Letter From Peter Mackay

[dnsfurlan]

Here's another small point, and its directed to all you PC guys: If the PC Party is such a clear and moderate alternative for Canadians, why is its membership so much smaller then that of the CA. You would think that a party that was so much more representative of the way Canadians think would attract many more members to its flock. But it hasn't happened. Why? And doesn't this fact seriously detract from your arguments that the PC Party is a truly national alternative? How can that be if so few people consider themselves members of your party?

[Rob1963]

You don't have to be a member to vote for the party. Polls have consistently shown the PC Party ahead of the CA for some time now.

[dnsfurlan]

Your last couple of paragraphs are what scares me about the Alliance. I think they want to make Canada the northern USA

Really. Why don't you hear the word "scary" every time Canadian liberals mimmick American liberalism? And isn't that argument a bit simplistic. Its CAer at want to see a strong Canada. Its the CAers who aren't afraid of displaying their Canadian patriotism.

Again, one of your main answers to these issue is demonization: scary, far-right, etc. Aren't you capable of more than simple name-calling and fear-mongering?

[Rob1963]

Because America is not liberal. I agree though, that argument is a bit simplistic. Just a gut feeling I have.

And I am not afraid of displaying my patriotism, I just don't do it in your face like the Americans and CAer's.

[dnsfurlan]

You don't have to be a member to vote for the party. Polls have consistently shown the PC Party ahead of the CA for some time now.

You still didn't address the question I raised. Polls can change easily. Membership usually doesn't. Why aren't there more PC members? I think its a legitimate question that you PCers should be able to answer, shouldn't you?

[Rob1963]

I think it's because this notion of merging with the Alliance hasn't been put to bed for once and for all.

[dnsfurlan]

Because America is not liberal

It was for most of the twentieth century. Many of its institutions still are. The media being one very obvious example. The State department being another. There are many more examples of its liberalism, but Canadians just want to see it as some kind of cowboy jungle. Its not. Statism flourished there as well as here. Lets not kid ourselves here.

[dnsfurlan]

I think it's because this notion of merging with the Alliance hasn't been put to bed for once and for all.

Come on. Thats not much of an answer. If anything, becoming a member would stengthen the party against any incursion by the Alliance.

Why is the PC Party in such a weakened state? And doesn't this fact detract from your claims of being a legitimate alternative? Again, polls fluctuate. Enduring allegiances do not.

[Black Dog]

It was for most of the twentieth century. Many of its institutions still are. The media being one very obvious example. The State department being another. There are many more examples of its liberalism, but Canadians just want to see it as some kind of cowboy jungle. Its not. Statism flourished there as well as here. Lets not kid ourselves here.

Yes, some of the most prosperous periods in recent US history have corresponded with "liberal" government policies and relatively large scale state involvement.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Actually, Rob, Canada was once one of the most conservative, right wing countries, in the world. We were more conservative than the US before 1963. Canada was built on these basic founding principles.

-Free Markets

-Individual Liberty

-Strony Military, Proud History

-Strong Families make a stronger country

-Sanctity of life.

Over 100,000 men died fighting for those principles in world war 1, and world war 2. Men in world war 2 made damn sure that those principles were safegaurded after seeing the abuse of human life in Europe, and those same men who fought, fought against injustices. The same happened in the US.

-Canada also shunned the new deal of FDR.

The Canada which you know is Trudeau's Canada, Trudeau considered Canada as bad as nazi Germany, and Trudeau mocked jews who went to fight for this country in world war 2. Trudeau made his vision of Canada in the 1970's, and 1980's. So dont try to get me to believe this "canada was always progressive" crap.

The Alliance is not extremist, on Abortion, the vast majority of Alliance member's believe it should be allowed, but not covered under medicare.

Alliance member's were asked in a poll, which American party they prefered, and the majority supported the Democract's.

[Neal.F.]

Alliance fanatic, i hope that isn't Joe Clark "Metoo"ism coming out of you..... Most Alliance MPs are NOT in favour of abortion. The vast majority are oppoised to it either completely, or will grant an exception in the case where the mother's life is in peril.

You can find infotrmation on who syupports what here.

The people at lifesite compiled the information from a questionnnaire they sent out. They also looked at the voting and previous political history of each candidate in the '97 election.

Keith Martin is openly pro abortion. believed to be pro choice are Bill Gilmour. , John Duncan, Howard Hillstrom & Val Meredith.

It is also a scary thought that Most alliance members prefer the Dumbocruds in the US. Sounds like more "Me too"ism.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Actually that was a pretty obscure poll, It was an internet poll, it was stupid to put that in their. I think that the majority of Alliance MP's are pro-life, but would prefer the people to decide whether abortion is legal or not in a referendum.

[Neal.F.]

That sir, is a cop out of the worst kind. Abortion is murder.

to be "personally opposed" but believe it is OK for someone else to decide in their case is like saying that one is opposed to murder, but if someone else decides it's OK to kill someone who is inconvenient, that's just fine.

What it boils down to is this: Do we, or do we not have the fundamental right to life? yes or no? Does someone else have the right to arbitrarily decide that someone else's life needs to end, if so, who?

the pro-aborts have decided that a woman in consultation with a doctor (wasn't there something called the hyppocratic oath?) can decide to murder a baby for the crime of being inconvenient?

It sounds to me , Sir, with all due respect, that they are trying to defend the indefensible. It also sounds to me like "me too"ism. The polls say that opposition to "a woman's right to choose" is unpopular, so let's just sweep it under the carpet, and say "well... we don't like it but who are we to tell someone what choices to make".....

Sounds like an Al Gore answer.... Maybe you are right that most Alliance voters identify better with the Dumbocruds.

[Alliance Fanatic]

Neal, what I meant was that the Alliancewould allow the public to decide on social issues. The vast majority of Alliance MP's are opposed to abortion, and would probably vote against abortion in a referendum. The alliance would also make sure that no tax dollars are funding abortion. As for that poll I put in, it was stupid to do, because they asked only about 250 Alliance members who they would vote for in the US.