Women Abandon Conservatives

[Argus]

The Canadian Conservatives are more likely to support US actions. They supported Isreal unabashedly -- called the response "measured".

Well, yes, we do tend to support our traditional allies. Conservatives do tend to be traditionalists. And in any fight between someone evil and someone who's a friend we'll tend to support the friend. BTW, Harper's "measured" statement came very early in Israel's response, I believe on the first or second day.

Conservatives are emotional. They need an "enemy" and are unable to look at issues from more than one point of view (theirs) -- just like the Republicans.

Come on. I don't need an enemy. I'd rather not have an enemy. I'd be quite happy to wave a magic wand and see Islamic fundamentalism disappear. But what other point of view do you think we should take in that regard?

"God Bless Canada" --

Stephen Harper is, indeed, a religious man. So?

Harper is like the kid in school who copies the bully... he's not really a bully but he thinks he'd like to be. He thinks the bully is way cool. If you asked him though -- he'd deny it.

Who has Harper bullied? When has he displayed an interest in bullying anyone?

[Argus]

Honey, Bush doesn't even know where Canada IS, let alone bless it.

What I meant (sighhhhh) is that GW Bush is known for saying "God Bless America" at the end of his speeches.

Mr. Harper now says "God Bless Canada". If that aint copyin' I don't know what is.

It could be any number of things. Politicians are always trying to strike a chord with people, always trying to give out a certain image. Do you honestly think Harper watched Bush give a speech, and thought "Yeah, I can say that too!".

[Argus]

Yes, she goes where the power is. Who wouldn't.

Well, people who believed in loyalty, who had a certain vision, a set of beliefs based on their desires for what kind of Canada they wanted to live in.

Tories are not the cons of today. Tories were sensible normal people.

They were bloodless immitators of the Liberals, interested in nothing other than power and enriching themselves and their friends.

Stronach expected the "new" conservatives to be like the PCs.

Stronach didn't even know what the PCs were as she was playing with barbies the last time they were in power. Stronch has never held a real job, dropped out of college, and was looking for power and glory. When it looked like she could get that from the Liberals instead, she went to them. That simple. She, like most Liberals, cares about nothing and no one but herself.

I used to like that the Reformers were normal people, that they opened their mouths and said politically incorrect things, but the national media ridiculed them and them out to be extremist hicks from the boonies. But they were in politicis because they believed in something, not because they wanted power and fame and to suck on the government teat. They had to become more like the cold, calculating politicians the media respected in order to gain power, turning their backs on a lot of policies ordinary Canadians supported to assuage the hatred of the Toronto media. But there are still a lot of Reformers in the Tory party, and they still have the same populist goals, even if they're muted under the more top-down, disciplined style of politics which seems to be necessary these days.

[Argus]

I take it your silence on what a terrible PM Dithers was means that you agree he was an unmitigated disaster.

I hate to admit it (at least I CAN admit it) but yes, although I liked Martin, the sponsorship scandal was a major disaster. (Mostly because the conservatives hung onto it like a rapid pitbull...)

Martin was weakling wracked by indecision, blowing whatever way he thought the wind was headed. There didn't seem to be anything he was after but power, no programs he cared about, no direction he wanted to take the country. He was a thoughtless, phoney rich boy with a towering ego and the kind of self-righteousness that really makes me despise people, and if he had any principals they were never in evidence.

IMO Trudeau was the best! We need another leader like him! He made Canada what it is today --

A nation deep in debt. He took a country with almost no debt in boom years, and turned it into a huge debtload which crippled our economy when times turned bad. He was an intellectual who was inspired by great ideas - but didn't like the details. He wanted programs but didn't like to worry about how they'd be paid for. He also threw open our doors and brought in millions of third world people, many of whom had no skills or education. The slums filled with visible minorities, the drive-by shootings and ethnic street gangs are all due to Trudeau. They used to call Toronto "New York, run by the Swiss." Now they call it a smelly, dirty, smog-filled, crime-ridden dump.

[Argus]

I for one am very happy that Stephen Harper has had this stint as PM. It's allowed Canadians to see what he and the CPC are. It's been a most fortunate turn of events.

Why do you suppose in a recent poll of Harper, vs Layton and all the current Liberal leadership Candidates, Harper came out well ahead as the best man to be Prime Minister?

[gerryhatrick]

Stronach didn't even know what the PCs were as she was playing with barbies the last time they were in power. Stronch has never held a real job, dropped out of college, and was looking for power and glory. When it looked like she could get that from the Liberals instead, she went to them. That simple. She, like most Liberals, cares about nothing and no one but herself.

Take your despicable attacks elsewhere.

I frankly don't care about Belinda Stronach, but seeing your cowardly, sexist attacks is sickening.

[Ricki Bobbi]

A nation deep in debt. He took a country with almost no debt in boom years, and turned it into a huge debtload which crippled our economy when times turned bad. He was an intellectual who was inspired by great ideas - but didn't like the details. He wanted programs but didn't like to worry about how they'd be paid for. He also threw open our doors and brought in millions of third world people, many of whom had no skills or education. The slums filled with visible minorities, the drive-by shootings and ethnic street gangs are all due to Trudeau. They used to call Toronto "New York, run by the Swiss." Now they call it a smelly, dirty, smog-filled, crime-ridden dump.

Great post!

The saddest part is Trudeau never thought that hes terrible fiscal management was an issue. And people consider him our greatest PM ever???

[Argus]

Stronach didn't even know what the PCs were as she was playing with barbies the last time they were in power. Stronch has never held a real job, dropped out of college, and was looking for power and glory. When it looked like she could get that from the Liberals instead, she went to them. That simple. She, like most Liberals, cares about nothing and no one but herself.

Take your despicable attacks elsewhere.

No, I don't think I'll choose to do that. You are free, however, to leave.

I frankly don't care about Belinda Stronach, but seeing your cowardly, sexist attacks is sickening.

Sexist? Cowardly? Are you demented?

I mean, more than usual?

[Canadian Blue]

Thats because most Canadian's wouldn't be able to name more then two PM's before Trudeau. As well most Canadian's probably are more infatuated with his style rather then substance.

No offense GH but why are you so avidly supportive of the Liberals despite alot of their hypocritical stances. The conservatives aren't the best, but at the very least they are in touch with reality and have made some common sense decisions like arming our border gaurds.

By the way, what preparations did the Liberals make in the past 13 years to be able to make Kyoto targets, none. This government wasn't really given many options due to past inaction by the Liberals.

The arrogant approach to your fellow Canadian's is pretty disgusting as well, about 60-70% of Canadian's don't support the Liberals, that doesn't make them inferior. That attitude is sickening, and you don't have any right to bash your fellow Canadian's that way, it only divides a country.

[Ricki Bobbi]

The arrogant approach to your fellow Canadian's is pretty disgusting as well, about 60-70% of Canadian's don't support the Liberals, that doesn't make them inferior.

It does in some people's eyes.

The term "Natural Governing Party" could only be borong out of a sense of arrogance and entitlement.

[gerryhatrick]

Sexist? Cowardly? Are you demented?

Demented? No, don't think so.

These are your words, are they not?

Brainless Belinda

Coincidentally again, Belinda only has her job - not to mention the clothes on her back, because of daddy, whlie Chow Chow only has her job because of hubby.

This girl hasn't accomplished anything in her life despite all the advantages, has no education, and in an age gone by (not very long ago either) she'd have been called an adulterous whore.

You're a coward for attacking a woman anonymously on a blog, and you're sexist because you obviously (from many more posts than just these) think women are pretty much stupid.

[Canadian Blue]

They could not afford not to act like men. They were in a man's world and acted as men.

Now, if only we could get these women to act like real women (and not be automatically shunned by men) then we'd be making some headway. As it is, these women acted like men to fit in to the club. Thatcher probably cried her eyes out daily LOL -- but she could NEVER have shown that she had even a gram of femininity because... well duh.

RB, he has a minority govt. Not a landslide like Trudeau. Pffft he ain't half the leader Trudeau was.

Tribal politics, something that we in western society should try to throw away after seeing the effects it had in other countries. Why can't a woman be a social conservative, or a social progressive, a socialist, a liberal, a libertarian, an authoritarian, conservative, etc. Why is it predetermined that a woman must have one way of thinking in terms of politics. The same can be said of race as well, should politics be chosen based on your racial identity. Every human being has different identites dealing with race, religion, politics, social ethics, morales, sex, etc. However a person should have the freedom to have different identities based on their own individual beliefs. As well forcing a person to have a predetermined identity based only on race or sex is wrong, it is against democracy and liberty. Canada is probably behind most of the world in terms of democracy, their are few countries in the western world where their are so few checks and balances in the Judicial, Executive, and Legislative branch. Canada needs to look at changing how Canada's democracy works, and thats why in some ways Green party representation wouldn't be a bad idea in parliment.

Belinda Stronach is kind of similar to George Bush. Same type of background in a way.

RB, the sad thing is that these people have adopted these values and our blind to anything else around them. GH is a hardcore Liberal, yet he will not be willing to acknowledge anything wrong with the Liberal party, past and present, thus he is simply blinded due to the fact he considers being a liberal part of his identity. As well in arguing the point he seems to believe himself and other Liberals are superior to other people based on this belief. Once again this is tribal politics, and it does nothing to serve democracy. The same can be said of people who support Bush 100% and believe people who do not support him are un-american and aren't patriotic.

[Ricki Bobbi]

RB, the sad thing is that these people have adopted these values and our blind to anything else around them. GH is a hardcore Liberal, yet he will not be willing to acknowledge anything wrong with the Liberal party, past and present, thus he is simply blinded due to the fact he considers being a liberal part of his identity. As well in arguing the point he seems to believe himself and other Liberals are superior to other people based on this belief. Once again this is tribal politics, and it does nothing to serve democracy. The same can be said of people who support Bush 100% and believe people who do not support him are un-american and aren't patriotic.

Yeah. Such is life. Just have to keep fighting for the best interests of the country. Another Liberal government right away would be a terrible, terrible blow to the country.

[Canadian Blue]

If they had good leadership then they could work some good for the country. However the last debate I saw was one of the worst debates I have ever seen. Absolutely no ideas were circulated, it was only Harper bashing and cheap shots. Nothing was brought up how they wanted to make the country better, only the idea that Harper is an evil "Bush Republican". If a liberal government got in again that would do major damage. Alberta would be up in arms again if the loss was seen as simply a backlash against Alberta, and knowing the Liberals they'll target western Canada in order to gain votes elsewhere as they have for the past 25 years. If Frank Mckenna, Brian Tobin, or John Manley were leading then maybe the story would be different. I think that most Canadian's have given up on being heard, only around 60% even bother to vote. So a government might get a majority with only 20-25% of Canadian's voting for them. Thats a sad state of democracy, Sweden just had an all time low in voter turnout which was 80%.

[Ricki Bobbi]

There is a reason why McKenna, Tobin and Manley all bowed out.

Been more like the last 40 years that the Liberals have been running election campaigns with no real attempt to appeal to the West, if not actively campaigning against us.

[gerryhatrick]

RB, the sad thing is that these people have adopted these values and our blind to anything else around them. GH is a hardcore Liberal, yet he will not be willing to acknowledge anything wrong with the Liberal party, past and present, thus he is simply blinded due to the fact he considers being a liberal part of his identity.

Blah blah blah blah. What a bunch of garbage.

[Canadian Blue]

Divide and Conquer is usually the best strategy to win votes in Canada, and it shouldn't be. It's extremely easy to have a platform which only extends to lets say the east yet ignore the west in order to win. Thats why this country needs to reform democracy so that a government needs to pay attention and compromise to the whole country in order to get votes passed. I don't see why it can't work here, in Australia it is necessary to compromise with other parties in order to get elected. The major parties in Australia can not get elected unless they can get support from the Greens, One Nation, Family First, or the Democrats.

GH, you can't refute it. As well the fact that you think people who aren't Liberals are inferior is evidence of that.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Divide and Conquer is usually the best strategy to win votes in Canada, and it shouldn't be. It's extremely easy to have a platform which only extends to lets say the east yet ignore the west in order to win. Thats why this country needs to reform democracy so that a government needs to pay attention and compromise to the whole country in order to get votes passed. I don't see why it can't work here, in Australia it is necessary to compromise with other parties in order to get elected. The major parties in Australia can not get elected unless they can get support from the Greens, One Nation, Family First, or the Democrats.

GH, you can't refute it. As well the fact that you think people who aren't Liberals are inferior is evidence of that.

Don't really know enough about the Australian system to comment.

As time goes on I am more and more thinking a form of proportional representation would definitely be an improvement on first past the post. But the Senate would have to be reformed (or abolished) at the same. Which means re-opening the constitution. yikes...

Why even respond to a poster who says "blah blah blah. What a bunch of garbage"? Seems like a waste of time to me.

[gerryhatrick]

Why even respond to a poster who says "blah blah blah. What a bunch of garbage"? Seems like a waste of time to me.

A bigger waste of time was posting the garbage in the first place.

It amazes me how you're silent over personal attacks from the rightwingers here, but if a leftie even accuses someone of being "confused" you're up in arms.

[betsy]

Can you please name some strong women rulers in history who were anti-war?

They could not afford not to act like men. They were in a man's world and acted as men.

Now, if only we could get these women to act like real women (and not be automatically shunned by men) then we'd be making some headway. As it is, these women acted like men to fit in to the club. Thatcher probably cried her eyes out daily LOL -- but she could NEVER have shown that she had even a gram of femininity because... well duh.

I'm talking of women in history....beyond Thatcher.

I'm talking of Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, the Empress Tsu Zsi of China, the Ice Queen of England, Cleopatra, etc.,

You are right...they could not afford not to think and act like men....but not because they were in a man's world. It was because they've found themselves in challenging circumstances, therefore they had to decide like any ruling monarch should: using sound decisions and judgments.

Anti-war sentiments...and touchy-feely-aromatherapy...are usually set aside....when certain circumstances threaten what you hold dear.

[betsy]

Now, if only we could get these women to act like real women (and not be automatically shunned by men) then we'd be making some headway.

Actually, a lot of women throughout history had acted like "real women." These are the wives, and concubines or mothers of rulers.

They were not shunned by men....but rather they have made rulers heed to their whims or advices...sometimes to the peril of the ruling king. Marie Antoinette was one of them.

Rulers and monarchs, including Prime Ministers....need to unburden themselves at some point. The wife or the mistress is usually a welcoming presence, and some I bet are not shy at offering their own point of views.

These women do not actually rule, but they were referred to as the real "power behind the throne".

Please, let us not relegate women's status to just that of airheads and bimbos.

Womens' wiles are natural weapons of our species....nothing to be ashamed of that. We are not as powerless as a lot of liberal thinkers would want you to believe.

[betsy]

RB, he has a minority govt. Not a landslide like Trudeau. Pffft he ain't half the leader Trudeau was.

Trudeau made fun of the queen. Publicly. Plastered on papers. Very juvenile in his pirouetting behind her....I could only guess that he must've had a drink too many and was overcomed by his "feminine side."

From the pictures I've seen...I must admit he made such a graceful pirouette that would put some budding ballerinas to shame.

Oh btw, he seemed to have made fun of women in that sense....directed at the queen....but sexist nevertheless.

He was not taking the queen seriously as he would the PM of France?

He mocked her before everyone...before all the world.

Would he have mocked her if she happened to have been a king?

So he thinks that the queen....despite her status...had not really made it to fit in the "men's club?"

So it seems this sort of a man is your idol?

[betsy]

Now, if only we could get these women to act like real women then we'd be making some headway. As it is, these women acted like men to fit in to the club.

I edited your statement...and this I very much agree with you.

The post modern feminism seem to have this psychological need to emulate men....in order to be like men!

WHY do we need to be LIKE MEN?

Wearing power suits and all....just so to be taken seriously...or to have power?

Why did we need to erase the use of some words like "actress".....and instead insists on being called "actors." Is there something shameful about anything feminine?

I greatly admire Condoleeza Rice, who makes no apologies for being black...or a woman. I usually see her dressed like a woman....and yet there is no mistaking it: she's got the power in her own right.

[betsy]

Why did we need to erase the use of some words like "actress".....and instead insists on being called "actors." Is there something shameful about anything feminine?

And yet they bristle and bitch over the use of the word, "Mankind" that encompasses both men and women.

I am a woman...and yet I'm lost with these feminists way of thinking.

They seem to be fickle to me...all the more perpetuating the stereotype of what women are: fickle-minded bitches.

[Argus]

Sexist? Cowardly? Are you demented?

Demented? No, don't think so.

These are your words, are they not?

Brainless Belinda

Coincidentally again, Belinda only has her job - not to mention the clothes on her back, because of daddy, whlie Chow Chow only has her job because of hubby.

This girl hasn't accomplished anything in her life despite all the advantages, has no education, and in an age gone by (not very long ago either) she'd have been called an adulterous whore.

Well, yes, they are my words .... from a different post.

They are not the words you were responding to. So what gives? You responded to the words in that other post already. Is the fuss over Belinda causing you too much stress?

You're a coward for attacking a woman anonymously on a blog,

You've attacked numerous people "anonymously" on this same site.

and you're sexist because you obviously (from many more posts than just these) think women are pretty much stupid.

You appear to be frantic in your patriarchal desperation to protect a pretty blonde girl. I can see no other reason for your string of moronic posts on this subject.

Do you have a crush on Belinda?