David Orchard Always a Liberal

[scribblet]

I guess we knew all along that David Orchard is a Liberal, supported by his attendance at the Liberal convention and support of Dion all the way along. His group delivered some pretty solid support for Stephane Dion.

It also confirms that he never ever was a conservative, he just picked a port he thought he could dock in, and use to his own advantage.

Seems like a fitting home for him; guess he's still a zealot too.

[jbg]

It also confirms that he never ever was a conservative, he just picked a port he thought he could dock in, and use to his own advantage.

Arguably, from roughly the end of the McDonald era throiugh 1987, your country didn't really have a "conservative" party.

[normanchateau]

It also confirms that he never ever was a conservative,

Would you say that Winston Churchill's floor-crossing switch from the Conservatives to the Liberals in 1904 confirmed "that he never ever was a conservative"?

[Remiel]

David Orchand didn't cross the floor. His party ceased to exist. There was nothing left to cross the floor from.

[August1991]

Arguably, from roughly the end of the McDonald era throiugh 1987, your country didn't really have a "conservative" party.

It depends entirely on how one defines "conservative". In politics often, American usage and Canadian usage are deceptively different since the words or ideas seem superficially the same.

----

As to David Orchard, I have always considered him to be a nutcase and any interview or article that I've read only confirms my opinion. Dion was desperate for support in English-Canada when he accepted Orchard's endorsement.

[normanchateau]

As to David Orchard, I have always considered him to be a nutcase and any interview or article that I've read only confirms my opinion. Dion was desperate for support in English-Canada when he accepted Orchard's endorsement.

No doubt a man of integrity like Harper would have shown Orchard the door if Orchard had endorsed him.

Either that or he would have made him chief of staff to a cabinet minister as he did with nutcase Darrel Reid.

Anti-abortionist Darrel Reid even opposes stem cell research.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Either that or he would have made him chief of staff to a cabinet minister as he did with nutcase Darrel Reid.

Anti-abortionist Darrel Reid even opposes stem cell research.

What does any of this have to do with David Orchard?

[normanchateau]

What does any of this have to do with David Orchard?

Welcome back RB. Suspension over?

[scribblet]

Either that or he would have made him chief of staff to a cabinet minister as he did with nutcase Darrel Reid.

Anti-abortionist Darrel Reid even opposes stem cell research.

What does any of this have to do with David Orchard?

Nothing, he's trolling - don't fall for his baiting its not cool.

[normanchateau]

Either that or he would have made him chief of staff to a cabinet minister as he did with nutcase Darrel Reid.

Anti-abortionist Darrel Reid even opposes stem cell research.

What does any of this have to do with David Orchard?

Nothing, he's trolling -

You still haven't answered the question of whether Churchill's switch from the Conservatives to the Liberals is evidence that Churchill was never a conservative. But I suppose it's far easier to avoid the question completely given your accusations against Orchard and instead accuse someone of trolling.

[Canadian Blue]

David Orchard is a red tory, however when you look at the definition of a red tory social conservatism is usually dominant. Which would make a large portion of former PC's not red tories at all, maybe just Liberal lite.

[scribblet]

David Orchard is a red tory, however when you look at the definition of a red tory social conservatism is usually dominant. Which would make a large portion of former PC's not red tories at all, maybe just Liberal lite.

Now your confusing me, I always thought a red tory was one who was not socially conservative, more to the left of the party. Actually I have thought that Harper and his gov't policies are more liberal lite than anything.

Didn't David Orchard have his own left wing group to fight free trade at one time, and I believe his motives where always in question when he joined the conservatives.

[normanchateau]

Actually I have thought that Harper and his gov't policies are more liberal lite than anything.

The 64% of Canadians who voted for parties to the left of Harper's in the last election probably don't share this opinion.

[Canadian Blue]

Red Toryism derives largely from a British Tory and imperialist tradition that maintained the unequal division of wealth and political privilege among social classes can be justified, if members of the privileged class contribute to the common good. Red Tories supported traditional institutions like religion and the monarchy, maintenance of the social order, and good government. Later, this would manifest itself as support for the welfare state. This belief in a common good, as expanded on in Colin Campbell and William Christian's Political Parties and Ideologies in Canada, is at the root of Red Toryism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Tory

Harper isn't really that ideological, compared to lets say Reagan, Thatcher, Bush, and Layton. So far Harper has run a fairly middle of the road government. The only reason why we hear these ideological, right wing republican bush, etc. accusation's is because the Liberal's find it hard to come up with the idea's they can actually bring forward so they can be an effective opposition.

Lets face it, why come up with idea's, when its so much easier to simply throw out a bunch of accusation's.

As for the Socon argument, Harper's pro-choice, hasn't taken a strong stand on SSM, and has been neutral on many social issues. So far the only real argument is the marijuana one, and the appointment of Darrel Reid, both which are pretty weak arguments.

[normanchateau]

As for the Socon argument, Harper's pro-choice, hasn't taken a strong stand on SSM, and has been neutral on many social issues. So far the only real argument is the marijuana one, and the appointment of Darrel Reid, both which are pretty weak arguments.

Some would argue that his vote against legislation making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of homosexuals is a so-con position. But if you share Harper's vision, you'd see that as a weak argument.

[Canadian Blue]

I see that as a weak argument, especially since many civil libertarian's are also against hate crime legislation. As well you obviously can't seem to make out the grey area in that bill since you are using a simplistic argument.

But if you share Harper's vision, you'd see that as a weak argument.

I'm fairly non partisan, the next election I'll either vote Conservative or Green, haven't made up my mind yet. All I have to do is compare Harper to politician's who are considered socon's down in the US and even here in Canada and I can clearly see Harper isn't the extreme socon you make him out to be.

Remember Elsie Wayne's comments. I don't think Socon's are to be feared, they deserve a say in politics as well. Just because I don't like radical socialists doesn't mean I'm going to go out of my way to ensure their not heard.

[Wilber]

It also confirms that he never ever was a conservative,

Would you say that Winston Churchill's floor-crossing switch from the Conservatives to the Liberals in 1904 confirmed "that he never ever was a conservative"?

A few years later he came to his senses, rejoined the Conservatives and stayed there for the rest of his life.

[jdobbin]

A few years later he came to his senses, rejoined the Conservatives and stayed there for the rest of his life.

But was hounded all his life about his loyalties because he had an American mother.