Governing for All - the Blending of Conservatism

[Keepitsimple]

There is a tendency in politics, aptly demonstrated within this Blog, to express views in partisan fashion – and to polarize many worthwhile discussion threads. The Conservatives have been in power for a year now – a rare incursion into Canada’s Liberal dominated governance. While this may yet prove to be a mere interlude, the past year has shown that Canada can capably survive and indeed thrive with another government at the helm. This past year has also given us a glimpse of something that Canada has been unfamiliar with for some time – firm and principled leadership. Stephan Harper has shown himself to be a wily and shrewd politician. I have personally admired his mix of humility and brazenness and his respect for the traditions and history of this great country. Having said all this, I recognize – as do many others – that a large number of Canadians are still uncomfortable with the change from a Liberal government to what they might view as an untested one. Yet it is a very natural occurrence in any democracy to have changes in governance – indeed, it is change that nurtures a healthy democracy.

This "unease" has of course been exacerbated by the demonizing of Stephan Harper and the Conservatives in the last election (soldiers in the cities; far, far right wing; strip away your rights, George Bush clone, etc.). The demonizing has been continued by Liberals and a media which has become very complacent with the Natural Governing Party.

With Canada having undergone a change in Government, it is now up to Stephen Harper and the Conservatives to govern on behalf of all Canadians and also, on behalf of all Provinces. This is what governments do. Conservatism brings with it a fundamental vision of efficient government, fiscal responsibility, a stronger focus on family, and an allegiance to the roles and responsibilities of the Provinces and Federal Government as set out in our Constitution. Our friends on the “Left” would have Canadians believe that Conservatives don't care about poverty; that Conservatives are against Childcare and against helping our First Nations - they're just mean-sprited. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is about how we go about accomplishing these noble goals. Compassion is not a Liberal virtue - it is a Canadian virtue. Liberals have had many years to address the problems of poverty in general and the unique needs of our First Nations Communities. They have maintained majorities in our parliament and have had the power to make a difference – yet these situations are now worse than ever. Similarly with the environment – Liberals signed Kyoto and have accomplished very little – with the exception of the announcement of a “Green Plan” when the Martin government was in its death throes….and keep in mind – this Plan was never really implemented.

So let us try new ways to address these issues. Let us try to avoid simply throwing money at problems. That has clearly not worked. People are asking – how can Stephan Harper suddenly embrace Climate Change. It’s simple – he’s listening. It’s a priority for Canadians. Sceptics will say he “sees the votes”. That may be true – but again – that’s what governing is about – listening to Canadians and adapting. The important thing is getting things done - action, not rhetoric.

I’ve called this post the “Blending of Conservatism” because with the mantle of power, Stephen Harper is beginning to demonstrate the ability to form policies that appeal to a much broader audience than his traditional Conservative base. That's what leadership is all about.

Give the man a chance. Give the Party a chance. Continue to give our country a breath of fresh air.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Give the man a chance. Give the Party a chance. Continue to give our country a breath of fresh air.

It will take a lot of hard work between now and the next election, but it is definitely a possibility that Harper will get the chance to serve a second term.

I think the Harper-haters are divided into two camps.

1. The true Liberal-partisans who are repulsed that Canadians actually rejected them and lust to be returned to power. They are the one's who spread the lies about *scary* *scary* *scary*. Lies that have not proven true, but their refrain has changed to*scary if he gets a majority*.

2. The true social democrats. Who are appalled by Harper and see very little difference between the Liberals and Conservatives. They instinctively hate anything American and buy into *scary* *scary* *scrary*. Filled with a sense of entitlement, they believe the Government should be the solution to everyth ill society faces. They don't care how much it costs as much as they aren't the one's who paid for it.

These two groups comprise about 40 to 45% of the electorate in English Canada. Thankfully they will be increasingly divided between the Liberals, NDP and Greens. This will leave the other 50 to 55% of the remaining voters who are open to the possibility of the Conservatives. Another well-run campaign and the Conservatives will be able to appeal to a large majority of these voters...

[gc1765]

I think the Harper-haters are divided into two camps.

1. The true Liberal-partisans who are repulsed that Canadians actually rejected them and lust to be returned to power. They are the one's who spread the lies about *scary* *scary* *scary*. Lies that have not proven true, but their refrain has changed to*scary if he gets a majority*.

2. The true social democrats. Who are appalled by Harper and see very little difference between the Liberals and Conservatives. They instinctively hate anything American and buy into *scary* *scary* *scrary*. Filled with a sense of entitlement, they believe the Government should be the solution to everyth ill society faces. They don't care how much it costs as much as they aren't the one's who paid for it.

There's also the group of people who simply don't like Harper's policies...

[hiti]

snip

Liberals have had many years to address the problems of poverty in general and the unique needs of our First Nations Communities. They have maintained majorities in our parliament and have had the power to make a difference – yet these situations are now worse than ever. Similarly with the environment – Liberals signed Kyoto and have accomplished very little – with the exception of the announcement of a “Green Plan” when the Martin government was in its death throes….and keep in mind – this Plan was never really implemented.

The Kelowna Accord, which Steve canceled was addressing the unique needs of our First Nations. What substitute does Steve have? Nothing.

And yet Liberals have made a difference. They wrestled Canada back from the brink of bankruptcy, where Mulroney had taken us. They balanced the budget, started to pay down the debt, implemented $100.5 billion in tax cuts in 2000, $22 billion in 2005 and $29 billion in 2006. These tax cuts were aimed at lower income Canadians.

WTF did Steve do???? He robbed the poor to pay the rich. I personally lost over $400 per year in taxes. He immediately gave his rich buddies a $5 billion GST reduction, he raised the lowest tax bracket and lowered the personal exemption and wiped out the Liberal tax cuts to the poor, the elderly and those who can't afford big ticket items to take advantage of the GST cut.

So let us try new ways to address these issues. Let us try to avoid simply throwing money at problems. That has clearly not worked. People are asking – how can Stephan Harper suddenly embrace Climate Change. It’s simple – he’s listening. It’s a priority for Canadians. Sceptics will say he “sees the votes”. That may be true – but again – that’s what governing is about – listening to Canadians and adapting. The important thing is getting things done - action, not rhetoric.

snip

Give the man a chance. Give the Party a chance. Continue to give our country a breath of fresh air.

Steve is not embracing Climate Change. He needs votes so he borrowed the Liberal Project Green plan that they had set up, but lost the election so some parts of the plan had not been fully implemented. This of course was after he had canceled all the environment plans as soon as he was elected.

Some problems can't be fixed without putting money into it. Every single Steve announcement on Climate change was a Liberal Project Green project. Steve just took out the parts where the poor and seniors received monies to retrofit their homes, changed the names and all of a sudden the "new" government has a plan on emissions and kyoto targets but it's not kyoto. Amazing.

Steve is not listening. He is politicking. He wants his majority so he can change Canada into his own image. All those speeches he gave, all the letters he wrote, all those words he said, they are still his intent. He is just biding his time and needs a majority to wreck our political system.

Seeing the votes is not governing. Steve is doing what it takes, lie, cheat, cover up..... whatever it take to get his end result. And that is not listening to Canadians and adapting. It is listening to Canadians to see how he can fool them into voting for his majority.

Steve cannot be trusted and his fresh air is rotten underneath. The man is a scam artist. A thug. His Party sucks big time. It has no heart. No soul.

[Keepitsimple]

snip

Liberals have had many years to address the problems of poverty in general and the unique needs of our First Nations Communities. They have maintained majorities in our parliament and have had the power to make a difference – yet these situations are now worse than ever. Similarly with the environment – Liberals signed Kyoto and have accomplished very little – with the exception of the announcement of a “Green Plan” when the Martin government was in its death throes….and keep in mind – this Plan was never really implemented.

The Kelowna Accord, which Steve canceled was addressing the unique needs of our First Nations. What substitute does Steve have? Nothing.

And yet Liberals have made a difference. They wrestled Canada back from the brink of bankruptcy, where Mulroney had taken us. They balanced the budget, started to pay down the debt, implemented $100.5 billion in tax cuts in 2000, $22 billion in 2005 and $29 billion in 2006. These tax cuts were aimed at lower income Canadians.

WTF did Steve do???? He robbed the poor to pay the rich. I personally lost over $400 per year in taxes. He immediately gave his rich buddies a $5 billion GST reduction, he raised the lowest tax bracket and lowered the personal exemption and wiped out the Liberal tax cuts to the poor, the elderly and those who can't afford big ticket items to take advantage of the GST cut.

So let us try new ways to address these issues. Let us try to avoid simply throwing money at problems. That has clearly not worked. People are asking – how can Stephan Harper suddenly embrace Climate Change. It’s simple – he’s listening. It’s a priority for Canadians. Sceptics will say he “sees the votes”. That may be true – but again – that’s what governing is about – listening to Canadians and adapting. The important thing is getting things done - action, not rhetoric.

snip

Give the man a chance. Give the Party a chance. Continue to give our country a breath of fresh air.

Steve is not embracing Climate Change. He needs votes so he borrowed the Liberal Project Green plan that they had set up, but lost the election so some parts of the plan had not been fully implemented. This of course was after he had canceled all the environment plans as soon as he was elected.

Some problems can't be fixed without putting money into it. Every single Steve announcement on Climate change was a Liberal Project Green project. Steve just took out the parts where the poor and seniors received monies to retrofit their homes, changed the names and all of a sudden the "new" government has a plan on emissions and kyoto targets but it's not kyoto. Amazing.

Steve is not listening. He is politicking. He wants his majority so he can change Canada into his own image. All those speeches he gave, all the letters he wrote, all those words he said, they are still his intent. He is just biding his time and needs a majority to wreck our political system.

Seeing the votes is not governing. Steve is doing what it takes, lie, cheat, cover up..... whatever it take to get his end result. And that is not listening to Canadians and adapting. It is listening to Canadians to see how he can fool them into voting for his majority.

Steve cannot be trusted and his fresh air is rotten underneath. The man is a scam artist. A thug. His Party sucks big time. It has no heart. No soul.

I guess that means you fall into category #1 of RickiBobbi's quote - but that's OK. It takes all kinds of people to make a democracy work. Just for the record though - the Kelowna Accord, as put together by the Liberals, was not all bad. The problem is that it had very little focus and accountability....so once again, the money would have disappeared down a black hole. I don't want to slag the Liberals for Kelowna - at least it was a real attempt. Where I fault the LIberals is that they did not start to really address the problems during the previos 10 years when they had majoroities - it wasn't a question of money. Lord knows, we've had plenty of money to distribute to First Nations but over the years, it hasn't made the difference that it should have. The Conservatives have said that they will honour the goals of Kelowna and in fact have worked very well with the BC government and First Nations out there to resolve a lot of issues and start to improve the quality of life. Jim Prentice is very well respected by First Nations - always has been - and he's making a difference. Jim is more than a politician - he's worked with First Nations for many years and understands the problems. You won't see much credit being given to him by the media because...well, because he's a Conservative. Like I said.....let's start to take a different approach at solving these things.

[Remiel]

How can anyone be expected to take seriously an argument that begins with how principled their chosen leader is? I don't think Harper is any more principled that Chretien or Martin or Layton. I don't think Martin was any more principled than Harper or Chretien or Layton, and so on and so on.

As for you, Ricki Bobbi, you can keep going on with your *scary* *scary* *scary* routine, but the fact is that is exactly how you paint the Left as well. It is absolutely NO DIFFERENT. You're just being a hypocrite.

If the Liberals are the Natural Governing Party the Conservatives are the Natural Alternative Party. If you think about it, that really implies basically the same thing about both of them. The Conservatives decried the " Culture of Entitlement " but it is just as strong in them. They believe that they are entitled to be the only other governing party.

If the NDP were to actually lead a minority government, ever, you would probably see the same thing that happened to the Conservatives. Their governance would be closer to the middle ground than their rhetoric, and we'd have calls for giving them a majority on the same basis that you call for giving the Conservatives a majority. However, that will never happen, because, of course, the NDP are *scary* *scary* *scary*.

Anyway... as for allowing Harper another term, if he gets another minority, fine. As a side benefit, the more working minorities we have, the better chance that we'll eventually get proportional representation. I don't want Harper to have a majority. I'm on the Left, but I wouldn't want the NDP to have a majority either right now. I don't think I want another Liberal majority right now. I think perhaps what we *need* is a prolonged period of compromise. Maybe once the parties have learned to work together again, someone can have a majority.

[Keepitsimple]

How can anyone be expected to take seriously an argument that begins with how principled their chosen leader is? I don't think Harper is any more principled that Chretien or Martin or Layton. I don't think Martin was any more principled than Harper or Chretien or Layton, and so on and so on.

As for you, Ricki Bobbi, you can keep going on with your *scary* *scary* *scary* routine, but the fact is that is exactly how you paint the Left as well. It is absolutely NO DIFFERENT. You're just being a hypocrite.

If the Liberals are the Natural Governing Party the Conservatives are the Natural Alternative Party. If you think about it, that really implies basically the same thing about both of them. The Conservatives decried the " Culture of Entitlement " but it is just as strong in them. They believe that they are entitled to be the only other governing party.

If the NDP were to actually lead a minority government, ever, you would probably see the same thing that happened to the Conservatives. Their governance would be closer to the middle ground than their rhetoric, and we'd have calls for giving them a majority on the same basis that you call for giving the Conservatives a majority. However, that will never happen, because, of course, the NDP are *scary* *scary* *scary*.

Anyway... as for allowing Harper another term, if he gets another minority, fine. As a side benefit, the more working minorities we have, the better chance that we'll eventually get proportional representation. I don't want Harper to have a majority. I'm on the Left, but I wouldn't want the NDP to have a majority either right now. I don't think I want another Liberal majority right now. I think perhaps what we *need* is a prolonged period of compromise. Maybe once the parties have learned to work together again, someone can have a majority.

That's a reasonable position to take......but for the record, Conservatives do not think of the Left as being ***scary***. We might not like the heavy government approach to issues, but we don't find it ***scary***.