The Shotgun Blog
« "The Howard Roark effect" | Main | Paging Sir Edward Coke »
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
The Tide is Turning
In 1995 Carl DeFaria won the provincial riding of Mississauga East for the Tories, holding it in the 1999 election. The Liberals, seeking to recapture the seat, ran former Olympic athlete Peter Fonseca, who won election in 2003 and re-election in 2007. What do these two men have in common? Aside from having held the same riding? They're both ethnically Portuguese. Mississauga East (Now Mississauga East-Cooksville) has, not surprisingly, a substantial Portuguese demographic. How do you beat an ethnic politician? By using another ethnic politician to neutralize the ethnic advantage.
It's a game as old as Tammany Hall. Canadians whose ancestors arrived with Champlain and Simcoe may snort their contempt at playing ethnic democracy, yet how is this different from what has been practiced in Canadian politics for generations? One of the reasons D'Arcy McGee was so important an ally to John A, was that he brought the Quebec Irish Catholic vote with him. Canada's regionalist politicking is enshrined in our equalization policies. The difference between now and then, is that now you have a harder time of pronouncing the name of the candidates. The Conservatives are beginning to understand this. The Liberals have forgotten it, the Fonseca case notwithstanding.
In a Brampton living room last weekend, Sunny Gill helped seal the conversion of a young Sikh truck driver who claims he can move 300 votes from the Liberals to the Conservatives.
The truck driver was just the latest domino to fall favourably for Mr. Gill, the local Conservative South Asian outreach co-ordinator. It was a satisfying moment.
“When you come here, any immigrant thinks the Liberals are demi-gods. But when you establish yourself, you look at their policies,” said Mr. Gill.
“If we're able to split the ethnic vote, we're going to slaughter the Liberals.”
It wasn't long ago that voting Conservative was considered a cardinal sin in some ethnic communities. But polls now show that immigrants, the unshakeable bedrock of Liberal support, are forsaking Pierre Trudeau's party – the party of multiculturalism, of expanded immigration, of the Charter – for Stephen Harper.
The vital thing about courting ethnic votes is how cheap it actually is. No Sikh Adscam. The elaborate fountains and golf courses have been kept to a minimum in Brampton. For a Tory strategist this is low hanging fruit. Rather than spending billions in the murky world of Quebec politics, a few polite words and some old fashioned constituency work and the votes start rolling in. New Canadians are not natural Liberal voters. The Grits have benefited for decades in having a lock on these voters because, frankly, the Tories failed to market themselves properly. New Canadians tend to be more entrepreneurial and socially conservative than old stock Canadians. They're natural Conservative voters. As Mr Gill suggests, sooner or later the Liberals are going to get slaughtered. The bankrupt party of the urban, professional elite. Their current leader is the perfect, clueless representative of that trend.
Posted by Richard Anderson on October 27, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
All the lying Conservative spin doctors who try to tell me the Liberals are losing popularity, Not in Quebec for sure even, they need to face the fact that Harper tends to still be his own enemy and he is known for his one step forward two step backwards poltical moves, be patitent, just wait a little bit he Harper will for sure put his foot in the dung again..
Posted by: The reality Check | 2009-10-27 4:02:33 PM
ADQ cuts ties to senior Tories Quebec's third-place provincial party is severing ties to senior federal Conservatives, including a key fundraiser for Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The Action démocratique du Québec says Senator Leo Housakos and other high-ranking Tories will no longer be allowed to hold positions of influence within the provincial party. They too are Distancing from federal Conservatives, Quebec party
Posted by: ADQ | 2009-10-27 4:06:32 PM
Canadian voters did not give Harper a majority mostly because of his religious driven agenda.
Now that he's pandering to religious minorities to get more votes, I'm not sure it will please the few fiscal conservatives lasting on his side.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-10-27 4:25:38 PM
This will only work short term because as soon as Harper gets a majority he will cut back on non-white immigration. Also they will continue to deport as many non-white Canadians as they can. It won't be long before the racism in the Conservative party base boils to the surface and scares off the immigrant voters.
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-10-27 6:13:06 PM
Why are most of candidates in Quebec French?
Could it be they are racists?
Posted by: set you free | 2009-10-27 6:39:04 PM
"Canadians voters did not give Harper a majority mostly because of his religious driven agenda." And which religion might that be? What claptrap!
"...as soon as Harper gets a majority he will cut back on non-white immigration. Also they will continue to deport as many non-white Canadians as they can." Are you for real? Please provide the names of all the "non-white Canadians" who have been deported.
Halloween is getting closer, so perhaps that is the reason for this flurry of claptrap.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-10-27 7:36:04 PM
Canadian voters did not give Harper a majority mostly because of his religious driven agenda.
What specific policy issues, specifically, are "religious driven"? Or is that just a generic insult?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-27 7:57:54 PM
This will only work short term because as soon as Harper gets a majority he will cut back on non-white immigration.
I'm sorry; is there another kind in this country? And would cutting back on white immigration (if that were possible) be less morally impure? How so?
Also they will continue to deport as many non-white Canadians as they can.
Most white Canadians are full citizens and are thus not eligible for deportation, a protection extended to white and non-white citizens alike, I believe. And as far as I've heard they've only been interested in deporting criminals and illegal aliens. Let us know if that changes, hmm?
It won't be long before the racism in the Conservative party base boils to the surface and scares off the immigrant voters.
Keep dreaming, Greenthumb.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-27 8:03:29 PM
Pay no attention to him, Alain; he'd send Harper to the gallows on totally fabricated charges if he could.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-27 8:04:35 PM
Not in Quebec for sure even, they need to face the fact that Harper tends to still be his own enemy and he is known for his one step forward two step backwards poltical moves...
Yes, unlike Paul Martin, Stephane Dion, and Michael Ignatieff, who never embarrass themselves or their parties in public. (People still remember Stephane for the most comprehensive comedy of errors in modern Canadian politics.) Bob Rae, Ignatieff's successor-in-waiting, is unlikely to fare much better, especially in Ontario, which remembers having him for a premier, and that not fondly.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-27 8:10:25 PM
"And which religion might that be?"
Who cares, Alain ?
The base of "social" Conservatives behind Harper are furious anti-abortionists, anti-feminists, anti-gay & gay mariage, anti "Evolution", anti "global warming"; etc.
Harper is pushing an agenda reflecting that and that's why he will never get a majority in Canada. We all know it.
Of course, his religious agenda might very well bring some waco and extrimists from every religious groups but the huge majority of Canadians still firmly beleive in the seperation of religion and the State.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-10-27 8:22:12 PM
"And which religion might that be?" Who cares, Alain ?
The person accusing him of having a religious agenda should care. Unless, like I said, it's just a knee-jerk insult offered without any thought or care.
The base of "social" Conservatives behind Harper are furious anti-abortionists, anti-feminists, anti-gay & gay mariage, anti "Evolution", anti "global warming"; etc.
Do you have some proof of this, or is this just the propaganda they feed you in a province still hung over from the Quiet Revolution, before which the Catholic Church basically ran the province? How is swinging from one extreme to the other an improvement? Switching targets for your extremist hatreds does not make you less a hater; it just makes you a hater with a new logo.
Harper is pushing an agenda reflecting that and that's why he will never get a majority in Canada. We all know it.
"We"? For whom else do you speak? For increasingly fewer people, according to the polls. What's the matter? Are you afraid that your province's long-standing de facto veto might be in jeopardy?
Of course, his religious agenda might very well bring some waco and extrimists from every religious groups but the huge majority of Canadians still firmly beleive in the seperation of religion and the State.
Separation of church and state means therOf course, his religious agenda might very well bring some waco and extrimists from every religious groups but the huge majority of Canadians still firmly beleive in the seperation of religion and the State.e is no state religion and citizens are free to worship as they please or not at all. It doesn't mean that our laws cannot derive from the values handed down from our culturally dominant religion or religions or from any other source, provided they pass Constitutional muster. It is the content of the laws that matters, not where we get them from.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-27 9:21:22 PM
"It is the content of the laws that matters, not where we get them from."
Ooookay...
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a while. You are o so good at that and that's one of the reasons you and I never play togeter.
Why is it, Mr. Matthews, that S. Harper is unable to reach a majority other than his backward ideologies ?
Posted by: Marc | 2009-10-27 11:20:55 PM
That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a while. You are o so good at that and that's one of the reasons you and I never play togeter.
There's your problem right there, Marc. Your brain is wired for identity politics, not policy. To argue that the source is more important than the idea is totally irrational and reeks of partisan bias.
Why is it, Mr. Matthews, that S. Harper is unable to reach a majority other than his backward ideologies ?
Because the Liberals could run 300 clones of Saddam Hussein and still carry Ontario and, sans Bloc, Québec. After all, his anti-American credentials are unimpeachable, and that seems to be the only thing central Canadians care about: not being American.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-28 12:13:56 AM
"The base of "social" Conservatives behind Harper are furious anti-abortionists, anti-feminists, anti-gay & gay mariage, anti "Evolution", anti "global warming"; etc."
Posted by: Marc
I am friends with many of these evil social conservatives you speak of. While they, unsurprisingly, may not take kindly to your shrill denunciations, they are for the most part, perfectly intelligent and very tolerant people.
As I understand it, the anti-global warming people are those like Al Gore. Perhaps you are confusing them with the pro-global warming people.
As for evolution, I find it odd how so many evolutionists despise the traditional family, and favor infanticide. Perhaps they are not so smart as they profess to be. Perhaps creationists are no so naive as they like to seem to be.
Posted by: Timothy | 2009-10-28 12:03:14 PM
What specific policy issues, specifically, are "religious driven"?
Attack on Harper out of line - Winnipeg Free Press - Apart from knowing he was raised a Presbyterian and now attends a Christian and Missionary Alliance Church with his family, we, the public, know nothing about what he personally believes. author: Email: [email protected] "David Haskell" http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/attack-on-harper-out-of-line-65930672.html
Hey you really have to be ignorant or have to be blind not to notice Harper supporting the Jews as God's chosen people is part of his religious faith. Harper for me still is a fundamentalist for he does wrongfully believe that the Bible says the Jews are still God's chosen, and yes the same Bible says only a man is the head of the home too.. while the Bible says no marital divorce, and no gay marriages, Harper wrongfully supports relationship divorces, borking, marginalization of others.. never the less also he Harper is a Liberal when it comes to alcohol, lying, abusing others, and money matters or dealing with his own wrong doings or that of his supporters, then there is his sexist attitudes where women are second class being to the males... and the Alliance men are God's chosen now too.. yes the Alliance men of the Christian Missionary ALLIANCE CHURCH FOR WHICH HIS PARTY WAS INITIALLY NAMED FOR TOO EHH
THEN THERE WAS ALL THE JUDGES HE LATELY CHOSE TO SUPPORT HIS RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS OF FAMILY, NON GAYS, NON ABORTION TOO
Now yes the people who do not go to the Alliance church still do not understand what the Alliance Church really stands for.. Jesus Christ as healer, sanctifier, coming king, deliverer, It is very clear now that the new Conservative Canadian spin doctors are now trying MAKE OVER Harper, to cover up the existence of any PM Stephen Harper hidden fundamental Christian agendas by presenting him to be a really moderate, liberal Christian.
Harper's own Christian Missionary Alliance you must be born again Church itself is not a moderate one when they are one of the few Churches that do these days proclaim Healing to be now a daily, divine Christian right and also attaining personal holiness, sanctification by the Holy Spirit too. And this is no ordinary fundamental Christian church, for it is not accepted by the majority of Christians, who in fact do not tend to know that this so called church even exists or what they basically believes, so the majority of Christians, fundamental evangelical Christians too, they do not really believe the Alliance Church as having their similar Christian values now as well even..
And what the lying spin doctors would try to say Harper was not a basic self proclaiming fundamental evangelical ? get real now.. who are you lying too? But to yourself mainly.. How absurd for anyone now even to deny this that Harper has many fundamental evangelical values even confirmed this by Harper now appointing court judges who hold his religious values.. that was why he supports family values too, Harper is against abortion, gays, bad drug usage as well.. but what was surprising is he Harper undeniably buys alcohol for others.. playboy next too? So no this is not an acceptable evangelical trait for sure.
You can fool most of the people most of the time, some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all the time.. nevertheless a good name is worth more than any silver or gold you acquire, and a bad name is disrespected even after the person's death. One of the most surprising things to me in real life was to witness, experience. and many times now too, that the real bad, immoral con men, liars, thieves, fakers, imposters, pretenders do often like to be associated with a Christian Church .. and can hold positions as Pastors, elders now too.. So excuse me when now someone claims to me that such and such a person is now a really good person. In reality I rightfully next tend to first check it out firsthand, for rightfully I no longer believe what most people tell me. And especially how good PM Stephen Harper now is too.
Posted by: Jewish | 2009-10-28 12:25:27 PM
QUEBEC the second largest PROVINCE in Canada holds 75 seats AND cannot be ignored. The Mjority of people, young people now as well do nto speak emglish in reality too.. have nver been outside of Quebec..Mr. Harper naively thought he could handle Quebec himself and that his goodwill gestures toward the province would do the rest. He’s now reaping the results of his own delusion. Harper certainly will never get the support of Quebecer by STILL falsely bashing them for a start. Quebecers ARE VERY different, AND they are a separate WHOLE community and they are NOT just North Americans who speak French. They have a catholic and not a protestant background too, and they believe in the sprit of the law over the letter of the law, and they are not easily fooled like the Anglophones often are.
PROUD HARPER, AND THE WEST WRONGFULLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND STILL THAT IF YOU DESPISE, ABUSE QUEBECERS THERE NEXT IS A SERIOUS PRICE TO PAY FOR IT.. A REAL SERIOUS PRICE.. AND NO ONE CAN HAVE A MAJORITY CANADIAN GOVERNMENT WITHOUT THE QUEBEC VOTE.
Posted by: French Canadian | 2009-10-28 12:37:10 PM
The Christian Missionary Alliance church is unlike the fundamental Baptist, Mennonite, Brethren churches, and it is a half breed.. it is a Pentecostal church that does not encourage speaking in tongues.. and it is not a local congregational owned or run church, it is run by the Corporate headquarters in Toronto... they do not fully disclose their expenditure finances too.. it is not kosher for sure as well..
Posted by: So what? | 2009-10-28 1:56:12 PM
French So Jew:
Why bother with the fake names. Your horrific grammer, as well as your child-like lack of knowledge about the proper use of English homophones reveals your presence every time. Spell check can only do so much (or is that, spell cheque can only dew so much)
Posted by: DrLibery | 2009-10-28 3:10:35 PM
PROUD HARPER, AND THE WEST WRONGFULLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND STILL THAT IF YOU DESPISE, ABUSE QUEBECERS THERE NEXT IS A SERIOUS PRICE TO PAY FOR IT.. A REAL SERIOUS PRICE.. AND NO ONE CAN HAVE A MAJORITY CANADIAN GOVERNMENT WITHOUT THE QUEBEC VOTE.
You've got it wrong, FC. The way the rest of the country sees it, it's Québec who's abusing them. Most of Canada's Prime Ministers come from there, they consume a disproportionate share of equalization funds (unforgivable given their highly developed industries and educated population), and they are the beneficiaries of numerous government grants, funds, and handouts. But no matter how much you give, it's never enough.
Politically speaking, Québecois are absurdly hot-tempered and entirely too attached to the ideas of the 1960s. They explode into high dudgeon over the most trifling of matters; witness the shitstorm of protest over a lousy $45 million in arts funding (which disproportionately affected Québec) even though overall funding was INCREASED. The province is also bleeding population and has not been in the black since the Quiet Revolution.
Pointing these facts out is not abuse. Pointing out that the Bloc Québecois has a separatist agenda is not abuse. Pointing out that La Belle Province has not profited by her flirtation with socialism and can be intolerant and racist is not abuse. So before you get yourself all set and ready to "punish" English Canada for abusing you, perhaps you should review your own behaviour. If you're going to try to stick it to the rest of the country no matter how much or how little they give you, what have they to lose by giving you nothing?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-28 3:44:48 PM
Yeah kind of like that guy that posts as shane mathews, zebulon pike, 419 and DrLiberty.
Posted by: DrGreenthumb | 2009-10-28 3:53:25 PM
Cheap? Geez, how soon we forget.
"Dalton McGuinty's government marked the 2006 and 2007 fiscal year-end by rushing $32.5-million dollars out the treasury's door. Destination: cultural and religious groups likely to vote Liberal in the coming October elections.
2007 grant recipients included: - Islamic Institute of Toronto ($500,000) - St. George Arab Cultural Centre ($300,000) - Bengali Community Centre ($250,000) - Armenian Community Centre ($500,000) - Six Sikh temples ($750,000) - Chinese Professional Association ($250,000 ) - Museum of Hindu Civilization ($200,000) - Sri Sathya Sai Baba Centre of Toronto, ($250,000) - United Jewish Appeal ($15 million)
Most astonishingly, the McGuinty government also threw a million dollar grant at the Ontario Cricket Association -- a sum that was $850,000 more than the Association itself had requested. The Iranian-Canadian Community Centre's $200,000 grant was disbursed despite there being "no written request for funding." In some cases, the spectre of a political quid pro quo was overt: The $250,000 that went to the Chinese Professional Association of Canada (CPAC) was delivered just a few months after 10 CPAC board members attended a fundraiser for the Minister of Immigration and Citizenship, Mike Colle (who has since resigned). A CPAC board member also worked in the Minister's office. Small world.
Awestruck Sikhs beheld $250,000 landing in a temple that was embroiled in a court battle over the alleged mismanagement of funds. Meanwhile, two grants of $100,000 each went to Sikh gurdwaras in Malton and Rexdale, where certain Sikh devotees promote the Khalistan movement and push to break up India. Photos of Sikh "martyrs" cover the Malton Gurdwara's walls. Even an image of Talwinder Singh Parmar is posted there, despite his masterminding 329 murders --including 280 Canadians and 136 children -- in the 1985 Air India bombing, the worst terrorist attack in this nation's history. It is the equivalent of funding a mosque that venerates Osama bin Laden."
Posted by: DJ | 2009-10-28 4:26:28 PM
In fact, it can be argued that pandering to the vismin vote destroyed the Liberal Party.
http://chrisvanoostveen.blogspot.com/2007/02/dions-faustian-deals.htmlBut now, the truth comes out. In fact, the Liberal Party picked Dion (by only 9%...) because of a handful of disgraceful, pathetic backroom deals with ethnic Sikh, Tamil, and Muslim voting blocs at the convention to destroy Canada's anti-terror legislation:
"Among veteran Liberal insiders, it is believed that the several hundred Sikh convention delegates Bains and his allies led into the Dion camp (via Gerard Kennedy) came with a price: an end to the investigative powers contained in the Anti-Terrorism Act, which was opposed for predictable reasons by various Sikh, Tamil and Muslim organizations.
Indeed, I am informed by a well-informed source that the critical deals were cut months in advance, and were driven by Bains -- and, in the case of Muslim delegates, by Arab-Canadian MP Omar Alghabra -- through Kennedy, who'd been staked out early by ethno-politicians as an empty vessel into which they could pour their parochial agendas."
Posted by: DJ | 2009-10-28 4:39:59 PM
To get right winged Christian votes initially Stephen Harper readily identified himself as an evangelical. Now many Christian pastors, Evangelical and Catholics, Real Women also had readily certified that Harper was a genuine Christian evangelical too. So did many Christian Publications including the Hill times. Next even did a Christian Radio station in Red deer Alberta. So all of sudden why is their a hypocritical, false attempt to repackage this same Harper as a moderate, a non religious, non practicing Christian, a secular Beatle fan instead?
Posted by: WOIW | 2009-10-28 6:46:42 PM
The way the rest of the country sees it, it's Québec who's abusing them.
Wow it is hard to believe that the rest of Canada wants Quebec to stay Canadian in the first place if that was realy so inluding Harper
Most easterners have no respect for the self centered West firstly
Posted by: WOIW | 2009-10-28 6:50:18 PM
WOIW, just because Harper is a Christian privately does not mean his policies reflect a religious agenda.
And Greenthumb, don't show your stupidity. It's bad enough you don't have anything substantive to post without being an imbecile in the bargain.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-28 9:32:54 PM
DJ:
Very salient post. That is precisely the problem with what Harper is doing. Admittedly there is not any indication that he is prepared to go as far as the Liberals, but once a leader makes clear that he is prepared to rule over a series of carefully manipulated and segregated voting blocks rather than the needs of the country as a whole it opens the door for the most ridiculous uses (or non-use in this case) of government imaginable.
DrGreenthumb:
Do you assume everyone that doesn't just spew vitriol at Matthews on this site is he.
What very childish example of projection. Not that I like to give Freud too much credit, but when explaining actions driven by a simple he has some merit.
Posted by: DrLibery | 2009-10-28 10:21:58 PM
Listen,
Since I seem to be the one who brought (unintentionally) all the anger in the room, let me just clarify one thing or two.
First, I would like to address “DrLibery”...
Dr. Liberty,
It is not clear to me if you’re accusing me of using different pen names or if you’re addressing somebody else. If it’s the case let me just say I never or never would I use another name than “Marc”, my own name.
I’m no Shane Matthews and I too find the behaviour very boring and inappropriate.
As for the “[…] lack of knowledge about the proper use of English […]” you’re so concerned about, allow me to answer that…
If one day I, personally, wake up discovering the English language has no more secret for me…I will SHOOT myself.
This would probably mean that English has become my first language.
It would mean that I live, work, think, eat, drink, dream, love and fuck in English and there’s no way I could support it.
I’m sorry.
Until that day comes and for the benefit of other bloggers who won’t mind one or two grammatical errors, please restrain yourself from using the “speak white” attitude that brings nothing more to the discussion (if not more haters) while sounding to me as a compliment.
@ Timothy,
Sir, I’m not painting Social Conservatives or Believers as “unintelligent”.
My sole point was that the hardcore or at least extreme ones are and will always follow a party taking an anti-abortion/gay marriage/feminists/”science” stance, never mind the whole performance or the full agenda.
(That’s why I quoted the “social” part.)
With political positions like these, you can De Facto count on the support of extremists from most religions. It’s no secret political parties hire specialists and consultants to reach the support of the “religious Right”. The problem here is that it eventually allows a window for religion-based policies in a country that would normally not allow it.
When that window is unlocked, it’s open house for every “religious accommodations”.
Religious-based policies are always a threat to someone else’s rights.
Religious people? Not as individuals, in general and not in my book.
It also allows a party backed by religious voters to implement policies that hurt all of us even if they, as Believers, would never accept such things at first look.
Hey! But the guy said anti-abortionists!
As for the “tolerant” part: we could argue on that all night but that’s not my intention.
If you wish, I am inviting you to look at Shane Matthews’ behaviour in general or the exchanges between “religious” and “non-religious” posters on past threads, right here on the Shotgun, when the subjects were abortion, environment, gays and gay marriage.
Have fun…
I’m sure we agree Québec is the less “religious” region in North America.
If it is true we have no problem with women deciding for themselves, we certainly do not promote such a solution. It will maybe interest you to know that this year, our province has the highest percentage of births in Canada. Before Barbara Kay comes to the Shotgun crying “MUSLIMS!”, let me just say those births are concentrated in mostly “old stock” populated regions.
It is also true that murders are up everywhere in Canada while in Québec, we’re recording our lowest murder rates in 40 years.
Not so bad for a…God-less People and Nation.
*
Bottom line, Harper is slowly but surely losing Fiscal Conservatives and Libertarians for not being one and mocking them. He lost Québec for good with his “Separatisssss” hunt and his religious-based policies and actions. Ontario will always swing parties as long as a leader assures them full control and Conservatives all across Canada are waking up to the fact he’s half the man he pretended to be.
The biggest victim, following “all Canadians”, is: the Conservative Party of Canada, which would not automatically be a wrong option otherwise.
Stephen Harper will never get a majority
Bring all the pollsters you want: it won’t happen.
Just ask “Set you free” who happen to mock me just before both last provincial and federal elections with polls promessing record high victories in Québec for the CPC and the ADQ…
Oh boy…that must have hurt.
Posted by: Marc | 2009-10-29 12:23:12 AM
First of all, Marc, Liberty's rebuke for a false accusation of posing was aimed at Greenthumb, an established curmudgeon, not you. So no need for you to feel impugned on that score.
Secondly, the fact that you would rather shoot yourself than allow English, or presumably any other language but French, to become your first language is very telling. There's a reason the word "chauvinist" is of French origin. I'm not worried, though, since I doubt you are one of the very few urban Québecois who owns a firearm.
Yes, there are hardcore extremists who come from the same general end of the political spectrum as Harper. But there are also hardcore extremists who come from the Liberal/NDP/Bloc end. In fact, there are many, many more. You don't see right-wingers erecting barricades, rallying noisily in the streets, charging police lines, smashing windows, trashing Frankenfood labs, chaining themselves to logging equipment, spiking trees, harassing sealers, or committing acts of piracy against whaling vessels. The point is that this "point" proves nothing. We are discussing the agenda Harper has pursued so far and also the one he would pursue if given a majority, not the extreme Right.
"Religious-based policies are always a threat to someone else's rights?" Don't make me laugh. The rights of the unborn were stripped by the secular state. So were those of the taxpayer to keep his own money, the citizen to speak his mind without fear of prosecution, the parent's right to discipline his children, and the victim's right to expect justice done if someone has wronged him. The restrictive racial and sexual policies of the previous century, by the way, were based on social tradition and have NO theological validity.
Yes, Québec is one of the least religious area of North America--now. It was the reverse in 1960. It appears this province is unhappy except at either extreme, one or the other, eschewing all middle and all common ground. Exchanging one ultra for another is seldom an improvement and betrays a constituency that is a slave to its passions with a contempt for reason. Your own biases are blatant and shocking. You have been far more intolerant than your opponents on this board.
"Highest percentage of births in Canada"? Okay, now remove nonwhite immigrants from the statistics, and look at them again. It doesn't look so rosy now, does it? Québec is the province that gave us Henry Morgantaler and provides unlimited access to abortion at state expense. Predictably, their population has dropped by over a million people since 1990. And that's with immigrants and their high birth rate included in the picture.
"Murders are down"? Actually, they're down across most of North America, and the main reason is that the population is aging. It's true they're up on the Prairies, but that's because of their high aboriginal population. Look at the crime statistics and you'll find that provinces with high concentrations of aboriginals, like Saskatchewan (about 10%) have high crime rates, whereas provinces with low concentrations, like Ontario (2%) have low crime rates. Call it racist if you like, but statistics don't lie. And it's to be expected, since your central-Canada/Liberal-dominated Supreme Court has decided that aboriginals ought not to be punished for the crimes they commit, owing to wounded racial pride.
If conservatives dump Harper, they'll be idiots for doing so. No other politician in Canada comes as close to their ideals. He has had to compromise, as any majority politician has to, but the fact remains that he has presided over the longest minority Parliament in Canada's history, which is itself a testament to his abilities as a statesman. And I seem to recall, a few years ago, central Canadians predicting that Harper would never become PM at all; the very idea filled them with revulsion. So I trust you'll understand if I say that I take your sombre prediction with a grain of salt.
Yes, you did bring all of the anger into this room. Doubly unforgivable, considering Québec has little reason to be angry with anyone but herself.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-29 7:17:37 AM
Sorry, that should read, "He has had to compromise, as any MINORITY politician has to."
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-29 7:34:44 AM
PROUD HARPER, AND THE WEST WRONGFULLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND STILL THAT IF YOU DESPISE, ABUSE QUEBECERS THERE NEXT IS A SERIOUS PRICE TO PAY FOR IT.. A REAL SERIOUS PRICE.. AND NO ONE CAN HAVE A MAJORITY CANADIAN GOVERNMENT WITHOUT THE QUEBEC VOTE.
"You've got it wrong, FC. The way the rest of the country sees it, it's Québec who's abusing them. Most of Canada's Prime Ministers come from there, they consume a disproportionate share of equalization funds (unforgivable given their highly developed industries and educated population), and they are the beneficiaries of numerous government grants, funds, and handouts. But no matter how much you give, it's never enough.
Politically speaking, Québecois are absurdly hot-tempered and entirely too attached to the ideas of the 1960s. They explode into high dudgeon over the most trifling of matters; witness the shitstorm of protest over a lousy $45 million in arts funding (which disproportionately affected Québec) even though overall funding was INCREASED. The province is also bleeding population and has not been in the black since the Quiet Revolution.
Pointing these facts out is not abuse. Pointing out that the Bloc Québecois has a separatist agenda is not abuse. Pointing out that La Belle Province has not profited by her flirtation with socialism and can be intolerant and racist is not abuse. So before you get yourself all set and ready to "punish" English Canada for abusing you, perhaps you should review your own behaviour. If you're going to try to stick it to the rest of the country no matter how much or how little they give you, what have they to lose by giving you nothing?"
It is absolutely amazing how many people to try to make thmslves feel better in Alberta and have to find someone to falsely hate SUCH AS THE PEOPLE FROM QUEBEC OR ONTARIO.
Quebec and Ontario were a major part of Canada for hundreds of years before the west was firstly and for that reason alone do need to be respected here too..
I get a big laugh of all of those people really now clearly so ignorant of Quebec too and I do wonder how many of them have ever even been to Quebec in the first place and that is why they are so clearly ignorant too by what they write and say.. the west itself is not a better place too..
Posted by: WOWED | 2009-10-29 9:37:49 AM
You would have thought that Westerners would be so happy having one of their own as PM, Stephen Harper, but wait he was an easterner....
.. yes some people can never be made happy still
Posted by: No ordinary Canadian | 2009-10-29 10:33:56 AM
Does PM stephen Harper also support this bad act of the CMA?
Purpose Drivel: C&MA seizing churches/assets of faithful pastors
The Christian & Missionary Alliance has started to seize the assets and churches of those who resist the man-centered philosophies the denominational leadership is trying to foist on them, such as Purpose Driven/seeker sensitive, and Emerging mysticism.
It sounds like the false teaching and abuse of power in the name of Rick Warren continues unabated... the danger continues and so we must continue to shout from the housetops to flee the sinking purpose driven ship and get into the real Ark of safety, the glorious salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, for the glory of God alone, and to comfort those who have been cast out by the false teachers in their circles, slandered before their congregations, and turned on by those who once were friends. We remind you that you are not alone! We have, many of us, suffered the same fate. And greatest of all, Christ suffered this reproach -- this is his reproach that we bear. And so count it all joy! I know it does not feel that way now.
Pastor Bob Iddings has written up a testimony of what happened to him in the Christian & Missionary Alliance at the hands of one Wayne Spriggs, District Superintendent of the Eastern Pennsylvania District of the Christian and Missionary Alliance and its District Executive Committee.
The behaviors of Spriggs and his cronies is eerily familiar. The secrecy, the miscommunication, no documentation, not allowing witnesses, the lies, the "hurry up we need to get this meeting scheduled" stuff...oy... it almost looks like they're all being controlled by the same entity!
http://www.purposedrivel.com/2008/09/c-seizing-churchesassets-of-faithful.html
Posted by: About the CMA | 2009-10-30 6:33:24 AM
Yeah, we're really going to take seriously anything posted on a site with the word "drivel" in its URL. Or did he just misspell the word "driven"?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-30 6:53:38 AM
Canada is just about over. multi Culture, Multi Language, Multi Loyalty. Run by the bilingual guys, while we are taxed to pay "The Nation of Quebec" to act like they are already independent. Oh yes, we have to be bilingual while they have language police and new comers to "The Rest of Canada" are speaking English as a second language " if they want to " . Record breaking numbers of mass immigration. It's becomeing a lost cause.
Posted by: John | 2009-11-19 6:10:37 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.