The Shotgun Blog
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
With Conservatives Like These.....
Joseph Ben-Ami asks some hard questions of Prime Minister Harper:
The plain fact of the matter is that although the government has had to make difficult compromises due to its vulnerable position, it has also adopted some practices and policies that cannot be explained away in this manner.
The mammoth increases in program spending in its first two years are a case in point. Nobody at the time was clamouring for these increases and there was no possibility that the Liberals would have forced an election if Mr. Flaherty had failed to provide them.
Another, more recent example that I have written about is the decision to resurrect the former Court Challenges Program under a new name – the Language Rights Support Program. Government apologists continue to insist that this new initiative is fundamentally different from the Court Challenges Program that was cancelled in 2006.
Do these apologists not know that their talking points were written by bureaucrats who opposed the government’s decision to shut down the CCP in the first place?
And then there's the wheat board and the gun registry. At least the Tories went to court to smash the CWB monopoly, albeit unsuccessfully. That the long gun registry still exists nearly four years into "conservative" rule is a mark of shame. This isn't to say that Iggy would have done a better job. Certainly not.
That assessment probably has less to do with ideology, and more to do with the growing sense that he's Stephane Dion with better English skills. In practice the proposition to the electorate, next time the writ drops, from the Tories will be this: You could do worse. Perfectly true. Yet shouldn't we be holding a Conservative party to something like conservative standards? Otherwise truth in labelling demands Stephen Harper run for the Status Quo Party next time around.
We American conservatives could only wish to have some of those problems. We don't even have a party.
We have something called the "Republican Party" that handpicks a far-left candidate for a district won by the GOP since around 1871. To say this party is out of touch is an understatement.
Posted by: GeronL | 2009-10-20 7:42:39 AM
You must understand that Canada is like post-Obama US (if he succeeds). The core of electorate that would call themselves conservative in Canada is likely no more than 60% of that proportion in the US. Canada is no longer governable by conservatives except as caretakers of the welfare / Nanny state. Harper is in tenuous power only because the left is split up three ways (ignoring the Quebec boat anchor).
We are seeing conservative / libertarian opposition to the Republicans here like never before and hopefully they will find some direction soon. They must eject the bipartisan, cooperative, appeasing the media types (Frumistas), and run principled candidates. Without leadership at present there is fortunately no one for the MSM to attack except Fox News, Beck and Rush. Huckabee is poling the highest of potential Presidential candidates right now.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-10-20 10:35:05 AM
Sadly Joseph is correct. Take the Trudeau creation, the Court Challenges Program, that has resurfaced under a different name, so typical of government bureaucrats or spin-doctors. There was no reason whatsoever for this.
It seems we have a competition between the Liberal Party and the Acting Liberal Party, falsely calling themselves conservatives.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-10-20 10:40:05 AM
Is there really a "conservative" party in Canada?
Is hypocrisy their forte?
Are Harper and his “conservative” government hypocrites?
By Stephen J. Gray
“Individual freedom is something Conservatives value…
What exactly are those conservative values?
I think we all instinctively recognize them when we see them, although it is sometimes difficult to define them. I like to summarize my idea of conservatism in three "Fs" --freedom, family and faith.” Stephen Harper 
Mr. Harper says he believes in “freedom,” yet his government sided with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and was an intervenor with others against free speech:
Read rest of article at:
Posted by: Stephen J. Gray | 2009-10-20 10:51:51 AM
This is entirely beside the point, but is anyone interested in some comic relief? Mathews, "End the Fed", and some guy who keeps changing his are still battling it out over the drug issue ...
Posted by: Charles | 2009-10-20 11:58:30 AM
The problem is to define conservative. There are fiscal conservatives and then there are social conservatives that are big government conservatives. The problem is Harper and the Conservative Party are playing for a majority and are totally ignoring fiscal conservatives. Harper has shown he has no principles by using liberal policies just so he can get elected. The Conservative party needs a leader who has the balls to propose conservative policies.
Posted by: Doug Gilchrist | 2009-10-21 4:06:38 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.