Canadian Conservatives should support Andrew Scheer in 2019!

Credits: Frank Gunn, CP from CBC website.

You would think the outcome of the May 2017 Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) leadership campaign would have brought Canadian conservatives together. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case.

Which begs the question: Why are Canadian conservatives so divided?

Particularly, why are we so divided at a time the Trudeau Liberals are vulnerable regarding their exploding deficit, ideologically based carbon tax and the unfair tax changes soon to hit small businesses. Yet, the “who is a real conservative” complaining seems to be in full swing.

I have been blogging since January 2006 and I remember well how we went through the same nonsense when Stephen Harper was Prime Minister. Some conservatives even said they would not vote for him because he wasn’t conservative enough. In fact, even as I kept a list of the Harper Government Accomplishments, some on the right complained the Tories weren’t doing anything.

Complain, complain, complain. Blah, blah, blah. It is so tiring and so absolutely self-defeating. The reality is that, in today’s Canada, far right or libertarian conservatism would never win across the entire country. And, Harper knew that!

Anyway, how do I know this “not conservative enough” nonsense is going on? Day in and day out it’s all over my Twitter feed. And no, I have no intention of mentioning Twitter user names or hashtags, so as not to promote even more division.  But, here are a couple of complaints I have been reading and hearing about over the past few months:

  1. Andrew Scheer did not really win the CPC leadership race because of a problem with ballot counting and the fact that Quebec dairy farmers signed up for CPC memberships in droves. So what? The implied complaint is that Max Bernier would have won had there not been those extra memberships. Moreover, some are even complaining that Kevin O’Leary was the only true conservative in the original bunch. Look, I didn’t take part in the counting, but neither Bernier or O’Leary would have won a federal election for the very reason I mentioned above — their views were too extreme for average Canadians. Anyway, CPC memberships that were paid on time were valid. End of story. Scheer won. To put it bluntly, those conservatives who wanted a different leader need to get over the result and move on.
  2. Andrew Scheer complained about RebelMedia in an interview and allowed himself to be interviewed by the leftist group @leadnowca. Cue the violins. First of all, Rebel does not represent all Canadian conservatives. While I was a supporter at the start, I stopped after about a year because they were spending most of their time and money on petitions — acting as activists and not journalists. Regarding the leadnow fiasco, had Scheer not allowed such an interview, he would have been criticised for not having the courage to do so.

Sigh! The reality is that we don’t hear or read this kind of nonsense from Liberals. Unlike Conservatives, they stick together through thick and thin.

The crux of the matter is that this Conservative bashing by other conservatives has to stop if Scheer and the CPC are going to win a majority government in 2019 — the only outcome that will save us from national bankruptcy and a swing so far to the left that we will no longer recognize our country.

P.S. The same process is happening in Ontario with ONPC Leader Patrick Brown. The question Ontario conservatives have to ask themselves: Is staying home and not voting because you don’t like Brown worth leaving Ontario in the hands of the Wynne Liberals? If not, start supporting Brown!!! In other words, conservatives across Canada who are complaining about their conservative leaders for not doing what they like, want or believe, need to suck it up and get over themselves.


Folktale “Arab & his Camel” clarifies claims of Islamophobia

The Arab folktale “The Arab and the Camel” is a perfect metaphor for what Muslim migrants are doing in the UK and Europe — and in fact, wherever immigrants from Muslim countries are invited and accepted. They are, largely, not content to integrate into their new societies.

Rather, they want their welcoming politicians and policy makers to change everything to suit them. A perfect example of that phenomenon is the no-go zones in Europe where everyone dresses in Arab garb and Sharia law and practice are the norm.

Which brings up something I read about this week that, because Muslims living in Europe were having more children than non-Muslims, they would eventually own it all. Here is the relevant quote:

  • The Archbishop of Strasbourg, Luc Ravel, nominated by Pope Francis in February, recently declared that ‘Muslim believers know very well that their fertility is such today, that they call it … the Great Replacement. They tell you in a very calm, very positive way: ‘One day all this, all this will be ours’ …”.

As this Pew Research page shows, that may or may not become reality.

Anyway, regarding the folktale. The moral of the story is simple — take over a little bit at a time and the master will not notice until it is too late.

  • “In the story, the master snuggles down in the tent for the night leaving his camel to sleep outside.  The camel sticks his nose in the tent and asks the master for permission to keep his nose in the tent so that he can stay warm. Of course, the master says yes. And, so it goes, one body part after another until the camel is fully in the tent and the master is outside.”

Ring true? You bet. I mean, think about it. This year Ottawa passed Motion 103 regarding Islamophobia — that restricts anyone saying anything about Islam or Muslims. Maybe, even this post will be considered Islamophobic. Yet, we don’t have any motions regarding Jewishophobia. And, that is in spite of plenty of proof that some Imams regularly call for the destruction of Jews, as well as the subjugation of non-Muslims.

Meaning, the folktale is instructive. Think about it. Decades ago in Ontario, opening prayer was stopped in public schools. And, Christmas plays had to become secular rather than religious. Yet, now, those same public schools allow Muslims to hold Friday prayer services in public school cafeterias (even to the point where the girls are separated from the boys).

In other words, little by little, inch by inch, politicians and policy makers are favouring one religious group over all the others to the point of discrimination on the basis of toleration.

All I ask is that those who are making governmental policy decisions on the basis of political correctness, remember that equality should not be about cancelling out all feminism has gained during my lifetime or by giving in to one group over others on the basis of perceived offence by that group.

The crux of the matter is that the actions of the camel in the folktale have, inadvertently, become the metaphor for the use of Islamophobia to justify concessions and special privileges for a specific faith.

Update August 21st, 2017: First quote, on how Muslims living in Europe today think that eventually they will own it because they are having more children than non-Muslims, added today (H/T Jack’s Newswatch).

Media one-sided bias re Charlottesville is contributing to social hysteria


Twitter @polNewsForever

I am absolutely flabbergasted at the extent of the mainstream media bias — including at Fox News — and most of Twitter related to the riots in Charlottesville, Virginia yesterday.

All day and all night long TV commentators and Twitter left- wingers tried to turn the horrendous events that happened there to only be about the Unite the Right racist supremacists.

I mean, every guest Fox could get on in a hurry tried to blame President Trump for daring to say that both sides were wrong and full of hate. I mean, even some Republicans, like Marco Rubio, tried to tell the President, not only exactly what he should have said, word for word, but how he should have said it.

Well, the President was right. There were two sides in the wrong in Charlottesville. For proof, take a quick look at a few of the headings on this Google so-called news page:

  • How a White Nationalist Rally Turned Violent,
  • Man Charged With Murder at Neo-Nazi Rally, and
  • White Nationalist Rally Sparks Violent Clashes.

All of it one-sided. Then, there is a video at Rebel Media with Faith Goldy that shows a very different narrative. In fact, I just happened to be watching her video on my cell phone using a LIVE App when it all happened.

Plus, today, I found a number of videos at this @polNewsForever Twitter account. The truth is in the videos. While I certainly don’t agree with the Alt-Right racists, they were marching peacefully. The real problem was when Alt-Right participants had to pass through BLM and the Alt-Left fascists Antifa.

Which begs the question: Why are the U.S. and Canadian media not condemning the Leftist Antifa as much as the Right Nationalists?

And where were the police in Charlottesville? Were they told to step down as the police were in Berkeley, California riot — only to then appear when the car went into the crowd and people were hurt?

Look, I am a Canadian, with American friends and relatives, who pays attention to what is going on in the U.S. So, I am aware that the U.S. is split down the middle politically. I can see clearly, from this distance, that a civil war is brewing because the media are only spinning one narrative. The crux of the matter is that such spinning gives the progressives the mistaken belief that they are in the majority. They are not.


Heather Heyer is the young woman who died from her injuries after a car deliberately ran into her and others in Charlotteville. At this point, it appears to have been one of the White Supremacists but we don’t know for sure as there were plenty of Antifa and BLM there as well.  No matter who killed her and injured so many others, they are domestic terrorists. But, many of the comments on the Facebook and Twitter pages honouring Heyer do not actually honour her because they blame Trump for enabling all the hate in Charlotteville yesterday. Which is just as uncalled for as it would have been to blame President Obama when five police officers were gunned down in Texas last year by BLM protestors.

Unfortunately, as I said in my post above, all this divisiveness only confirms my concern that a civil war is brewing in the U.S. particularly when I hear certain Democratic congress members call for impeaching Trump. Just what would that do? To get a hint, they need only to look at the November 8th electoral map to see reality. 

Thanks Mr. Runciman for a job well done!

There is so much one could say about Bob Runciman and all of it would be positive, no matter what your political affiliation.

He would not know me but I watched him for four years during the first Mike Harris mandate from 1995 to 1999 — when I was an EA and Chief of Staff for one of his MPP colleagues. I specifically remember, for example, sitting in the Ontario’s visitors section in the Legislature when he offered to resign his Cabinet Post because there had been an error in a Throne Speech attributed to his staff.

While I have not been able to find that incident on the Internet, it showed how ethical he was and what most of us would think of as a “statesman” — something we rarely see in today’s provincial or federal parliament.

Here is Runciman’s Wikipedia page. It says he was first elected as an MPP in the Ontario Parliament in 1981, representing Leeds in Eastern Ontario. He was briefly on the Frank Miller Cabinet prior to the defeat of the Miller Government as a result of the Bob Rae David Peterson compact.

Then, in June 1995, when the Harris ONPCs were elected with a huge majority, he was initially appointed Solicitor General and Minister of Correctional Services — where it was reported he did an outstanding job. Runciman held other Ontario Government posts as well but that is the one I remember best.

Seven years ago, on January 29, 2010, when former PM Stephen Harper appointed Runciman as a Senator, many remembered his excellent record in provincial government and cheered that appointment. We hoped, of course, that his appointment and many others like his, would result in an elected Senate — which of course we now know will never become a reality given the way the Trudeau Liberals are running the show.

The crux of the matter is that Bob Runciman is a statesman of high regard and I wish him well in retirement.

Is Trudeau’s Canada for sale?

PM Justin Trudeau in Revelstoke, B.C. July 30, 2017 (Jeff Bassett/Canadian Press)

Is Trudeau’s Canada for sale? If we judge how much money the Trudeau Government is spending on matters not related to average Canadians, I would say yes. For Liberals, it seems to be all about paying whatever it takes to get international prestige and favour.

Think back to September 2016, for instance, when Mr. Trudeau spoke at the UN.  He specifically said his Liberal government would be spending less emphasis on national interests and more on global interests.

Remember too when Trudeau kept saying “Canada is back.” What exactly did he mean?  Did it simply mean “rebranding” as the CBC claimed? Or, that Canada was back to spending taxpayers money for climate change initiatives and global aid programs?

For example:

  1. In their first 100 days governing Canada, the Trudeau Liberals allocated $4.3 Billion to be spent abroad for UN climate conferences and helping third world countries deal with climate change.
  2. Still in those early days, the Trudeau Liberals allocated $450-Million for UN peacekeeping operations because, remember, during the 2015 election campaign, they promised to take Canada’s military out of the Middle East. Well, apparently, as of June 2017, the Liberals still haven’t decided where to do that peacekeeping.
  3. More recently, the Trudeau Liberals came up with a “feminist plan” that allocated $650 Million for international feminist services over several years, money that includes paying activists to interrupt and lobby in countries where abortion is illegal.
  4. Last, but unfortunately not likely to be least, the Trudeau Liberals gave $20 Million! to the Clinton Foundation. Yes, that Foundation where there are allegations of pay for play and misspending.

No doubt there are many more examples of money spent abroad. And, of course, while the money was spent in Canada, we all know about the Omar Khadr $10.5 million pay out. A travesty for sure. Taxpayers hard earned money going to a convicted terrorist because his rights were somehow violated when he was being interviewed by RCMP investigators at Guantanamo Bay.

But, for me, the proof that the Trudeau Government is more interested in spending money abroad than at home came this very week in BC when the PM was encouraging Canadians to donate privately to the Red Cross to help Canadians adversely affected by the BC fires. Significant was the fact that he did NOT say his government would match those funds.

In my opinion, regardless of the endless selfies and photo ops reminding us of PM Trudeau’s rock star status internationally, Canadians need to pay attention to the amount of money flowing OUT of our country. Is Canada for sale? I already said “yes” at the start of his column. But, readers can judge for themselves, especially since all this generosity is being spent while Canada expects a $28.5 Billion deficit for 2017/18.

Liberal bias in Bloomberg’s Marc Champion analysis of Trump’s Warsaw speech

I am sure that Bloomberg’s Marc Champion is an excellent journalist. But, given his obvious anti-Trump bias, he couldn’t have heard what I heard during President Donald Trump’s amazing Warsaw speech.

Yes, I like Trump but as a Canadian I have no horse in this race, so to speak. It is just that when I first saw the tweet from Marc Champion referring to his column “Trump Just Redefined Western Values Around Faith, Not Democracy,” I was dumbfounded. How could anyone listen to that speech and interpret Trump’s stated “Western values” as anything other than representing democracy and the rule of law?

For example, Trump talked openly about how the Polish know exactly what life is like in a free Poland, compared to living under Communism or Nazism. I also clearly heard Trump refer to the Poles right to freedom of religion and the freedom of speech that allows its citizens to debate differing ideas?

Yet, Champion writes:”In a speech to cheering crowds in Warsaw on Thursday, Trump described the West’s values in terms of religion and culture and called for the defense of its civilization against radical Islam. It amounted to a manifesto for his foreign-policy vision. The address included repeated invocations of God, faith, tradition, national sovereignty and family. It made only passing reference to what are usually cited as core Western values: the rule of law, democracy and freedom of speech.

Made only passing reference? What did Champion expect? Did he expect Trump to provide a politically correct shopping list of each and every Western value?  Duh!  The term Western “values” should cover all the core values.

In my opinion, such complaints are just petty because they assume conservatives don’t value tolerance and inclusiveness. Wrong! Inclusiveness should not negate the fact that the Polish want their country to be primarily a Christian country. I mean, lots of Christian countries have welcomed Muslim migrants into their society — like Sweden which, unfortunately, is being torn apart for doing just that.

In other words, the Polish closed border policy is not necessarily an intolerance towards Muslims but, rather, tolerance towards Christians. But, make no mistake, that appears to be a problem for Champion. Specifically, he writes:”Last year, Polish President Andrzei Duda took part in a religious ceremony that officially recognized Jesus as the King of Poland.”

What Champion may be forgetting is that it was a beloved Polish Pope, John Paul II, who set off the tearing down of the Soviet wall.

In this aerial photo, a column of migrants moves through fields in Rigonce, Slovenia, Sunday, Oct. 25, 2015. (AP Photo/Darko Bandic)

We also need to remember that, quite apart from Islamist terrorists, Muslims the world over are saying that they expect their new countries to allow them to institute Sharia Law and all that implies. They also say openly that what they ultimately want is to turn the entire Western world into Muslim nations.

I mean, just look at the millions of migrants moving across Europe in the image to the left, essentially a peaceful invasion of mostly men of fighting age, and you can see what is happening to that “Western” continent.

Clearly, Poland is correct to be cautious!

In the final analysis, Champion’s analysis of the Warsaw speech is a perfect example of how the liberal media interpret — with their one-sided politically correct magnifying glasses — what conservative thinkers like President Trump believe.

The crux of the matter is that such liberals don’t seem to see the potential dangers in their own foreclosed intolerant way of speaking and thinking.




PM Trudeau’s narcissism an embarrassment for many Canadians

Check the short video clip above of Gary, a CBC Kids puppet, getting a hug from Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Ever so cute, right? Gag me! Can you imagine the reaction of the liberal media if former PM Stephen Harper had talked to and hugged a puppet? They would have said, and rightly so, that it was childish and an example of a self-promoting narcissist. And, they would have been right.

Our current Prime Minister is 45 years old, 46 in December 2017. He has 3 children of his own. Yet, he comes across as a self-absorbed, conceited man-child, or at the very least, a man-teen.

Yet, dare complain about that or anything else the man does or doesn’t do and the liberal mainstream media get their shirts in a knot, calling such complaints “conservative bias”.

For example, Sun media dared to compare Harper and Trudeau on their understanding of economic issues affecting the middle class by looking at their upbringings and work experience — and Huff Post calls such a comparison nothing more than blatant “conservative bias”. Yet, in my opinion, the Sun comparison is reality and it is the Huff Post reaction that is blatant bias — as in making pro-Trudeau excuses for the fact that Trudeau is not middle class and never has been.

In fact, the writer of the Huff Post editorial sounds like a snowflake. He or she writes:

As for Harper and Trudeau’s former occupations, we’re a little miffed here. If you’re trying to paint the Prime Minister as a down-to-earth Canadian, maybe let’s not highlight the whole corporate lobbyist and political aide bits.”

Note, there is no mention in the Huff Post column that the information about Trudeau was incorrect — they just wanted to put down Harper’s experience as a former lobbyist and political aide. Is the journalist so partisan and clueless that he or she can’t see that working as a lobbyist and political aide might be good preliminary experience for a politician and that by ridiculing and minimizing that experience might actually be viewed as shilling for the Liberals and Trudeau himself?

There is an old saying that the proof is in the pudding or in the eating of the pudding. Well, this past Saturday on Parliament Hill, at our 150th Canada Day, Trudeau proved his incompetence, first, when he forgot to acknowledge Alberta as a province and, then, when he said he was jealous of recent immigrants because they got to choose Canada. Meaning? That new Canadians were somehow more Canadian than those of us born here?

So what if we take our citizenship for granted? Is that not a good thing? Has Trudeau no clue that those of us born here have paid taxes all our lives, working day in and day out to build and better our country. And, more importantly, did he completely forget that it was our loved ones who bled and died for this country in two world wars, peacekeeping and Afghanistan?

Anyway, as I said at the start of this post, PM Trudeau’s child-like narcissism has become a national embarrassment and particularly clear since the election of the new Conservative Leader, Andrew Scheer. While actually younger than Trudeau, Scheer is mature and acts like a statesman.

The crux of the matter is that 2019 can’t come soon enough!

Andrew Scheer wins CPC Leadership race!

Update May 28th, 2017:

Well, in a nail biter finale, Andrew Scheer won the CPC leadership race last night and I couldn’t be more pleased. I think he is just what the Conservative Party needs. Some say, such as John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail, that Scheer is Stephen Harper 2.0 with a smile. Well, since Mr. Harper won several elections and was PM for 10 years, that is not a bad comparison in my opinion.

Already, of course, the media is trying to paint him as a “socon” (short for social conservative) in a dismissive way, even though I have heard Scheer say many times that, if he won (like Stephen Harper), a government he led would not re-open a debate on controversial issues such as abortion and same sex marriage.

For example, I listened to Scheer’s interview with Peter Mansbridge of the CBC’s The National after he won last night.  It was very strange because, clearly, no matter how many times MP Michelle Rempel explained the voting process to Mansbridge, after the two social conservative candidates dropped off the ballot, he kept wondering aloud which candidate their voters would go to — not seeming to realize the voting system didn’t work that way. Unlike Liberal conventions where supporters vote for another candidate when their candidate drops off the ballot, all the votes were already in for this race.

So, when Mansbridge asked Scheer if he won because the socon vote went to him, Scheer said no and he was right because that is not what happened. What happened in that more CPC members had listed  Scheer in the 10th spot on their ballots than they did for Max Bernier.  And, those unknown voters could have been progressive conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, social conservatives or none of the above.

End of story. The crux of the matter is that Andrew Scheer won and I wish he and the entire Conservative caucus well!

Original Post was dated May 10th, 2017:

Just letting regular readers know that I have already voted in the CPC Leadership race. I chose Andrew Scheer as my # 1 choice, Erin O’Toole as my # 2 choice and Lisa Raitt as my #3 choice. I didn’t vote for any others because I would not want any of the other candidates to win, knowing they could not possibly win against PM J. Trudeau in 2019. And, that is just a reality. For example, while I like Kellie Leitch and Max Bernier, I don’t believe that either of them would inspire enough country-wide Conservative votes in a federal election to make them PM. Just my opinion.

Endnote: I don’t know if I am going to continue to blog after the CPC Convention on May 27th, 2017. I have been blogging now for eleven years and am very tired. The other issue is that traffic for blogs is way down in favour of Facebook and Twitter.  Anyway, I can always be found on Twitter @sandycrux.