Conservatives need to stop appeasing liberal political correctness

Click for source.

Lorrie Goldstein’s article “Conservatives wrong to appease Liberals” in today’s Toronto Sun is bang on. Why? Because, as Goldstein says, appeasing political correctness simply doesn’t work.

Be it in the UK with Brexit, the U.S. with the election of Donald Trump, or here in Canada with the election of Justin Trudeau’s Liberals, the very people who condemn conservatives for being politically incorrect are the very people who would never vote for them.

For example, in Canada during the 2015 federal election, the Liberals, the NDP and the liberal media complained ad nauseam that the “nasty” Harper Conservatives had to change their “tone” — both in the House of Commons and elsewhere.

The problem was, the nasty tone was not coming from Conservatives. The phenomenon is called projection in psychology. The Urban Dictionary describes the condition as: An unconscious self-defence mechanism characterised by a person unconsciously attributing their own issues onto someone or something else …. ”

I mean, you can see it in the U.S. since Donald Trump won the U.S. election. Protesters will stand in front of a silent conservative and scream that they are Nazis and fascists for daring to support Trump. I particularly remember the professor at the Berkeley riots screaming hateful epithets at a police officer who didn’t say a thing. On that topic, check out this Google page where there are 12,000,000 related hits on academics saying exactly what they criticize others for saying.

In Canada, during the Harper years, the Liberals and their media friends constantly cried wolf with never-ending “gotchas,” all the while claiming that PM Stephen Harper was cold, brittle and sarcastic. Unfortunately, during the 2015 federal election, too many Canadians believed the Trudeau Liberal “sunny ways” mantra and lies that they would be more transparent and accountable.

Anyway, fast forward to 2017.  Senator Lynn Beyak dared to say that she hoped that some Aboriginal students experienced some good while in the residential school system. The problem was that Beyak was hammered, not only by the liberal left for daring to suggest such a thing, but MP Rona Ambrose, the Interim Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC). In fact, Ambrose removed Beyak from the Senate Aboriginal People’s Committee rather than support her right to free speech.

Talk about an overreaction to political correctness. But, it doesn’t end there unfortunately. Today’s Toronto Star recommends that Beyak “do the right thing” and resign from the Senate altogether.

Unbelievable! Our country is being overrun with liberal progressive “thought police.”

Well, enough already!!!! Goldstein is correct. The crux of the matter is that when Conservative politicians like Ambrose try to appease Liberals by being politically correct, conservative voters might just decide to stay away from the ballot box in 2019.

End note: If Senator Beyak reads this article, I want her to know that many conservatives like myself do not want her to resign because she has done nothing wrong. She simply stated an opinion, an opinion that in no way takes away from the horrors some Aboriginal students experienced in the residential school system. However, interestingly, it is obvious that some of the comments on Twitter under the hashtag #lynnbeyak, are examples of the very projection and fascist bullying I talked about in this post.

Canada’s Conservative leadership race a crowded field

conservative-french-debate-20170117

Click for CBC column.

The current Conservative Party of Canada’s (CPC) leadership race is quickly becoming a crowded field. For starters, at 13, there are too many candidates, many of whom have no chance of winning.  As well, as Tuesday’s French debate showed, many of the candidates don’t speak even passable French, which is an essential skill in order to lead Canada.

Worst of all though, is the infighting. For example, as I wrote recently, it was completely unnecessary for Lisa Raitt to lash out at Kellie Leitch just because Leitch wants to screen  for Canadian values refugees and immigrants coming from countries where there is terrorism.

Still others, like Kevin O’Leary are, in my opinion, just trying to get attention and latch on to Donald Trump’s popularity to the south. Believe me, O’Leary is not like Trump, who praises all veterans and the military. O’Leary says that while peacekeeping is an honour, being a warrior is not.  Meaning, that to actually fight is not an honour. Well, excuse me. Try telling that to the thousands of men and women who fought, were maimed or gave their lives in World Wars I, II and Korea.

Anyway, at the moment, given all the factors, including passable French, I am leaning towards Andrew Scheer. I also like Leitch, Chong and O’Toole and hope that their French improves. In fact, I have joined the CPC so that I can vote in May when the leadership vote is held. However, that said, I am still willing to look at other candidates.

To me, the key to who has the best chance of running against Justin Trudeau and winning is the candidate who can match Trudeau’s “sunny ways.” Scheer would definitely be equal in that regard as he is young, experienced, personable and has a young family as well. Similarly, O’Toole has presence. Yes, I know they don’t have the charisma of Trudeau but if Canadians get fed up enough with the direction the Liberals are taking the country, I believe that, by 2019, a majority would look carefully at the CPC leader.

The crux of the matter however, is that, for the good the party and country, some of the current candidates need to get out of the race and those who are left need to criticize the Liberals rather than each other.

Kellie Leitch is right about screening immigrants re Canadian values

kellie-leitchKellie Leitch is currently running for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, a position she is well qualified to hold.  She not only has political and governing experience but she is a well-respected pediatric orthopedic surgeon.

So, what precisely is so wrong with what she asked in a survey such that the entire political class thinks the sky is falling?

She apparently asked if Immigrants and Refugees coming to Canada should be vetted in terms of whether or not they accept Canadian values.

Well, duh? Is that not simply common sense?

I mean:

  • Do we really want people to come to our country who believe in honour killing simply because their female children want to wear western dress?
  • Do we really want people to come into our country who don’t believe women are equal to men?

Yes, I know, people can lie to be accepted. But, what we have here is a politically correct fear of asking — for one reason alone — of being called Islamophobic.

Why? Because the majority of immigrants from European countries, Australia and/or the East, once here, usually try very hard to fit in to Canadian society. Many Muslims from the Middle East do not.

In fact, oddly, Muslims from the Middle East try to make Canada into the hell hole country they left. Prayer rooms in schools. Acceptance of niqabs. Wanting Shariah law in family courts. I mean, take a look at this Google page and you will see to what extent some Muslims want to change Western society.

Anyway, does my telling it like it actually is make me Islamophobic and a bigot? No, it does not, because everything I say is true. What it does make me feel, however, is fear, fear that certain immigrants and certain refugees not only won’t agree to accept established Canadian values, but openly oppose those values.

So, Ms. Leitch, hang in there. Ignore the naysayers because you have the silent majority behind you.

One more thing, ignore all the politically correct naysayers regarding the so-called snitch line. No one, in all the time in the year since you made that announcement, has said what help is actually out there for any young female who is threatened with genital mutilation. No one. Meaning, instead of dealing with the issue, they sweep what is happening under a politically correct rug.

The crux of the matter is that political correctness is the biggest danger we have in our society today and I am thankful that at least one of the Conservative leadership candidates — Kellie Leitch — has the guts to stand up and say it like it is.

O Canada! Some of us continue to stand on guard for thee!

Trudeau proposal at Liberal Convention vs Stephen Harper record

Justin Trudeau at Winnipeg Convention 1030After reading his very balanced analysis of former PM Stephen Harper’s ten years in power, I agree with Michael Den Tandt that history will be kind to the former PM. In fact, I believe that, since no human being is perfect, he will eventually be seen as one of Canada’s best PM’s.

Now, compare Den Tandt’s Harper record, both pro and con, to the last seven months of the Justin Trudeau Liberal Government, including what is going on at the Liberal Convention in Winnipeg this weekend.

Ah, yes, everything is now sunny ways. Except it isn’t! Elbowgate comes to mind. While I don’t want to make a big deal out of that incident, one thing was clear. When things are not going Mr. Trudeau’s way, he just might barge in to make sure everyone behaves as he thinks they should.

At the Liberal Convention in Winnipeg, for example, Mr. Trudeau is aggressively promoting a change to the federal Liberal Party Constitution that would allow anyone to become part of, at no cost, what the current PM is calling “a Liberal Movement.” Whatever that is supposed to mean. One thing is for sure, Liberal party loyalty will go by the wayside if there are no longer any grassroots “members.”

And, yes, many of those grassroots are complaining. I mean, when even liberal-friendly Joan Bryden is questioning the rate and kind of change Mr. Trudeau is recommending for his party, you have to know that Liberal leadership arrogance has already set in.

On the complaints about the Trudeau proposal, Bryden writes:

While the proposal is being touted as a way to throw open the doors of the party, it has raised hackles among rank and file Liberals who suspect it will actually turn the party into a different kind of exclusive club, one in which the leader and his cronies run the party as they see fit.

Of course, the irony is obvious. For years we heard that Stephen Harper was a controller who had a hidden agenda and, as such, was going to change the face of the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), if not all of Canada.

Well, as Den Tandt summarizes, Harper wasn’t the controller people claimed he was, he didn’t have a hidden agenda and he left both the CPC and Canada in good procedural and fiscal shape.

I wonder, will Liberals be able to say the same by 2019? I doubt it!

In my opinion, then, I believe that history will judge Stephen Harper’s leadership legacy, both to his party and his government, to be superior to that of Justin Trudeau’s.

Why is it only a problem when member of CBC Board is Conservative?

I have always known that our Canadian media and representatives connected to media are anti-conservative.

But, the complaint by Ian Morrison, spokesperson for the “Friends of Canadian Broadcasting (FCB),” that the CBC Board is too partisan because former PM Mr. Harper appointed 9 of 11 members in 2008, is puzzling.

Yet, check this FCB link and you’ll notice that the group has gone to the trouble of identifying Board members and their donations to the CPC.

So what? Why is the FCB so concerned?

Don’t all Canadians have the right to association under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section Two. I mean, the Charter doesn’t say it is only a right until you:

  1. Are appointed to a public board; or
  2. Support a conservative political party.

Anyway, why such a complaint now?

Well, apparently, Brian Mitchell, a Montreal lawyer and member of the CBC Board, announced his resignation in order to run for the presidency of the Conservative Party of Canada.

The problem, it seems, is that Mitchell was one of those 9 Harper appointees.  Meaning, he is and was a conservative party supporter.

Now, check out Jeremy J. Nuttall’s column in TheTyee.ca which is posted at the very top of a liberal-oriented news aggregator twitter feed and website — as though the fact that Conservatives are on the CBC Board is somehow major news.

To avoid that kind of partisanship, the FCB’s Morrison wants appointments made that are based solely on merit and not political.

Talk about naive!

I did my Ph.D dissertation research on the role of beliefs, as in world view, on teacher practice. What I found out when doing my review of the literature (which covered political beliefs as well) is that there is no living human being, at least one who votes in a free society, who doesn’t have a world view coloured by political ideology.

Yet, Nuttall quotes Morrison as follows:

I read ‘merit-based’ as meaning people with experience, knowledge and perspective that would be appropriate for the board of the largest cultural board in the country,” he said. “I read ‘independent’ to mean not a bunch of party hacks.”

Not a bunch of party hacks? Interesting turn of phrase when you consider that before Mr. Harper made his 9 appointments, there were mostly Liberal appointees on that board.

In other words, might there have been Liberal party hacks prior to 2006? Likely. As Nuttall writes: “When he [Mitchell] was appointed to the CBC board in 2008, he noted, it had few Tory appointees.”

So, it seems that the term party hacks is not only a subjective term, but a biased and pejorative term when it relates to Conservative supporters or donors.

Whatever.

The crux of the matter is that no matter what political party a Canadian associates with, or votes for, they should have the right to be appointed to any public board in the country, including the CBC Board.

John Ivison claims CPC would split if PCr won Conservative leadership

I missed this John Ivison column on April 5th (H/T Jack’s Newswatch).  He talks about there going to be a split in the Conservative Party of Canada unless Brad Wall decides to run (even though Wall has repeatedly said he is not interested), or if any former PC wins the race — like Peter MacKay. I sure hope Ivison is wrong.

Updated & shortened April 24th, 2016.

OECD reports Canada leading G7 nations thanks to Tory policies

The latest report from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is another good reason to vote for your Conservative Party candidate on May 2nd.

The OECD is reporting, for example, that Canada is leading all the G7 nations in economic growth, a message that needs to get out there in spite of all the election noise and the fact that we know the reverse would happen — given their promises to raise corporate taxes and spend billions of dollars on social programs — if the Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition ever grabbed power. 

Specifically, according to both this Sun Media link (H/T Wilson) and this Kitchener/Waterloo Record editorial, Prime Minister Harper and his Conservative government should take a bow. As the Record states (my italics):

“A leading international think-tank says Canada will lead its peers in the G7 in economic growth during the first half of this year. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development says the outlook for economic growth has brightened for all G7 countries, with the exception of Japan. But the improvement has been most marked in Canada and to a lesser extent the United States….

Canada is now expected to grow by 5.2 per cent in the first quarter of 2011, and 3.8 per cent in the current second quarter. Much of that growth has come from the resources sector in Western Canada and continued strength in the housing market in most parts of the country.”

It is the sentence that “much of that growth has come from the resources sector in Western Canada” that is perhaps most important given the tendency for Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and NDP Leader Jack Layton to say one thing while in Alberta, while quite another when they are in Eastern Canada.

For instance, while in Eastern Canada, Ignatieff has repeatedly said, if the Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition were to be asked to govern, they would clean up the oil industry in Alberta and implement a Cap and Trade market system — a very irresponsible promise given that it is primarily the oil resource rich provinces that are keeping Canada’s economy strong.

As such, I would ask my fellow Canadians to ignore all the daily opposition and media noise about faux scandals over these next few weeks, particularly coming out of the CBC, CTV and CPAC, when it is the economic issues that will impact our everyday lives.

Therefore, kudos to Prime Minister Harper and his former Conservative Goverment for this good news.