When the Conservatives do the right thing they deserve the credit
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
I was really pleased when Lincon freed the slaves, how's that for credit?
Too old school. Okay I was pleased by PM Brian Muluny's Ozone treaty and his position on South African Apartid.
I'll give credit to Harper if the rumours are true and he's going to support abolishing the Senate. Even if its for the wrong reasons.
Too old school. Okay I was pleased by PM Brian Muluny's Ozone treaty and his position on South African Apartid.
I'll give credit to Harper if the rumours are true and he's going to support abolishing the Senate. Even if its for the wrong reasons.
My stealth-Sikh friend who goes turbanless and beardless but chairs a committee in his temple would approve. But Jason's only one guy; when the Quebec wing of his party passes a motion that Mme. Marois do the right thing by her own Charter by consigning the huge and gory Christian crucifix that now dominates the very centre of her 'secular' government to a museum of Quebec history and culture then I'll extend that to his party.
Oh? Don't they have a Quebec wing? Great, no one with a personal stake in the game, even less reason for ambivalence or delay from the government that appointed an Ambassador of Religious Freedoms. Can't claim all are equally unfree or free when just one religion owns the National Assembly.
Oh? Don't they have a Quebec wing? Great, no one with a personal stake in the game, even less reason for ambivalence or delay from the government that appointed an Ambassador of Religious Freedoms. Can't claim all are equally unfree or free when just one religion owns the National Assembly.
Not sure why Fuji is worked up about this. Does it deserve a special post when a man who is not Jewish goes to the funeral of a Jewish friend and covers their head in the Synagogue?
It ain't exactly a portrait in bravery when he takes a position that is both supported by the overwhelming majority of Canadians and at the same time panders to the anti-Quebec crowd that makes up a large part of their Western base. The fact that his stance also happens to be on the ethically "correct" side of the issue is entirely incidental, I assure you. 'Tis a win-win all 'round, and the only people he stands to alienate are Quebec sovereigntists that never vote for the PCs anyways. His posturing is no more courageous than if he declared that ice cream was good, or punching strangers in the face is bad.
Nonetheless, he has done the right thing in standing up for people who no doubt felt marginalized by Quebec's racist action. He has made sure they know they are welcomed in Canada despite it. He has also backed up the photo with official statements that his government will oppose the law in court.
The Conservatives have also done the right thing by making other brave statements like "criminals are bad", "job creation is good". They also do the right thing every single day they don't shart in their pants. And let's not forget their daring support for puppy dogs and rainbows.
The PQ-tistes and Western Cons need each other like the Hatfields need the McCoys. Without the hostility towards the other side to fire up the base, they'd be sad and irrelevant. But... but.. this is controversial, right? No. This is pandering, plain and simple. The PQ is thrilled with this fake-assed display of principal from a predictable opponent. It helps them garner support for sovereignty against those interfering feds. And the Cons are thrilled to give them what they want here since it takes up column inches without mentioning the senate. The fact that Kenney is taking the ethically correct position is irrelevant, but a happy coincidence I suppose. Far, far more important though are the bonus points for firing up anti-Quebec anglos with the whole tempest in a teapot, always good for a few votes.
I'm surprised that you of all people, fuji, fail to see how utterly unsurprising and manipulative this "brave stand" is. The reality behind the posturing on both sides is that the PQ cares no more about their stupid values charter than the PC cares about opposing it. Both stances are no more than convenient tools to get more mouth-breathers voting for them. And guaran-fucking-teed that both sides are secretly thrilled to motherfucking bits over the way the whole thing is playing out. Wouldn't have it any other way. If Quebec hadn't come up with this Charter or some similar bullshit to boost both parties, Harper HQ would have had to phone them to suggest it.
Same old hypocrisy from Harpo's team.Good job Jason Kenney.
Last December Mr. Kenney was perfectly comfortable stomping on the right of Muslim women to wear the burqa or niqab during the citizenship ceremony.
While its difficult to decipher what you are babbling about it appears as if you support Marois general objective of removing religious symbols and want the Conservatives to as well. Or perhaps it was the opposite. Or maybe its just for her to be consistent even if its to consistently restrict freedoms. When you sort it out let us know. Better yet don't bother.
You apparently missed the topic of this thread: Praise for a statement by a Conservative Party spokesperson. I think I made it clear he and his party had no dog in the fight, but beyond that he had weaseled on the PQ Premier's indefensibly hypocritical claim to defend a secular Quebec government while she stands under a giant crucifix in the National Assembly. Still I thank you for asking me to repeat it.
Somewhere there is a thread properly and predictably bashing Marois and her Charter, perhaps that's the one you thought you were reading, but I didn't bother with it. Had you really not wanted me to clarify, you would have been wiser to have done the same with my post. But I knew you were just funnin'.
I'm sure hoping he does, but I suspect by the time there is an actual law to oppose, it will have been watered down to the same sort of tolerable infringement on rights as requiring a niqab to be removed to testify in Court.
