View topic - Reform 2...? You tell us. :: Free Dominion - Principled Conservative - Party and Canadian Politics

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:26 pm Post subject: Reform 2...? You tell us.

Ok folks, here it is. We are having a meeting in Kingston, on May 12th, to determine whether we should re-start the party or not. If you can agree to the following 5 policies below, PM me and i will give you more info. I'm am disgusted at where the CPC is going, and the Shane Doan issue is the last straw for me. This will not be a large meeting. We have space for 30 people. Socons and fiscal conservatives will be welcomed with open arms. Red tories...don't bother contacting me. I am a founding member of the Reform party and am completely disillusioned at the dreadful state this country is in. Its now or never. The one thing i can promise you,is that this new party will never be infiltrated by red tories, special interest groups or quebec again. If you have a problem with these policies, do not bother contacting me.

1- Less government (elimination of

>departments and staffing) 2-Substanial tax reductions across the board

>3- referendum, recall, elected senate and elected judges 4-An end to

>enforced bilingualism and multiculturalism 5-enshrining property

>rights...this will resonate with everyone, real vote getters, and most

>importantly the other parties won't touch these issues. We set the

>agenda ourselves, who cares what the other parties are saying or

>doing. None of them will discuss these issues during an election

>anyways,

another reason we stick out like a sore thumb.
:
Liberal, Tory, same old story… Hi folks, just a little something to get us primed for the meeting on May 12th…in Kingston. A few things before hand, I attend a lot of meetings monthly here in Ottawa. I chair and moderate when asked. I am volunteering to moderate our meeting in Kingston, after were done eating of course. Relax I’m a strong believer in free speech, and I don’t believe in micro managing meetings, but we do need some order and I think everyone should have equal time to speak. I believe this is fair, and I have a lot of experience doing this. We need some one to take minutes as well, some one volunteer please, and let us know.

Ok now, why are we having this meeting? Why do we need a new party? What are your views in regards to policy? What do you bring to the table? What will make us different from the CPC…? Just a few things that we’ll to be discussing…be prepared to answer these at the meeting. Pass this on to the people attending please. This is to be a small meeting, one that will allow us to get prepared for a larger one down the road, hopefully very soon. I’m really looking forward to this meeting. Cheers, I look forward to meeting everyone. T

Licia Corbella

Fri, May 4, 2007

Federal Tories losing touch

By LICIA CORBELLA

Besides being a political power play that is way offside, the Shane Doan affair is instructive on another level.
It shows just how sadly out of touch the federal Conservative party has become.
When the Conservatives broke their election promise on not taxing income trusts, most of their voters understood why and forgave them. The Tories did what they believed was best for the country and many economic analysts agreed that changing circumstances required a change in policy.
When the Tories fiddled with the equalization formula and gave the lion's share to Quebec, most of their voters understood why and forgave them.
In their eagerness to be viewed as more green than Kermit the Frog, the Tories announced a carbon tax. Most of their voters understood why and forgave them. If the Liberals had done this, there would have been screams of bloody murder in Alberta. Then again, a Tory carbon tax is likely better than what the Liberals would do under Stephane Dion.
When it comes to the Conservatives being uncharacteristically off-message on what happens to Taliban prisoners after our Canadian soldiers hand them over to Afghan authorities, most of their voters understand why and forgive them. After all, Afghanistan's government is in a bit of a mess.
Now that it's been shown the Liberals knew Taliban prisoners might get tortured way back in 2002 and decided to turn them over to Afghan authorities with no provision for even checking on their welfare, many voters recognize the Liberals were much worse on the file than the Conservatives - and hypocrites besides.

But this latest swing by the Tories into shameful Liberal, NDP and Bloc territory in the Doan affair will not be forgiven so easily. It is not good for the country, for the party, for decency or for anything.
All politically attuned Canadians know that for power all politicians in Canada must pander somewhat to Quebec. It is simply a necessity. Most of us can live with some of that.
But trying to score political points on the back of an upstanding, honourable young hockey star playing his heart out for his country on a volunteer basis in Moscow is akin to a cheap shot for many Conservatives. This will stick in their craws for a long time.
Yesterday, Conservative members of the Commons' official languages committee -- including the five Conservatives who supported a Bloc motion to summon Hockey Canada officials to yesterday's hearing -- tried to soften their message and show support for Captain Canada. It was too little, too late.
They should have voted against the motion. Period. First, Doan categorically denies having called a French Canadian linesman a "f---ing Frenchman." By virtue of the fact that he is known not to swear and actually uses the word "fudge" on the ice at times of frustration would appear to back him up.
In addition, Doan was cleared by the NHL more than a year ago on this almost two-year-old incident.
If there is ever a time when French and English come together most beautifully in this country, it is on the ice. The political arena tends to muck up the whole thing.
The Tories are plummeting in the polls because they no longer know who they are or what they stand for and voters know it.
They should stand up for decency and this country. Always. Shane Doan stands for both. By voting to question his captaincy the Conservatives prove unquestioningly how offside they have skated in their blind pursuit of power.
licia.corbella@calgarysun.com www.ottawasun.com

Selling out true conservatism

Gerry Nicholls, National Post

Published: Friday, April 27, 2007

If Prime Minister Stephen Harper deserves credit for uniting the
Conservative Party of Canada, he must also take the blame for dividing the
conservative movement.

And make no mistake, Harper's deliberate strategy of diluting conservative
principles and moving the party to the left has split the movement into two
factions.

The members of one faction, who might be dubbed the "Tory Partisans,"
support the Prime Minister as they would support their favourite sports
team. Ideology doesn't necessarily matter to them. What matters above all to
Tory Partisans is winning.

The other faction, which might be called the "Principled Conservatives," are
horrified with what Harper is doing; they believe the Conservative party
must actually stand for certain values and ideas.

In other words, the Principled Conservatives want the Conservative party to
be truly conservative-- that is, a party which stands for free enterprise
and less government.

As for me, I am firmly in the Principled Conservative camp.

As a conservative activist for more than 20 years, I have always believed in
the importance of linking principles with politics. What's the point of
electing a Conservative government if it will act no differently from a
Liberal government?

Or to put it another way, Canadians need a true choice when it comes to
selecting their governments -- they need an alternative to the Liberals.

And to be blunt, the Tories have simply not delivered.

They have failed to cut back on the size of government, failed to control
spending and failed to introduce broad-based tax cuts for both individuals
and businesses.

Of course, the Tory Partisans have counterarguments to all this, which they
trot out to defend Harper's "centrist" approach. Yet they are not so much
arguments as myths.

And for the sake of Canada's conservative movement, we need to examine and
debunk these myths once and for all. So here we go:

MYTH 1: CANADA IS A LEFT-WING COUNTRY

Both Tory Partisans and left-wing pundits propagate this myth, which claims
that Canadians are too socialist to elect a truly conservative party. Too
socialist? Tell that to Don Cherry. Tell that to Albertans. Tell that to the
Ontarians who live in what the media likes to call "Harris Country." Or tell
that to the Quebecois who live in a province where two of the three main
provincial parties are right of centre. The fact is there are enough votes
for a truly conservative party to win an election in this country. Somebody
just has to go after them.

MYTH 2: CONSERVATIVE IDEOLOGY IS TOO SCARY

One of the oldest myths out there. Remember when pundits and media "experts"
dismissed the electoral chances of conservatives like Ronald Reagan,
Margaret Thatcher and Mike Harris. They were all considered "too right wing"
or "too scary." Yet they all achieved great success. Why? Because they stood
for something. They had values. And there's nothing scary about promising to
get government out of people's lives.

MYTH 3: MOVING LEFT IS JUST A TACTIC TO ENSURE A MAJORITY IN THE NEXT
ELECTION

Selling out true conservatism
Gerry Nicholls, National Post
Published: Friday, April 27, 2007

Three problems with this myth: First by moving to the left, the Tories are
actually hurting their chances of winning a majority. Second, even if they
do win a majority they won't have a mandate to implement a conservative
agenda. Third, once you start making government bigger it's hard to make it
smaller. As Reagan once put it, "No government ever voluntarily reduces
itself in size ? a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life
we'll ever see on this Earth."

MYTH 4: PRAGMATISM TRUMPS PRINCIPLE

Former Conservative campaign manager Tom Flanagan is the chief promoter of
this myth. He recently wrote: "Too many years out of power have given
conservatives an anti-government mentality. The whole point of merging the
Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives was to create a
political party that could win control of the federal government."
Flanagan's wrong. The whole point of conservatism is to make government
smaller. We are supposed to have an "anti-government mentality."

I do not seek to cast aspersions on Tory Partisans. They are right when they
say that winning elections is important. But Tory Partisans must remember
one key fact: They can't win elections without principled conservatives at
their side.

Gerry_nicholls@hotmail.com

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:35 pm Post subject:

On this point I am clear. I will not support the creation of a new conservative political party prior to the next election. What conservatives need right now is a voice outside of the party structures. The CPC will not respond to the voice of conservatives inside the party and the creation of a new party will be a slap at our friends who have chosen to stay with the CPC in spite of their reservations. We need an independent conservative voice that will provide clear, considered criticism of government when necessary and praise when warranted. A voice such as this will balance the constant harping and lobbying done by the leftists. And we won't be left with dead silence when an issue such as the lightbulb ban gets proposed. The fact that public opposition to that proposal was left to a few journalists, demonstrates the failure of conservatives to have a national voice. Groups we thought were reliable, like the NCC and AIMS, have been eerily silent on some of the CPC initiatives.

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:39 pm Post subject:

Who has the Reform name reserved? Was the CPC able to keep it to prevent such an eventuality? The CA had Reform in its official name. But then it also had Conservative despite the alreasy existing Progressive Conservatives. Maybe you can use it.

I'll stick with Harper to see this thing throuh.
_________________

Mo Strong, Mo Problems.

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:46 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:46 pm Post subject:

A party for people who want to sit around and complain about things, but do not want to ever have a realistic chance to make any meaningful changes?

Count me out.

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:51 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:51 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 12:59 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:04 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:06 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:08 pm Post subject:

Thanks for the clarification ES. I certainly agree that is healthy to have this debate. It would be .very difficult for me to support the creation of a new political party at this time, but I'm certainly willing to listen to what people have to say.

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:22 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:36 pm Post subject:

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:52 pm Post subject:

The fact that there are serious conservatives even discussing the concept of a new party, should be a wake up call to everyone who is still within the CPC. Resist the urge to attack those who have started this initiative [I am not one of them and have not been invited to the meeting] and start asking yourselves how it has managed to come to this.

It would be easy to reject these people as anti-Harper who never intended to give him a fair shake. But when you honestly look at how far Harper has moved since (a) he was named CPC leader and (b) since he was elected Prime Minister, it is not difficult to see why people are having grave concerns.

I dare say that most of those who were CPC members in 2004 supported Harper over Stronach and Clement. And many also likely supported Harper over Day in 2002 for the CA leadership [to my eternal shame, I was one of them]. You can dismiss us as perpetual Harper Haters and attack us as we leave or you can try to understand why we have been driven away from the CPC and decide to take steps to stem the tide.

Your chances of convincing me are very remote, but if you actually pay attention to the comments of other people [yes, even Bulldog] you would quickly see that it is paining these people to have to consider not voting CPC. They are being torn between a desire to keep the Liberals out of power and a desire not to reward a CPC which has turned its back on them. Harper may be correct in his assessment that the vast majority of conservative voters will hold their nose and vote for him because of fear of Dion. But is that anyway to build a winning coalition: forcing people who supported you for the leadership to go through so much angst and then have to leave the ballot box with a bitter taste in their mouths and a feeling of emptiness in their hearts?

Posted: 05/ 06/ 07 1:55 pm Post subject:

There won't be a CPC sign on my lawn in the next election. They may very well not get my vote at all, I can't say one way or the other at this point in time.

	The time now is 02/ 09/ 10 9:08 am
	Home ∴ Forum ∴ Recent ∴ Register ∴ Profile ∴ Log in to check your private messages ∴ Log in FAQ ∴ Search ∴ Donate ∴ Activist's Toolbox ∴ FD Links ∴ FD Swag [ Login to join chat ] FD Arcade - Click Here-->