Apolitical Staples

Greg, Jason Kenney is correct. And if the Tories would just get over the social conservative thing, they’d have a lot more female urban voters, and gay male urban voters, as well. I know a lot of gay men in TO who would vote for Harper, but for the “revisiting” of the marriage issue.

And if the Tories would just get over the social conservative thing

But Rondi, that is their thing.

I thought their thing was small government, fiscal responsibility and sensible foreign policy. The social conservatism strikes me as a Reform thing — something to placate Albertans, who are going to vote Tory anyways. Harper would do better to think about voters like me, who won’t necessarily vote Tory.

I thought their thing was small government, fiscal responsibility and sensible foreign policy.

I think a lot of libertarians thought the CPC would tilt that way. Their track record so far does not support that. In fact, I would say that they are moving closer to the modern Republican model of social conservativism mixed with drunken sailor like spending (something Andrew Coyne has noted in several posts).

Socialist Greg,

aside from the single SSM vote, which would fall under Rondi’s ‘just placating that wing of the party move’,

care to outline the major social conservative policy initiatives that have so dominated the CPC platform?

There’s a big difference between being a social conservative party, and not completely shunning so cons.

They are a voting bloc. Or put another way, they are a group of voting Canadians. Should they have absolutely no voice at all in our democracy?

I would suggest that their interests as a group are likely under represented, when compared to their voting numbers, rather than over represented.

Last I checked we still are a pluralistic democracy. Or perhaps some groups just don’t count?

aside from the single SSM vote

Firstly, that’s sorta like saying “Aside from the shooting how was the theatre, Mrs.Lincoln”. It is a huge issue that marked the first part of their term. Also, you have daycare (much hated by the socons) and to a lesser extent the court challenges programme and Status of Women (I say to a lesser extent because I suspect there is some crossover appeal to the libertarians in these cuts). Also, you can see in Harper’s message to immigrants an appeal to “family values” as the reason they should support the CPC.

Also Chester, I do not mean to suggest that their appeal to the socons is not legitimate. I think the CPC is an alliance between Socons and libertarians. It seems to me that that is not a very stable alliance as Rondi pointed out, because their interests do not always coincide. Socons don’t mind wielding government power as long as it advances their agenda, whereas libertarians distrust government power, period. That can’t be an easy circle to square.

It is not daycare that socons are opposed to it is government funding of a choice that resides in the family. It is a double-double as it applies just as well to libertarians.

Actually, I now see what Socialist Greg’s standard is.

All policies which please the So Cons (regardless of how appealing it may be to other segments) must be avoided.

I think Socialist Greg proved my point. It’s not enough not to be So Con per se, the “acceptble” party has to be actively anti-So Con.

But coming from a socialist, It’s understandable, so no problemo.

Thankfully most Canadians view socialism (N.Korea, USSR ect.) for what it is - the proverbial road to hell paved with good intentions (and a lot of peasant corpses).

‘Tisn’t such a hard circle to square.

It just requires standing up for individual conscience and government neutrality. Case in point — that rumoured “Protection of Religions Act” that caused such a hubbub in the blogosphere. Other case in point — cutting funding to left-wing advocacy groups.

Foreign policy — aligning with liberal democracies against terror-producing semi-states abroad — is another point of broad agreement in this coalition.

I didn’t particularly like revisiting the marriage issue, but it was done that way in order to lay it to rest finally even within the Conservative Party. And that’s now been done.

Re the court challenges program, Status of Women, &c. — “some” crossover appeal to libertarians? Nonsense, it was total appeal to libertarians.

There is a reason why libertarians and social conservatives have tended to build bridges — it’s a natural coalition between classical liberalism and classical conservatism against socialism in its soft or hard forms…

Woops got a tad agressive there. Chester’s family suffered at the hands of a socialist regime, sorry.

Chester must keep his cool in order to spread the love that is conservatism.

What the holy hell is a social conservative? Somebody who wants to preserve no fault divorce, abortion on demand and gay marriage? Affirmative action? Who are these reactionary bastards anyway?

“I think the CPC is an alliance between Socons and libertarians.”

It’s also an alliance with social liberals; in fact many conservatives in mega-cities like Toronto are social liberals. But I know several gays who are Conservative and now that SSM is out of the way, there will be more. As Mike Harris used to say, “ When I talk to gays, I discover that they like tax cuts too”

The over-riding decision to vote Conservative becomes one of smaller government trumping everything else such as social issues where yes we do have disagreement (just as the Liberal party does BTW).

If conservatives can agree on the notion that letting entrepreneurs in the marketplace reinvest more of their profits is what breeds success, then we hold our noses on the rest. Because we know Dippers and Liberals believe in bigger government and that will only hurt our prospects on a vibrant economy needed to fund a base level of Health Care and Education and more recently to ensure we have the best environment that’s economically feasible in a competitive world.

It is a huge issue that marked the first part of their term.

I can think of several huge issues that have dominated the first term of Harper’s government, but the SSM vote wasn’t one of them. It came and went with a minimum of fuss. The specific cuts to SWC and the CCP generated much more heat. The CPC promised to ask whether the SSM issue should be revisited; the progs whined that it was inappropriate to ask but everyone (socons and solibs alike) predicted the vote would fail. The CPC then posed the vote and it failed as predicted. The progs again whined that it had been inappropriate to do so - I suppose they had to milk it for all it was worth, but that turned out to be very little. Everything the government does has to be spun for party advantage by the opposition parties. Yawn.