Such a charge becomes much more interesting when a Liberal makes it.
...In contrast, "Liberals trumpeted a trickle-down social-safety net approach, arguing that a strong anti-poverty social-safety net will address the root causes of crime."
However, a "focus on prevention alone does nothing for those families in crime-ridden high rises where illegal guns police the hallways," the paper maintains.
Worse, Mr. Bryant states, the Liberals have "very little substance to offer by way of alternative, and certainly nothing new or effective. The typical federal Liberal approach to crime, in a word, is a boomer approach that is stuck in the summer of love."
As a result, Mr. Bryant argues, "Crime is for Liberals what the environment is for Conservatives."
Update: The mole strikes again!

Comments (6)
Ya gotta love Bryant’s timing and blood-stained tracks in the snow for every one to see and read, eh? Is there anything else that could possibly go wrong for Flipper & Co?
Posted by Erik Sorenson | March 6, 2007 4:50 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 16:50
Grow a spine, Liberal wimps. The CPC has nothing to offer but warmed over failed Republican policies. All the Liberals need to do is point to the U.S. penal system and their whole case falls apart. They won’t do that though for fear of offending the dumbasses in the own caucus. So, go get ‘em CPC.
Posted by Greg | March 6, 2007 5:22 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 17:22
Talking about spines, (Sinister) Greg, how’s Jack’s on Afghanistan these days?
Barbs aside, I really think Dion is “retiring” soon. Think of it. If Dion goes, the Tory advert $’s are wasted. The Libs can say the offside policies and positions were Dion’s and can start afresh. Buzz says “thanks”. I love it. The best tactic for a cash-strapped party. Just one press conference, health reasons (cough, cough). Fifty bucks cost, tops.
May give Harper pause about an election real soon. May save some Liberal seats. Would caucus like it? You bet!
Waddya think?
Posted by Erik Sorenson | March 6, 2007 6:06 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 18:06
Talking about spines, (Sinister) Greg, how’s Jack’s on Afghanistan these days?
As far as I know, he hasn’t changed his mind. He hasn’t backed down either even though I am sure you guys have wounded him deeply with you manly taunts of “Taliban Jack”.
Posted by Greg | March 6, 2007 6:12 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 18:12
Let’s pick apart this “tough on crime” stuff from the moral angle … ‘cos that’s the only angle from which it should be considered, right? Not from the point of view of electability and mass appeal. And we should be able to get through this without warming over our Auntie American’s predictable opinions.
The war on drugs is a crock, it’s a crime against humanity for governments to presume that they can decide which substances are fit for human consumption and which are not, and it’s a tragedy beyond words that any political party presuming to represent the public good would imprison people for selling and consuming products which are no more harmful when either used or abused than tobacco, alcohol or cheeseburgers. The lefties come out slightly ahead the conservatives in this area, because of their feeble, half-assed commitment to decriminalize simple possession. Very slightly.
But that advantage won by the lefties is erased by their idiotic attachment to destroying Canadian cities by encouraging drug use through the provision of free syringes and crack pipes, shooting-up zones, and lately the push is on to give away free drugs. Fattening up and stupefying the dregs of society so that pig farmers can turn them into sausages. And the lefties bear a huge responsibility for the rampant abuse of drugs with their high-tax, high-welfare and low-responsibility approach to governing. Drug abuse is the number one pastime of the unemployed and underemployed, and unemployment and underemployment are the hallmark of socialist governments. The lefties are not only stupid in this regard but greedy as well, because it is the leftist army of bureaucrats, social workers, poverty activists, health care workers, etc. which enriches itself off the boredom and misery of the less fortunate.
Then you have real crimes, which are committed against lives and property. Conservatives come out a little bit ahead in this regard, at least as far as rhetoric is concerned, but they fall down to the extent that they do not advocate any major cut to government spending or taxes. The welfare state is in its essence a criminal enterprise which removes both the means by which people can make an honest living and the motivation for doing so. Conservatives seem to be afraid that if they stood up for life and property in any meaningful way, they’d lose the criminal vote. (Unfortunately the criminal element, having more time on their hands and being less inclined to making a living the old fashioned way, come out and vote far more consistently than the people who are busy working, taking care of their families, and paying taxes). So instead they’ll pick their battles and beat up a few heinous criminals and hope that no one notices that their pockets are still being picked.
Posted by Anonymous | March 6, 2007 9:21 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 21:21
It is hilarious that The provincial liberals are lecturing the federal liberals on crime. maybe i’ll drive through caledonia this weekend and see what an awesome job they are doing about enforcing the law in this province
Or i’lll go and ask Jane Creba’s murderers about poverty forcing them into a life of crime. You know, the murderers that drove away from the shooting in a BMW…
Posted by matt | March 6, 2007 10:23 PM
Posted on March 6, 2007 22:23