Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:56 pm    Post subject: What will it take to finally unite the right? Reply with quote

I know kwlafayette has hinted around this subject, mainly in asking us why we keep allowing the Liberals to tar our former leaders, especially those who are successful. Not only allow but, in some cases, actively participate as well. The current example is Mulroney but it has happened before to other leaders.

Why do right-wing parties insist of self-immolating? Are the various grassroots movements so diverse that they cannot abide each other? Is it jealousy? Is it simply that the Liberals and the MSM have the knack of pushing exactly the "right" buttons (bad pun) to make us go up in flames?

Right now, the Liberals are infighting about the ineffective leadership of Greenie Dion. Chretien and Martin were infamous for their struggle but if you asked most Liberals about it, their first loyalty is always to the party... and then their chosen leader or hopeful.

I'm not suggesting that we'd be better off emulating the Liberals (God forbid!!) but the least we can do is stop taking shots on our own net.

-Mac
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I'm not suggesting that we'd be better off emulating the Liberals (God forbid!!) but the least we can do is stop taking shots on our own net.


We should at least give Mulroney the, benefit of the doubt, innocent before proven guilty thing.
Concerned Canuck





Joined: 05 Feb 2007
Posts: 20
Reputation: 10.1
Location: Aurora, Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The establishment does a lot to tarnish our past leaders in order to hurt our future leaders. Trudeau was Canada's worst PM ever, but people unapologetically deify him. A lot of conservatives today stand aside when our former leaders are bashed because they do not want to be seen as the only one there standing for them.

Also keep in mind, it is always worth it for a liberal to bash a conservative, they have a lot riding on it. It is not always worth it for a conservative to bach a liberal.

For example, I had teachers always lieing to me about how bad Mike Harris was. It was worth it for them because in their minds they had their salaries and quality of work on the line. A conservative may not find it worthwhile to bash a liberal, when they are only paying a few dollars a year in taxes to pay for that liberal anyway.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a tough question Mac. There are a lot of different brands of conservatives in this country and not all of their viewpoints are necessarily compatible. We have social conservatives that don't mind fiscal spending. We have fiscal conservatives that may or may not be social conservatives. What we also have, and this may be most important, is the people the converted over from being Liberal in the last 2 - 3 years.

I think have a long standing success may be the way to unify our party. I think if we can make it until 2009, win the next election with a minority or majority, I think a lot of the divisive issues will be less divisive as people see that at least they have a voice, and can make small changes over time. I think adopting this type of "Big Tent" strategy is the only way to go in this FPTP system.

That's what I think anyway. I'm not saying it will/would be easy, just saying it is a proven way to win elections. Unfortunately, this would make us much more of a centrist party than a Conservative party. All thing said though, I'd rather have a centrist party lead by Harper than a far left party led by any of the other "leaders" out there.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is a tough question, isn't it?

We've seen those same pressures here in the Blogging Tories... fiscal versus social versus "red tory" versus whatever. For the most part, we handle it fairly well but there are still disputes... and some of us have learned to leave some discussions alone...

What binds us together is a love of Canada and a wish to see her return to greatness. What form of greatness and how to effect that change is still up for discussion... but, in order to have a discussion, we need to be able to communicate effectively and respectfully...

As much as I don't like Joe Clark, you'll rarely hear me mention him because I don't want to "shoot at our own net" so to speak. When I do mention him, it's to define where he went wrong. Likewise with Mulroney. Now Dief... he rocked on so many levels, I can almost forgive him for killing the Avro Arrow. Almost.

-Mac
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?

I don't disagree with you at all but he did lead one of the parties which now form the current Conservative Party to two strong majorities. Mind you, that's what I hold against him (two majorities and no conservative policies!!) but the simple fact of the matter is when we attack Mulroney, we're doing the Liberal's work for them.

-Mac
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?
In terms of spending, Mulroney doubled the debt. This was a vast improvement from Trudeau, who multiplied by 10.
mltoryblue





Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 109
Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe that divisions or different positions are more visible amongst Conservatives than Liberals because we are a party of core beliefs and take stances on many issues.

It is easy for Liberals to rally around a leader because they are willing to accept what ever their leader tells them and roll with it. They are a party thats core beliefs are whatever seems to be popular at that place in time.

When governing is the only thing that matters, who cares about taking a tough stance on anything!

The MSM doesn't help either. When the CBC puts out "Trudeau, Maverick in the Making", then sends investigative reporters out to tarnish Mulroney, it tells you where their allegiance lies.
TealTories





Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 473
Reputation: 34.7Reputation: 34.7Reputation: 34.7
votes: 1
Location: Calgary

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think it is a generational thing as well.

The Baby Boomers seem to idolize Trudeau (the charter, just society etc etc), because Trudeau was a sexy PM. His ideas were an easy sell to alot of Canadians. It all sounds eutopian, and easy to demonize someone who is against multiculturalism, for example.
To the average canadian (not BT'ers and people who read past the headlines) it would sound and the media would make it sound like, you are a racist, if you were against it.

Where the Xer's see the flaws within Trudeauisms and see the good that Mulroney did for this country. As the left tries to keep "one upping" Trudeau over the last 15 yrs we see a different country than Trudeau promised. We see more rights for the criminal than the victim. We see how multiculturalism has divided new Canadians and the rest of the population. We see how the courts continously take justice out of our legal system.
This isnt what was promised to our parents.

And I beleive...........
That conservatism is growing because those Liberal promises have been broken and because the baby boomers are starting to see what the X ers see. Not to mention their was not real alternative for a long time. Now that the CPC is back on its feet you will seee alot more conservative govt's over the next 20 yrs.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Craig wrote:
I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?
In terms of spending, Mulroney doubled the debt. This was a vast improvement from Trudeau, who multiplied by 10.


Doesn't that mean they each increased it by the same amount?

When Truedeau came to power, the debt was X. As you stated, he increased it by 10 time. Now when Mulroney came to power you say he doubled it. Therefore:

Trudeau: X * 10 = 10X
Mulroney: 10X * 2 = 20X

Both PM's increased the debt by 10X, no?
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If 13 years of arrogant, corrupt, Liberal majority rule did not do it, then I question if there is anything that will. I question if there is anything strong enough to compel a red Tory to support a social conseravtive for even one term. I question if there is a force strong enough to make a fiscal conservative support a social spender. Maybe there should just be a Red Tory party, and a Blue Tory party, and they can just sit in opposition and everyone would be more happy than they are now.
TealTories





Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 473
Reputation: 34.7Reputation: 34.7Reputation: 34.7
votes: 1
Location: Calgary

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
If 13 years of arrogant, corrupt, Liberal majority rule did not do it, then I question if there is anything that will. I question if there is anything strong enough to compel a red Tory to support a social conseravtive for even one term. I question if there is a force strong enough to make a fiscal conservative support a social spender. Maybe there should just be a Red Tory party, and a Blue Tory party, and they can just sit in opposition and everyone would be more happy than they are now.


K I am with you. This public internal bickering has got to stop.
I say Joe Clark on CPAC this weekend and it made sick listening to this guy put this gov't down.
Why is it that liberals (as a party and current government) can get caught stealing alot of money by the auditor general have very little impact on voter intentions.
Yet a convicted criminal makes allegations on a conservative PM in power 15 yrs ago and it is threatening the current governments support?

What is wrong here?
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bleatmop wrote:
kwlafayette wrote:
Craig wrote:
I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?
In terms of spending, Mulroney doubled the debt. This was a vast improvement from Trudeau, who multiplied by 10.


Doesn't that mean they each increased it by the same amount?

When Truedeau came to power, the debt was X. As you stated, he increased it by 10 time. Now when Mulroney came to power you say he doubled it. Therefore:

Trudeau: X * 10 = 10X
Mulroney: 10X * 2 = 20X

Both PM's increased the debt by 10X, no?
No. 10X * 10 is 100X.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote
Quote:
I was too young to really know so please enlighten me. How was Mulroney conservative? I googled "tax cuts, mulroney" and found nothing. Did he put a lid on government spending? Did he put forward tough law and order measures? Did he fight for unborn children?


Mulroney controled spending so that when he left the only reason there was a deficit was because of the interests on the debt. Once the interests rates went down and the GST income started coming in the yearly debt was gone.

He did not cut taxes. With a huge inherited deficit it was hard to cut taxes ala Reagonomics.(I guess he could have tried)

He ended up with an operational surplus(total spending -debt payment/revenue)

He did fight for the rights of the unborn( the Senate has blood on their hands)
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


What will it take to finally unite the right?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB