[Reverend Blair]

<strong>Written By:</strong> Reverend Blair
<strong>Date:</strong> 2006-01-12 21:30:00
<a href="/article/213014325-bush-league">Article Link</a>

<p>That appraisal was based on Stephen Harper’s record on the illegal invasion of Iraq, his anti-environmental stance, and his social conservatism. It was not meant to be hatchet job on Harper. In fact the article was written in praise of Harper by a conservative columnist who works for a conservative think tank and printed in a publication known to be right leaning. Basham is Harper’s political ally, a friend in the neo-conservative sense of the word. Harper, desperately trying to separate himself from his record, immediately fired off a rebuttal pointing out that he had softened his view considerably on those issues.</p> <p>In an <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20051214.COCATO14/TPStory">article for The Globe and Mail</a> Basham responded to Harper’s rebuttal saying "I had said that Mr. Harper was pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative. His response was disheartening: He used evasions and weasel words to both affirm and deny every item on the list."</p> <p>When your friends are accusing you of using evasions and weasel words, what does that leave your foes with? Well, many of Harper’s foes just quote what he and others in the Conservative Party have said. There are a few web sites dedicated to this. The Liberal Party runs <a href="http://www.stephenharpersaid.ca/">StephenHarperSaid.ca</a>, The Canadian Democratic Movement has a page of <a href="http://www.canadiandemocraticmovement.ca/displayarticle378.html">Harper quotes</a>, and Brainy Quote also has many of Harper’s more memorable attacks on Canada on <a href="http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/stephen_harper.html">their site.</a> The latest <a href="http://liberal.ca/multimedia_e.aspx?id=70">Liberal attack ads</a> also depend heavily on things that have sprung directly from Mr. Harper’s mouth.</p> <p>Harper’s tenure at the National Citizen’s Coalition (NCC)also raises many questions. According to a <a href="http://www.stephenharpersaid.ca/pdf/ncc.pdf">document </a> at Stephen Harper Said, “Over its almost four decades of existence, the NCC has funded campaigns against the Canada Health Act, the Canadian Wheat Board, and allowing Vietnamese refugees into Canada. It has also campaigned in the courts against any attempt at electoral financing legislation that would limit third-party advertising spending during elections, such as that done by NCC itself. The NCC has spent millions of dollars funding campaigns aimed at impacting the outcome of elections. For example, it founded and funded Ontarians for Responsible Government, a lobby group that played a large role in electing the Harris government in Ontario. As few as four people control the organization and its self-reported $2.8-million dollar plus annual budget.” </p> <p>There are many things that Harper has said over his career that point to him not having much respect, or even understanding, of Canada as a nation. From the <a href="https://www.albertaresidentsleague.com/How/AlbertaAgendaLetter.htm">so-called Firewall Letter</a>, an open letter to Ralph Klein from Stephen Harper and other leading Conservatives urging premier Ralph Klein to back out of several federal programs, including the Canada Pension Plan, and build a firewall around Alberta, to statements that disparaged Quebec, the Maritime provinces, and Ontario. Perhaps, if Mr. Harper dislikes the rest of Canada so much, he should be running to replace Ralph Klein as premier of Alberta instead of trying to represent all of Canada.</p> <p>It isn’t just Stephen Harper that has a record of saying things that go against the values and wishes of so many Canadians. The social conservatives and religious right within the Conservative Party has been very vocal in the past. An <a href="http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/475500.html">article in the Halifax Chronicle Herald</a> suggests that the silence of social conservatives this time around is not an accident. When the Chronicle Herald questioned Conservative campaign volunteer Paula Henderson about two candidates who attended a meeting with a group opposing same sex marriage, Henderson replied, “We’ve been told by Ottawa that we don’t talk about that. That’s a dropped subject.”</p> <p>Tom Barret, writing for the <a href="http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/01/11/MuffledModerate/">Tyee</a>, has also questioned why so many Conservatives who were very vocal about their socially conservative views have become quiet this election. Barret points out that several Conservative candidates not only hold right-wing religious beliefs, but some are directly tied to groups like Focus on the Family. Focus on the Family’s Canadian wing is an off-shoot of the controversial US group led by Dr. James Dobson.</p> <p>One Conservative candidate in BC, Darrel Reid, is a past president of Focus on the Family Canada and was backed in his nomination bid by Defend Marriage. Reid’s involvement with the religious right caused his riding president to quit.</p> <p>The Conservatives under Stephen Harper have softened and obscured their contacts with the religious right and have done their level best to deny contacts with the Bush government and the Republican Party in the United States. They have simultaneously tried to move away from their past policies and suddenly become silent on issues that have been the driving force for much of the existence of the Reform Party, The Alliance, and the “new” Conservative Party. Many of these issues, such as same-sex marriage; abortion; deep integration with the US; and trade and economic policies that benefit big business to the detriment of working people and small business are the same issues that have driven one Republican campaign after another. Considering that the Conservatives sent a delegation to Republican National Convention and have many ties to the groups that have supported the Republican Party’s regressive social policies, it is very important that voters know where Harper and his party stand on the issues.</p> <p>Recently Stephen Harper claimed to have evolved in his views over the last decade or so. It was only a short while ago that Mr. Harper told a Vancouver radio station that he had no intention of changing his views and that he didn’t believe in image make-overs. According to <a href="http://www.liberal.ca/images/dir/PDFs/060112_casjafva.pdf">documentation</a> on the Liberal website, Stephen Harper and other leading Conservatives have participated in fund-raising events for the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association. According to the document on the Liberal site, “On March 31, 2005, less than one year ago, Stephen Harper helped raise approximately $15,000 for a far-right, third-party social policy advocacy group called the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association (CASJAFVA) at a large fundraising dinner in Richmond, British Columbia. CASJAFVA lobbies governments on social policy issues such as same sex marriage and abortion and publishes a bi-monthly magazine advocating conservative social policies using reprehensible images, including caricatures of Prime Ministers Martin and Chrétien as Nazi’s pictured with Hitler. (PDFs of these magazine covers are attached below) The publication also includes extreme statements comparing same sex marriage to child molestation, necrophilia and torture.”</p> <p>Since the Vancouver interview and the March 31, 2005 fund-raiser Harper attended, he has claimed to have changed his views on several issues, has undergone a major image make-over, and has gone out of his way to silence his candidates on issues when he knows those candidates have views that are at odds with many Canadians. Personal evolution over a decade may be possible for an individual, but such evolution over six months is highly unlikely.</p> <p>In a party that promises to allow free votes over social issues, each candidate must be shown to have evolved, or at least be encouraged to express their views to the voters in their riding. Having a leader, who has made a point of assuming no responsibility for the way his party members vote, claim to have undergone a conversion simply is not good enough. If they are allowed to vote contrary to the official Conservative platform on issues like abortion, then each candidate must make it clear exactly where they stand on such issues.</p> <p>It is time for the Canadian media to shine a bright light on Mr. Harper, his party, and their connections to right-wing religious organisations, the Republican Party and the Bush regime. The best interests and sovereignty of Canada are not promoted by religious lobby groups or their political friends in the United States. To ignore these ties would be Bush-league.</p> [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on January 15, 2006]

[Innes]

These are all valid issues.

Harper has promised social conservatives that they will be able to push their values in his government through private members bills and he will support bringing these issues to a vote. In this way, he can claim they are not official policies of his government but these votes reflect democratic principles. The question I have is that how can voters make an informed democratic choice when Conservative candidates are told not to discuss or indicate where they stand on these issues?

[Guest]

Haarper's real agenda can be seen in his June, 1997 speech. He will be bush's golden blowboy.

If haarper is elected, expect a terrorist attack and, shortly thereafter, secession to the "good ol' US of A", in one way or another. The so-called "sponsorship scandal" will look like a birthday party in comparison. Canadians will deserve it if they are TOO STUPID to read between the lines. Australia is looking better and better.

Fuck neocons. Fuck conservatives.

[Guest]

Anonymous -- The eroded education and critical thinking skills of the average American look "like a birthday party" next to your stammering and utter idiocy. Let's try......

Fuck YOU. Fuck fuzzylogic lefty blogsites that quote "the Tyee" as authoritive reference.......

[Guest]

Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.
– Theodore Roosevelt

Harper is owned by the invisible government, lock stock and barrel. He was at the Bilderberg conference a few years ago wearing a very glum face. In attendance at this 'conference of the elite' was his masters, the Canadian based neocons, the owners of Indigo crooks, and National putz.

I won't be voting.

[no1important]

Harper will become a mini Bush.

Harper is saying things now what the voters want to hear, not what his real agenda is and keeping candidates quiet where they stand on issues? That is a sign of a dictator to me.

The worst thing that could happen would be to elect a Conservative government, a miniority one would not last too long but he will destroy us and do whatever Bush asks of him if he gets a majority.

[Guest]

Australia is looking better and better? You might want to look Australian government policies before making that statement. There is a reason John Howard has been to Dubya's ranch and Paul Martin hasn't. Besides if you don't like what the conservative party stands for, you should stay and make your voice heard instead of running away.

[Guest]

And this is different from any other party... How?

[samuel]

Just once, I would like to see NDPers come clean. What are you hoping to achieve by attacking Cons? The BLOC or NDP forming a ruling Party is wishful thiking and we've had over a decade of Liberal bullshit. So why, what's your objective behind this when you damned well know it will only serve to prop up Liberals?

And before anyone gets the urge to say there's no harm in dreaming, the Liberal track record is proof there is genuine harm to be gained from propping them up by attacking Cons.

---
Québec needs out of Canada yesterday. Support the cause by voting Liberal

[Guest]

True, I won't be voting for him either, he does not show me any canadian value and as a proud Canadian Citizen, we what Canada to be free instead of becoming a mini Bush or being push around and about.

[Guest]

Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Get used to it, lefty scum!!

[mk]

"Recently Stephen Harper claimed to have evolved in his views over the last decade or so."

So he's become a "compassionate conservative", to borrow a phrase?

Was anyone anywhere on this site at the Montreal convention? What went on there? Is Harper's change a result of populism within the party, or of a shush-up-with-that-stuff-will-ya-while-we-win-an-election? I know from perusing a couple of the socon forums that the party brass ticked them off by torpedoing a vote on the gay marriage issue.

[Guest]

It amazes me how many follish people there are in this country. The Liberal government have been nothing but dishonest with Canadians. They do not deserve anyones vote, unless you support criminal behaviour. It follows that only Liberal backers would try to speculate on what deviousness lies in other people's character, as that is what they know best and exemplify whenever they open their mouths. I'll bet their mom and dad taught them different.

[Guest]

There is a blue wave sweeping over Canada. We are taking our country back and there's nothing you Marxists can do about it.

[Guest]

and the Liberal's aren't controlled by Power Corp?? Do you think Chretien was afraid that someone would discover the reality behind his son-in-law's Oil-For Fraud connections if the US led coalition invaded Iraq?

We'll have a new government in 10 days, perhaps they can reverse the trend of international irrelevance the Liberals have degraded us to.