Does  |
| If you don't ask, I won't tell. |
A good friend of mine over at C.R.U.S.H. ~
Canadians Rallying to Unseat Stephen Harper, asked a question today. And yes, it is the same question that any Canadian,
^NOT entirely in the dark about 'dear leader' asks every other day:
"What needs to happen to rid this country of Stephen Joseph Harper"?
So, we batted around the same tired old ideas, all of which could potentially work and in fact should work, but none of which succeed for various reasons.
But today was somehow different. Something was suggested that I had not heard before, a tactic so unthinkable, so repulsive as to have gone without consideration by anyone at C.R.U.S.H. for the last two years. It was a tactic that would require brashness and bravery, a very strong stomach and the willingness to work with some very unsavoury characters. It was suggested that we consider joining the Conservative Party of Canada en mass and bring it down from within. It was suggested that we become as it were, a Trojan Horse or as a more modern mind would put it, infiltrate the borg. Well, that was certainly ^NOT on my agenda, but since I have not yet given up and will never succumb to the notion that resistance is futile I agreed to consider it.
So, I decided to see just who qualified to join the Borg. I quickly found this information:
Founding Principles eh? Well, I doubted that I could possibly agree with them, I am no Conservative, but it might be worth a look. What harm could it do, just to have a look?
And as I read them it occured to me that many of them do not seem to be principles that I would ever have attributed to Stephen Harper. Lets just pick a few that help to add the light of day to those doubts.
1.) "A balance between fiscal accountability, progressive social policy and individual rights and responsibilities" ~ Well, that is the first one on their list, and although I agree with it, does Harper?
Are they fiscally accountable?
No. They were forced to reveal the numbers last Fall and even then they faked most of them, and ended up being charged with contempt because of it. They still have not released any real numbers since they took office. They are in aconstant fight with the Parliamentary Budget Officer over exactly that.
Are they in favour of progressive social policy?
No. they want to jail as many Canadians as the existing prisons will hold, and then build more prisons. Every expert in Canada says that this will lead to higher residivism rates and that it will all contribute to poverty and despair.
Are they defenders of our Indivdual rights?
No. Individual rights have begun to deteriorate under harper. Even as a minority prime minister, he started limiting personal rights. As I write this he continues to allow Canadians to be arrested and abused simply for assembling in peaceful protest and has been much less tolerant of dissent than any other government in our history. His imprudent use of Toronto as a backdrop to the 2010 G20 was an exercise in state power and control. 1130 persons were hauled off to spend an average of 24 hours in cages that just happened to be there for the purpose. The Occupy Movement has only highlighted his contempt for th eindividual rights of Canadians. His party is the only one to show no signs of even admuitting that their is a difference between Billionaires and the homeless.
Individual responsibilities?
Hell yeah, that part he agrees with. Never in our history has so much time, money and effort been levied against us to teach us about our personal and individual responsibilities. There is very likely a second recession on it's way and it is going to be our responsibility to ride it out while we suffer cuts and fewer services. The fact that it is not our doing does not stop it from being our responsibility.
That is just the first bullet point above and already it is apparent that Stephen Joseph is not qualified to be even a member of the party, let alone it's leader.
The list of requisite conservative beliefs goes on to include a belief in our Parliamentary institutions, a respect for the rule of Law, a belief in the Environment, a belief in the equality of all Canadians, a belief that good government is responsive and attentive to the needs of it's citizens.......
The list is long and none of it confirms that Stephen Harper is qualified to be a member of that party in any real sense. I could go on, and over the next few days, I will probbably flesh this thought process out a bit, but my point is already made. I can add lnks to the web that demonstrate all of these concerns, and I may do that, but It may be time that those who wrote this charter and founding principles actually took them to heart, and considered how very far off the mark that this little man has taken them.
So, No, I was wrong above and could easily join a party that stood for all of these great principles, but if anyone in the know thinks that it is possible for a party to do so with this fopp at the helm, they are either sadly mistaken or taking a page out of the Neo-con book and lying!
That, I believe is exactly what Stephen Harper has been doing for the past 15 years. It should be obvious that he can
^NOT be trusted. I mean seriously, if he really cared in the least about the values listed above, would he put up with the likes of Tony, 'hands in the till' Clement?
Please feel free to comment below. I will have little trouble answering any of your questions. The proof is everywhere if you open those baby blues.
