When Stephen Harper "United the Right", He Solidified the Centre. Just Not For Himself.

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

How Stephen Harper became a "Tory" is the stuff of legend. Or more accurately, the stuff of fairy tales. He did have a brief stint with the PCs in the early 80's, but left the Party because they weren't right-wing enough.

The fact is, that the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada was not really right-wing at all, at least not in heart and soul. They were just right of centre. And they were 100% Canadian. And in many ways, historically, they were not unlike the Liberal Party in terms of policy.*

That doesn't mean that there weren't fierce rivalries. They were like two football teams (I don't want to use hockey because Harper has done that to death) who battle each other for the prize, but at the end of the day, both teams are in the same league, and committed to the game.

And while they both went after the same prize, the team that won it, honoured it. Showed it off and protected it for the next winner, whether it be themselves or their opponents.

They didn't win it, then smash it, to make sure that no one else could have it. That's how I see the Reformers, whether calling themselves Social Credit, Reform, Alliance or Conservative. They are the party that wants to smash the trophy and terminate the league.

Uniting the Right Was Not About Vote-Splitting

The common belief was that the PCs and Reform-Alliance joined forces to avoid splitting the vote. Sounds good but completely false. That's the way it was sold when David Frum arranged a meeting between Jean Charest then head of the PCs, and Preston Manning, then head of Reform.

In terms of bridging the differences between the parties of Preston Manning and Jean Charest, the conference made little headway ... the chasm in terms of the egos and pride of the leaders; the different attitudes that the parties have towards populist initiatives; Reform's origins in western alienation, Social Credit, and religious fundamentalism; and the fact that Reform emerged in part as an angry protest against the policies of a Progressive Conservative government made a rapprochement unlikely. (1)

A later report by Laurence Putnam confirmed the divide.

The first misconception about the Reform movement is that it is a conservative party. The Reform party has all the characteristics of a Western populist party and very few marks of a conservative party. (2)

And as to the myth of avoiding vote-splitting. In the West, many of those who voted PC did not go to Reform. Most of Reform's gain was at the expense of the NDP, another party that started out as a Western protest movement. But many also went to the Liberals.

Since the 2000 election, unity activists in both the PC and Canadian Alliance parties have preached that the PC party lost a major part of its family when the Reform Party rose to prominence, however, this is not exactly true. The PC Party did not experience a mutiny, but rather with the decline of the PC Party in Western Canada, an opportunity was extended for a new crew, the Reform movement, to come to power. In fact, many members of the Reform Party elected in 1993 had never been Conservatives at all. Preston Manning had been a member of the federal Social Credit Party prior to incepting the Reform Party. MPs Diane blonczy, Deborah Grey and Val Meredith were never members of the PC Party ... As these members were not Tories throughout the 1980's and early 1990's when the Tories were at their most successful peak since Sir John A. Macdonald ... (2)

Promoters of unity between the PC and Canadian Alliance parties had argued that if there were either only a PC or CA candidate in your average Ontario riding, they would have beat the Liberals in 2000. But what about Etobicoke North? In 2000, no PC candidate ran in Etobicoke North, but a Canadian Alliance candidate did, and yet they gained only 3.9%, and the majority of the PC votes migrated to the Liberal candidate. This despite the fact that provincially, the identical riding was held by PC M.P.P. John Hastings.

This riding is one example that proves 1+1 doesn't necessarily equal 2 when it comes to defeating a Liberal incumbent in Ontario ridings. Another interesting Ontario result was found in the riding of Markham, where Jim Jones was elected as a Progressive Conservative in 1997. Mr. Jones crossed to the Alliance in the summer of 2000, but lost re-election just months later. Why was Mr. Jones electable to the people of Markham, Ontario, as a Tory, but unelectable as a Canadian Alliance M.P.? (2)

It's because the majority of the Canadian electorate are moderates. The same people who voted for Brian Mulroney later voted for Jean Chretien, illustrating that votes between the Liberals and the PC Party were always liquid, while votes cast for ideologically-driven parties, like Reform/Alliance and NDP**, came from a "base".

The Reform movement only became palpable to Canadians when they shed their wolf's clothing and started calling themselves "Conservative", or worse yet "Tories", cashing in on a century and a half tradition. And for awhile, they were able to fool some of the people some of the time. But unfortunately for them, as their policies became increasingly un-Canadian, their level of support has drifted back to their "base".

They have no hope of drawing votes from the NDP, except perhaps in the West, but they are also losing the votes of moderates ... aka: ordinary Canadians.

So now they have a problem. Instead of eliminating what they thought was their own competition, they have eliminated all competition for the centre, and all of the "liquid" votes are now flowing away from them.

They are a right-wing fringe party. Nothing more. They came, they saw, they scared the hell out of us, and now they must leave.

This brings us to Michael Ignatieff. I see him as the perfect leader to unite the centre. And if I wasn't convinced before, a column by the widow of the late PC president Dalton Camp, has me sold. Ignatieff is not "a bleeding heart Liberal" but will lead a party that will be fiscally responsible but socially aware.

His family has a long history in this country, and come from all political stripes. His G-Grandfather, George Munro Grant helped Sir John A. and Confederation, and later promoted his railway. His uncle George Parkin Grant was also a Conservative, and author of the popular Lament for a Nation, as reaction to the defeat of John Diefenbaker. His fear was that we would become too Americanized and too beholden to corporations, and while this book was reactionary, he would later suggest that he felt that Pierre Trudeau was on the right track. (3)

Michael's father George Ignatieff was a foreign secretary under Diefenbaker, Diplomat under Pearson, and even served as acting president of the United Nations General Assembly***. He was also a peace activist, who fought hard against nuclear weapons, earning him a reputation as a "Peacemonger." (4)

Another uncle was Vincent Massey.

And though Michael Ignatieff's political views are his own, they have been nurtured in the true Canadian tradition.

So while Johannes Wheeldon may ask "Can Iggy Find His Centre?" He didn't have to. He was already there. And as Wendy Camp says: "He has come home to us." And whispering in his ear, will be family voices from the past, making sure that he doesn't screw up what they helped to build.

Footnotes:

*Stephen Harper referred to the PCs or "Red Tories" as "Pink Liberals".

**The NDP has since become more moderate and appealing, though some of their early followers feel that they had to sell out to do so. I like them and remember the greats like Tommy Douglas and Ed Broadbent, and the leader Jack Layton used to be.

***Stephen Harper and the Reformers never trusted the United Nations.

Sources:

1. The Winds of Right-wing Change in Canadian Journalism, By David Taras (University of Calgary), Canadian Journal of Communication, Vol 21, No 4, 1996

2. An Analysis On The Differences Between the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada & The Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance, by Laurence Putnam As prepared for the Fraser Institute, December 2002

3. Lament For a Nation: The Defeat of Canadian Nationalism, By George P. Grant, McClelland & Stewart, 1970 edition with new introduction by author.

4. The Making of a Peacemonger: The Memoirs of George Ignatieff, By Sonja Sinclair, University of Toronto Press, ISBN: 0-8020-2556-0

Why Do the Poor Have a Deep Emotional Attachment to a Party That Serves the Interests of the Rich?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

In January of this year, the BBC published an interesting article: Why do people vote against their own interests? It was a light bulb moment, and defines to a tee the basis of neoconservativism, as represented by the Republicans in the U.S. and the Reform-Conservatives in Canada.

They are both clearly parties representing the interests of their country's wealthiest citizens, yet most of their "base" support comes from the fringes and those who stand to lose the most if neoconservatism wins.

Last year, in a series of "town-hall meetings" across the country, Americans got the chance to debate President Obama's proposed healthcare reforms. What happened was an explosion of rage and barely suppressed violence ... But it is striking that the people who most dislike the whole idea of healthcare reform - the ones who think it is socialist, godless, a step on the road to a police state - are often the ones it seems designed to help.

Why is that? Political scientist Dr David Runciman is quoted as saying:

If people vote against their own interests, it is not because they do not understand what is in their interest or have not yet had it properly explained to them. They do it because they resent having their interests decided for them by politicians who think they know best.

The Reform Party built an entire movement based on that theory. "So you don't trust politicians. Neither do we" they cried.

And across the border, when Republican Newt Gingrich watched those TV spots and read those ads he was inspired.

Indeed, Canadians became exporters of neo-con innovation in the 1990s. 'I would say Margaret Thatcher and Mr. [Preston] Manning are the two non-Americans we learned most from'', said U.S. Republican House Speaker, Newt Gingrich in 1995.'I know him [Preston Manning] because I watched all of his commercials. We developed our platform from watching his campaign.' (1)

And using the techniques and talking points honed by Manning and the Reformers (Stephen Harper was chief policy advisor at the time), Gingrich's team created their "Contract with America".

It is thus not difficult to understand why the Republicans, in the run-up to the mid-term elections of last November [1994], made such a point of dissociating themselves from Washington and identifying instead with popular sentiment on such issues. The dividends of defining Washington as the source of false values are seen in the results of the elections, which gave the Republicans control of both the House and the Senate. (2)

It's ironic that so many people accuse Stephen Harper of being a Republican (including myself), but the Democrats in the U.S. should be calling the Republicans 'Reformers', and accusing them of copying Stephen Harper.

Proud to be a Racist and a Redneck

Vancouver - On his small square patch of Canada, surrounded by a nine-foot fence of English laurel, Reform Man is railing against the Frenchmen who run the bloody government, and dropping remarks about Chinese drivers.

"I admire a lot of those other cultures, but in their own country," said Sid Blanchett, a diesel engine mechanic. Mr Blanchett lives in north Vancouver, a hotly contested riding in the 2 June election. There are two signs outside his fence: one for the Reform Party, and another that says "No More Prime Ministers from Quebec". He's proud to be a racist and a redneck, he said, if that means defending his own culture, religion, and traditions.

Covering Reform can be like waking up in a Monty Python sketch, as one Vancouver journalist said this week. Old-fashioned caricatures pop up and say the most extraordinary things. Members belt out Oh Canada at party meetings, and while they drop clangers about blacks, gays, or Sikhs, the race they really detest is the French. (3)

Preston Manning and the Reform Party played on those prejudices:

Having a clear critical dynamic, focused on the corrupt Ottawa establishment, was of the first importance to Reform's recent success. In this, as in so many other ways, this party has a similar focus to the United States Republican Party in its present mood ... Part of its appeal is to anti-Quebecois sentiment "let Quebec either secede", Reform says in effect, "or, preferably, stay in Canada but without any of the special privileges it seeks." Outside Quebec this message is extremely popular. It might be noted that Reform did not bother to run candidates in Quebec.

Preston Manning is a smart guy and I have no doubt that he is not racist. But in the same way that his father's Social Credit party fed off anti-Semitism, Preston knew how to feed off people's insecurities. And when his MPs were quoted making racist remarks, he'd simply say that the Reform Party does not condone Racism, but rarely did anything else.

This explains his handling of the Jan Brown/Jim Silye incident.

The cases of Jan Brown and Jim Silye were typical. Among the most progressive and cosmopolitan of the Reform MPs, they also became known for their ability to shine in Question Period. Both were urban moderates and excellent communicators who developed positive relationships with the media and, in the case of Brown, a degree of national name recognition. Both were often unhappy with the "racist redneck" element in their caucus, and endured much criticism from other caucus members for their continuing attempts to broaden the base of Reform policies.

[Then] when [Reform MP] Art Hanger announced he was going on a "fact-finding mission" to Singapore to explore the use of caning and other forms of corporal punishment in the penal system, most Canadians were astonished and amused. Brown and Silye were humiliated, and said so publicly. "I don't want to be campaigning for caning and whipping," said Silye, a millionaire Calgary businessman and former Stampeders star. Brown, another Calgary MP and a corporate consultant with two degrees, agreed with Silye and suggested Reform would lose mainstream voters if it did not shake its extremist image. For their comments the two were raked over the coals at a lengthy caucus meeting in which one MP after another took the floor to lambaste the two, accusing them of betrayal ... (4)

And:

Barely two months later, during debate on the government's proposed amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act protecting homosexuals from discrimination*, the Reform caucus erupted again. When B.C. MP Bob Ringma** told reporters he would move gay or visible-minority employees to the back of the shop if they were costing him business, colleagues such as Dave Chatters, Leon Benoit and Myron Thompson agreed. In fact, Thompson went further, saying "If they were costing me business, I would remove them." Asked for her comments, Jan Brown replied, "I'm so saddened by this..." (4)

In response, Manning did reprimand Ringma, but also suspended Jan Brown. Instead she quit.

We might wonder at the logic behind this, but it goes back to the party's basic philosophy of "us against them". The Jan Browns did not fit into this, but the Rob Ringmas did. They were the people who kept the party faithfuls motivated to call themselves The Reform Man and display a sign on their lawn touting the party line "No More Prime Ministers from Quebec".

This Brings us Back To Why the Most Disadvantaged Oppose Those Wanting to Raise Them Up

Thomas Frank, the author of the best-selling book What's The Matter with Kansas ... believes that the voters' preference for emotional engagement over reasonable argument has allowed the Republican Party to blind them to their own real interests.

The Republicans have learnt how to stoke up resentment against the patronising liberal elite, all those do-gooders who assume they know what poor people ought to be thinking. Right-wing politics has become a vehicle for channelling this popular anger against intellectual snobs. [my emphasis] The result is that many of America's poorest citizens have a deep emotional attachment to a party that serves the interests of its richest.

Watch the following video and listen to how many times the Fox News personality uses terms like "elites in the media and academia", "academic circles" in a piece suggesting that Obama is a socialist.

And in condescending language, make any notions of offering a hand up, as a socialist plot. "These people believe that folks are poor because other people are rich." "Wealth redistribution" "drawing emotion from guilt, jealousy and envy" (all sins). So if God and the Republicans want to ignore the poor, it's only for their own good.

This guy even goes so far as to say that history has buried more bodies from the envy of socialism than the greed of capitalism, which of course is completely false, but they are playing to their "base". The people who should be demanding better from their government as equal citizens, instead are being led to believe that they should not be demanding anything at all.

"Glen Beck and the American people". They are on an even plane. Forget that Glen Beck works for a multi-national corporation, and earns 50 million dollars a year. He is still one of them. And those socialist academics, who are advocating for the lowest levels of society, are "elites". They don't belong to the club. It's "Glen Beck and the American people". Wink, wink.

At the Reform Party's opening assembly, many people left, especially seniors; when they realized what their policies, wrapped in a veil of ambiguity, really meant. An end to subsidies for farmers. An end to public health care. An end to unemployment insurance, Canada Pension and Old Age Security. (5) Those who stayed never really thought it through.

It was "us against them". They spoke their language. And if they felt any tinge of doubt, the Rob Ringmas would come out to remind them.

And while the Reformers preached that everyone was responsible for their own destinies, it enabled them to promote policies that hindered those destinies. The end to things like public health care and public education.

At the 1991 Reform Party Assembly, a guest speaker was William Gairdner, author of the book The Trouble with Canada, which journalist Murray Dobbin stated ".. helped lay the groundwork for Reform Party policy." (6) Reform Party policy which was then being drafted by Stephen Harper.

The Reformers gathered in Saskatoon saved perhaps the loudest cheers, whistles, and applause for Gairdner's last shot: 'And my favourite proposal, by the way, is returning choice to education by privatizing every school in the country'.(6)

Of course making all schools private, would ensure that the disadvantaged remained disadvantaged, and the country's wealthy would remain at the top, while "the poorest citizens continued to serve the interests of its richest."

Gotta' love neoconservatism, which has been dubbed "the revolt of the rich", who use the poor and disadvantaged as their foot soldiers. Brilliant. Wrong. But still brilliant.

Sources:

1. Slumming it at the Rodeo: The Cultural Roots of Canada's Right-Wing Revolution, Gordon Laird, 1998, Douglas & McIntyre, ISBN: 1-55054 627-9, Pref. xiv-xv

2. Policy from the People: Recent Developments in the USA and Canada, By Philip Ayres, Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of The Samuel Griffith Society, April 2, 1995

3. Racists, rednecks and the reform of Canada: With a poll imminent, reactionaries are out in force, By Tim Cornwell, May 26, 1997

4. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, By Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 318-319

5. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7

6. Dobbin, 1992, Pg. 165-166

More on Hatred Being Validated by the Conservative Movement

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

If you think the conservative "Tea Party" movement is daunting, take a look at a new report issued by the Department of Homeland Security that says right-wing extremism is on the rise throughout the country. In the report, officials warn that right-wing extremists could use the bad state of the U.S. economy and the election of the country's first black president to recruit new members to their cause.

In the intelligence assessment issued to law enforcement last week, Homeland Security officials said there was no specific nformation about an attack from right-wing extremists in the works. The agency warns that an extended economic downturn with real estate foreclosures, unemployment and an inability to obtain credit could foster an environment for extremists to recruit new members who may not have been supportive of these causes in the past. (1)

And:

A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines "right wing extremism in the United States" as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. "It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," the warning says. (2)

These Tea Parties are bringing back all of the old radicals and encouraging new radicals. It's what happens when you combine religious fundamentalism, the new Conservatives and Fox News.

One of the very bizarre accusations overheard at the tea bag protests Wednesday was that President Obama is somehow a "fascist." At the same time, and often in the same protest, he was also accused of being a "communist." Of course it's ideologically impossible to be both, in the same way it's impossible to be both informed and a FOX & Friends host, but then again I'm expecting too much logic and message coherence from people who spent all of Wednesday protesting against socialism and wealth redistribution while gathered in publicly funded -- dare I say "socialized" -- parks and town squares.

But back to that "fascist" accusation. I'm not convinced that tea baggers like Michelle Malkin understand that fascism is, in fact, a form of right wing extremism. Because for the last 24 hours or so, Malkin, Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the usual band of apoplectic brainiacs appear to have been vigorously defending "right wing extremism" after having previously accused the president of being on the same flank of the ideological spectrum. (3)

I visited the site mentioned in the video, which is the second in the four part documentary: White Power USA: The Rise of Right-Wing Militia in America. Council of Conservative Citizens is a hate group, that has been legitimized by the new Conservative movement. According to the Anti-Defamation League, they are:

Ideology: White supremacy, white separatism

Outreach: Mass mailings, prison newsletter

Approach: Advances its ideology by inflaming fears and resentments, among Southern whites particularly, with regard to black-on-white crime, non-white immigration, attacks on the public display of the Confederate flag, and other issues related to "traditional" Southern culture.

Connections: Several mainstream figures have spoken at or attended CCC meetings, including Senator Trent Lott; Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour; Mississippi state senators Gary Jackson and Dean Kirby; and several Mississippi state representatives. Former governors Guy Hunt of Alabama and Kirk Fordice of Mississippi also spoke at CCC meetings.

Extremist associations: David Duke, Mark Cotterill, Chris Temple, Jared Taylor, Paul Fromm

Considerably more polished than traditional extremist groups, the Council of Conservative Citizens propounds its bigotry in the guise of hot-button conservative advocacy. Striking hard-right positions on such contentious issues as immigration, gun control and affirmative action, the organization has insinuated itself into the mainstream successfully enough to attract a number of prominent conservative politicians to its gatherings. However, an examination of the origins, membership and publications of the CCC suggests that it remains, despite its assertions to the contrary, squarely within Southern racist traditions. While not every CCC chapter may be equally extreme, all are founded on anti-minority bigotry. (4)

OK. So you don't think this could happen here, huh? Not in Canada, right? Well pull up a chair because you're going to want to be sitting for this.

We already have a non-profit group called Immigration Watch Canada. And guess who they call on for inspiration?

Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border: Coyotes, Bears, and Trails. Remember J.T. Ready from part one? In fact, most of the links on Immigration Watch Canada, are to American anti-immigration right-wing extremists. The Tea Party Gang. Who knew?

Thank you Stephen Harper. I just love who we are now.

Sources:

1. Homeland Security Report Warns Of Rising Right-Wing Extremism, Huffington Post, April 14, 2009

2. Federal agency warns of radicals on right, The Washington Times, April 14, 2009

3. Sharing Tea Bags with Right Wing Extremists, By Bob Cesca, Huffington Post, April 15, 2009

4. Council of Conservative Citizens, Extremism in America, The Anti-Defamation League

The Validating of Hatred by the Conservative Movement

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

I have been writing a lot about the resurgence of hate groups, that have now attached themselves to anti-tax, anti-immigration and some of the more extreme Religious Right organizations. They are now moving from the fringes and using these organizations as a bridge to the mainstream.

The above is part one* of the documentary White Power USA: The Rise of Right-Wing Militia in America, and validates what I have been saying. And if you think we're immune you're dead wrong. I'm not suggesting a militia but we will be attacked. And Harper's Fox News North, launched by his ex communications director, Kory Teneycke, is where the battle will begin. They just have to overturn our hate crime laws, but they're getting closer all the time.

However, it actually started sooner than that. The Reformers have been quietly moving Canada to the right. Not in our thinking. Canadians are still Canadians. But the perception of Canada by other nations, is diminishing. They now see us as just another Bush administration.

The Mexican Invasion

Earlier this month, Habtom Kibraeb, an Eritrean refugee, committed suicide in Halifax from fear of a pending deportation. In December 2008, a 24-year-old woman was deported to Mexico, where she was murdered months later. She had applied for asylum in Canada twice. This tragedy occurred while Kenny was imposing visa requirements on Mexicans, claiming they were bogus. (1)

The above video mentions J.T. Ready, a Republican candidate who is heading up a movement to stop illegal immigration from Mexico. He has support from some pretty high places, including the Republican Party. One of them is Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce. He was responsible for drafting the controversial Proposition 200, which makes it a crime for public officials to fail to report people unable to produce documentation of citizenship when applying for benefits, and allows citizens who believe that public officials have given undocumented persons benefits to sue for remedies.

Since Proposition 200 passed last fall, its backers have presented an alarming 20 bills targeting immigrants in the Arizona legislature, have cheered the vigilante Minuteman Project on the Arizona-Mexico border, and have worked to sponsor similar bills in other states. But there is a growing grassroots mobilization against the resurgence of racist policies in Arizona, and the threat of an international and national boycott of the state looms. (2)

And yet it is gaining momentum and has sparked a new group: Protect America NOW!

J. T. lost the election but his Minutemen are still on the March and have the full endorsement of the Republican Senator Pearce. You can see them together in the photo to the right.

Just three weeks ago at a tea party rally in Tempe, he handed out fliers calling for landmines to be placed along the Mexican border to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing into Arizona.

Now, neo-Nazi J.T. Ready says he plans to lead an armed group into the desert south of Phoenix this weekend to put a stop to what he called “narco-terrorists.” Ready appeared decked out in camouflage during an interview Wednesday with KPNX (Channel 12). He showed off a stockpile of guns and ammunition he plans to take with him and claimed his group will stake out an area of Pinal County that drug smugglers use as a route to bring “chemical warfare into Phoenix.”Ready has grabbed more traction with local media in recent months as the debate over illegal immigration heats up. He has also appeared frequently at rallies and protests in support of Arizona’s new immigration law, hoping to attract supporters to his cause.

That was no different on May 29 at the “Stand With Arizona” rally in Tempe, an event organized by several tea party groups. Ready was there handing out fliers for the Mesa chapter of the National Socialist Movement, the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States. (3)

And left unchecked the worst may have already happened.

I called Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada Thursday about a report I’d read on the Website of NBC affiliate KVOA Tucson concerning four border crossers fired upon by two men wearing camouflage and bearing assault rifles.

One man was injured with a gunshot wound to the left forearm, the rest were unharmed. The shooting occurred around 5 a.m. on Friday, June 11 at Peck Canyon, nearby Rio Rico. Sheriff Estrada suggested in the KVOA report that the shooters could have been U.S. citizens “hunting illegal border crossers.” What the piece didn’t explain is whether the victims of the attack had been able to identify the perps as Anglo or Hispanic. But Sheriff Estrada told me that the migrants couldn’t say. (4)

And:

In addition to shootings of Latinos by Border Patrol agents, there have been mysterious shootings and even murders in Arizona deserts. Troubling details are emerging that suggest these attacks on Latinos are not drug-related, as often reported, but the work of violent border vigilantes. (5)

These actions have been inspired by the new racist policies of the Republicans. Grover Norquist gave Russell Pearce an award for his no-tax rhetoric. The Tea Party group is an extension of the Republican party and Fox News, who have now validated hate.

Will Fox News North promote the same things? I'm sure the Republicans never expected this outcome. Remember, this is not your father's Conservative Party.

"This is a problem in Canadian refugee law which encourages bogus claims." -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper

While apologizing to the president of Mexico, Prime Minister Harper has echoed what his immigration minister, Jason Kenney, has been saying for some time. Canada's refugee system is overwhelmed with bogus refugees who come to take advantage of a generous asylum system. These bogus refugees are queue jumpers who are sneaking into Canada through the asylum system. And nobody likes a queue- jumper, least of all Canadians.

... Kenney is quite clear about who a bogus claimant is: anyone who is a failed refugee claimant. He cites Mexican claims as the example. Eighty-nine per cent were rejected in 2008. He has said they are all queue jumpers, economic migrants who are abusing the refugee system. But are they?

With the minister's indulgence, I would define a bogus claimant as one who makes a false refugee claim knowing that he or she is not a refugee. That definition would undoubtedly cover some Mexican claimants who come to Canada with a phoney story about horrible events that never happened. It would even cover the Mexican migrant who has naively been misled by an unscrupulous travel agency to simply arrive in Canada. It would not, however, describe many of the failed Mexican claims ... When Kenney says that he does not believe that Czech Roma or Mexicans are refugees, and therefore they are presumably bogus refugees, he is contradicting both the IRB and the Federal Court which have both said that some Czechs and some Mexicans are refugees who are at risk of serious harm. (6)

We're just a few tea parties away from a J.T. Ready. Or are we?

Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Jason Kenney is known as the Minister of Censorship and Deportation because of his record as one of the most repressive immigration ministers in Canadian history. Deportations have increased, while the number of people accepted as refugees and sponsored family members have drastically dropped. Instead, Kenney has increased the number of temporary workers who are constantly exploited for their labour. His new refugee bill creates a racist two tier system based on nationality, and he has called a wide range of migrants– from Mexicans to the War Resisters – “bogus”. Under his regime, an Eritrean refugee committed suicide from fear of a pending deportation, and a young woman was murdered upon her deportation to Mexico. (7)

Footnotes:

*You'll see Amy Goodman from Democracy Now on this video. She was the journalist who was detained in Canada and had her car searched because they were afraid of what she may be here speaking about. Ironically, it was freedom of the press.

Sources:

1. Community Group Outraged at Kenney’s Proposed Refugee Reform, By No One Is Illegal-Vancouver, March 30th, 2010

2. Racist Fervor becomes Law in Arizona: Calls for State Boycott Gain Momentum, by Margot Veranes and Adriana Navarro, June 5, 2005

3. Teabagger Neo-Nazi J.T. Ready says he plans to lead an armed group into the Arizona desert, By Nick R. Martin, June 18th, 2010

4. Cross-Post: The Rio Rico Shootings, J.T. Ready, and Neo-Nazis in the Desert: June 19, 2010

5. Murder in the Desert, Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric Turns Violent, By Jill Garvey, Artists Against Bigotry,
June 16, 2010

6. Bogus claims made about bogus refugees, By Peter Showler, The Vancouver Sun, August 18, 2009

7. Peoples March Against Jason Kenney, P.E.O.P.L.E.S M.A.R.C.H A.G.A.I.N.S. J.A.S.O.N K.E.N.N.E.Y
Saturday July 24th at 2 pm, TBA, Vancouver

A Deceptive Democracy. Who's Running the Country Anyway?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Bush is the product. Rove is the marketer. One cannot succeed without the other .... The inherent danger in an arrangement where the political advisor also drives policy is that the consultant is deciding what is best for the next election cycle and his political party while the president needs to be considering what best serves the country beyond election day. These two interests are frequently divergent and in conflict.

The end result is obvious: Karl Rove thinks it, and George W. Bush does it. That's the way it works. And it works well. Rove's political strategies are steering administration decisions on domestic issues and foreign policy. Karl Rove's political calculations have proved more often right than wrong and, for a president interested in reelection, a formula that sways a constituency or adds electoral votes is something he cannot afford to ignore. (1)

This relationship left Rove's biographers to point out: Karl Rove has posed a new and disturbing question for American voters and their republic. Who really runs this country? (2)

When Guy Giorno, the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, made a rare public appearance recently to testify before a House committee looking into government secrecy, even some veteran Parliament Hill news photographers needed to have him pointed out so they would know which way to aim their lenses.

Giorno’s spotlight-shy style makes him an unfamiliar figure, but the issues he’s intimately caught up in couldn’t be more conspicuous. In the past, critics inside the Conservative party have grumbled that his bad advice led to missteps by Stephen Harper—sparking a public backlash when the Prime Minister prorogued Parliament in January, and bringing the Tories to the brink of defeat in late 2008 when the opposition formed a coalition over the threat of losing their federal subsidies.

On the other hand, senior Tories credit Giorno as a key architect of last year’s budget, and the aggressive marketing of it as “Canada’s Economic Action Plan”—a springboard for the Conservatives’ bounce in the polls this spring ... “People can pick apart and second-guess individual tactical decisions that impact the Ottawa news cycle ... but Giorno has gotten the big things right.”

Sometimes, however, predicting when this week’s tactical decision might turn into next month’s unwelcome big thing is not easy. As a devout Catholic whose faith has never been far from the centre of his politics, Giorno is assumed to have played a role in the government’s decision to ban foreign aid funding for abortions. It was controversial from the outset, but the move has grown to cast a huge shadow over Harper’s bid to make “maternal and child health” in developing countries his signature cause when he hosts the G8 and G20 summits in Huntsville, Ont., and Toronto next month.

Perhaps more than any issue that’s arisen in Giorno’s nearly two years as Harper’s top adviser, outlawing overseas abortion funding threatens to drag him unwillingly toward the centre of media attention. Montreal’s Le Devoir reported a few days ago that an unhappy Harper wants the matter defused before world leaders, many of whom disagree with his stance, arrive in Ontario for the summits. But Giorno is reportedly worried about how Conservative supporters would react to any retreat and is urging Harper to “protect the base.” (3)

"Urging Harper to protect his base"? The job of a Canadian prime minister is not to "protect his base". The job of a Canadian prime minister is to do what's best for Canadians. And to do what is expected from Canadians, not a backroom operative. And yet that's what's happening here.

Guy Girono made the decision to end voter subsidies.

Guy Giorno made the decision to prorogue Parliament.

Guy Giorno was the architect of the budget.

Guy Giorno made the decision to spend millions (and millions, and millions) on campaign style advertising at our expense.

Guy Giorno made the decision to ban foreign aid funding for abortions.

Which begs the question: Who really runs this country?

Sources:

1. Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential, By James Moore and Wayne Slater, John Wiley & Sons, 2003, ISBN: 0-471-42327-0, Pg. 11

2. Moore and Slater, 2003, Pg. 17

3. Guy Giorno: national man of mystery: PM’s chief of staff target for blame, but insiders say he gets big things right, by John Geddes, May 31, 2010

Calgary West Wants Anders Trashed But Harper Can't Let Go

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"Rob is a true reformer and a true conservative. He has been a faithful supporter of mine and I am grateful for his work." Stephen Harper

Rob Anders first won the Calgary West riding for the Reformers in 1997, after Stephen Harper stepped aside to run the National Citizens Coalition. Anders was also with the NCC, acting as the director of Canadians Against Forced Unionism.

A strong social conservative, he also belongs to James Dobson's Focus on the Family, (an offshoot of the Council for National Policy); Charles McVety's Canada Family Action Coalition and the Right-wing Fraser Institute.

It would appear that the riding association in Calgary West is not so thrilled with his performance and negative imaging, and have been trying to oust him.

Rob Anders and Donna Kennedy-Glans don’t agree on much, but they agree on at least one thing: they haven’t seen much of each other since Anders was first elected in Calgary West under the Reform banner in 1997.

“There’s no sense of relationship with the MP,” says Kennedy-Glans, a corporate lawyer and former Nexen vice-president. Like many other political observers, she describes Anders as a lacklustre representative who’s inaccessible, narrow-minded and lacking in empathy. “It’s been really hard to get involved in federal politics in this riding for the last little while,” says Kennedy-Glans, who’s lived in Calgary West for almost 25 years. “I’m finding that’s where a lot of people are at." (1)

This wasn't the first time they tried to get rid of Anders, yet Stephen Harper has gone to enormous lengths to hold onto him, even having the national party change the rules just to accommodate him.

CALGARY (CBC) - The Conservative Party's national council has taken over the Calgary West riding, whose board members have been trying to oust the local Tory candidate for the next election. The 30-member board of the Calgary West Conservative Association has been trying to oust MP Rob Anders and hold a nomination race in the riding .... (2)

And yet Harper himself stated that he would not play politics like this. So why such an interest in an MP who has been called an embarrassment by his own constituents? According to a posting on the National Citizens Coalition's own website:

I think Harper should be paying attention to the riding of Calgary West where Rob Anders continues to be our candidate despite a big show of unhappiness in the electorate. Maybe the NCC should look into the political shenanigans that the cabinet has pursued in order to keep Anders in the seat despite the fact that after three elections the cabinet doesn’t think Anders is worthy of an important position in the conservative ranks. Perhaps there are other ridings with similar problems. We want a riding election for our candidate, not a shoe-in organized by cabinet "new rules."

There are indeed "other ridings with similar problems", including:



I suspect it's Ander's ties to so many groups who have been pivotal to Harper's success, from Focus on the Family to the Progressive Group of Independent Businesses. He couldn't fire him even if he wanted to, or there would be hell to pay.

Next: Craig Chandler, Rob Anders and the Progressive Group for Independent Business

Sources:

1. Former oilpatch exec hopes to unseat Rob Ander, s Donna Kennedy-Glans says MP is inaccessible and narrow-minded, by Jeremy Klaszus, March 26, 2009

2. Tory national council takes control of Calgary riding, Yahoo News, February 5, 2009

Rob Anders and James Inhofe: A Match Made by Carlo Collodi?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

I'm not sure if Carlo Collodi had Rob Anders in mind when he wrote The Adventure of Pinocchio, but the above adaptation, by Harper's MP, did not get the thundering applause he may have expected.

After graduating from the University of Alberta's political science program, Anders honed his thespian skills at Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute, the Alma mater of Karl Rove. In 1994 he was hired as a professional heckler for James Inhofe, the Republican candidate in the Oklahoma senatorial race. After being outed, he was labelled a "foreign political saboteur" by CNN.

Licking his wounds, he came back to Canada, and found a spot with the National Citizens Coalition, where he would become the director of Canadians Against Forced Unionism. One of his first initiatives was to run radio ads in Red Deer, targeting Stockwell Day, who was then Alberta's Labour Minister.

The ads encouraged right-to-work legislation, something that was then being considered.

Canadians Against Forced Unionism (CAFU), an offshoot of the National Citizens Coalition, made its case for voluntary unionism to the government's Standing Policy Committee on Natural Resources and Sustainable Development on February 21. The presentation came less than three months after the Alberta Economic Development Authority's joint review committee on right-to-work legislation said there is no economic justification to introduce the legislation in Alberta.

"Canadians Against Forced Unionism is at a loss to understand why the government has not endorsed voluntary unionism," said Rob Anders, CAFU's Alberta director. "I think the economic benefits of voluntary unionism are self-evident." (1)

When Stephen Harper resigned his seat as Reform Party Member of Parliament for Calgary West, Anders became his replacement. It was an easy seat for him, having a long tradition of conservatism and support for the Reform Party.

At the time Anders campaign literature stated that he was the director of International Commodities Trading, an Alberta-based company, and that he was involved with the Royal Alberta United Services Institute, the Fraser Institute, the Alberta Taxpayers' Association, the Progressive Group for Independent Business, the Canadian Property Rights Research Institute, the National Firearms Association, Responsible Firearms Owners of Alberta, National Right to Work Committee, Focus on the Family and the Canada Family Action Coalition.

However, his nomination was actually brought forward by Hermina Dykxhoorn (2), president of the Alberta Federation of Women United for Families, an anti-women's rights group and affiliate of REAL Women of Canada.

Some believe they are they partly to blame for the low number of female candidates in Alberta's provincial elections.

With 16 per cent female legislators, the province that once topped the charts for electing women is now well behind the middle of the pack. Outsiders might implicate this province’s “redneck” reputation. Birthplace of the anti-feminist group Alberta Federation of Women United for Families, champion of the moral order ... Indeed, promoting the status of women was erased from the Klein government’s “to do” list in the mid-1990s when the Advisory Council on Women’s Issues and the Women’s Secretariat were dismantled. When the premier proclaimed Alberta women capable of speaking for themselves without any financial or organizational help, Alberta women’s groups said their voices were loud and clear but the government had long since topped listening. In the face of such recalcitrance, feminist organizations like the Alberta Status of Women Action Committee simply gave up.

New Democrat activist Shannon Phillips believes left-leaning women’s political ambitions are stifled by the Conservative party’s electoral and ideological hold on the province. She says it’s hard to convince progressive women to run, because any opposition to the Tory monolith is met with ire and derision. However, Alberta’s present day reputation for shrinking from anything labeled feminist doesn’t fully explain the recent ebb in women’s electoral fortunes. (3)

In 2001 LifeSite News suggested that the UN was waging war on religion and quote the President of Alberta Federation of Women United for Families:

Calgarian Hermina Dykxhoorn, president of the Alberta Federation of Women United for Families, has seen the UN executive at work. Over the last decade, she has been a pro-family lobbyist at UN conferences in Beijing, Istanbul, Rome and other venues. "At the 1996 Istanbul Conference, the director general of the World Health Organization (then Dr. Hiroshi Nakajima) told a press conference that `the three great monotheistic religions are not compatible with the New World Order' ... But the UN Secretariat isn't opposed to all religion, she said. "They don't mind Hindus and Buddhists, because they've got more flexible moral codes.

... UN executives appear to be particularly tolerant of "Gaia" or "earth religion," ancient paganism in a new guise. Dykxhoorn has seen Gaia religion material distributed in UN offices, and spokesmen for the London- based Gaia Foundation hold their press conferences in normally off-limits UN press rooms. "Gaia is the ancient Greek name for the Earth Goddess," says the Gaia Foundation's Web site. "This Goddess, in common with female deities of other early religions, was at once gentle, feminine and nurturing, but also ruthlessly cruel to any that failed to live in harmony with the planet." Dykxhoorn said, "They're against the three great mono-theisms, because those religions stress the sanctity of life and the sanctity of the family ... .The intention of people who want to change the world is to gain control of other people's children." (4)

And on a national child care plan:

Hermina Dykxhoorn, president of the Alberta Federation of Women United for Families, believes the government has to "change the tax system so one parent can stay home." She isn't surprised by studies that indicate children are better off at home, rather than in institutionalized day-care centres. Dykxhoorn hopes such studies will "put to rest the clamour for universal public day care -- funding something bad for kids."

A recent report published by The Fraser Institute echoes that sentiment. The study, Children's Dilemma: Who Cares More?, called for tax cuts rather than a move toward subsidized day care. It's a myth that women can "have it all." We can't. (5)

They also oppose abortion, weighed in on the same-sex marriage debate and suggested that a high number of gays were pedophiles. I guess that explains why they promoted Anders.

Is it any wonder that women have no status in the Harper government, when groups like this and REAL women are hand picking candidates and dictating policy?

And despite the fact that Ander's constituents want him to be replaced, calling him an embarrassment, Harper refuses to allow anyone else to run against him. That says a lot about the man.

Next: Calgary West Wants Anders Trashed But Harper Can't Let Go

Sources:

1. Right to work resurfaces, Canadians Against Forced Unionism urges MLAs to endorse voluntary unionism, By: Shelley Russell, Alberta Teachers Union, February 1995

2. Hold your fire, National Post Thursday, July 03, 2003

3. Barriers to Women: Why are we so far from gender parity in our legislature? by Linda Trimble and Jane Arscott, From Alberta Views – June, 2005 pp. 28-31

4. The UN Quietly Wages War on Religion, LifeSite News, August 20, 2001

5. A mother's place is in the home, By Lydia Lovric, The Hamilton Spectator

The Creation of Stephen Harper's Sandbox

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

The creation of the Alliance party was the result of efforts by three neoconservative parties: The federal Reform Party, Ralph Klein's Alberta and Mike Harris' Ontario. The creation of the Conservative Party of Canada, came about through a hostile takeover of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.

And though there were many warnings about the outcome of a neoconservative takeover, we didn't listen.

The wonderful Dalton Camp, a longtime conservative insider, opposed the notion completely. When he first learned of the attempt to unite the right he was livid, claiming that the conservatism of Stockwell Day "is viewed by most Tories as embedded in the lunatic fringe." (1)

But I think Frances Russel of the Winnipeg Free Press said it best. She felt that this was not going to be a "big tent" party as many were suggesting, but rather a sandbox.

One week into the launch of the latest "great right hope" and the portents are perilous for those who seek a "big tent" party capable of unseating the governing Liberals. So far, the proponents of a united right are making it clear they aren't interested in giving a real option to Canadians. They are only interested in fashioning their own little sandbox where they can play their own narrow ideological games.

Mr. Manning was positively giddy in his article in yesterday's Free Press. He thinks he's finally realized the dream he and his father put into book form back in 1967, the dream to create a party of ideologically pure social and economic conservatism to confront "the collectivist welfare state" that disregards "individual liberties and
responsibilities" and is an affront to "personal salvation."

Moderates within the Progressive Conservative Party must act quickly to ameliorate the harsh, hard-right image of the new party before it solidifies in the public's mind. The Harrises, the Mannings, the Longs -- and the Stephen Harpers -- are not living in political reality. (2)

And she was right, because the only way that Harper has been able to sell neoconservatism to Canada has been to operate in the shadows. Or as his former right-hand man Tom Flanagan once suggested, "fooling Canadians into thinking you're moving to the left when you're not". (3)

Senator Lowell Murray wrote a piece for the Globe and Mail urging Peter MacKay to reconsider.

Stephen Harper called last week for an "electoral coalition" between the Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance parties. If our party's leader, Peter MacKay, goes down this road -- and he seems tempted to explore it -- he will waste precious time and political capital. And he will find it's a dead end.

... The fact is that the two parties are fundamentally different. That they are incompatible would soon become clear to Tory candidates trying to defend Alliance policies, and vice versa, in the unstable electoral cohabitation proposed by Mr. Harper and others. Reform conservatism, which is what the Alliance practises, relies on people's fear of moral and economic decline combined with nostalgia for a Canada that no longer exists. It spoils all the good arguments for the market economy by making a religion of it, pretending there are market criteria and market solutions to all our social and political problems. (4)

And even Norman Spector called it the 'Kiss of Death':

Stephen Harper wants to make "common cause" with newly elected Tory leader Peter MacKay in order to throw the Liberal rascals out of office. The Alliance leader says voters expect the two parties to present a single slate of candidates in the next election.

That's eyewash: Most Canadians -- including out here in British Columbia, where the Alliance traditionally elects the plurality of its MPs -- expect Paul Martin to be their next prime minister. They'd be appalled if Tory/Alliance backroom boys and girls came together to carve up the country for political gain. In truth, the proposal is largely tactical, a cleverly designed kiss of death for the Tories. (5)

What we now have is a sandbox, where Stephen Harper and his schoolyard bullies play their ideological little games, and for anyone who disapproves, they can expect to have sand thrown in their face or get a wedgie from hell.

It took Marci McDonald's book, the Armageddon factor (6), for us to realize what has happened to our country. The American Religious Right has accomplished in four years, what it took them thirty years to do their own country. But they couldn't have done it without willing accomplices, a sleeping electorate and the complete lack of an independent media.

And I don't mean that they have turned us into a 'Christian' nation, though a theocracy is definitely on the horizon.

We've been neo-conned, and I suspect we're about to find out just how painful that really is, as we are now on the verge of losing everything that once identified our country. And unless we can convince the parties on the left to unite for the common good, there may be no turning back.

"When I get through with Canada, you won't recognize it". Stephen Harper

That may be the only time he's ever told the truth, because I barely recognize it now.

Sources:

1. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 381

2. Watch for a purge of Red Tories, by Frances Russell, Winnipeg Free Press, 24 October, 2003

3. The Man Behind Stephen Harper, The new Conservative Party has tasted success and wants majority rule, By Marci McDonald, Walrus Magazine, October 2004

4. Don't do it, Peter: There is no good reason for Tories to climb into bed with the Alliance
by Senator Lowell Murray, Globe and Mail, June 23, 2003

5. An Alliance kiss of death: The Tories should call Stephen Harper's bluff by proposing a common platform for the next election, by Norman Spector, Globe and Mail, June 25, 2003

6. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3

The Health, Wealth and Stealth Continued: Roots of Change

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Craig Chandler, a long time Reform-Alliance-Conservative supporter and organizer, used his Progressive Group for Independent Business (PGIB), to help the unite the right, with the motto "Unite the Right to Unite the Country."

His group has contributed to the success of Mike Harris, Stockwell Day and Stephen Harper, to name a few. He's kind of an "energy bunny", who's often been controversial, and while I would never agree with his ideology, I kind of like him simply because he's honest. He may exaggerate his importance, but there's no denying his influence.

I also appreciate that on his Concerned Christian Coalition website, he clearly states that it is FOR profit. It's a business, not a non-profit organization. In this way he doesn't have to hide his political stripes, as so many of them do, though usually not well.

In David Lethbridge's 2001 article: Prescription for Fascism (1), where he writes about the "quackery" movement and ties many of the groups with the extreme-right, he lists among them Citizens' Voice for Health Rights . The head of CVHR is Debbie Anderson who was part of the National Executive, and BC chair of Chandler's PTIB. She was also involved with the "Roots of Change" Conferences. (I should mention though that Canadian Wholesale Direct, a relatively well respected health-food distributor, lists Anderson's CVHR first under its heading "Health Freedom" (1)).

Tom Walkom in the Toronto Star, wrote of Chandler's initiatives, reminding his readers that they were independent of the "Winds of Change", run by David Frum and Ezra Levant.

When influential conservatives held a conference to unite the right two years ago, Craig Chandler couldn’t even wangle an invitation. “I called to get in but (organizer and journalist) David Frum wouldn’t let me,” the 27-year-old former Reform party candidate recalled this week. “He said they were full. It was a kind of cliquey, elitist sort of thing.”

So Chandler got his own back. Yesterday, he kicked off his own two-day, unite-the-right conference in Toronto. And David Frum wasn’t there. Instead, Chandler’s Roots of Change conference is attracting the kinds of blood-and-guts rightists who sparked the Reform party, but who – as Reform attempts to become more respectable – find themselves relegated to the sidelines. (2)

They may have been sidelined but they continue to support and influence the party, with their various grassroots movements. Chandler recently had an audience with Stockwell Day, so they are obviously still on speaking terms. I'd be happy if someone from this government just answered my emails.

I should also point out that if they were in fact on the "sidelines", or part of the "fringe" their speakers included not only Stockwell Day, but Link Byfield, Mark Montini from the Leadership Institute, Steve Jalsevic from the anti-abortion Campaign Life Coalition* and Michael Coren of the Financial Post, to name a few.

Lethbridge, mentions not only Debbie Anderson speaking on behalf of Citizens' Voice for Health Rights, but several others including:

Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee: a union busting organization from Springfield, Virginia. You can listen to Mix's interview on Fox News here. A director of the NRWC is none other than Morton Blackwell, and need I remind you, that besides the Leadership Institute, that Preston Manning designed his own institute after, he is also one of the founders of the Council for National Policy, the vanguard of both the Religious Right and the Republican Party in the U.S.

I already mentioned Mark Montini from the Leadership Institute above. He is one of the most influential speakers and Republican pollsters in the U.S. I love his motto: "If Mark doesn’t light your fire, your wood is wet". (LMAO) I've visited his site and I guess my wood must be soaked.

He is a vocal opponent of same-sex marriage and was sued by a gay couple for stealing a picture of them and then using it in one of his campaigns.

Ron Leitch of the Preservation of English in Canada (APEC) - was a long time associate of Ron Gostick and an early Reform Party supporter.

Jocelyn Dumais of the Quebec-based ADAT - another union busting group.

Robert Metz of the Freedom Party of Ontario - Their platform is the usual laundry list of neocons everywhere: tax reductions, and opposition to welfare programs, the Human Rights Commission, affirmative action programs, multiculturalism and official bilingualism, yada, yada, yada.

John Thompson, executive director of the MacKenzie Institute, a right-wing think tank based in Ottawa, with a pro-war agenda (fear mongering) - The Western World's scarcely recognized war with the Islamic Jihad stumbles on; handicapped by the unwillingness of most Muslims to engage in the war (so far, anyway) and by our own common inability to correctly name or identify the enemy. As we get lost in the minutia of homegrown Jihadists, airport security and fighting in Afghanistan, we are losing sight of the forest on account of the trees. Maybe if they can't see the forest for the trees, their wood is just wet.

They don't all sound like "fringe" and in fact many are quite legitimate, showing that Chandler is better connected than his opponents suggest.

I'm going to continue with a few more "Health"/Right-wing connections, so stay tuned, because as Lethbridge concludes:

" Wherever we find tendencies to irrationalism and conspiracy-mongering, there we find fertile ground in which fascism can grow, or a movement which fascism can exploit. These tendencies are rife within the ever-expanding and overlapping alternative medicine, New Age, and tax refusal circles. While the class basis for these tendencies is essentially petit-bourgeois, it is by no means restricted to this class; certainly, sectors of the working class are being strongly influenced by these same forces. It would be foolish to dismiss fascism's entry into these areas which are often considered purely marginal or simply bizarre. On the contrary, much political and agitational work needs to be done on this front, as on so many others, where fascism has found a new foothold." (1)

Next: Religion vs Knowledge

Sources:

1. Prescription For Fascism: Alternative Medicine and Right-Wing Politics, By David Lethbridge, April 2001

2. Chandler’s Roots of Change Conference attracts fringe elements: Unite-the-right’s downmarket element. Meeting attracts those relegated to sidelines, By Thomas Walkom, Toronto Star, March 21, 1998

How Stephen Harper and the Theo-Cons Helped to Engineer an Election

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"For Harper, the courtship of the Christian right is unlikely to prove an electoral one-night stand. Three years ago, in a speech to the annual Conservative think-fest, Civitas, he outlined plans for a broad new party coalition that would ensure a lasting hold on power. The only route, he argued, was to focus not on the tired wish list of economic conservatives or “neo-cons,” as they’d become known, but on what he called “theo-cons”—those social conservatives who care passionately about hot-button issues that turn on family, crime, and defence.

"Even foreign policy had become a theo-con issue, he pointed out, driven by moral and religious convictions. “The truth of the matter is that the real agenda and the defining issues have shifted from economic issues to social values,” he said, “so conservatives must do the same.

"Arguing that the party had to come up with tough, principled stands on everything from parents’ right to spank their children to putting “hard power” behind the country’s foreign-policy commitments ... " (1)

Stephen Harper's exploitation of the Religious Right was planned and nurtured over many years. Even back in the Reform Party days, he tapped into many front groups, who were able to enjoy enormous tax benefits, while claiming to be religious, charitable or civic enterprises; when in fact they were highly motivated to get the Reformers elected. Many fell under the Northern Foundation (2), a group to which he was as founding member (3) and included the anti-feminist REAL Women of Canada. (4)

But it wasn't until Stockwell Day and Jason Kenney hit the federal political scene, that their armies became mobilized. This was going to be a culture war that not only pit Christian extremists against government, but "Bible-believing fundamentalists against their Christian brethren." (5) It was not merely an attempt to replace politicians at all levels with Christians, they had to be "born again" Christians. People who believed in the absolute, literal word of the Bible. Or at least how they interpreted that word.

And one of the people leading the charge was Charles Mcvety, a close personal friend and long time supporter of Jim Flaherty.

McVety .. turned to key strategists who choreographed the religious right’s takeover of the Republican Party to help ... In February of 2004, he imported Jerry Falwell for an “Emergency Pastors Briefing” to rally six hundred evangelical clergymen against a bill that included making denunciations of homosexuality a hate crime. In December of 2005, he helped to launch the Institute for Canadian Values with a gala dinner tutorial from Ralph Reed "the boyish tactical wizard behind Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition, which succeeded Falwell’s Moral Majority and helped mobilize the South for Bush." (5)

With nearly two million believers in his grassroots guerrilla force, Reed terrified liberal Republicans with his organizational stealth. “I paint my face and travel at night,” he once boasted. “You don’t know it’s over until you’re in a body bag. You don’t know until election night.”

... his appearance a day after the federal election call drew a sold-out crowd of evangelical and Conservative activists, including Senator Anne Cools and McVety’s old friend Jim Flaherty who, as Ontario’s attorney general, had once called for jailing the homeless.

But Reed also offered a lesson on how to take over a nomination contest or a riding. “He taught us all that only a handful of people actually go and seriously volunteer to get someone elected,” McVety says. “We’re talking about 150 people per riding. Tiny numbers! This is the size of a small church.” (1)

Rondo Thomas and Equipping Christians for the Public Square

Working through another Flaherty supporter, Tristan Emmanuel, founder of a group called Equipping Christians for the Public Square; Mcvety began his covert operations. I don't know if he painted his face and travelled at night, but he set his sights on a few dozen ridings scattered across the country.

McVety himself zeroed in on one particular target: Mark Holland, the Liberal MP in his own riding of Ajax-Pickering, who had organized the pivotal caucus petition that convinced Paul Martin to push Bill C-38 [same-sex marriage bill] through before the Commons’ summer recess last year. (1)

McVety helped to engineer the nomination of Rondo Thomas, his longtime deputy at Canada Christian College, but then a video surfaced of Thomas that questioned his ability to function in the world.

A video has recently surfaced showing Ajax Pickering Conservative candidate Rondo Thomas whipping up his troops in the battle against equal marriage for same-sex couples. As the top lieutenant of Defend Marriage Coalition leader Charles McVety, Mr. Thomas played an active but mostly low-profile part in the
fight against passage of Bill C-38, the equal marriage bill.

In the video, Mr. Thomas was quoted as saying:

“There is going to be a clash of morality views between those who believe in righteousness and those who believe in immorality and when we collide there is going to be conflict…It doesn’t matter what the media says, it doesn’t matter what the government says — the facts don’t count. We are going to win this conflict.” Rondo Thomas is one of the top leaders of those against equal marriage and he is intimately connected with everyone from Charles McVety to Campaign Life Coalition to American Ralph Reed, founder of the Christian Coalition.”(6)

But McVety did something else that even more disturbing. He phoned Mark Holland, the Liberal candidate who went on to win the election.

“How are your constituents going to feel about you not being married?” Almost no one knew that Holland and the mother of his three children had never tied the knot in their fourteen years together. The MP was stunned. “To me it was a veiled threat,” he says. (1)

Tristan Emmanuel

Emmanuel was a candidate in the 1997 federal election for the Christian Heritage Party, and has been a long time political activist for Canada's far right. He was behind a group called Canadians for George Bush, who rallied for Canada to join the Iraq War. Speakers included Jim Flaherty, Stockwell Day and Tim Hudak, who is Mike Harris's protegee.

Galloping Beaver discusses how Tristan Emmanuel and his Equipping Christians for the Public Square worked behind the scenes to get Stephen Harper elected.

If anything is not receiving sufficient attention during this election campaign it is the hard link between Stephen Harper's Conservatives and the likes of Tristan Emmanuel ... which should be a clear reminder that the Conservative Party of Canada is not the old Progressive Conservative Party. In fact, the CPC is rapidly becoming more and more like the US Republican Party and that is particularly so with respect to the influence of the dominionist bible movement or, the "Christian right".

He has been active in promoting "Christians" to run for the Conservatives who now have at least nine candidates sporting radical Christian credentials. All of them openly campaign against same-sex marriage, most want abortion made illegal and some are virulent racists. A good proportion of them have been or are leaders of the Canadian branches of organizations such as Focus On The Family and the Promise Keepers.

Emmanuel has some rather disturbing beliefs of his own. He praised Franklin Graham for his openly stated opinion that Islam was an "evil and wicked religion" and endorsed the belief that Christians and Muslims did not share the same God, which in Emmanuel's view made Muslims infidels. He has described gays and lesbians as "sexual deviants". Canadians have a reason to be nervous. The CPC is moving closer to the position in which the US Republican Party finds itself. If the Conservatives form government, the differences will be difficult to distinguish. (7)

It has been four years since that election and the Religious Right has actually become even more powerful, a force that is going to be very difficult to remove from "office".

Religious front groups now dominate the political landscape, and as Stephen Harper and his Reform movement work diligently to turn Canadians off politics, they will continue to strengthen their hold on Canadian governance.

Unfortunately, our media ignored this threat simply becasue they didn't want to attack someone's religious beleifs. But we are under attack now. And you have to remember that these Christian extremists are even going after mainstream Christians who promote a social gospel.

They only want fundamentalists like themselves.

Sources:

1. Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons: The rising clout of Canada's religious right, By Marci McDonald, The Walrus, October 2006

2. Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper demonstrates continued ultra right wing affiliations by blocking pro social justice Toronto candidate, By Dr. Debra Chin, The Canadian

3. Preston Manning and the Reform Party. Author: Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, pg. 100

4. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada. Author: Trevor Harrison Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, Pg. 121

5. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

6. Rondo Thomas: Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: Campaign cover-up going on, Egale Canada, January 16, 2006

7. The Albatross Around Stephen Harper's Neck, The Galloping Beaver, January 2, 2006

Pierre Poilievre: Political Sociopath

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

The characteristics of a sociopath might include a glibness or superficial charm. They might be manipulative and cunning with a grandiose sense of self. They are often pathological liars, with no sense of remorse. They can be impulsive with a lack of behavioural controls and a constant need to have their egos stroked.

Several of these characteristics can be applied to anyone entering the political arena, but few will be identified as having them all. And those who do have them all, I refer to as Political Sociopaths.

A political sociopath enters political life as a combatant; but with a pathological narcissism that puts their own interests above absolutely anything or anyone else. Stephen Harper himself is definitely one. John Baird another. But I think the one to best fit the profile is Pierre Poilievere.

Pierre Poilivre and the Calgary School

Like Stephen Harper, Pierre Poilievre was tapped on the shoulder by a group of neo-Conservative academics known as the 'Calgary School'. They seek out young people who are not only political junkies, but who can also be manipulative, cunning and with a grandiose sense of self. If they can feed their enormous egos, they have no trouble pulling the strings.

It is also desirable that their protegees have little or no experience in the real world. Pierre Poilievre, who it is said is being groomed as the future leader of the Reform-Conservative party, fits the bill perfectly.

Rick Mercer stated in an interview recently: "What bothers me is the trend in politics with people like Pierre Poilievre, who’s the prime minister’s parliamentary secretary. A lot of people have him pegged as the future leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and there’s absolutely no evidence the man has ever had a job. He’s an MP, and there’s just no evidence. If there is evidence, maybe he’d like to bring it forward."

When he was running for election in 2004, he stated that he was co-owner of a political research company called 3D Contact Inc., and according to the company profile, the 'contacts' were Stephen Harper, Ted Morton and Stockwell Day. His partner was Jonathan Denis, now Minister of Housing in the Alberta government.

Poilievre also claimed to have done policy work for Canadian Alliance MPs Stockwell Day and Jason Kenney, and prior to running for office himself; worked as a full-time assistant to Day.

And though born and raised in Calgary, he selected a nice middle class neighbourhood in Ottawa, winning in 2004 to become the youngest MP on the Hill. However, it would not be his age but his immaturity that defined those early years. Now it's his narcissistic, hyper-partisan combative, all fluff and no substance posturing.

His partner is Jenni Byrne, who has been named as one of the Top 100 Most Influential People in Government and Politics in Ottawa by the Hill Times:

Ms. Byrne, a backroomer, is considered an influential staffer for having a key role in staffing ministerial offices and also to craft strategy to deal with issues facing the government on a daily basis. She is the link between the party's headquarters and the Prime Minister's Office. Ms. Byrne's boyfriend is Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre, a loyal Harper foot soldier.

She has since left the office of the PMO to work at party headquarters.

Meanwhile, Harper said goodbye this week to one of his longest-serving and most partisan advisers, Jenni Byrne, who will leave her post as director of issues management to become director of political operations for the Conservative Party of Canada.

Conservative political staffers within the Prime Minister's Office and in ministers' offices say Giorno and Byrne are the two most influential and powerful political aides in Ottawa. They routinely direct the affairs of all but the most senior and trusted cabinet ministers, such as Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Transport Minister John Baird. Byrne, a former nursing assistant in her mid-30s, moves to a role currently being filled by Doug Finley

Like Poilievre, she has been actively involved with the Party, even going back to their Reform days.

Traits of a Political Sociopath

Callousness and Lack of Empathy

Poor Behavioural Controls

Sneaky and Manipulative

Cunning