Peter MacKay running for Conservative leadership | CTV News

the next PM right there..

David Orchard was not available for comment.

Before they anoint him as the saviour of the Conservative Party, I'll wait to see who else is running. Because, having another Progressive Conservative Tory vice a CPC Tory likely won't do much to salve the wounds Trudeau has inflicted on Alberta and Saskatchewan.

On the plus side though, if he wins maybe he can garner some conservative seats in the Maritime's because, apparently to get elected out there all you need to do is have nice socks.

Although that brings up another problem. How will he poll in Quebec. I also wonder if there's any chance Max Bernier try's to return to the Tory fold or has he burned to many bridges?

GOOD NEWS!!!

-J.

Good sign, especially if it leads to the social conservatives being contained and controlled in the way Scheer couldn't (or wouldn't) keep them in line.

Depends on what you consider social conservatives. If you mean the radicals demanding a return to the 1930's position on abortions, gay rights, mandatory religion and other issues that have been ground out through the courts for years, then maybe.

But, if you consider people who ascribe to family, duty, traditional values and established institutions as Social Conservatives who must be muzzled then, you may as well just keep electing the Liberals because all Mackay will be is another Red Tory. Which means there will be no meaningful difference between the two parties except for the colour of their banners.

Talk about a blast from the past. Who�s next, Stockwell Day, Preston Manning even?

Depends on what you consider social conservatives. If you mean the radicals demanding a return to the 1930's position on abortions, gay rights, mandatory religion and other issues that have been ground out through the courts for years, then maybe.

But, if you consider people who ascribe to family, duty, traditional values and established institutions as Social Conservatives who must be muzzled then, you may as well just keep electing the Liberals because all Mackay will be is another Red Tory. Which means there will be no meaningful difference between the two parties except for the colour of their banners.

The Conservatives desperately need a social libertarian caucus in their midst, the kind of people that are utterly uncompromising on individual freedom and liberty being absolutely that will not be negotiated away. And not just to counter the social conservatives who have their obsession over homosexuals, working moms, and controlling uteruses from cradle to grave dominating all their actions. It's also to counter the increasing anti-liberty totalitarian instincts inside the Liberal and NDP, the kind of speech-banning, hate-crime definition expanding, and coerced sensitivity-training urges they have. Insist, for example, that the human "rights" tribunals be stripped of most of their power or abolished altogether. No gun grabs from citizens who aren't criminals. No screwing with the legal system in order to get trial verdicts that boost racial and identity politics at the expense of the rights of the accused. Bring in comprehensive self-defense laws that wipe out the ability of the state to endless harass anyone who harms a criminal that's attacking them or invading their property.

This is what social libertarianism should look like. And it is definitely not social liberalism, because that particular train of thought has been so thoroughly disgraced after being hijacked by leftist extremists that it'll someday end up putting people into some version of a Canadian gulag archipelago. Yeah, Gerald Stanley deserved a harsh prison sentence for defending his family from invaders but that Yaniv freak in Vancouver has every right in the world to endlessly harass other people through abusing the legal system who don't want to wax it's testicles for it in a women's spa. Thanks, libbos, you really outdid yourselves with that bit of insanity. That it would piss off the social conservatives just as much as it would the social liberals by wiping out their ability to impose their religion on everyone else would just make it that much sweeter to see.

If it makes the wretched dopes from both sides of the crazy divide angry then it is absolutely a good thing to make happen.

Depends on what you consider social conservatives. If you mean the radicals demanding a return to the 1930's position on abortions, gay rights, mandatory religion and other issues that have been ground out through the courts for years, then maybe.

But, if you consider people who ascribe to family, duty, traditional values and established institutions as Social Conservatives who must be muzzled then, you may as well just keep electing the Liberals because all Mackay will be is another Red Tory. Which means there will be no meaningful difference between the two parties except for the colour of their banners.

The more simple reason is that Peter MacKay arguably isn't a very good politician.

I'm utterly mystified as to why he seems to be so admired when he has such a thin resume of accomplishments.

He was the same political wizard who couldn't win the old PC leadership without David Orchard's help, he used emergency rescue vehicles as a goddamn taxi service, and as Justice Minister he kept getting his bills trashed by the courts.

Depends on what you consider social conservatives. If you mean the radicals demanding a return to the 1930's position on abortions, gay rights, mandatory religion and other issues that have been ground out through the courts for years, then maybe.

But, if you consider people who ascribe to family, duty, traditional values and established institutions as Social Conservatives who must be muzzled then, you may as well just keep electing the Liberals because all Mackay will be is another Red Tory. Which means there will be no meaningful difference between the two parties except for the colour of their banners.

The Conservatives desperately need a social libertarian caucus in their midst, the kind of people that are utterly uncompromising on individual freedom and liberty being absolutely that will not be negotiated away. And not just to counter the social conservatives who have their obsession over homosexuals, working moms, and controlling uteruses from cradle to grave dominating all their actions. It's also to counter the increasing anti-liberty totalitarian instincts inside the Liberal and NDP, the kind of speech-banning, hate-crime definition expanding, and coerced sensitivity-training urges they have. Insist, for example, that the human "rights" tribunals be stripped of most of their power or abolished altogether. No gun grabs from citizens who aren't criminals. No screwing with the legal system in order to get trial verdicts that boost racial and identity politics at the expense of the rights of the accused. Bring in comprehensive self-defense laws that wipe out the ability of the state to endless harass anyone who harms a criminal that's attacking them or invading their property.

This is what social libertarianism should look like. And it is definitely not social liberalism, because that particular train of thought has been so thoroughly disgraced after being hijacked by leftist extremists that it'll someday end up putting people into some version of a Canadian gulag archipelago. Yeah, Gerald Stanley deserved a harsh prison sentence for defending his family from invaders but that Yaniv freak in Vancouver has every right in the world to endlessly harass other people through abusing the legal system who don't want to wax it's testicles for it in a women's spa. Thanks, libbos, you really outdid yourselves with that bit of insanity. That it would piss off the social conservatives just as much as it would the social liberals by wiping out their ability to impose their religion on everyone else would just make it that much sweeter to see.

If it makes the wretched dopes from both sides of the crazy divide angry then it is absolutely a good thing to make happen.


Yup you got that right. +5 if I could.

What wounds are you talking about?

What wounds are you talking about?

The wounds you get when you've been pissed on and missed but shit on and hit. Trudeau is Anti oil, Anti Alberta and dividing Canada at the core level to achieve his own personal political ends. His handling of the pipelines has shown a complete disregard for not only Alberta and Saskatchewan but for all of Canada who would benefit from the monies these projects would have created.

https://edmontonsun.com/opinion/columni ... ti-alberta

So when the PM of a country allows one or more provinces to be economically disadvantaged while allowing others a windfall, that they don't deserve but get because of personal favouritism it creates very large wounds. Wounds just like his father created with the National Energy Program. But at least his father believed we were all Canadians. Unfortunately for us, Trudeau the Lesser only thinks of us in terms of small fragmented Canadian tribes.

We're all Canadians to Trudeau to him we're all different Canadians. Western Canadians, Eastern Canadians, Muslim Canadians, White Canadians, female Canadians, male Canadians, Native Canadians, etc, etc, etc. And, all this is designed to keep us separated because even when our PM says we're Canadians, what he means is that we're all different which makes it much easier for him to keep us separated and that way he can keep conjuring up the boogeyman conservatives as the real enemy of your tribe.

So, the wounds of his purposely mishandling the pipelines and catering to special interest groups while watching thousands of people lose their jobs in the patch while doing nothing is creating wounds that won't be healed in his lifetime.

I'm amazed that the people who vilify Trudeau for taking a chopper to the Agha Khan's island forget MacKay using SAR helos to pick him up from vacation.

It's only bad when the other side is doing it.