Same Old Same Sex
Stephen Harper has re-iterated his promise to hold a free vote on Same Sex marriage should he get elected as Prime Minister.
I can sort of see what Harper is trying to do here. Announce it on day 1 and you get the troops fired up - the people door knocking in minus thirty need a reason to go door knocking. Media pundits often forget about the ground war and, with the cold weather, mobilizing volunteers is going to be harder than ever.
But, geez. This is an issue that's better off staying dead. And I'm not just saying that because I'm in support of SSM. The fact is, the law has been passed and it's time to move on. A lot of people who were against SSM have seen that the sky hasn't fallen and it just looks petty when Harper won't accept the will of Parliament on this one. Even if 2 or 3 Liberal Cabinet Ministers were forced to vote against their conscience, the vote still passed and Harper should just move on.
More troubling for Harper is the fact that this election will be fought in Ontario and British Columbia. I can't for the life of me see how this will get Harper any votes in either of those two provinces. Any time the talk turns to social issues, the Conservatives get hurt. Harper looked good this morning talking about change, crime, and cleaning up government - talking about social issues is just stupid.
I can sort of see what Harper is trying to do here. Announce it on day 1 and you get the troops fired up - the people door knocking in minus thirty need a reason to go door knocking. Media pundits often forget about the ground war and, with the cold weather, mobilizing volunteers is going to be harder than ever.
But, geez. This is an issue that's better off staying dead. And I'm not just saying that because I'm in support of SSM. The fact is, the law has been passed and it's time to move on. A lot of people who were against SSM have seen that the sky hasn't fallen and it just looks petty when Harper won't accept the will of Parliament on this one. Even if 2 or 3 Liberal Cabinet Ministers were forced to vote against their conscience, the vote still passed and Harper should just move on.
More troubling for Harper is the fact that this election will be fought in Ontario and British Columbia. I can't for the life of me see how this will get Harper any votes in either of those two provinces. Any time the talk turns to social issues, the Conservatives get hurt. Harper looked good this morning talking about change, crime, and cleaning up government - talking about social issues is just stupid.
posted by calgarygrit at
9:20 p.m.
12 Comments:
social justice issues are completely wrong to campaign on, i agree. with harper especially, they are doomed.
By
rabsteen, at 10:00 p.m.
I do believe that the question was posed to Mr. Harper. The media knows Mr. Harper's views on SSM so asking the question is not going to make a Woodward outta someone. His dilemma is that he can be honest and restate his position which is the right move, or he could try and dibble dabble around it and play into the hidden agenda farce. I do agree with you that the media is fickle and will soon tire of the story, so it is wise to get it out now. Those who are against SSM will remember in January, while those who are for it realize that a minority Conservative government would have no chance of touching it. It's a non-issue for the most part IMO.
By
NorthBayTrapper, at 10:40 p.m.
we'll see how this plays out tomorrow on the news. When I first heard it I had a sinking feeling that here we go again. But maybe getting this out early will cause it to be buried later. As for the I love Canada, remember Patriotism is the last bastion of a scoundrel (sp). I seem recall that the people who support the liberal party are the first one to complain when americans talk lovingly of their country. Now they scream that the Concervative hate their country because the leader did not fall to his knees with tears in his eyes wailing about the love of his country.
Cripes get a life!
By
Anonymous, at 10:53 p.m.
Revving up the base isnt a good plan when the base is only about 30%.
This isnt 50-50 America, so Harper starts already from a disadvantage.. and saying stuff like this doesnt increase the base where he needs to.
By
Oxford County Liberals, at 11:07 p.m.
I think the impact of this statement will be directly proportional to the amount of media attention it gets.
Bart, you are correct to note that Harper looked good, positive and pushing the change button all over the place. For those who care about this issue passionately this will solidify their opposition or support of Harper accordingly.
If, it could be done, a group of protesters dogging Harper at every turn on the SSM issue would help keep the issue at the fore-front.
If someone would pay me 2 months worth of salary, I would do it.
A.Liberal
www.lastcanadianexit.blogspot.com
By
A.L., at 11:21 p.m.
My initial reaction was:Oh No, not again! On reflection it's perhaps best to restate his position honestly early on. Better now than in the last week of the campaign!
The most interesting thing today was the Global/Canwest poll which showed the Liberals and Conservatives starting the campaign neck and neck at 31% each.
By
cardinal47, at 11:22 p.m.
"The fact is, the law has been passed and it's time to move on. ...it just looks petty when Harper won't accept the will of Parliament on this one."
No issue is ever closed in a democracy. If a Tory-dominated Parliament outlaws SSM, then that will be the will of Parliament. In that case, will you advise those who support SSM to "just move on"? I'm not opposed to SSM myself, but Harper has every right to try to revisit the issue. Whether it's a wise move politically is another matter.
By
Aeolus, at 1:18 a.m.
Don't forget he got nailed in the English debate in 2004 for dancing on the issue. You can't weasel on this when your Achilles hill is the 'hidden agenda.'
At least with a clear, objective measure of success, we all know what will be done and then we can assess whether it will pass.
Perhaps one part of this strategy is wedging people from the Liberal party to the NDP. If pressed, he will point out that a third of the Liberals voted against the bill too, and only the NDP and the Bloc voted for it. That could backfire though as the Liberals did whip their members into voting.
Fuck, I hate Paul Martin. When we ran against his leadership campaign in 2003, the entire Martinite crew were so happy to dump on the gays, whom they *hate* *hate* *hate*.
By
Anonymous, at 1:26 a.m.
Agreed.
The Tories should avoid this issue like the plague
By
Anonymous, at 3:30 a.m.
The only ones who want to avoid this issue are the Lieberals who shoved the legislation down our throats in the first place.
What kind of people OPPOSE a free vote on something? - Socialists.
By
Anonymous, at 11:20 a.m.
Yaaaaaaawn.... ssm is not an issue to most Canadians one way or the other. If same sex couples want to make the mistake of getting married and ruining a perfectly good relationship then so be it. Personally I advise against it as it hasn't been working out so well for not-same sex couples...
Harper is smart to bring it out into the open before the Libs accuse him of having a hidden agenda. He is smarter still to make it a "free vote" issue, where as the Liberals rebuttal regarding the "not-withstanding clause" is a real non-starter. People get "free-vote" but how many avg cdns understand what the friggin "notwithstandingclausenschubel" thingy is?
Media issue NOT a public issue.
By
Anonymous, at 11:33 a.m.
I'd point out that in the media commentary today, most suggested that the Liberal war room took about a second and a half to jump on Harper over this "gaffe". Well, it would have taken about the same amount of time for them to do the same to some no-name candidate who spouted off a position on marriage that WASN'T the party policy, so you might as well have them go nuts on the ACTUAL party policy, from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Others have already pointed out the futility, in a likely minority situation, of trying to pass a motion (NOTE: not a bill, as some would have you believe) asking if the House wanted to revisit the issue. Harper is simply pointing out to the large social conservative contingent of the party that he hasn't forgotten about them, knowing full well that what he proposes is doomed to failure (an outcome with which I presume he is more than content). Conservatives have basically told any so-con in the party that marriage is the only issue that they're allowed to talk about, so Harper has to wave the flag for them at least once. Best do it now, and it'll be old news by January 23.
By
Anonymous, at 3:49 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home