Maybe I'm too sensitive? 
I liked this week's issue of Maclean's but this paragraph from Darrel Bricker in John Geddes' article caught my attention. It was on the right track but then quickly veered to 'scare' territory:
Still, Bricker sees potential for Harper to turn the prospect of a minority win to his advantage. Many voters who might consider turning to the Tories in order to punish the Liberals over the sponsorship scandal are worried about how far Harper might push a right-of-centre agenda. The likelihood that he would have to rely on backing from other parties in the House, suggesting a check on the Conservatives, tends to ease those concerns. "A minority works for him a bit if the proposition is he could come in and clean things up, like with his ethics law, but not, say, change the law on abortion," Bricker said. "Even if it is with the Bloc backing him up, there's some sort of control over what he could do."

Change the law on abortion? For $%$^#'s sake - couldn't Bricker pick an actual Conservative policy that the others might not support like Property Rights or a more conservative Child Care policy than the other three parties want. Bricker also uses the 'A' word to describe the what the CPC would push for - it's their "AGENDA".

He must know that the party voted against any change to abortion yet he's propogating this idea. I know we Conservatives are sensitive to this but you don't expect knowledgable people to act like this.

On a positive note, in the same article, this is an interesting point that not many have raised:
"I think the reality is that if Stephen Harper forms a minority government, his biggest support for the next two years will come from the Liberal party, because they'll be in a leadership fight," says B.C. MP John Reynolds, co-chair of the Conservative campaign. "They won't want an election."

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?