Divide the Right: Election Notes

Docter McVety is stamping his little feet again.

Stephen Harper’s refusal to reopen the abortion debate risks suppressing the Conservative vote, a leading voice of Canadian social conservatism says.

“There is just no energy out there,” Charles McVety, the evangelic leader and Christian activist, said in an interview. “Frankly, my fear for Stephen Harper is that being so overt standing against the pro-lifers, he risks not motivating Conservative voters.”

Mr. McVety noted the Conservatives lost 160,000 votes between the 2006 and 2008 elections. He blames Mr. Harper’s decision just before the 2008 campaign to block Conservative MP Ken Epps’s private member’s bill that would have made it a separate offence for killing a fetus when a pregnant woman was murdered.

And they haven't forgotten this session's failed sneaky abortion recriminalization attempt either, viz this thread at the Freaks.

So-cons are finally wising up.

Well, not all of them. A new thread over there has my FB friend Connie wondering about REAL Women and Canada Family Action.

So, why are these socon organizations pimping for Stephen Harper? Why are they are ignoring the fact that the Christian Heritage Party welcomes social conservatives, and that Stephen Harper keeps kicking them in the teeth?

Has someone promised them something? Do they know something the rest of us don't know? Or, do they just have masochistic tendencies? I'd love to know the answer to that.

It is confusing. One -- albeit MASSIVE -- force is chiding Harper, two other pretty powerful groups are backing him.

Hmmm. Christo-Fascists, masochism, hair shirts, self-flagellation. Connie may be onto something there.

(I've been a bad bunny. In the comments on the Globe piece, I've posted a link to the Christian Heritage Party a couple of times. Just doing my bit for strategic voting.)

More So Conned Reaction

Or, 'Another Instalment of DJ! Visits the Freaks So You Don't Have To'.

It's still early days for measuring the so-conned reaction to Stevie Peevie's steel-toed boot to their forced-pregnancy delusion, but it seems to me there are -- so far -- three identifiable types.

First, the over-reacting emotional dimbulb, example here being Cecilia:

Do you think Harper has secret prolife plan? He doesn't. Harper is a pro abortion zealot. He'll never let any type of abortion legislation pass while he's on watch. Harper doesn't give a damn about a woman who has been "coerced" into ending her pregnancy.

Harper has to go.

Um. OK. (I don't think Cecilia understands the proper use of sarcasm/scare quotation marks. But then, there's sooo much she doesn't understand, isn't there?)

Next, the reality-challenged ideologue, represented here by our old pal Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass/Sock-Tube Holocaust Survivor, Pacheco:

In my opinion, we are putting too much emphasis on what Harper thinks.

Politicians don't lead, they react and follow. So why take what they say too seriously?

Harper will bend when the underlying politics of the question go against him. And that is going to come with time. Harper is a passing leader. He won't be the guy who has to really face this issue. It will be the next leader.

I swear that I have never heard the phrase "this debate is over" by so many of our opponents. It's quite comical, not unlike the "unqualified support" management gives to a hockey coach before he gets the boot.

Besides, the otherside is confusing the numbers with political will. They are assuming that one correlates with the other. The fact is that the one-third who are pro-life have more gravitas than the weak kneed pro-aborts. Believe me, if the momentum shifts significantly, many of the so-called "women's right to choose" brigade will go silent when the politics of the question shift. Don't kid yourself. The key is in the momentum.

As the momentum shifts so do politicians. Very few are principled. And frankly, we have more principled pro-life politicians in power than we do "principled" pro-aborters. And that's the key factor here.

So not worry, the march for life continues with or without Harper who will still have to give a full accounting to God for his actions -- some of that "accountability" he likes to talk about -- except this kind of accountability has eternal consequences.

So, the anti-abortioneers have 'principles', time, and Gord on their side, while we 'pro-aborts' have only superior numbers of sane people. OK, works for me. (Pacheco does understand the correct use of quotation marks.)

Then there's yesterday's example: the once-hopeful now totally pissed-off, as represented by my Facebook friend Connie.

The ideologues are useless to DJ!'s evul scheme to divide the right. We'll just have to wait for them to die off.

But maybe we can work with the dimbulbs and the pissed-off.

I'm thinking a concerted chorus of 'nyah-nyah -- how's that "Waiting on a Majority Thingy" working out for ya?' might help our cause.

No one likes to be mocked, of course, but it may work differently on the two groups. The emotional dimbulbs might get whipped out of shape enough to vote for the far-far-right christianist parties. Whereas the pissed-off may just become cripplingly depressed over their painful and embarrassing realization of being strung along for so long and stay home.

Now, we at DJ! would never ever suggest trolling of any kind, but a good place to er, gauge how the Mock the Right Campaign is going over might be this Facebook group, Canadian So Cons. From the info page:

We are constantly told that Canada is a socially liberal country, and that social conservatives do not have a place in the public square.

Well, they sure do! Membership in the group numbers a whopping 21! Including many of our fave fetus fetishists like SUZY ALL-CAPS.

Another place to um, monitor reaction might be Bruinooge's Facebook group set up to support his 'coerced abortion' private member's bill.

Mock the Right! It's fun and it might actually do some good!

UPDATE: The conversation at the Freaks continues. Our evul plan is working!