Wildrose Shifts Far Right; Disenfranchises Libertarian Contingent

[PsYcNeT]

Posted today by the former VP Communications for Wildrose Calgary-Glenmore

https://calgarydreamer.wordpress.com...-of-principal/

In face to face and online talks, I had spoken with other WildRose members who truly believed that any animosity of perception of racism and intolerance was over. But being a member of a sports team with gay members, and looking around at random WR events, I knew this was far from the truth. What was sad was this was confirmed as I walked around. But in those several chats, what especially disturbed me was that LGBT people were described as “uppity” and “whiners”. This wasn’t a bad joke, or even a casual careless statement. Looking at each face, it was an honest belief. Needless to say, I was actually angry, no more like pissed and furious, on TV as I was positioned to stand right behind Danielle at the rally. I was close to storming off that day, but calmed down by the end of her speech.

This past weekend at the AGM, the party, either in the misguided misunderstanding that nothing LESS than the statement of equality would do after the Lake of Fire event, or out of genuine desire to swing far right, actually BACKTRACKED and voted out the 2013 statement that affirmed and protected HUMAN RIGHTS.

I’ve been asked to stay, to reconsider and try to rebuild from scratch and be a part of the culture. I can’t. I wouldn’t ever be able to face my friends and my son with any pride or self-respect. To me, to serve in WildRose while it shifts right is an act of cowardice and insults those I love and care for. But I will find a way to serve, even if it means finding some way to reform through another party, or as a voice on the sidelines.

Pretty damning stuff. Looks like the general publics perception of the party was not unfounded.

[undercoverbrother]

I heard about this today.

I do not follow politics closely, but good for him for standing up for his beliefs.

[Flash Walken]

Wow, powerful piece.

[crazy_eoj]

It's sad to hear he has given up on being a part of moving the Wildrose Party in line with what the majority of Albertans want; a fiscally conservative and socially moderate party. As he mentioned, there is no alternative to the PC's other than the Wildrose.

As a true grassroots party the Wildrose gives a voice to all it's members, even the one's with terrible perspectives and opinions. Sadly it seems many would prefer the top down leadership style of the the PC's and CPC, and maybe it's time the Wildrose went that way as well?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

It's sad to hear he has given up on being a part of moving the Wildrose Party in line with what the majority of Albertans want; a fiscally conservative and socially moderate party. As he mentioned, there is no alternative to the PC's other than the Wildrose.

As a true grassroots party the Wildrose gives a voice to all it's members, even the one's with terrible perspectives and opinions. Sadly it seems many would prefer the top down leadership style of the the PC's and CPC, and maybe it's time the Wildrose went that way as well?

Well that's one way to spin it.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

It's sad to hear he has given up on being a part of moving the Wildrose Party in line with what the majority of Albertans want; a fiscally conservative and socially moderate party. As he mentioned, there is no alternative to the PC's other than the Wildrose.

As a true grassroots party the Wildrose gives a voice to all it's members, even the one's with terrible perspectives and opinions. Sadly it seems many would prefer the top down leadership style of the the PC's and CPC, and maybe it's time the Wildrose went that way as well?

Posts about grass roots giving voice to everyone. Ignores the fact that more than half the delegates voted against the inclusive statement.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by nik-

Posts about grass roots giving voice to everyone. Ignores the fact that more than half the delegates voted against the inclusive statement.

Ignores fact that Wildrose is only party to allow members to set policy.

Ignores fact that many delegates voted for statement, including majority of MLA's and Leader.

Condemns entire party.

Better?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

It's sad to hear he has given up on being a part of moving the Wildrose Party in line with what the majority of Albertans want; a fiscally conservative and socially moderate party. As he mentioned, there is no alternative to the PC's other than the Wildrose.

What does this mean? You mean right-wing alternatives? There are the Liberals, Alberta Party and NDP, for starters.

[1stLand]

What did he expect when he joined the party? He didn't expect that some grassroots members would be homophobic?

He should have stayed on and tried changing some prejudiced opinions.

The party seems to be far more moderate than what it was when he joined in 2009.

It will continue to become more socially progressive.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Ignores fact that Wildrose is only party to allow members to set policy.

Ignores fact that many delegates voted for statement, including majority of MLA's and Leader.

Condemns entire party.

Better?

I'll own it. >50% is an embarrassment. So if that's the pool of people setting policy, yeah, I would prefer top down leadership.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by nik-

I'll own it. >50% is an embarrassment. So if that's the pool of people setting policy, yeah, I would prefer top down leadership.

I think the success of the CPC indicates that likely this is the way to electoral success.

Many people complain about the political process being exclusionary and average people having zero input on decisions. However, by having member driven policy to attempt to combat this issue it seems to only have hurt the Wildrose Party.

Stephen Harper has it right. He controls the message, and that has kept his party elected.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

Ignores fact that Wildrose is only party to allow members to set policy.

Ignores fact that many delegates voted for statement, including majority of MLA's and Leader.

Condemns entire party.

Better?

Smith didn't vote for it. She said she would've voted for it, but wasn't there. As I mentioned in another thread on this topic, I am so tired of that cop-out. We saw the same thing on the gay-straight alliance motion, in exactly the same way. The Wildrose voted totally against it and after some backlash some MLAs gave the now tried and true 'I would've voted in favour, alas I wasn't there'.

Frankly if Smith was any kind of leader she not only would be there, she will speak to how important this was for the party and push for its passage. Don't get me wrong as a Wildrose opponent, I think it's fine she skipped it. I just think that missing this was a pretty big deal.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

What did he expect when he joined the party? He didn't expect that some grassroots members would be homophobic?

He should have stayed on and tried changing some prejudiced opinions.

The party seems to be far more moderate than what it was when he joined in 2009.

It will continue to become more socially progressive.

Seriously, in this day and age, why would anyone feel like they should stick around and try and change prejudiced opinions, especially when there's a whole group of them re-affirming one-another's prejudices? Anyone who's still harbouring resentment towards homosexuals is a dinosaur who isn't going to be reasoned with, and deserves to be publicly called-out on their backwards opinions. If a party is going to let those relics hold sway in policy statements, then the whole party needs to be publicly called out on it.

The comments last election were disturbing and offensive enough that I'll always hold it against them until they demonstrate that they actually are one of the more progressive parties on social issues. It'll never be enough for them to simply quiet their socially-conservative ranks, because I'll always assume -- as this policy reversal suggests -- that any progress on social issues is done for optics, with the rank-and-file of the party looking for any opportunity to retreat from those stances as soon as they think the limelight is off them.

[1stLand]

Well Octothorp, Political Parties evolve.
PC Party was against same-sex marriage for instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-se...age_in_Alberta
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/albert...riage-1.528949

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by 1stLand

Well Octothorp, Political Parties evolve.
PC Party was against same-sex marriage for instance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-se...age_in_Alberta
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/albert...riage-1.528949

I haven't voted for them either. What's your point?

[4X4]

Wildrose is as pathetic as the Oilers. Such opportunity they had, with all the f'ups of the PCs, sorta like a bunch of first overall draft picks, but instead of leading, they continually find ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. It's almost amusing. And Danielle Smith just sounds as ridiculous as Eakins. Does she ever actually say anything, other than how bad the other guys are? Are those some moral victories, Danielle?

I can't believe I once voted for them. And the further right they go, the more I'm embarrassed. Good on Terrence Lo.

[Chill Cosby]

It's amazing what some lunatics can do while maintaining some level of support simply because they label themselves 'socially conservative.'

On that note, in what twisted fantasy could Wildrose possibly meet all their promises (including a balanced budget) without a significant tax increase? Who is falling for that garbage?

[Azure]

Any government can balance the budget if they cut enough spending.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Azure

Any government can balance the budget if they cut enough spending.

Who needs roads and hospitals anyway.

I am going to have my kids in the US for a million bucks a piece.

[PsYcNeT]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/po...173/story.html

“These issues are ones that people feel very passionately and strongly about, and there was obviously a strong reaction to what happened on the weekend, but I think through our actions, we’ll be able to demonstrate that we’re continuing to broaden our base and attract more people to our party,” Smith said. “As we continue to grow as a party, I am sure we’ll find the right language so that everybody feels respected. Maybe we have to take another crack at it in the future.”

Bonus comment (may be trolling):

Good ! One less darned atheist in politics. Since when did we allow them in office anyways?
I could put up with all us tribes except that clan of godless heathens. He wants to give an inclusive message, yet exclude the "Big Guy/Gal" ? I sure feel more comfy with a man/woman of God watching the candy store, than a man who doesn't feel the eyes of High (wordplay unintended) watching him when left alone with the goods. Atheists ! They just don't believe, and they don't care that they don't believe.