Faramir wrote:Hodgson wrote:Smaug wrote:I agree with those remarks Catonist. Albertans have never been particularly ideological.
What surprises me the most about the last election is that Albertans have allowed a woman with a radical social agenda to stay in power. People say the Wildrose were damaged by a social conservative spouting off about a biblical view of homos ... but no one said boo about roadside trial by breathalysers to punish non drunk drivers.
What is up with that? How did we allow social conservatives to be used as a foil to make a radical social agenda seem legitimate?
I think the drunk driving thing was over blown.
Basically cops don't want to steal people's cars because they had a burger and a beer an hour earlier. They Checkstop for the hammered folks that clearly shouldn't be driving.
You probably will never be pulled over for drunk driving unless you are hammered and shouldn't be driving.
Peter Goldring granstanding on civil rights was pointless. If he just had a couple and was asked, the correct answer to the question of "Have you had any alcohol tonight?" is simply...."No."
As for Redford's radical social agenda.....I'm not convinced. She oversaw elections in third world countries for the U.N. The status quo remains in Alberta right now.
She's basically a bureaucrat that is not afraid to spend big money on public stuff like health and education.
The difference between her and the NDP is that she seems to understand you need an economy on fire in order to pay for it all.
I like that.
Plus, she has some solid conservatives in the party that will explain to her the ways of conservatism should she stray too far.
Social Conservatives can be as socially conservative as they want to be, but most folks don't want them involved with their own lives.
Yeah, Redford is a UN human rights lawyer hack. Solid conservatives? Who?
Rick McIver. Sandra Jansen.