Sunday, June 27, 2010

A Tale of 2 Leaders...

"All (the PC's) are interested in is retaining power at any cost... We've had enough of socialists and liberals masquerading as conservatives... This is what you get when you have a party that is more concerned about trying to be everything to everybody than it is about doing what's right. "

- Danielle Smith, leader of the Wildrose Alliance - June 25, 2010

"Basically I support ... what's written here," one member said during the firearm debate. "I'm just worried about how this may be received in the public and portrayed the media, so I'm voting no."

"You can't get any of your agenda implemented if you can't get elected..."

- Danielle Smith, leader of the Wildrose Alliance - June 26, 2010

Wow... way to stick to your guns, stand for what you believe in, and not water down your beliefs in a crass attempt to appeal to just enough Albertans to take power, Danielle.

I'm not saying you're wrong - your party made a lot of unexpectedly expedient political moves to try and appeal to the soft centre on Albertan voters. These moves suggest that if your party DOES win power in 2012, I might not have to move to Cranbrook as a result. Kudos on your political maturity.

Just do us all a favour, and stop trying to pretend you've got the moral high ground, as "true conservatives who won't sell out your core beliefs for power". Because it's clear, based on what went on this weekend, that the object isn't to bring conservative government to Alberta. It's to bring Wildrose government - at whatever the cost.

It's politically smart. It shows an understanding of political reality. It allows for the possibility of good governance.

And it's exactly what the Tories would do, and you criticize them for it.

You're no better.

So stop insulting our intelligence.

Stop pretending.

(Note to the Nation: Actual review of the policy decisions made at the WAP AGM and Policy Conference will be coming soon - this just serves as the appetizer)


Anonymous said...

Witnessing the watering down of the rhetoric this weekend by the WRA has to illustrate to Albertans that these guys are going to say whatever they want Albertans to hear to get elected, THEN change their agenda to implement all the things they don't have the cajones to say they're going to do.

When you see Mark Dyrholm, Craig Chandler, David Crutcher (and a whole host of Rob Anders wannabes) become candidates for WRA, it will be increasingly more difficult for the WRA to control what is said at the doors. It will be then that the true colors of this movement will be illustrated.

Anonymous said...

None of that matters, as all Wildrose MLAs are subject to recall. If they do not do as their constituents want, they can be removed. Also keep in mind that the policies were member driven, not exec driven. If one member speaks about worrying about he media, it does not reflect the rest of the membership or the party itself. In fact, I do believe after the "media concern" fellow spoke, several members spoke in direct disagreement with him. Nice try though.

The Invisible Hand said...

So... one guy at the microphone says he's willing to soften the gun rights policy to get elected, and you claim that means Danielle Smith (who voted for said policy, according to your own linked article) is "watering down her beliefs in a crass attempt to appeal to just enough Albertans to take power"?