Tim Murray by

Are these the voters Scheer should be appealing to?

T

he maverick, charismatic leader of the fledgling Peoples’ Party of Canada, Maxime Bernier, surprised many of us when he recently appeared on the Rubin Report . In the wake of the interview, party members and supporters received a bulletin from Bernier where he posed an interesting question concerning his rivals. “Can you imagine (Conservative leader) Andrew Scheer, (Prime Minister) Justin Trudeau, or (NDP leader) Jagmeet Singh appearing on this show?” My answer was reflexive "NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS".In fact, there are a lot of things I can’t imagine Andrew Scheer doing — or saying.I can’t imagine Andrew Scheer saying "I would cut the annual immigration intake down to 250,000 per year."Or "You know, Senator Lynn Belak, you were right about Residential Schools . The whole CBC narrative is a damn lie. I am sorry I kicked you out."Or "While the great majority of Muslims in Canada are peaceful ordinary people, there is nothing peaceful or ordinary about the ideology of Islam, which is a totalitarian blend of religion and politics."Or "There is no science behind transgender ideology. I am not going to share a trans person's subjective image of him or her self any more than I would agree with a schizophrenic that he is Jesus Christ. Trans people need compassionate treatment, not pandering. Education falls within provincial jurisdiction. But my private opinion is that transgender propaganda should be kept out of classrooms."Or "Gay couples have no right to deny the right of children to have both a male and a female role model in the home. I would outlaw gay adoption, or IVF for gays."Or "I would abolish federal kangaroo courts and revamp the whole Canadian Human Rights Act. A business owner should have the right to deny service to anyone for any reason. If a consumer does not like being discriminated against, then he should organize a boycott. It's time that we stop funding the grievance industry. The Hurt Feelings Lobby should be told one thing. GROW A HIDE. You have NO RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED."Or "I don't accept the concept of microaggressions and I will NEVER apologize to anyone for allegedly committing one."Or "The notion of 'hate speech' which has crept into our language and our law should be cast out. The whole idea is absurd. The only thing that matters is the CONTENT of what a speaker or writer says. His emotional state is IRRELEVANT. The question that should be asked is whether what a given speaker or writer says is true, not about whether he loves or hates me when he says it. "Hateful" opinions are opinions. We should not be in the business of trying to look inside people's brains to discover what emotion they are harbouring. There is a reason why the US Supreme Court ruled that "hate speech" is free speech, because that it exactly what it is. Snowflakes have no right to impose totalitarian laws upon us to protect their feelings."Or "No one is entitled to be safe from opinions or comments they don't like, especially at a university. But such a statement is worthless if no ready-made sanctions are on deck. I will spell them out now."Or "It is easy to say that universities and colleges must ensure free speech, but I will actually do something concrete and meaningful about it. University administrators who fail to ensure harrassment-free free speech will be terminated. Universities and college instructors or administrators will not be able to avoid government intervention of this kind under the guise of academic independence or freedom because their failure to ensure peaceful discussion and the unimpaired exchange of ideas and opinions on campus is A VIOLATION OF THEIR MANDATE, OF THEIR CONTRACT WITH THE TAXPAYERS WHO PAY THEIR SALARIES."Or "I will not just talk about privatizing the CBC, I will do it, and within my first term of office".Or "I will slash arts funding. Instead, I will give taxpayers a per capita tax rebate equivalent to present federal subsidies and allow THEM to use THEIR OWN money to patronize art of THEIR choosing, not government appointed ideologues."Or "Taxpayers should not have to pay for other people's ideologies with their conscripted tax dollars. Let the politically correct fund their own broadcaster, their own environmental NGOs, their own political parties. Political parties are NOT a public service or utility. Taxpayers should not have to pick up the tab for partisan organizations via tax deductions for donations."Or "Traditional Ecological Knowledge" as it is called, is BUNK. It should not be treated seriously or be given a platform along science in university settings. Leftists do not want Creationism taught in science classes in public schools alongside Darwinism, yet they have no problem with native hocus pocus being taught at universities."Or "Taxpayers should not have to subsidize other people's cultures. If you want to keep your cultural traditions alive, then use your own money to do it. Maybe taxpayers don't like the values and customs of a given ethnocultural group. Why should they fork over their own money to them? Should I subsidize a madrasa? The government maintains that "diversity is our strength". But that is a matter of opinion, and there are many studies to say that it is not. If you like "diversity", as a citizen of a free country, you are free to support it. But other citizens should be free NOT to support it."Or "Attendance at Pride Day or a Mosque should not be socially or politically mandatory. I support your right to peacefully worship at the place of your choice or celebrate the festivities you value. In a free secular society that is enough."Or "First Nations were not FIRST. They occupy land that was, at some point in history, obtained by the ethnic cleansing or displacement of other tribes. They do NOT have the moral authority to accuse so called "White settlers" of being thieves and interlopers. Our ancestors worked their guts out from dawn to dusk to clear the land and eventually grow enough food to feed tens of millions of people at home and abroad. They earned their "white privilege" by hard work. They also brought literacy, advanced technology, electricity and modern medicine to the table. We do not need to apologize for their net contribution to our nation. Most Canadians are done apologizing. They ask, “If Canada is such a racist or sexist or homophobic country, why do millions want to come here? Including those groups of people whose self-appointed advocates claim are victims of "systemic" discrimination."Or "What the hell is "systemic" discrimination anyway? I will tell you what is. It is a charge you make when you can't prove any actual discrimination."Or "Quota hiring and quota college admissions policies should simply be illegal. Employment "equity" is a bullshit concept. Every Canadian is entitled to equal opportunity, but not equal results. Our goal should be to create a meritocracy, and one big political pork barrel."I could go on and on. The point is Andrew Scheer won't go down this road. He may call himself a Conservative, but he is not "conservative" because our culture is presently liberal, and his strategy is win by appealing to the centrist "swing" voters.Maxime Bernier, on the other hand, understands as Trump did, that the path to victory is not to compromise one's principles or policies, but instead to tap into the 40-45% of registered voters who do not vote. It is not apathy that causes a lot of these people to stay home on election day, but the lack of a candidate who has the testicular fortitude to speak forbidden truths. The more "Mad Max" crosses the line of PC discourse, the more popular he will become. And the more popular he becomes, the more Scheer will be induced to move to the Right. Scheer needs to feel fire under his butt from his right flank. As it is now, the only thing he seems to want to talk about are fiscal responsibility and balanced budgets.