If You Vote For The Conservatives, You Must Really Have Something Against Women.

This one is pretty obvious, given the recent flap about Brad Trost and his self-congratulatory statements at the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association convention a couple of weekends ago in Humbolt. By now, you’ve likely already heard about how Trost lauded the assembled crowd for their pro-life petitions, and informed them that it was largely due to these efforts that the argument was made to de-fund International Planned Parenthood. Good for you, Brad! You helped to make it even harder for women in developing countries to get much-needed reproductive health care, effectively refusing them access to HIV screening, pap-smears, and post-natal care. Feels good, doesn’t it?

By the way, wasn’t it a nifty trick the way Trost created a little media frisson about the de-funding of International Planned Parenthood, thereby giving Stephen Harper a plum opportunity to assure everyone that he’s “not interested in opening the law on abortion”? Why, it’s almost as though they had spoken at some point earlier in the week and cooked the whole thing up to target voters on both sides of the debate. No, I don’t think that’s far fetched. These people aren’t as dumb as they look.

Below is a video of Trost* in a debate with NDP candidate Denise Kouri. There isn’t much that’s terribly revelatory in this clip. It’s pretty much the same-old, same-old from Trost, reiterating that he’s a social-conservative (pro-life, anti-same-sex marriage, anti-long gun registry, generally hateful, blah, blah, blah). Still, it’s nice to see him slapped down by Kouri and to have the crowd erupt in applause for her.

God, I hope they don’t get a majority.

*Special thanks to Don Kossick for tipping us off to the video.

Author: Wanda Schmöckel

Wanda Schmockel is just trying to get by without shoving. You may follow her on twitter @vschmo

3 thoughts on “If You Vote For The Conservatives, You Must Really Have Something Against Women.”

  1. Stephen Harper says as long as he is Prime Minister the debate will not be reopened. However, even if that is true I’ve heard some (quiet) speculation that the party may replace him due to the amount of bad press and bad feelings there are towards him in the last few years. The debate could definitely be reopened if the Conservatives chose to elect another Party leader after the election.

  2. A sick part of me almost wants to see a Harper majority, just to get it over with. Until he gets it, he’ll still be pulling the pity vote. Best case scenario: he gets a majority…Canadians finally release their pent up hatred towards the jerk after just 6 months…he has a terrible, terrible majority government. And, the opposition gets a chance to rebuild, not that the NDP needs it. Anyway, guaranteed a Con majority will sweep these losers out of Saskatchewan. We’ll be SO SICK of them by then, guaranteed we’ll elect 10 NDP in 2015.

  3. What you are describing, Talbot, is the situation in the U.S. Recall when Obama was elected, a lot of commentators were saying “We needed that second Bush presidency to get to this moment,” intimating that without the disastrous Bush legacy, there would be no way Obama could have been elected.

    The problem starts when you look at Obama– who has upheld or even increased some of Bush’s more draconian foreign policy and Homeland security programs.

    What I’m saying is that hoping for a party you strongly disagree with to get a majority just so national sentiment will swing the other way is a very nasty way to do politics, and ends up polarizing public debate.

Comments are closed.