A few weeks ago I received an intriguing email from someone claiming to be long-time member of Alberta’s Progressive Conservatives. With the condition of anonymity, he offered to open up and give me is thoughts regarding the present state of the party.

After checking into his background, I decided to go with it. Given that anonymity naturally brings credibility into question, feel free to come to your own conclusions about the following phone conversation. We’ll run with a cliché and refer to him as ‘John’.

LS: How long have you been a member of the PC party of Alberta?

John: Over twenty years. I bought my first membership when Getty was premier.

LS: What part of the province are you in?

John: I’ll say I’m in Southern Alberta. I’m a member of a CA board of directors and have been on and off for years.

LS: Okay. Let’s get to the heart of it.

John: Well..(chuckles)..not all is well. To be honest and obvious, things have been rocky for a while.

LS: For how long?

John: There’s always issues in every political party. Things started to go south near the end of the Klein years. Then we endured Stelmach. At the start, it was kind of difficult to unify. As you know after a leadership race the most important move for membership to make is to get behind the new leader. The problem was so few members actually supported Stelmach – we just didn’t know him. The saving grace was the election. We benefitted greatly from the lack of opposition.

LS: That helped to solidify the party?

John: It went a long way. Members took the results as the public showing faith in Ed. We read it wrong.

LS: Okay. We’ve gone through the Stelmach era. We have seen the maturing of the Wildrose party into a viable alternative in the minds of many voters, the Liberals now have a former PC MLA at the helm in Raj Sherman, the ND’s still maintain their core support, the Alberta Party has arrived on the scene, and Alison Redford is now the PC leader and premier. The landscape is in flux --

John: -- the situation is totally different now, and that’s really the issue here. Redford hasn’t exactly set the world on fire. Yes, the polls showed a nice bump upwards after she won, but let’s remember our numbers improved after Stelmach announced he was leaving. He was the focal point of Albertan’s anger, so that’s no surprise.

LS: They have since slipped a bit.

John: Sure. Alberta voters aren’t naïve. They’re not dumb. It’s still the same MLA’s, the same party in power. It’s not the feeling of renewal like when Ralph took over. I think many PC members were hoping for that to happen again – counting on it or expecting it even.

LS: And it hasn’t happened with Alison Redford?

John: The spin doctors say it has. The picture they are working hard to paint is another renewal of the party under a strong, female leader. There are a few problems with that.

LS: Such as?

John: (chuckles) There’s already a conservative party in Alberta with a strong female leader. As well, Redford had little choice but to fill her ‘new’ cabinet with the same old faces. Instead of a reborn party, the image is that of a new face on an old group. Her habit of flip-flopping certainly isn’t helping, either.

LS: You’re saying there’s a confidence issue at the membership level?

John: Absolutely. You must keep it in perspective, however. I’m not saying that the entire membership feels this way, not at all. But there are enough card-carrying party members who hold serious doubts about Redford – and our chances at the ballot box – that it has become an issue within the ranks.

LS: Are there any specific moves by the government that has caused this, or is it just a general wariness?

John: The fact she came into power so close in similarity to the way Stelmach did was unsettling. When questions about how she won – I’m talking about allegedly getting support from unions – it raised some eyebrows. Then the flip-flops. But what some of us in the ‘trenches’ are talking about is the policies. It hasn’t escaped out notice that many of the very issues the Wildrose has been bringing up, the position that party has taken, are now ‘priority’ for Redford’s clan. You’d swear they were lifting some of these ideas straight from the Wildrose platform. As one member said to me: “if they are going to follow Danielle’s lead, why not just vote for Danielle?”. Then there’s the other side…

LS: Some members feel the PCs are copying the Wildrose?

John: Yeah. But then there’s the other side of the coin. It’s almost comical to watch the PC’s try to defend Redford against allegations that she is a ‘big government liberal’. That’s common knowledge. That’s what scares some of us. A good example is the .05% drunk driving law. Cabinet members and Redford claim that ‘this is what Albertan’s have told them’. Bullshit. A good portion of their own membership disagrees with this idea. Some see this – I see it as window dressing. They want to look like they are doing something, even if the statistics aren’t on their side.

LS: I recall hearing the Minister responsible saying ‘…we have to change the culture’. That struck me as a little too close to social engineering.

John: Exactly. Of course a government wants to look like they are always acting in the public’s best interest. The problem is when boundaries are crossed. The fact is, this government is fighting the growing public impression that they are liberal. All progressive, no conservative. Their words might say one thing, but their actions are telling a whole different story.

LS: What do you see happening in the next provincial election?

John: Right now, polls show one thing. But polls are fluid – they can swing 20 points or more just in one campaign, let alone half a year. Redford is still riding the post-Stelmach wave, but that will not last much longer. We still benefit from an opposition that hasn’t outgrown us, but let’s be realistic: the Alberta party is a non-factor. The Libs are the Libs, Sherman or no Sherman. The NDs are static. The only reason many Progressive Conservative members are overconfident to the point of arrogance is that they discount the Wildrose. Alberta voters, however, could very well see things differently. They are still young, but they are growing stronger.

LS: With all of these questions and a lack of confidence in your leader, what keeps you in the party?

John: The same thing that has kept many of us here while so many others have left. I don’t know, maybe the belief that the PCs are still the best choice. Maybe it’s hope that the party will survive Redford like it survived Stelmach and Getty. Maybe it's because the Wildrose party hasn't won me over - yet. Or perhaps I’m just stubborn (chuckles).

LS: You have no intentions of leaving the party then?

John: Never say never. I never thought I’d consider it, I’ll say that. I intend on continuing to support the PCs. I plan on voting for them the next time around. But, of course, a lot can happen between now and then.

One of the cool things about conducting a small sociological experiment is the possibility the results will overwhelmingly confirm your own strong suspicions. What’s even better – the dessert to the great feast, if you will – is when the opportunity presents itself unexpectedly.
When it happens by chance and the end results in a strong reaction, it is sweet.

Yesterday while wasting valuable minutes of my life catching up on my Twitter page, I noticed a tweet from the CBC’s Jian Ghomeshi had been retweeted to me. (I never would have thought I’d use forms of the word ‘tweet’ so often in one sentence….)

It read:

Jian Ghomeshi
Hello Calgary! Just landed. Anticipating a very fine few days. #yyc

There was my opportunity. I would need to be a bit of an asshole in order to solicit a response, yet I couldn’t be too specific or it would render the experiment void.

I replied:

LeighPatrick
@jianghomeshi Feel free to leave anytime.

That was it. No details or amplified explanation. One sentence, albeit a rude one.

Those who know me or are familiar with my website understood the point right away. It is no secret that I have been vocal against the CBC for decades, and have long called for the privatization of the money pit. For the people of a nation to be forced to subsidize a media organization, which in turn uses the funds to spread its own ideological agenda, always seemed to me the antithesis of freedom.

Has Ghomeshi said anything specifically that I take issue with? Is he one of the usual leftwing socialist CBC talking heads? I don’t know – I’ve never listened to his radio show. But he’s part of that group. He’s part of the CBC team, along with George Strom-etc., the new Toronto-centric face of the network that has spent millions attacking the image of Western Canadians.

Some got that. Most didn’t.

Instead, as I suspected when I thought up this little test, I got to see left wing hypocrisy in all its glory. Calls of ‘racist’, ‘bigot’, and the like were rapid-fired. It seems that many people assumed, because Jian Ghomeshi happens to be of Iranian heritage (although I believe he was born in England), I must be telling him to leave Calgary because his is – apparently – Muslim.

While Jian said this…

jianghomeshi
Hmm...seems not all Calgarians are interested in giving the old warm welcome... (eep) RT @LeighPatrick Feel free to leave anytime. #yyc

…other felt the need to read something that wasn’t there, create their own meaning to my words, and show the ultimate in hypocrisy by exposing their own racist tendencies by assuming I must be referring to Jian’s race as the reason for my Tweet:

MrBryanLawyer
@LeighPatrick @jianghomeshi ...and the sterotype of Albertans as closed-minded and xenophobic is perpetuated one ignorant tweet at a time.

secondcityAB
@jianghomeshi @leighpatrick thrilled to have you! Wish you hadn't RT'd that idiot to perpetuate stereotypes of our city to the rest tho.

mmairaq
@LeighPatrick so do u not like the mooslims ?

unreuly
Ugh. #YYC gets its rep in the rest of Canada from the likes of @leighpatrick (rude, ignorant, xenophobic, boorish). Apologies @jianghomeshi.

…and one of my favorites:

rakitoon
@LeighPatrick On behalf of all Albertans, thanks for perpetuating the stereotype we're all bigoted asshats. @jianghomeshi

Once again, here’s the exact line I typed: Feel free to leave anytime.

Nowhere is there anything about race, religion, colour, or creed. A bitchy, yet quite harmless, statement. The reaction was anything but sedate.

What has been not so much learned as reinforced is a simple truth: if Jian Ghomeshi’s name was John Thompson, if he was a ‘typical white’ guy, no one – not one – of those who fell over themselves to accuse me of having made a statement with racial overtones would have reacted the same way.

It is because he isn’t John Thompson but is Jian Ghomeshi, and it is because I am white and he is not, added with a pinch of the fact that I am Albertan, that the self-righteous cretins who inhabit the left of the spectrum reacted in the only way they know how. In their minds they see a typical redneck white Albertan telling a visible minority to ‘go home’. There could be no other possible explanation: he’s a bigot.

They put race into everything and judge all by that yardstick. They judge me and the meaning of my words through the lens of race. They are the real racists.

You have all been exposed. Here endeth the lesson.

The Colonel has seen it all. The retired United States Air Force pilot and war veteran has always had a keen interest in politics, with an opinion on almost any issue at the ready.

Against stereotype, he isn’t a ‘blind right winger’ – as evidenced in his claim that he has voted for a Democrat for president “…several times when they were the best choice.”

“Truman, Ike, Kennedy, Reagan, they all had their good qualities and ideas. Even Clinton had a couple of good days,” he said with a chuckle. “Of course, there were the others. Like Carter.”

International issues dominate the all-too-rare occasions when the two of us get a chance to chat. Whenever something that transcends the border hits the headlines I know there will be a no-holds barred conversation coming.

Today was no different. The Alberta/Iowa connection sizzled today over President Obama’s decision not to make a decision on the Keystone pipeline. The project, which would double the amount of oil shipped from Alberta’s ethically-produced oil sands to Texas, has long been the target of radical environmentalists and D-list celebrities trying to get their face in the paper (see: Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Daryl Hannah, etc.).

Their fears, however unfounded, became a rallying cry in the media. Protests and arrests of ‘famous’ people at anti-Keystone rallies made headlines, proving how slow news days can really be.

Those who live in the real world have tried to get the truth out to the public. Groups such as Ethical Oil (http://www.ethicaloil.org/) have sprung up with valid arguments not only in favor of the proposed pipeline, but in defense of the oil sands industry.

I asked the Colonel about Obama’s hesitation to take a stand.

“First of all, it should come as a shock to no one that he won’t make the call. That’s his M.O. He’s the vote ‘present’ president. “

He continued: “Here you’ve got record unemployment and the Keystone would create thousands of jobs both in Canada and the U.S. Then you have the environmentalists raising hell using fear of hypothetical damage.”

“Obama’s base, his two main segments of support, is left-wing tree huggers and unions. This issue has pitted each side against the other. If he says yes, the unions are happy but he loses the environuts. If he says no, he’s a friend of the Earth but loses the unions. So, in typical Barack Obama fashion, he says nothing.  He turtles.”

Holding off on the Keystone pipeline by calling for another ‘study’ and possible moving of the planned route runs the risk of stepping on the toes of unions, but the Colonel figures the Obama administration can appease organized labor with other goodies.

“You can promise unions a whole list of things. Environmentalists have a pretty narrow scope.”

We then discussed the options for Canada. The oil sands aren’t going away, and will continue to grow into one of the top global producers. I told the Colonel that many of us are of the opinion that if the U.S. doesn’t want our oil, there is a lengthy list of countries that do.

After all, building a pipeline west to the Pacific Ocean is just as possible as building one south to Texas.

“That’s the real potential problem here,” he said. “The longer this drags out, the more oil Americans will use from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela instead of increasing the amount of oil we get from a safe and democratic ally in Canada. If you folks decide to sell your petroleum to China or Russia instead – all because of environmental hysteria and a spineless, Carter-like president…well, who can blame you?”

“We’d have no one to blame but ourselves.”

A few days ago sub-humans desecrated a war memorial in Calgary with an unconscionable act of vandalism.

Here's a young Belgian boy who, more than fifty years after Canadian soldiers sacrificed their lives to liberate his nation during World War II, shows more gratitude, honour, and respect than many of our own younger generation.  (Forwarded to me on Facebook)

"A lone young Belgian boy is waiting to salute the Canadian troops passing by who had been attending a memorial service. Such class from our Canadian troops - watch what they do for this little boy. The "Eyes Right" command is the biggest compliment troops on parade can pay and is reserved for dignitaries in reviewing stands."