March 20, 2017

Kellie Leitch in-depth: “Enough with the political correctness”

Holly NicholasRebel Commentator
 

Kellie Leitch is the Conservative Party of Canada leadership candidate who lived in Fort MacMurray during her youth and is now the MP for Simcoe-Grey in Ontario. 

Her campaign, largely based on immigration policy, has managed to ruffle some feathers, but she says it’s a tough, common sense policy that’s in the best interests of the security of Canadians.

She was in Calgary recently to sign a pledge with Generation Screwed to pay off the debt in two years if elected Prime Minister, and I had a chance to interview her about her campaign.

Watch my video to see what Kellie Leitch has to say about her immigration policy, how she’ll pay off Justin’s massive debt and more.

She doesn’t support a carbon tax, wants to take the decision making out of the hands of the RCMP when it comes to firearms, and also wants to make it legal for women to use pepper spray for self defence.

And stay tuned to The Rebel as we continue to bring you news and updates on the candidates in the race for leader.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2017-03-25 13:04:51 -0400
?20 questions from the Chamber of Commerce is way too many
And the chickens have come home to roost.
Only 2 candidates at the all candidates meeting is pathetic
Making it almost impossible to acquire the signatures required
To get on the ballot is too onerous. Thus few and pathetic
Quality of candidates.

At the previous green meeting. A citizen lamented about the
Low voter turn out. If you want to keep the Youth vote away
Start with 2 forums put on by retired teachers at a senior center
Then follow it up with a Chamber of Commerce forum where
The CofC asks 20 questions. (they shouldn’t ask any)
Nothing of interest to the general public ever gets asked.

Anyway they are uploaded right now…
see youtube spectateswamp and Senora Center 23 Mar 2017

Hopefully I’ll have enough names to get on the next forum. Just to relieve the boredom.
Transparency through Video
Doug Pederson Candidate.
3
commented 2017-03-21 12:19:21 -0400
Spaced out said, “She is not going to win.”

Thank you for your omniscient prophecy, Spacey.
commented 2017-03-21 03:05:00 -0400
She is not going to win.
commented 2017-03-21 00:37:05 -0400
Re Social Conservatives—30 years ago, I was one and went to Church every Sunday, as did millions of Canadians giving worship to their various Religions. I quit going except I’m at an age where I go to many funerals at the same Church. Where the benches had dozens of couples, now there is just one person. The spouses are gone.
JACK COVERDALE is correct, Social Conservatives are a dying breed. My old Church is half full. Politicians know this, so if they are smart , they will not talk about SC values as it may turn the majority off. But if a Conservative talks about Fiscal Conservatism, a million Centre Liberals will listen. Harper won seats in S Ont. in 2011.
Russia was once extremely Religious, they lost it for many decades, now it is coming back. The reason being is if you don’t believe in something high up, there is no reason to live.
commented 2017-03-20 22:55:13 -0400
@ Ron Voss, ‘How about as an alternative, for example,something like “suspend immigration to Canada from countries or regions that support, encourage or harbour terrorists or Islamic extremism”?’
I sure would love to see that here Ron. It’s what’s really needed. That and deportations for anyone with links past or present to terrorists groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood.
Oops, that would clean out half of Justin’s cabinet.

Fair assessment Marek.
Well said, Allen.
commented 2017-03-20 22:24:08 -0400
Jack Coverdale since when do you speak for so many Canadians? Harper was a social conservative compared to the libs.
commented 2017-03-20 22:23:17 -0400
Jack Coverdale sorry history has not proven that you halfwit. Liberal party are not liberal. Try and figure that out once in your life.
commented 2017-03-20 19:06:17 -0400
D Mary,

Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem and can’t click on a link from The Rebel as well which reiterates my point.

The fact that Canada is a liberal country and the vast majority of Canadians are liberal IS the response to Kellie Leitch’s comments. Canadians in numbers to get her elected don’t want to buy what she is selling.

If it was Leitch vs. Trudeau in the next election – it would be a bloodbath loss for Leitch.
commented 2017-03-20 18:37:30 -0400
Make your point, in a nutshell, having said that (I hate that over used ridiculous phrase, no offense meant to anyone here)….sosme extra long comments here.
I don’t know enough about Kellie Leitch so I have no comment.
commented 2017-03-20 18:13:39 -0400
Drew, we are pointing things out to yet another one of Gordo Steele’s stupid aliases, nothing will change. He has been confronted, and shown his true colours and deflected. He will always just be his usual lying hypocritical government teat suckling self, a complete loser. Just like after President Trump won, he and all his aliases will disappear after the next series of defeats of his beloved lefties. He still is and always will be that pathetic.
commented 2017-03-20 17:26:51 -0400
Jack Coverdale if you are right then why did Harper have 2 terms and why did he have a larger majority than Justin?
commented 2017-03-20 17:26:01 -0400
Jack Coverdale you do not speak for all of Canada, and political correctness is the opposite of liberty, try and figure that out.
commented 2017-03-20 17:24:30 -0400
Jack Coverdale being a liberal country does not mean that it supports the Liberal party. There is a difference , we are a liberal democracy , that does not mean the Liberal party has to be in power. Oh sorry , you are too blind to get that.
commented 2017-03-20 17:13:44 -0400
Jack Gordo, what’s the matter? As usual you won’t address the specifics of the comments she made. Well done Gordo, once again you admit complete and utter defeat.
commented 2017-03-20 17:11:31 -0400
D Mary,

It’s not assumptions about Canada – it’s reality. It’s obvious you don’t know a thing about Canada or Canadians.

Perhaps you should watch this video on The Rebel, since even he acknowledges that Canada is a liberal country.

http://www.therebel.media/o_leary_can_bridge_the_enthusiasm_gap_to_trump_trudeau_in_2019
commented 2017-03-20 16:16:13 -0400
Jack Gordo, you can not address specifics of the content, and you still throw these blanket assumptions about Canada being liberal. Trump said he would protect, fix the stupid immigration, is for guns, all the things Canadians want Trudeau gone for, because Trudeau is destroying Canada. You don’t address anything, you just pull your Gordo “I speak for all Canadians” crap that no one believes. Canadians are thrilled Clinton didn’t win because they need Trump ideals here to save Canada. So, it sucks to be you yet again Gordo because you are going down yet again. And then you and your aliases will disappear until the next stupid thing comes along.
commented 2017-03-20 14:17:24 -0400
Jack, your point is well taken. But it should be recognized that Canada and the US have more similarities when compared with most other countries in the world which are demagogic, communist, bankrupt, theocratic, etc.
Of course Trudeau would like to lump us in with the latter.
commented 2017-03-20 13:58:14 -0400
Billy,

America is more of a conservative country and are typically late to the party on many social issues unless it’s New York or California. Our conservatives here would be considered liberal in America.

Gay marriage was legal in Canada over 10 years before the US and while it’s no big deal here – there are many in America that want it overturned. Americans are also much more churchy compared to Canadians.
commented 2017-03-20 13:38:31 -0400
Jack and Mary:
Canada and the USA are both “liberal” countries. Trump is not the typical Republican and some of his policies continue the liberalism of US government. Trump is not “far-right”, but is against open borders and for fair trade.
Leitch is as liberal (mostly) as previous Conservative leaders but has a similar anti-“open borders” policy.
Canada is a liberal democracy, and has been for a long time and nothing is going to change that, except only if Trudeau stays in power and continues the progressive agenda away from liberalism and towards extreme socialism, anti-freedom, anti-equality, anti-democracy and religious theocracy.
commented 2017-03-20 12:59:23 -0400
D Mary,

Well try to follow me this time. You see, Canada is a liberal country with the vast majority of Canadians self identifying as liberal in varying degrees.

Someone like Trump would never win in Canada and Canadians are still shaking their heads at Americans over that election, so a female Trump is just not going to fly in Canada.

Perhaps you are confused in regards to what country you are living in and the position of most Canadians.
commented 2017-03-20 12:43:26 -0400
You know Jack Gordo, you could try something new for a change and challenge the points made in the interview instead of yet another one of your blanket lies that doesn’t address the content. Oh, that’s right, it’s your typical deflection Gordo technique when you can’t argue any of the specifics.
commented 2017-03-20 12:42:33 -0400
According to Holly Nicholas, Kellie Leitch’s “campaign is largely based upon immigration policy that has gotten some peoples’ feathers ruffled, but she asserts that it is a tough, but common sense policy that is in the best interests of the security of Canadians”. Apparently, that really distinguishes her from the other candidates. A Globe and Mail/Nanos survey in August 2016 found that almost 75 per cent of Canadians, ranging from 70% (Quebec) to 80% (Prairies) by region, support or somewhat support “Making the screening process more onerous for potential immigrants from regions such as the Middle East to reduce potential security threats”. So, with that perspective, let’s examine Leitch’s ‘common sense’ policy, which has tapped into the angst that Canadians have, and, thus, her campaign benefits from those worried as per the survey. According to “Screening for Canadian Values”, from Leitch’s campaign website those values include, “Equal opportunity, Hard work, Helping others, Generosity, and Freedom and tolerance (A Canadian identity that is based on freedom and tolerance to allow each of us the chance to pursue our best lives and to become our best selves)”. On her Facebook page she had described what she means as follows: “Screening potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values that include intolerance towards other religions, cultures and sexual orientations, violent and/or misogynist behaviour and/or a lack of acceptance of our Canadian tradition of personal and economic freedoms is a policy proposal that I feel very strongly about.”

So, I ask, does such ‘screening’, as Kellie Leitch suggests, fit the bill as far as, “Making the screening process more onerous for potential immigrants from regions such as the Middle East to reduce potential security threats”?
How about as an alternative, for example,something like “suspend immigration to Canada from countries or regions that support, encourage or harbour terrorists or Islamic extremism”?
commented 2017-03-20 12:30:25 -0400
Thanks for the consistency Jack Gordo, once again you open your mouth saying Canada is liberal and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what an idiot you are.
commented 2017-03-20 12:27:57 -0400
D Mary,

No, that would be you if you actually support her. Especially in a country that is liberal.

Hey, why don’t you bet on a horse for the win, that is expected to come in last per the odds too while you are at.
commented 2017-03-20 12:00:48 -0400
Jack, aka Gordo Steele, thanks once again for opening your mouth and removing all doubt that you are the “complete joke” here, once again. At least you are consistent.
commented 2017-03-20 11:40:23 -0400
She doesn’t have a chance in hell. My dog Loki has a better shot than she does.

Leitch is a complete joke that even conservatives don’t want to vote for, per the video on The Rebel which asked what candidate they don’t want to win.
commented 2017-03-20 11:36:11 -0400
@canadian Mongrel….I received Pierre’s call to action on STAND5 as well…here is the text so that REBEL readers who are not on that mailing list get the idea and support it wether or not they are party members…
Dear Glenn,

Justin Trudeau’s Liberals are trying to conceal debate on their highly controversial Motion M-103.

As you know, M-103 directs Parliament to recommend ways to use an “all-of-government” approach to fight “Islamophobia” – which of course the Liberals did not bother to define.

Do you have a valid concern about Islam? Do you disagree with Sharia Law? Uneasy about radical Islamic terrorism?
The Liberals may very well classify you as Islamophobic.
Canadians across our country – myself included – see freedom of speech being encroached upon in Canada, and M-103 is another step in that direction.
These concerns could have been addressed if the Liberals had adopted proposed changes from Conservative MPs that removed the term “Islamophobia” and broadened the language to include eliminating all religious discrimination.
But the Liberals voted down all amendments to their Motion, and now M-103 is coming back to the House.

The timing of the debate is suspicious. It is now scheduled to take place the day before the federal budget. That means any possible media coverage will be swamped by reports of massive Liberal deficits and broken budget promises.
Once the debate ends this Tuesday, it will move to an immediate voice vote. If Conservatives do not “stand five” MPs to force a formal recorded vote, then we will never know who voted for or against M-103.
If five MPs don’t stand right after the voice vote, it will be just like the third reading of Bill C-16 on Gender Identity and Gender Expression. This bill passed its final reading in the House with only a voice vote, so Canadians will never know how their MPs actually voted on the Bill.
But if five MPs stand and demand a recorded vote, then every MP will be required to stand up and take a public stand on this important issue.

Please contact Conservative MPs, especially your own MP, right away to let them know that you want the Conservatives to “Stand Five Against M-103"!
I will be running ads on social media today and tomorrow to help spread the word, and call upon our Conservative caucus to “Stand Five Against M-103”.

Please help me reach out to hundreds of thousands of Canadians with this critical message: Stand Five Against M-103!

Sincerely

Pierre
commented 2017-03-20 11:27:50 -0400
Contact your M/P and state support Pierre Lemieux’s “Stand Five Against M103” campaign.

If five M’P’s stand after the Voice Vote, then a Formal Recorded Vote has to be taken; this is the purpose of his campaign: for constituents to see how their M/P’s vote on the issue. If your M/P does not support this stand five campaign, that also will tell you all you need to know about how they voted.
commented 2017-03-20 09:35:56 -0400
Agreed, Marek. Pierre supposedly had charisma. Where did that get us?

A Real Culture
©William Gairdner Real cultures are not necessarily compatible. They are more often than not competitive. Neither is real culture like a sweat-shirt, to be changed at will. It is part of each of us, profoundly rooted in the concrete experiences of everyday life; in the smell-to-make-you-swoon of the madeleine cake, of which Marcel Proust wrote so movingly for the French; in the haunting call of the loon, for me. And real cultures are also, as one critic put it, either “raising” or “lowering” themselves. If you want to know whether your culture is headed up or down, just look to the leaders – the thinkers, teachers, writers, and political visionaries – who will always be on the ramparts first. If they are defending, promoting, deepening, the core beliefs, you’re looking at a raising culture. But if your own leaders are the first and most powerful critics of the culture, or simply fail to defend it, or seek to replace it with a patsy “policy,” then it’s headed straight to the bottom. Lowering cultures are ripe for invasion, and if they are of the mealy-mouthed, everything-goes, modern liberal type, then not much has to be done by the invader. In the way that Marx said capitalists would be found selling the rope used to hang them, most modern democracies, so devoted to diversity and pluralism, have failed to defend themselves. Their weakness is most easily seen in “multicultural” policy, an abstract idea of culture imposed from the top by modern democratic governments as a desperate ploy to raise up what they have themselves lowered. Such eviscerating policy abstractions erode the real culture and create a vacuum into which some competitive real culture will surely move. What has been the real culture of a country such as Canada? Well if, by culture – as I contend – we must ask what specific kind of people, what religion, what political institutions, what philosophy, what economic system, what literature and art a people live by – then the answer for Canada is easy. And liberals faint when I say this, so I will have to shout. According to Statistics Canada, our Census takers, and any number of decent polls, we can justly use the word OVERWHELMING in its proper sense, to say: Canada, including all aboriginal and native people, has only 10 or so per cent “visible minorities.” That is a coward’s way of saying that Canada is an OVERWHELMINGLY white country in the same way (let’s spell it out) that Jamaica, say, is overwhelmingly black, or Japan is overwhelmingly asian. An OVERWHELMING 80 per cent of Canadians say they are Christian, empty pews and all. Our practical language of commerce, our “public” language, is about 80 to 90 per cent English. Canada is OVERWHELMINGLY an english-speaking-using nation. Canada’s political institutions – a Senate, a Parliament, a court, democratic elections, personal freedom under a rule of law – remain OVERWHELMINGLY British in their history, tradition and design (even in Quebec). Now I submit that these things, especially the love of these things, constitute a deeply satisfying and proud “culture,” and that our official failure to teach, promote, and fondly protect them will be our undoing, because multiculturalism, which is a policy and not a culture, cannot take their place. So something else will. Eventually, it will be some other culture. Consider the 1994 court bid by the Islamic Schools Federation of Ontario to allow official Islamic school holidays. Islam is specifically, even programatically, anti-Christian. We Christians are unbelievers. Infidels. In Islamic law, conversion out of Islam is a capital offence. No pluralism here. These folks are not fooling around. In an American Spectator interview in 1993 Hassan Hathout, Ph.D., leader of New Horizons Islamic school in Los Angeles, said “It is our duty to educate mankind” (the infidels). He shudders “at the [Christian] idea that God took on a human form,” and adds that for Muslims, Christianity “is an illness planning to attack us.” Islam also despises democracy as an inferior form of governance that seeks to substitute the shifting will of a majority for the truth as ordained by God and the Shari’a, the perfect law of Islam. Accordingly, as one scholar put it, “every major fundamentalist thinker has repudiated popular sovereignty as a rebellion against God, the sole legislator.” They are keen “to demonstrate democracy’s inferiority to Islamic government.” That’s why the Islamic faithful say they only need “one man, one vote…once” – in order then to govern by Islamic rules. Diversity? Only for multicultural suckers. Those of the Islamic faith, according to distinguished historian Bernard Lewis, have a “profound contempt” for the unbeliever and all his ways. (That’s you and me.) For them, “democracy is obviously an irrelevance. They are, however, willing to demand and exploit the opportunities that a self-proclaimed democratic system by its own logic is bound to offer them.” Fundamentalist muslims especially despise the democratic world’s egalitarian notion of individual “rights,” engraved in egalitarian charters. For them, only God has rights. Humans have duties. So as a Canadian people with a definable culture, we must decide either to recognize and start raising that culture, or resign ourselves handing out more of the multicultural rope with which we will surely be hanged.