News Flash To The Twits In Ottawa; Canadian Values Matter

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

[Lance Leftardashian]

Hopefully Mr. Chong will lead the conservatives in the next election. That is a Conservative that I would vote for.

[Anonymous]

Hopefully Mr. Chong will lead the conservatives in the next election. That is a Conservative that I would vote for.

I think you intended to post in this thread?



If you did intend to post it in the multiculturalism thread, let me know and I will move it back there.

[Anonymous]

Hopefully Mr. Chong will lead the conservatives in the next election. That is a Conservative that I would vote for.

Chong is not very conservative.

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

No MP should oppose this.

[Anonymous]

Hopefully Mr. Chong will lead the conservatives in the next election. That is a Conservative that I would vote for.

You would vote for someone who won't stand up for civilized values.

[Bricktop]

Personally I don't approve of screening.



I'd refuse entry to ALL of them.

[Anonymous]

Personally I don't approve of screening.



I'd refuse entry to ALL of them.

 

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

There are comparisons being made to Trump's plan of extreme vetting of immigrants.

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

There are comparisons being made to Trump's plan of extreme vetting of immigrants.

Kellie Leitch is not backing down on this....so far anyway.

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

There are comparisons being made to Trump's plan of extreme vetting of immigrants.

Kellie Leitch is not backing down on this....so far anyway.

What are there, about eight declared candidates. Let's say about forty per cent of Tory party members support this. It is the perfect wedge issue to separate her from the pack. As long as she is the only candidate supporting this fauz controversial issue, she could win the leadership of the CPC.

[Anonymous]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

There are comparisons being made to Trump's plan of extreme vetting of immigrants.

Kellie Leitch is not backing down on this....so far anyway.

What are there, about eight declared candidates. Let's say about forty per cent of Tory party members support this. It is the perfect wedge issue to separate her from the pack. As long as she is the only candidate supporting this fauz controversial issue, she could win the leadership of the CPC.

But, she will have the same problem Trump has in the US. Hot button issues may help separate one candidate from the pack and win the leadership of a party, but it will not work in a general election. It may have in the past when the NDP and Liberals would split the anti Tory positions, such as free trade. Now that the NDP is on life support across Canada, it is a risky gamble Dr Leitch is taking.

[Lance Leftardashian]

Canada must shed it's colonial legacy and repopulate with non whites and allow new languages to have equal status with English and French.

[Anonymous]

Canada must shed it's colonial legacy and repopulate with non whites and allow new languages to have equal status with English and French.

What colonial legacy?

[Hornung]

Good for Kellie Leitch. Don't give in to sell out Tories like Chong and Ambrose who pander to leftist hypocrisy.

Spare us the politically-correct hand-wringing over the idea floated by Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch to screen prospective immigrants for anti-Canadian values.



Immigrants have been screened for decades, economically and otherwise, to ensure they will succeed and contribute to Canada.



Immigrants are screened for health issues, criminal records and security concerns and are expected to understand their obligation to live according to this country's laws and constitution.



It has been some while since boatloads of immigrants landed on our shores and spilled down the gangplanks without rigorous scrutiny.



Leitch provoked debate (and condemnation) with a recent survey question:



"Should the Canadian government screen potential immigrants for anti-Canadian values as part of its normal screening for refugees and landed immigrants?"



The reaction from Canada's left-leaning media predictably implied Leitch was guilty of intolerance.



Here's how the Simcoe – Grey MP responded:



"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," she wrote to media in an email.



There's a term for the above statement. It's called common sense.



If prospective immigrants openly support organizations or sects that are fundamentally at odds with our values, that should factor into their suitability as citizens.



But both Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose and Leitch's leadership rival Michael Chong criticized that notion as intolerant, with Chong calling it "dog whistle politics".



They played into the left's attempts to frame the debate and ignored, as the Sun's Lorrie Goldstein points out, the values their own party embraced in power.



Many people come to Canada to escape the intolerance that tragically unfolds in other parts of the world. If we don't stand up for our values, we're doing a disservice to those same immigrants.



Of course not all who come to Canada will share all our values. It's up to us to set the tone.



"Canadians can expect to hear more, not less from me, on this topic in the coming months," Leitch's statement noted.



A difficult and controversial debate, but one worth having.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/c ... ues-matter">http://www.edmontonsun.com/2016/09/07/canadian-values-matter

Shen Li showing what a racist cyberbully she is again.