Andrew Coyne has always been anti-conservative. I want to say that he was part of the Progressive that was cut out from the Progressive Conservatives but that doesn't really fit. He went after Mulroney like a dog for a bone and kept licking long after it lost all its flavour. I'm sure you've heard of the self-loathing liberals, well as near as I can tell Mr. Coyne is a self-loathing progressive.
His views speak for themselves. He wants a national carbon tax for example. He is unwavering in that wish. He's a progressive. A liberal that likes blue. Only this liberal loves blue when nobody else does.
Read this lecture of his from his bully pulpit at a paper I formerly enjoyed. Somehow its seems to have gone downhill since Andrew Coyne arrived. He looks to be somehow channeling Ron Paul. For a progressive he is adept waging the holier-than-thou conservative finger in your face.
We need that finger in fact. It's easy to get lost in the labyrinth of day to day politics. From Steven Taylor and the NCC, I salute. -but from Andrew Coyne? Umm no. May as well invite Pat Martin for instructions.
I'm sure you are aware Ron Paul's role in the Republican primary. It's a particularly useful role for progressives. It defuses fiscal conservative arguments by proving that there is a limit fiscal conservatism. It's true: there is a limit. We do need government. We do need taxes. We do need a military. Etc... Everybody recognizes this vocally or not.
The trick is that there are ideological axioms that are taken as undisputed truth. These, like Karl Marx or the environmental movement can be twisted to rationalize anything. Unfortunately this includes the libertarian principals that are the underpinning of conservatism. There are libertarian arguments for legalizing prostitution, hard drugs, privatizing the military, even legalizing worse and perverted things. These are not Conservative ideals.
Progressives have recognized this. It's the same tactic used against them. Progressive conservatives don't see themselves as socialists but they see themselves as everything else associated with progressiveness. They are the elite who understand what's best and want to use the new discoveries in political thought to evolve government nearer to the heart's desire. They are predisposed to accept socialist ideas when repackaged as new and nuanced.
Everyone should recognize that progressives and liberals are two sides of the same coin. What they have learned, and you see this coming from Liberals too, is that you can always make a more conservative argument to any policy.
That is all they need to do. They need to raise the doubt that a party or a person has the most conservative views. Once they get someone explaining why they took the most sensible option, it opens the door to walk the argument all the way back to progressive ideas. This is how Ron Paul helps Mitt Romney. This is how Andrew Coyne helps himself.
RP doesn't mean to help MR but Coyne is both ends in one. I don't think he is actually libertarian but knows the arguments well enough to say: see you should be progressive too.
That's even ok in a way. You have your opinions. You like being progressive. Good for you, fine, whatever. With Coyne though there is something else. It's that self-loathing elite thing. They consider themselves above the rest and despise what they have in common with the non-elites.
He loathes non-progressives. He loathes the Conservatives. I've been reading Coyne for years in Maclean's, on The National, on twitter, and recently in the National Post. If you have too, then you also know that he can't stand Stephen Harper or the CPC.
His bio on twitter is: crap journalist
Agrees with me right? Nah. Progressive. He thinks he's an institution.
The case of the Robocall faux scandal is instructive. Andrew Coyne was out front inflating the story. As the flame was put to the dry tinder of piled Harper hatred in the media, Coyne distinguished himself among them. Twitter trends began to appear like #robocall or #robogate, but Coyne wanted them to be called #robocon. He tried really hard to trend it. If he didn't coin the term I'll bet he feels like he did. The con in robocon suggests who? Coyne knows how to push a narrative.
Look at a few examples:
See that. Its just robo-spamming for the NDP and it's "in no way comparable to #robocon." This implies the NDP had no part in "#robocon" when actually nobody knows.
So according to Coyne the government looks into OAS as distraction to the robocall smear. Incredible. He's no fool. He knows it isn't. Coyne is part of the problem: the media dirty tricks.
Andrew Coyne is not a conservative. Not a small c conservative and certainly not big C conservative. His own words:
He doesn't disagree. He agrees with Liberals and voted for them. How is that for principles?
Folks, he's not a friend of the conservative movement. He's not against Canada but he doesn't realize its more fragile than it seems. The only reason he's behind things like defunding the CBC is because he's betting the Conservatives won't do it. You know that if they cut the CBC 50% he'll complain it wasn't 60%. If you cut it 100% he'll complain you didn't liquidate it. Cut the CBC because its the right thing to do. Let Andrew Coyne explain himself to his progressive friends forever.