Andrew Scheer's Big Beyak Bigot Problem

As you know Andrew Scheer is now desperate to improve his image, and try to convince Canadians he is not a bigot.

After the Globe editorial board questioned his commitment to tolerance.

Mr. Scheer has apparently made it a priority to rebrand his party as a Canada's brightest beacon of tolerance. Based on what we've seen, he may not be the person for the job.

So yesterday Scheer swung into action, and announced he was going to show everyone he is a beacon of tolerance.

By taking aim at the ghastly Con Senator Lynn Beyak.



And expelling her from the Con caucus for allowing her website to become a sewer of racism.

Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer has removed Sen. Lynn Beyak from the Conservative National Caucus, in the wake of a Global News report which found Beyak’s website to have published several letters containing language that First Nations advocates call racist or offensive.

But what's weird is that despite all the other racist comments, and Beyak's long history of offending our First Nations... 


Scheer would do nothing about that, but instead chose to focus on this comment:

“I’m no anthropologist but it seems every opportunistic culture, subsistence hunter/gatherers seeks to get what they can for no effort. There is always a clash between industrial/organized farming culture that values effort as opposed to a culture that will sit and wait until the government gives them stuff.”

And say this:

“To suggest that indigenous Canadians are lazy compared to other Canadians is simply racist.”

Which just happens to be one of the few things the many bigots in his caucus and his rabid base might grudgingly agree with.

And what that tells me is that Scheer is still more interested in placating the social conservatives who made him leader, than he is in fighting bigotry. And that the only reason he expelled Beyak was because she was too blatant.

So I think it's time Scheer needs to be asked some really hard questions:

Like why did he take so long to expel Beyak from his caucus? Just like he took forever to disassociate himself from The Rebel, or disentangle himself from the ghastly Ezra Levant.

Would he have let Beyak remain in the Con caucus if she had removed that racist material?

And most of all he needs to explain this:



Because that's the problem with Scheer, there's the one with the creepy smile...



Who poses as Mr Nice Guy.

And then there's the secret one, the one they call Schmeagol...



Who does share the beliefs of reactionary Cons like Beyak, and is more Trumpkin than Canadian.

You know, yesterday I examined Scheer's claim to be a beacon of tolerance, and NOT an anti-gay bigot. 



And I found that to be obscene, considering the many times Schmeagol has voted against bills designed to protect LGBT Canadians from violence and discrimination.

Now the very good parliamentary reporter Dale Smith weighs in, and also finds Scheer wanting.

To make it clear, Scheer’s language of “tolerance” is just that – being seen to tolerate something that much of his party’s base finds distasteful, and tolerance is a far cry from respect. So you’ll forgive me if I find Scheer’s assurances that he is “supportive” to ring entirely hollow, because that’s not the language or actions of support.

And then there's what Neil MacDonald once wrote about Scheer's promise not to impose his religious views on Canadians.



And was also sceptical. 

Canadians do have Scheer's word that despite his strongly stated positions, he would not as prime minister introduce legislation re-opening the abortion question or same-sex marriage. 

But social conservatives in the United States have used all sorts of creative schemes to impose their views on populations in states where they hold sway. You often don't need legislation to get your way. 

Canada's a different place, but a prime minister enjoys much broader power than a president. A little de-funding here, a little creative regulatory tweaking there, and you can accomplish what you want without big, loud, bothersome House of Commons debates.

And all I can say is what I have said for months. 

Andrew Scheer is a stealthy religious fanatic and alt-right extremist.

Anyone who would trust him is either a scummy Con, or out of their minds.

And this country will not be truly safe until he is forced to resign...



CORRECTION: 

The tweet I used of Lynn Beyak turned out to be from a parody site. I'm sorry for the mistake, but since I'm sure Scheer and Beyak do share their beliefs, I don't think I'll apologize to them.