Once again, thank you Paul, for your work on the edges of Harper's policy making. So much of the media coverage is focused on the day to day – which is the role of daily newspapers afterall – that the larger shifts get missed. As I have said before, this is why magazines are such a vital part of media when done right.

I'm holding off reading until the ride home – have my print edition in by briefcase – but I had a question. As many will recall, Marci Macdonald wrote an article in Walrus called "Harper and the Theo-Cons". Back then, it seemed to me like thin gruel – they had only just gotten into government so there was not really any real evidence yet of a religious agenda. Indeed, if anything, he was avoiding even the appearance. You basically held the same view.

So my question is: were we wrong and Macdonald right? or is this a more recent development as he pushes the limits with a weak opposition?

A very interesting piece.

But really, no wonder women and men are diverging more and more politically.

I do wonder what self-selection criterion opted people into Gregg’s poll on attitudes. Things can’t have moved that quickly in just four years.

Interesting article. I think the often-stated assumption that the political centre is moving to the right is an oversimplification that deserves more of this type of exploration.

But even if we take it at face value, presumably people are not moving there uniformly, which opens space for more than one party on the right. Perhaps one that combines social and fiscal conservatism.

Federal Wild Rose Alliance anyone?

Fairly balanced piece, Mr.Wells.

Of course the aspects of economic conservatism and social conservatism need to be united. Not because Harper suggests it but because reason suggests it. If individual freedom is the ultimate goal to be chased, then such freedom cannot be without reason. In fact, freedom is by reason. Where do we learn to reason? We learn to reason within decent family settings where guidance can be provided in coming to understand the collective versus the individual. Religion can form a strong component, not just as part of a decent family setting, but also in light of what mainstream religion ultimately teaches: do not onto others what you may not want done onto yourself (and such counts for all, including parents growing into their role successfully and the child growing into adulthood successfully).

But reason, at times, finds it’s own tipping points. Current examples of those would be the abortion issue and the Afghan detainee issue. When abortion is considered to be a form of contraceptive, or when the Geneva Convention is understood by one warring party but not the other, then reason is at a loss. Hence those issues become great points of contention.

Great article.Thanks for sharing.