Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Bring It On Obama!

US protectionism will make Canada wake up. After every recession comes change, it just might not be the change Obama was thinking about. Obama wants cap and trade, fine, we will cap it off, and trade it to China and India. How would the US react to loosing 20% of their energy supply?

Eco-nuts and Quebec want our dirty oil banned, let's go for it, let's stop selling our oil and gas to the US, tomorrow. Just for one week. See we care about the polar bears and our millions of miles of trees and our untouched wilderness. Have you noticed that every time oil goes up the TSX also goes up? Funny that.

Save Us Unholy Sinners!

Canadian church leaders head to northern Alberta tomorrow to explore the theological, moral and ethical implications of the oilsands.

The clergy aren't the only people interested in the oilsands this week.

Down in Washington, D.C., one of North America's top energy research consultants will testify before the U.S. Congress on the importance of the oilsands to future energy supply.

Canada now supplies 19% of U.S. energy needs, but if oilsands production is accelerated, that could rise to 37%, according to a new report by IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA).

That in turn would translate into an injection of billions of dollars into the Canadian economy. Alberta isn't the only province that benefits. This massive industrial project creates a national demand for jobs, technology and manufactured goods.

The enormous tax revenue generated by all this activity benefits everyone.


Yikes, they want us to pollute more!! How many smog days has Alberta had? NONE. How many smog days for Toronto only? Too many to count. Last trip across Canada, we stopped at streams to let our dogs drink, until we hit Ontario, no way were we letting our dogs drink out of those brown polluted rivers.

The solution is getting back to nature. This article gives us an idea of how we can start.

Bison turn back the clock on a patch of prairie

CALGARY — In a remote part of the already remote Grasslands National Park in the southwest corner of Saskatchewan, a herd of plains bison is in the midst of calving season with another bumper crop of babies.

Three years ago, 72 pure-blooded animals were introduced to the 181-square-kilometre refuge as part of a Parks Canada initiative to bring large herbivores to an area that hasn't felt bison hooves in more than 120 years.

Now, that little herd has become prolific beyond expectations.


The animals in Grasslands were shipped as two-year-olds from Elk Island National Park near Edmonton, where Mr. Olson was based for 25 years. The youngsters acclimatized in a paddock before stepping beyond the gate where they had to learn how to behave like bison without guidance from adults.


Yahoo, I bet the eco-nuts love this, bison back on the prairies. I actually love it too. The more bison the better. They are actually a really healthy eat. HA!

They should be allowed to free range, like this:



I bet the eco-nuts are ecstatic about this herd of 300 Wood Bison.....NO? Oops, guess they don't want us to know that they are part of an oilsands reclamation project.

It's bad enough that Obama is trying to destroy our economy with "Buy American" protectionism. When Canadians like the Bloc in Quebec want to shut down the oilsands without even seeing them, ignorance is bliss. Quebec, listen to this, Alberta sends 8 billion into the equalization fund, you get 8 billion, do you see any connection? So sure we can shut down, but then you do not get 8 billion. Think about that, let it rattle around in your heads, prove to me you are not stupid.

16 comments:

mystereeoso said...

Re: "When Canadians like the Bloc in Quebec want to shut down the oilsands without even seeing them, ignorance is bliss."


Quebecers and other Canadians who don't live in Alberta can read, Huntsy. But you are quite right - ignorance is bliss. BTW, your link to the Bison article is not working.

mystereeoso said...

Re:"Last trip across Canada, we stopped at streams to let our dogs drink, until we hit Ontario, no way were we letting our dogs drink out of those brown polluted rivers."

Actually some of the world's cleanest groundwater is in Ontario!


If you've actually driven across Canada - you know there are plenty of streams and rivers in Ontario a dog can safely drink from. OK maybe not the Ottawa River:>

Southern Quebec said...

Good thing those bison are not in Quebec today...it's going to be 31C. Global warming...or hot air from the West?

East of Eden said...

SQ - 31 C is not unusual for this part of the country at this time of the year. This is the first year that I have not had to use my A/C in May. In 2003, before the "experts" had created a global warming hoax, I was using my A/C until the end of October. Two years ago, it his 31 C after Thanksgiving in the Toronto area when I was visiting my mother.

So, really, 31 C forecast for today is not unusual. May is always a mixed bag out this way.

East of Eden said...

Stereo - you are so right about the Ottawa River. Thanks to Ottawa's inept management, we seem to have lots of sewer being dumped into the river. I wouldn't use the streams anywhere near Toronto, either - yikes. Even in Algonquin Park, we aren't supposed to drink the water in the lakes, streams or even from the taps in the rest stations.

mystereeoso said...

The seasonal average for this day in May is around 22 degrees.

Also, "The Canadian Medical Association Journal reported 1,766 boil water advisories were in effect in Canada as of Mar. 31, 2008 (excluding those on 93 First Nations Territories)."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080408/boilwater_advisories_080408/20080408?hub=TopStories

mystereeoso said...

The greenhouse effect was discovered by Joseph Fourier in 1824, first reliably experimented on by John Tyndall in the year 1858 and first reported quantitatively by Svante Arrhenius in his 1896 paper.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect

Powell lucas said...

How right you are about Obama's assault on the Canadian economy. He won't reopen NAFTA because he has been made to see what a disaster that would be for U.S. energy security, so he will get to repatriate jobs by applying death by a thousand cuts to Canadian manufacturers.
Napolitano leads the "border security" raid by imposing more red tape and regulations. The congress makes its sortie by imposing "carbon emission" rules that will apply to goods from foreign countries while exempting many U.S. industries. The congress conducts its search and destroy mission by imposing "but American" rules. Each of these actions are exempt from NAFTA regulations so the U.S. gets to have its cake and eat it.
Its time to abrogate the NAFTA treaty!
CN Rail claims it can deliver over a million barrels of oil a day to the west coast terminals using the existing infrastructure.
Hey, China and India; Canada has oil to sell. Want some?

mystereeoso said...

Abrogate NAFTA? Why not? We already abrogated Kyoto. Canada on the world stage - politically AND environmentally retarded!

Southern Quebec said...

Lyin' Brian...the gift that keeps on giving...

maryT said...

Has O given up his blackberry yet, after all it is Canadaian. Does he know that.
OT but most of the farmers in this part of the country have their crops in the ground.

liberal supporter said...

This was exactly the reason for the Coalition. At the time, there was a window of opportunity for Canada to be in Washington during the Election to Inauguration transition period. The transition is always fluid and political leaders as well as senior policy makers being there makes a difference.

Our current government is as ideological as the previous US government, and their people would not be able to provide effective rebuttal of the protectionist view gaining strength. Bleating about free markets, while being oblivious to jobs being shipped offshore solely due to current exchange rates, is ineffective.

Having the ineffective Harper government replaced by a temporary coalition of the majority of the seats in Parliament would have allowed us to work with the US during the transition. The right people could easily make the case that the problem is not a lack of protectionism, it is that unfair practices become commonplace under the guise of free trade. The unfair practices involved manipulated exchange rates so that it appears to be much cheaper to source labour from other countries. In reality it is not that much cheaper, when you consider that the cost of living in those places is much cheaper. Only exchange rates do that. Plus the non existent environmental regulations makes offshoring cheaper. We could have maintained the focus on that fact, so that any "buy American" ideas would be replaced with "buy fair trade". That would keep us in the market, as well as the Europeans, while leveling the playing field with the far east countries.

Instead, we had the prorogued government, completely paralyzing us from having any means to sway the protectionist sentiments during the window of opportunity.

Since that window has now passed, we are faced with trying to play catch up, while the protectionism gathers steam. So the need for the coalition to deal with that short window of opportunity has likewise passed. That is why it is no longer in the cards.

hunter said...

What world do you live in LS? The opposition got their panties in a knot because their $1.95 per vote funding was going to be cut off. PERIOD.

They thought they could grab power from the people, who had just voted in the Conservatives with a stronger minority. Lefties, like you, can't imagine that we, the people, actually elected more Conservatives, you see, you can't understand people who hold opinions different from yours.

Why did Iggy sign the coalition document? He thought he could have become PM by stealth, another lefty trait. Steal if it gets you into power, no matter what the people actually want, because they are idiots. It was only the negative reaction from ordinary Canadians that made Iggy back off.

You can rewrite the coalition attempt to grab power all you want LS, but the voter will remember, no matter what unelected leader you might have.

liberal supporter said...

What world do you live in LS?
The real world. You?


The opposition got their panties in a knot because their $1.95 per vote funding was going to be cut off. PERIOD.
Your panties must be pretty knotted given your posts lately. Or could it be those polls?

The $1.95 was certainly a factor, but this was Harper's desperate attempt to stifle all dissent. Having again failed to get his majority, he needed to tilt the playing field since he would never win on his own merits. Why else would he go after this? It amounts to reneging on the deal made to ban corporate donations. He wanted to retain that ban, while removing the $1.95 which compensated for it. Did he expect to stop the economic meltdown by saving $30 million? Then blow $30 BILLION? You must be joking.

The fact remains the Opposition was demanding action on the economy, while Harper chose to fiddle. Plus the U.S. situation was in transition and needed smarter people than Harper can muster. A rapid change would do this.

They thought they could grab power from the people, who had just voted in the Conservatives with a stronger minority.
Baloney. The CPC wanted to do exactly the same thing when they were the Opposition. Why don't you learn how your own country's system of government actually works? It was intelligently designed, you know. The people did not vote in "the Conservatives". The ballot I marked did not have a series of choices of parties. They considered that in Ontario, it was called MMP, and would allocate seats to parties, and it was soundly defeated. The people voted in a House of MPs. The fact that they are members of specific parties can be the reason for voting for them, but Parliament does not actually run on formal political parties. Any group of MPs can become the government if they can gain the confidence of the House. The only power a political party has is to deny assistance and its name to any MP who steps out of line. A strong power to be sure, but it does not give parties actual status above MPs.

Lefties, like you, can't imagine that we, the people, actually elected more Conservatives, you see, you can't understand people who hold opinions different from yours.
Spare me your insulting diatribes that claim anyone who disagrees with you has some mental illness. It's unbecoming, and will be your party's undoing. People are sick and tired of your juvenile name calling in this regard. "Can't imagine"? "Can't understand"? Sheesh. Grow up.

Why did Iggy sign the coalition document?
For the reasons outlined above. Harper was fiddling while Rome burns, so to speak, and time was of the essence given the US transition.

He thought he could have become PM by stealth, another lefty trait.
More BS.

Steal if it gets you into power, no matter what the people actually want, because they are idiots.
Sounds like the CPC playbook. Your party wants to radically remake the country, which the people DON'T want. All of your gains were due to various screwups of the Liberals, not due to any agreement with your party's goals. Still, people knew in the back of their minds that you would destroy our country as we know it, and denied you a majority.

It was only the negative reaction from ordinary Canadians that made Iggy back off.
No, after January 20, it didn't matter. Canada had lost the opportunity to be there during the US transition and we are now paying the price. The coalition would not have been maintained for long after that anyway. It was an emergency measure. It would certainly not last until October 19, 2009 which is our next election day.

You can rewrite the coalition attempt to grab power all you want LS, but the voter will remember, no matter what unelected leader you might have.
What unelected leader? Do you still not understand how our system works? Your party leader is also unelected in the sense you are implying. Because "Iffy" and "Steve" are both elected Members of Parliament, and are both the leaders of their political parties.

Thucydides said...

LS is indeed living in a dreamworld.

Can he/she/it show any indication at all that the proposed coalition government had any foreign policy initiatives or proposals along the lines being suggested in their post? I certainly don't recall seeing any substantive discussion of policy by the leaders of the coalition except to splurge on a spending package in a "me too" effort to follow "the one".

Well, they have indeed managed to get their spending package, but not been able to target it to all their friends since the Harper government controls the purse strings still.

OTOH we have seen the disaster of the current US spending package (their jobless numbers now exceed the predictions made for the "no stimulus package" option), so I suppose we are either getting off lucky or the effects of our spending package haven't fully kicked in yet. Taking $32 billion from the productive economy in higher taxes or borrowing tends to do that, you know.

hunter said...

Poor LS, you come here daily and spew your garbage without being called out on it, and when I do, what is your response? You accuse me of calling you mentally deficit.

You did inspire me for my next post though, stay tuned. HA!