“There are many voters “on the fence” who will pick which side of the fence to jump down on based on the results of this federal election (which defines me). There are another bunch that just see a CPC federal win as a delay to an inevitable separation, as they believe that Canada as a country has passed it’s “best before” date. And there are a large number of voters that are just plain federalists.

You can see, then, how this would give an uncommitted voter anywhere else in Canada a bit of a mixed message?

The sense I get from what little coverage the national media give to the idea is that those who are unhappy in the west are a bunch of whiners with too much money, whereas the Quebec separatist movement seems to have, over time I guess, become a “legitimate” movement that warrants defensive measures.

I think some quantitative difference in the level of coverage in national media is to be expected, given that the Quebec separatists have formed several provincial governments (prior to which, by the way, they received almost no media attention unless they blew something up or killed somebody), and hold a large number of seats in the House of Commons.

I personally don’t think Stephen Harper is trying to engineer the dismantling of Canada: I think he’s promoting a viable (if debatable) redistribution of powers and resources. What I’m saying is that the promotion of his national vision is NOT furthered by the “Vote For Harper Or We’ll Shoot Your Puppy” stance…it DOES look and feel like coercion.

“Bingo. IMHO it IS #3, and yes, there seems to be a preference to promote #2 instead of #3.”

And I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, if that’s what one believes; but in my opinion too much #2 has polarized the issue so much that it’s hard not to get bristly about it.

“Vote for Harper or we’ll shoot your puppy” ROFLMAO I might just have to make a button with that.

Humor aside, how is that different from the Liberal party being the only one able to defend Canadian unity? Is that not “Vote for Martin or we’ll drown your kitten?”

That, in a nutshell, is my frustration.

Ontario seems to be obsessing over the idea of voting for a party that “definitely” (according to the Liberals, but not necessarily the polls) won’t get a seat in Quebec, yet have no problem voting for a party that almost definitely won’t get a seat in Alberta. McLellan won by 700 votes last election. Laurie Hawn has name recognition this time around, and is well aware of the tricks the Screecher used last time (since she ran into him at a retirement home, she must be aware that THAT particular gig may not work so well this time). I’m not aware of any polls in Alberta that give a riding-by-riding breakdown, but I doubt very much that we’ll see a Liberal MP in Alberta come Jan. 24.

As I have blogged Western Seperatism is different in form and kind from Quebec Nationalism. Western Seperatism is linked to the racist, anti-billingual, fascist right wing conspiracy freeks from the old right wing of the Social Credit party.
Its credibility is based on the neo-con right wing who embraced it in the 1990’s. It originated in the 1980’s when Alberta faced the downturn in the economy from the collapse of petrodollars. As with all fascist movements, it appeals to base populism that is reactionary, them or us. In this case it was a small movement that the Alberta Tories have been able to use to threaten Ottawa with. See my blog article for more on this. As for Stamp well being from Edmonton this loser runs in every election, for any position he can find and he loses cause he is a nutbar.

Westerners, primarily Albertans, aren’t looking to separate from Canada. Even those who muse openly about separation. They’re looking for respect from a Canada that benefits from their human (Saskatchewan and Manitoba) and natural resources (Alberta), and yet does not include them in the political discourse.

The problem here is not with western separatism, but with those who practice wedge politics, where it is OK to blame Alberta for believing there are better ways to do things. “Western separatists” are simply those who have learned at the knee of Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien, and Martin that to get respect, you first have to inspire fear. And there would be nothing that would make the central and eastern parts of Canada quake more than to lose the gravy train that is Alberta.

That being said, I don’t think I’ve ever met a person espousing the separatist option who wasn’t doing it as a way of expressing frustration over Liberal hegemony, corruption, and wedge politics.

Not to get myself in TOO deeply here, but I think every nationalist movement springs from a variety of environmental causes. They are the political expressions of shifts in the cultural and economic circumstances of a group which decides, for one reason or another, that they prefer self governance to whatever entity they’re currently part of.

To dismiss Western Separatism because of some of its political antecedents is as foolish, dangerous, and ultimately futile, as dismissing Quebec Separatism in 1970 would have been because of Lionel Groulx’s virulent anti-semitism (a strain of thought far from dead in Quebec, as evidenced by Mr. Parizeau’s intemperate remarks). It’s interesting and useful to identify the threads that lead to a nationalist movement, but the fact remains that if a vision captures a sector of the population, it assumes a life of its own.

“So much for a good discussion w/out labels.”

Don’t let that distract you.

Balb, westerners have been asking for a Triple E Senate forever. Elected Equal & Effective. While my preference would be similar to the US Senate (2 senators per province or territory) it’s pretty unlikely that either Ontario or Quebec would be prepared to “give up” their lion’s shares of seats. However, IF those senators are elected to a set term of 4 years, for example, they will HAVE to vote on bills based to some degree on their electorate’s desires, or risk losing their seat. That would go a long way toward the Triple E ideal.

With the current Senate being a bunch of appointees who are there until death or 75, whichever comes first, they are either a rubber stamp or can block bills should they so choose, with no repercussions.

The distribution of seats in the House should also be looked at more regularly. Alberta alone is growing something like 20% in population annually and that will continue for a while with all the work going on in Fort Mac.

The Canadian Wheat Board is a HUGE bone of contention. While I have heard that some farmers prefer using it to the hassle of marketing their own grain, it is ridiculous that western farmers can only sell their grain to the CWB and can & have been jailed if they even donate their grain directly. Ontario farmers get to do whatever they want. How fair is that?

Actually having a Prime Minister with western roots (even if he was born in Ontario, like a large portion of Albertans seem to have been) would go a very long way toward manifesting respect toward a large piece of the country. A large chunk of Albertans summer in BC, either the interior/Okanagan or the coast, so IMHO BC would expect him to understand their issues better than a PM from Quebec or Ontario.

Interesting. Candace and Patrick, I think most Ontarians, and certainly most Canadians, would agree with you on 90% of your points. I do.

I need to say that I think politicians of every stripe exploit regional differences, if they think it will help get them elected. If you happen to agree with them, they’re heroic, misunderstood voices fighting in wilderness to be heard on behalf of their suffering constituents. If you happen to disagree with them, they’re  exploitative bastards endangering your country by manipulating regional interests against the greater national good.

Ah the old canard about the Wheat Board is raised by Candace, its the favorite bugaboo of the Reform/Alliance right. The problem with the Board isn’t the Board, which was created by farmers, but by its take over by Ottawa and it becoming a creature of Ottawa now with an elected board it is a new Wheat Board that the right refuses to recognize.

In fact two of its board members are promoters of free market trading. However they are only two out of a dozen. The Wheat board was created in order to get fair trade prices for farmers wheat after the great depression, which I have blogged about, but you would actually have to read my blog.

Western Canadian alienation is political and a reality, it begins with Reil see my Rebel Yell article on my blog for more on this. And it coincides with Quebecs objections to the fraud of confederation.

Alberta Seperatism is a different creature, one that is modern, or perhaps post modernist neo conservative (now theres some label for ya get your dictionaries out)- and as I said was founded by those who want the West to be White folks only.

Kinda hard to dispute that little fact by merely glossing over it and saying that the political differences with Ottawa are our dislike of the Liberals. During the founding of Canada and the later Reil rebellion Ottawa was the domain of sleazy scandal ridden Conservatives.

Candace As for Stamp running the campaign, Klander was working on a campaign too and he wasn’t a candidate. So that is irrelevant. And Lance get the term right my blog is Libertarian Communist, or Anarchist if you like. And I don’t mind labels.

And as for Lance’s exhortation of the Neo Con agenda for Alberta if you look at his program for provincial power, which I showed in my blog article about Stamp is the Link Byfield school of poltical opportunism, the problem is that the seperatists and regionalists forget the provinces are a creation of the Federal State.

If you really want to decentralize we should create city states, cities and school boards existed in Alberta before the province came into being. Cities have had power since the Magna Carta but these powers were given to the provinces by the Federal Goverment.

And again all those provincial resources are on native land, territories that have outstanding land claims with the crown. So careful of what you ask for. You say Alberta Seperation and I say You can keep it I want Redmonton as a seperate city state.

Eugene Plawiuk said:

Well, it doesn’t really matter what he said. This was just a shameless promo for his blog which is as dull and devoid of meaning as his post here.

“The number one error being made by those who dismiss and ridicule the growing sentiment that the West must seek other alternatives unless real and substancial change to the federation is not just promised, but realized, is to compare the movement to that in Quebec - which depends on transfer payments.”

Well, darn that Candace, who made the comparison on her blog. I think it’s a comparison that’s made when it supports a separatists’ position, and derided when it doesn’t.

“Traditionally conservative values are diametrically opposed to the post-Trudeapia vision to make over Canada in the image of Toronto.”

I sympathize with Westerners who feel ignored and misunderstood by the rest of Canada. I feel that way increasingly when I find myself lumped in with the kind of imaginary latte-sipping porsche-driving gallery-haunting Cuba-loving metrosexual God-hating cliche that seem in minds of so many to populate the rest of Canada. It’s easier to hate a simple caricature than it is to dome to terms with the rather large number of rather diverse peoples in Canada who don’t share your fairly narrow definition of what constitutes “traditional conservative values”.

As for Alberta’s “paying the bills”…I think Ontario pays its share too, thanks. Our premier seems feel that we pay too much, but I strongly disagree. I’ve lived and worked across Canada, and I’m aware that certain parts of the country are more prosperous than others, and need more support. To me, that’s part of the point of the country. The notion of Canada run as a series of revenue generating cost centres is a bit narrow, in my opinion. Goodbye, Territories and Maritimes…sorry, you lads just aren’t pulling your weight.

Happy New Years to all the Stagelefties

Candace

“Ontario farmers get to do whatever they want”

Nope. As an old Ontario farm boy let me assure you the only place you can sell you wheat is the local farmer’s co-op. Or you can sell it at the other co-op a few towns over.

But since the co-op was run by your nieghbours and you got a fair price, no one minds. I’m not sure why you are upset with the Wheat Board, since as Eugene points out, it was in fact created by farmers…

Just so we have the facts straight and so you know that Ontario is in the same boad, Wheat Board wise, and not getting the special treatment you think

Kate
“A signal from Ontario that they prefer a party that has run the last two elections on stolen money, to one headed by a leader percieved to be from the West, is the number one reason that for many, this is a watershed election. As they say -

Choose. Your. Canada. ”

In other words, “Vote for Harper or we’ll shoot your puppy”.

I think we’ve established that threats aren’t very productive. There is a small core of folks, even here in Ontario, that are prepared to say to both Quebec AND Alberta “So shut the fuck up and go” that certainly would take kindly to being forced to vote via extortion. I’m certainly not one of them but I know quite a few. They figure that the true cost of separation will sink in and both will come crawling back. I think it will just destroy a really great country, even with the issue we talked about here.

The real issue is the wedge. Without a Liberal Federal Government, who would Ralph Klein or his predessors complain as the boogey man out to get your money, in order to scare you into voting for the Alberta PC party? Gives a whole new perspective to Ralphs musings about a Liberal Minority and his uncanny ability to under cut Stphen Harper and play into the Liberal hands at just the right moment (like in the last election). And without those same Alberta PCs, with their ’separatist’ bent, who would Paul Martin use as the boogey man? Besides Gille Duccepe or a PQ Primier? To scare people into voting Liberal.

Trust me, on the ground, the actual people in Ontario like Alberta (and no on even cares that Harper is from Alberta because most of us here know he was born and raised in Toronto). They aren’t nearly as socially conservative, but for the most part we say ‘live and let live’. Most of the issues can be fixed with a concerted effort to change our electoral system and add accountability. I’m not sure that will miraculously happen if Stephen Harper gets elected.

“Why do we try to appease Quebeckers when they show their displeasure with federalism, but we shun Albertans who whisper a similar discontentment.”

Elect a provincial government that is separatist and wathc what happens - you guys keep electing Ralph, who likes the politics of division just fine. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘appease’ Quebec. How has that been done? Official Bilingualism came in long before the PQ government in 1976, so it actually came first…

Anyway, enough rambling…Happy New Year. With the way the Liberals are handling themselves lately, were going to have a CPC minority backed up by the NDP anyway.

Oh Patrick you cut me to the Quick, however you are as wrong as Candace. She on the Wheat Board, which did not charge the farmers as late as two years ago, they violated Federal laws by trying to directly ship their wheat across the border as a direct provocation to get busted. You on the NEP as I pointed out earlier, but of course you didn’t read my post cause it was devoid of meaning, I said and history bears this out that the NEP was not the cause of Alberta’s problems it was the collapse of the petrodollar economy internationally, when the price of oil dropped, Alberta and Texas both suffered economic collapse. The NEP was not applied to Texas yet in Huston companies were laying off staff and executives were jumping out of windows just like those in Calgary. Ontario and the rest of Canada had already being suffering a recession that had not yet occured in Alberta. And as I have pointed out in my blog, which of course you don’t read, so I will repeat it for you,PetroCanada a result of the NEP saved Alberta and Canada’s oil businesses and assured the province of continued investment in our Tar Sands. So there was a silver lining to the NEP. But the NEP is a straw dog the right wing loves to remind us all of pointing their finger at Ottawa.
So let me understand this discussion here, a left winger in the East asks about Alberta Seperatism, and folks here continue to debate this political chimera as if it were real. It ain’t Western Alienation / Alberta Seperatism are all code words for Conservative anti-liberal (not Liberal) politics that can be summed up as Anti-Gay, Anti-Immigrant, Anti-Union, Anti-Abortion, Pro Christian rump politics. When you look at the votes provincially if we had real democratic electoral options, that is proportional representation, in Alberta the Klein Reich would not exist.
As it is under the current electoral first past the post regime, Klein wins, but does not represent the majority of Albertans who voted against him and his party.
So pardon me while I laugh about how indignent some (read right wing) Albertans are about the tyranny of Ottawa, when they support a far worse tyrant and one party state at home .

Eugene says “PetroCanada a result of the NEP saved Alberta and Canada’s oil businesses and assured the province of continued investment in our Tar Sands.”

Do you really believe this crap? How do you save Alberta and Canada’s oil sector by competing against it?

And it was Peter Lougheed’s courageous decision to shut off the taps to ensure a rise back to world prices, as well as the decision of the Government of Alberta to lower taxes on the initial stages of oil sands development, that assured the province of continued investment in the oil sands. Petro Canada was but one of the investors, and it invested only with dollars confiscated from Canadians through taxes that continued long after the original objective had been achieved.

I don’t normally recommend people use Liberal talking points, but in your case, Eugene, they would be an improvement over your blather.

I’ll give you last word. You’re just too stupid to engage in a conversation. I just hope nobody buys your ignorant rewriting of history.

I’m looking at the times on these posts, and I’m thinking…we need to get lives. New Year’s Eve, and we’re talking about the NEP at four in the morning?

Eugene! Patrick! Jesus, lads, get a grip!

“Mike, can you cite the court cases that sent Ontario farmers to jail for not selling to their local (or not-so-local) co-op? Because if you can’t, then, no, it is not the same. The Wheat Board MAY have been created by farmers, but it is now run by the gov’t and as recently as, I think, 2 years ago, farmers were jailed for going around them (one, at least, who was donating feed).”

No Candace I can’t. Could you give me the details, like why these guys are trying to sell outside of the system? I still can’t figure that out.

I think we can talk about the enormous need for agriculture reform and action all over Canada, without trying to make this into an East-West debate.

As for Kate’s comments, it hardly matters if you call it a ‘prediction’ rather than a threat - it is perceived as such. Believe it or not, you will find natural allies for your issues across the political spectrum in Ontario, if only they are presented in a positve light. There are lots of folks who would normally agree with you that simply put their backs up when told “Choose.Your.Canada” and feel coerced into voting a particular way under threat of separation. This is going to backfire on Paul Martin in regard to Quebec and it won’t work in regard to Alberta. In that sense, a stance like Kate’s, whether meant as a threat or prediction, is entirely unhelpful and actually a detriment to getting the changes you seek - the real issues are overlooked because your natural allies are ostracized due to the perceived threats. Blaming Ontario is just as wrong as blaming Alberta.

In this, Stephen Harper is right. The politics of division and fear have no place in the governing of our country, whether it is from the Feds or the Alberta PC party.

“When the PM flips you the bird, then messes with your economy, then can’t be bothered to recognize you as anything other than the anti-Christ at election time, what, exactly, do you expect? Tea & crumpets?”

Not to belittle your feelings, but lets put this into perspective. Trudeau flipping the bird happened almnost 30 yeas ago. The NEP 25 years ago. As Eugene and others (CalgaryGrit, for instance)have pointed out, as bad as the NEP was for Alberta and Canada, Peter Lougheed and later Don Getty must shoulder at least some of the blame. As well as the resession of the early 80’s. Don’t forget that 8 years when the Coservatives ruled, with the help of a large number of seats from the west. Did that help?

And Ralph set himself up as the Anti-Christ last time out, seemingly right on cue to undermine Stephen Harper. Paul Martin needed a boost and Ralph gave it to him because each needed the other to be the political boogey man in order to retain power. Crass and cynical, but sadly true.

I don’t expect tea and crumpets, but I do expect that more than “I’m taking my ball and leaving”. The issues you raise are not insurmountable within Confederation, it just takes political will. You think Harper is the person with that will. I hope you are right (It sure ain’t the Liberals). If he forms a minority (that seems likely) I hope he can affect some positive changes all Canadians can live with. I would hate to see you dissappointed.

I’m simply trying to de-demonize Ontario for you so we can have disscussion about the issues rather than threats - like we did at BPOC.

Mike, well said.

I’ve been married twice, Thots. Breaking up is absolutely the last resort. You owe it to the marriage to do everything you can to save it, because that’s what you promised to do. That’s the deal. And in my book, you don’t threaten to break up as a negotiating tactic. Once you’ve decided to go, go. But make goddamned sure that’s really, really, REALLY what you want to do. Just don’t pretend you’re walking out the door, then turn around and give your partner One More Chance.

If Stamp thinks Canada has no moral right to exist, then he in good conscience should commit his energies to a political vision that he thinks has validity.

I’m continually accused of not “getting” it. Well, here’s what I said.

Many westerners are frustrated at a federal structure and division of power and resources more reflective of a 1.5 century old model of Canada than the current reality, and see in the new Conservative party a vehicle for achieving a new and more equitable confederation.

Okay, I understand that.

And having lived and worked in Nunavut, I understand what it means to be be a minority in a federal system, when population defines the degree of participation you have in decision making, and when decisions that affect your life are made without your substantive input.

And having lived and worked in Ontario, I understand what it means to be a net contributor to the economy, rather than a province or territory that cannot sustain an economy without support. I posted about that awhile ago…to me, that’s part of the price we pay for Canada, and I don’t begrudge it. I wrote a nasty letter to our Premier when he suggested that Ontario needs to get “more” from the feds because of Ontario’s prosperity: I don’t mind my taxes supporting police services for Saskatchewan or mail delivery in Inuvik or health transfer payments for PEI. Just like fifty years ago my dad didn’t mind his taxes supporting all those things in Alberta.

But you’re right. There are some parts of it I don’t “get”. It’s obvious that the NEP created huge resentment. It would be naive, I think, to deny that Western politicians have exploited that resentment for their own political ends, but the resentment is nonetheless real, and I don’t have a gut feeling for what that means. Ditto the wheat board.

Maybe things do fall apart. Maybe the centre cannot hold. Maybe that rough beast slouching towards Ottawa to be born looks like Stephen Harper. I don’t know.

Fact Check

————–

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“Alberta doesn’t own the mineral rights to mcuh (sic) of the oil it calims (sic) to be defending the land claims by natives have never been settled on much of the Tar Sands. Just look at the outstanding Lubicon claim for example.”

In fact, Alberta does own the mineral rights, and in the settlement of outstanding land claims, can transfer rights it now owns to the First Nation. And the settlement of the Lubicon claim is the responsibility of the Government of Canada, a responsibility that successive governments have discharged badly.

—————–

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“So while Calgarians whine about NEP I still see that famous photo of Lougheed clinking glasses with Trudeau over both NEP and Petrocanada.”

In fact, Lougheed was clinking glasses with Trudeau over the Canada-Alberta Energy Pricing and Taxation Agreement (EPTA) which sought to reduce the harm of the NEP, as the recession of 1981-1982 was beginning, by providing for $60/barrel oil, a $20/barrel, 50% increase over the initial projection under the NEP. See http://tinyurl.com/8kdm4, page 42.

—————–

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“Petro Canada didn’t compete against the disembodied oil industry in Calgary, it saved it. The yankees left and companies were dying without PetroCan those companies would have dried up and blown away.”

Which reminds me of the Vietnam-era statement “We had to destroy the village to save it.”

—————–

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“As for the NEP much ado about nothing, Ontario was already Abenefiting (sic) from refining Alberta oil and shipping it state side (sic), as was Montreal. Refining brought in more cash than the pump price did.Thats what pissed off Lougheed and why he wanted the NEP to guarntee (sic) a set pump price that was higher than refiners in Sarnia were paying.”

In fact, Lougheed didn’t want the NEP to guarantee anything. He didn’t want the NEP. Period. If there is any doubt in your mind about that, listen to his own words:
http://tinyurl.com/7azez

————-

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“was or was their not a market recession and a crash in the oil market just prior to and during the NEP. Yep there was.”

(Sigh) Read http://tinyurl.com/b8rz3 for the timing of Canada’s recession in the 1980s.

National Energy Program was introduced in October 1980. The recession was a year later.

——————-

Eugene’s pseudo-fact
“And the Alberta Governments big mistake in 1984 was to peg their hopes on $50 a barrel oil which never materialized.”

In fact, the agreement Eugene earlier misrepresented contemplated a $60 a barrel price for oil. And that, in 1981, not 1984. However, give him credit - this is the only part of his entire post that came close to being accurate.

——————

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“The NEP was to balance out the well head cost agains the refiners profits”

More fatuous nonsense. See the Auditor-General’s summary as to the real purpose of the NEP: http://tinyurl.com/7f3td

——————-

Eugene pseudo-fact:
“thats why Lougheed supported it.”

In fact, Lougheed fought the NEP with every breath he took. But hey, when you’ve lied your way through an entire post, why stop with the biggest lie of all?

“It’s absolutely breathtaking - the utter arrogance of some of these responses.”

Is it? Well, sit down, put your feet up. May I offer you an icepack? Some tea? Got your breath back yet?

“It’s not up to you to declare what is and isn’t a legitimate option for Albertans or anyone else.”

Oh, for sure. Certainly not. However, as a bunch of Canadians sitting around chatting, we can certainly offer opinions on our perpective of the relative merits and demerits of various long and short term political options. And more to the point, we can try to talk about some of the underlying issues, in terms that are perhaps more conducive to adult exchange than the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric regrettablly used on lesser blogs.

Say, on the notion of the declaration of what constitutes “legitimate options” for other people…you wouldn’t be related to the “Kate” who has such interesting views on what should be done with Aboriginal people, purely for their own good…would you?

“Instead of worrying about why Conservatives “can’t get elected in Quebec”….”

Oh, THAT’S the problem. You ARE on the wrong blog. No-one’s talking about that here. Did you mistakenly paste in the wrong URL? I’ve done that myself sometimes. Darned embarassing.

‘I’m not arguing for or against here — I’m simply trying to wake a few of the naysayers and ridiculers up and suggest that instead of talk talk talk about what Western Canadians should and shouldnt’ say about our future place in confederation, you find the wisdom to shut up and listen for a change.”

I love having someone scream at me to listen. Doesn’t everybody?

Here, I’ll be nice and point something out. There are a couple of dynamics at play in this thread. On one level a couple of folks are exchanging the usual party lines at increasing levels of bloggy indignation. At another level a couple of people are having a somewhat lower key, somewhat tentative exchange of views, like real people having a real discussion in real life. So participate at any level you like. You’ve opted for the Righteous Cliche of Indignation, and that’s fine…but you’ll forgive me if I hold out for the grownup discussion that’s running at a somewhat lower pitch, right underneath the soapbox.

Sorry, Candace…you were saying?

I apologize if I missed something, but….

Was it a bunch of Ontarians in redshirts that forced Mr. Stamp to resign?

dammit. I just spent an hour writing a response to friggin everybody & firefox ate it.

I will go pout & consider re-writing it. Wahhhhhh!

The NEP was not, as Eugene would like to sell it, anything other than an attempt to get oil at below-world-price for the rest of Canada (the same RoC who gave a flying f*ck about any issues AB may have had prior to (a) discovering oil and (b) oil prices skyrocketing). Alberta tanked a good year before oil prices did. I remember going to my plugged-in car in a parking lot just before Christmas ‘83. There were 20 cars in the lot big enough for a couple of hundre (I remember, because my battery was dead & I needed a boost). The city was dead. Office buildings were thrilled about 30% occupancy, because they might break even. Kick-ass apartments were available for around $400, everything included.

Ralph set himself up as the anti-Christ in the 2004 election, Mike. So… why did Chretien pick him earlier? or Trudeau (although I think that was still Lougheed)?

food for thought. The dog needs to pee. I await responses tomorrow, but might be back to battle the “shoot the messenger” approach chosen to what Kate had to say.

If I can paraphrase and speak to the points being made from the “Alberta is outraged” side, I suggest that what is being said is not “vote Conservative or we’ll take our long guns and shove them up Ontario’s ass”. It’s “there’s a breaking point approaching where the willingness to make Alberta the whipping boy of confederation on the part of those engaging in wedge politics may well lead to the glue that binds us together failing”.

I posted earlier a link to a CBC archive which included information about the reaction of Albertans to the National Energy Program. A poll taken of Albertans at the time indicated that 49% of Albertans would favour separation rather than allowing the Liberals to confiscate the province’s wealth.

Given that the Supreme Court has ruled that any province has the right to hold a referendum and to, if successful, negotiate terms of separation, that is a level of separatist support that should give all Canadians pause.

I’ve rarely seen an Albertan say “If this election doesn’t go my way, I’m joining the separatists.” However, I think that if Ontario ignores how the Liberal oligarchy is affecting inter-provincial relationships, they do so at their peril. There are worse things than the threat of separation, as Quebec has shown. We could be put through decades of uncertainty as to whether the country can hold together. That should be avoided at all costs.

To westerners, I suggest you keep your powder dry. No point in speculating about something that has yet to happen. Voters in Ontario care about the country as much as you, and have as much to lose if it all falls apart.

To other Canadians, I suggest you not take lightly the voices heard, even those that sound to you extreme. They may be the voices you’re still hearing 10 years ago.

To everyone, let’s keep our focus on the salient fact that, if you want to stop buildings from burning down, you prevent arsonists from having matches and gasoline. We can’t reward Liberals for having integrity only when they get caught, and for bringing us to this knife’s edge. Vote Conservative, vote NDP, vote Green even - or abstain. Just don’t return Liberals to government. They don’t deserve it.

A substantive response to Kate’s substantive points, drained of the soapboxing? All right.

a) There are people in the West who favour separation, and their numbers are rising.

Yup.

b) This is because some Albertas are tired of putting more into the pot than the province takes out, and some feel that their Traditional Conservative Values are no longer reflected in Canada.

Yes, we’ve been talking about that.

Did I misss anything of substance? I don’t think so.

“Kate can not and, more importantly, SHOULD NOT, be held accountable for her commenters.”

Uh…okay. Is this apropos of something?

I haven’t said anything in this thread (yet) about the general tone of her blog. I was making reference to a specific point. She expressed disgust that I/we would dare have an opinion on what Albertans should think (see 41, above). I pointed out that (a) by and large, we were having an interesting, substantive, and generally respectful dialogue, and that (b) she had made some rather sweeping and, to me, offensive recommendations about what should be “done with” natives in this country without a qualm.

There are folks who like to discuss ideas, and there are polemicists who like to scream (on the right and the left). I have less and less interest in or patience with the latter. To each his/her own.