Hillary Clinton visited an elementary school in New York to talk to the kids about the world. After her talk she asked if there were any questions?
One little boy puts up his hand. He says his name is.
"Kenneth." "And what is your question, Kenneth?" she asks.
"I have three questions," he says. "First -- what happened in Benghazi? "Second -- why did you run for president if you are not even capable of handling two e-mail accounts? "And, third -- what happened to the missing six billion dollars while you were Secretary of State?"
Just then the bell rings for recess. Hillary tells the kids that they will continue after recess.
When they resume Hillary says, "Okay, where were we? Oh, that's right, question time. Who has a question?" A different boy -- little Johnny -- puts his hand up.
"And what is your question, Johnny?" she asks.
"I have five questions," he says.
"First -- what happened in Benghazi?
"Second -- why did you run for president if you are not capable of handling two e-mail accounts? "Third -- what happened to the missing six billion dollars while you were Secretary of State?
"Fourth -- why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
"And, fifth -- where the hell is Kenneth?"
ForeverCanadian activists tried to cancel Mitch Sylvestre's townhall. They failed miserably.
Instead, we've managed to livestream it outside, and many young people showed their interest in the subject of Alberta Independence.
If this was an indoor event, the impact would be different.
So, you're invited to cancel our events as hard as you want. Our crowd is getting larger every day.
MORE: Additional information provided to YEGWAVE by the parent states the incident involved their 14-year-old daughter and a friend near Rutherford Road and 118 Street on the evening of June 14.
According to the submission, the girls first noticed the dark grey van approaching with its side passenger door open. After passing them, the van allegedly performed a U-turn and began heading back toward them. Believing they may have been targeted, the girls turned around and ran in the opposite direction.
The parent alleges there were approximately five to six adult East Indian men inside the vehicle, estimated to be between 30 and 40 years old. Due to the fear and panic of the situation, the girls were unable to provide detailed descriptions of the occupants or clearly identify what was being yelled at them.
The submission states the van turned around multiple times and continued approaching the girls. Fearing for their safety and worried they could be forced into the vehicle, the girls began yelling for help. A nearby woman reportedly witnessed their distress and called 911. According to the parent, the van sped away after the occupants noticed the woman.
The family says they have fully cooperated with police. Officers reportedly spoke with nearby residents and obtained surveillance footage showing the vehicle and its driving behaviour. The parent says they have also gone door-to-door seeking additional video evidence. However, a licence plate has not yet been identified.
The parent says the incident has left both girls extremely distressed and frightened. They hope sharing their experience will raise awareness, encourage parents to discuss safety with their children, and help identify the vehicle and its occupants.
Anyone who witnessed the incident or may have dashcam or security footage from the area is encouraged to contact Edmonton Police.
@KatKanada_TM You should never change your national flag for anything. You shouldn’t change the logo, the colours or anything about it…unless you are becoming a new and different country eh?
Every time Whoopi Goldberg opens her mouth about racism, hate, and “division,” I flash right back to that 1993 Friars Club roast.
There she was, glowing, laughing, loving every second, while the man she was dating, Ted Danson, strutted on stage in blackface, cracking jokes at her event.
She didn’t storm out.
She didn’t scream “racism!”
She was beaming. Happy as hell.
Yet today, we’re supposed to believe she’s outraged by the very things she once laughed through and defended.
Because that’s what I can’t reconcile.
She’s a paid performer. A Hollywood lifer who has spent decades in the spotlight, and to me, the contrast between then and now raises a lot of questions.
She’ll condemn behavior today that she appeared willing to overlook when it involved someone close to her.
Hands down.
That’s why I have a hard time taking the outrage seriously.
The hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
Wake up, folks… She’s a Hollywood grifter!
I just finished watching this (2005) CBC documentary about the 1995 Quebec referendum.
It’s fascinating history, especially for Albertans.
Two things stood out.
First, around the 25-minute mark, Quebec separatists are shown building relationships with France and reaching out to the United States before the referendum. They were seeking recognition and discussing future economic relationships in the event Quebec voted to become independent.
CBC presents it as a matter of fact.
No panic.
No accusations of treason.
No outrage.
Just a recognition that if a region is considering independence, its leaders will naturally want to know what recognition, trade, and diplomatic relations might look like afterward.
Today, when Albertans have similar conversations with Americans, many of the same people immediately scream “traitor.”
Why?
What exactly is the difference?
Second, around the 50-minute mark, several political leaders discuss how important it is that a referendum question be clear and understandable.
That struck me because we’re seeing many of the same arguments in Alberta today.
Democracy works best when voters know exactly what they’re voting for.
Not when questions are engineered to create confusion.
Not when the goal is to muddy the waters.
Not when politicians try to manufacture a result.
History matters
And if you support Alberta independence, you should study Quebec.
Canada came far closer to breaking apart than many people realize.
For generations, Quebec maintained a strong identity, a distinct culture, and a vision for its future that often differed from the rest of the country.
English Canada understood that Quebec was different.
Yet when Albertans say we have our own culture, our own priorities, our own economic interests, and our own vision for the future, we’re told to stop asking questions and fall in line.
This documentary is worth watching; and I am nostalgic for when CBC had a semblance of journalistic integrity.
https://t.co/frbQ7yRHkn
Oilers assistant captain Darnell Nurse has requested a trade out of Edmonton, and has submitted a list of preferred teams to the team.
The 31-year-old defenceman has spent the entirety of his 12-year NHL career with the Oilers, and is seeking a fresh start elsewhere.
(H/T @TSNRyanRishaug)
@edmontonjournal It’s not the speed that’s the real concern here. It’s the way people have total disregard for the rest of the laws. I see it every day. 2 days ago I was stopped at a 🚦 and I got passed by 2 vehicles, both in the oncoming traffic lane. This behaviour is the real problem.
Pierre Poilievre came to Calgary to sell nostalgia. Alberta needs reality.
Pierre gave a polished speech about Canadian unity.
He talked about veterans, prairie farms, the Stampede, and the promise of Confederation.
It was emotional, patriotic, well delivered.
But it did not answer the central question:
Why should Alberta stay in a country structurally built to extract from us?
Pierre says Alberta’s problems are “easily fixable.”
They are not.
If they were, they would have been fixed decades ago.
Alberta has voted Conservative, sent MPs to Ottawa, stayed loyal, and paid the bills.
And still, from 2007 to 2022, Albertans sent roughly $244.6 billion more to Ottawa than we received back.
That is not a temporary policy mistake.
That is the business model of Confederation.
Pierre frames the problem as bad Liberal policy.
But the deeper problem is the structure of Canada itself.
The Liberals need Alberta’s money.
The Conservatives need Alberta politically.
Without Alberta, the Conservative path to government becomes almost impossible.
Pierre can sympathize with Alberta’s grievances, but he cannot confront the solution.
The Conservative Party is not designed to represent Alberta first.
It is designed to win federal elections.
That means Alberta’s views must always be softened and repackaged for Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada.
Pierre says we can fix this in Ottawa.
But equalization is constitutionally entrenched.
Dismantling it would require constitutional change, and the provinces that profit from Alberta’s wealth would have to agree to give it up.
Why would they?
That is the trap.
Alberta is told to work harder, pay more, sacrifice more, and then politely ask the rest of Canada to stop taking so much.
That is not partnership.
That is dependency dressed up as unity.
Pierre said we should “lock arms” with other provinces.
But Alberta has locked arms for decades.
We locked arms while our energy sector was attacked, our pipelines blocked, and our wealth redistributed.
At some point, “lock arms” just means “stay in line.”
Pierre says Alberta needs different policies, not a different country.
But Alberta independence exists because more Albertans have realized Ottawa is not the disease.
Ottawa is the symptom.
The disease is Confederation itself.
A system where Alberta creates the wealth, carries the risk, takes the abuse, and still has no power to stop the extraction.
A system where our future depends on convincing voters thousands of kilometres away to develop our economy.
The issue is not whether Albertans love their neighbours, respect veterans, or appreciate the sacrifices that built this country.
We do.
The issue is whether the country they built still works for Alberta.
The answer is increasingly obvious.
It does not.
Pierre asked Albertans not to give up on Canada.
But what if Canada gave up on Alberta first?
What if Confederation has been replaced by a system where Alberta’s role is to produce, pay, and be quiet?
That is why this movement is growing.
Not because Albertans hate Canada.
But because Albertans have learned from experience.
Federal promises expire. Respect for Alberta is always negotiable. Conservative governments slow the damage but do not fix the structure. Liberal governments see Alberta as a revenue source. The rest of Canada will always vote in its own interest.
So Alberta must finally do the same.
Pierre came to make the case for a stronger Alberta within a united Canada.
But he never explained how Alberta escapes the fiscal trap, how equalization ends, or why the provinces profiting from it would ever vote to stop.
The speech was beautiful.
The argument was empty.
Alberta does not need another emotional appeal to stay.
Alberta needs power.
Alberta needs control over its wealth, its economy, its resources, and its future.
If Canada’s structure makes that impossible, the answer is not another federal promise.
The answer is independence.
The question is not whether Alberta can afford independence.
The question is how much longer Alberta can afford a system that extracts our wealth and blocks our future.
@harleyrox_xoxo I can’t say I was cheering for the Knights, but the earlier post kept me paying attention 😉 Sometimes something good can come out of a situation you don’t care for lol