Robert Balfour

views/opinions are my personal views

[Jon Alberta Patriot @JonFromAlberta]

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

[Ryan Gerritsen🇨🇦🇳🇱 @ryangerritsen]

Trudeau decided to go to the U.S. World Cup opener game instead of Canada’s.

Here he is cheering with Katy Perry when the U.S. scored their first goal.

Just a reminder I added his very own speech to Canadians regarding the U.S. over top of this video to highlight what an absolute hypocrite this man is.

[Robert Balfour @BalfCalgary]

@TMSCalgary @ShaneWenzel Guess you missed the point. They donated that money. Not tax dollars taken from all. Really, really naive comment!

[ExitTheMatrix @FedGoesBrrrr]

@ShaneWenzel "just one more tax will fix it" is how we have gotten to a society where someone working for a living is paying >50% of their income in taxes

[Robert Balfour @BalfCalgary]

@Jody_Bodnar @ShaneWenzel @GirlScotia But positioned & messaged like it will help them!! Sadly successful marketing

[Shane Wenzel @ShaneWenzel]

@paxdal As a company involved in building new homes and land development, I have never seen as much policy creep as I have in the past decade.

[Shane Wenzel @ShaneWenzel]

@Jenrobwain I shudder to think what their definition is since most of them have never run a business in their entire lives.

[Shane Wenzel @ShaneWenzel]

@GrahamCoulter5 I completely agree with you, Graham. The extent of idiocy here is shocking, especially from a tenured professor. And, we all know it doesn’t end with just one industry.

[Shane Wenzel @ShaneWenzel]

Who comes up with these ideas?

An “excess profits tax” sounds appealing until you’ve actually run a business.

Profits aren’t guaranteed. Some years are strong, while others you might be fighting inflation, labour shortages, red tape, rising taxes, policy creep, a recession, higher costs, or other challenges.

If the government wants to tax the good years, will it offer significant tax relief during the bad years?

I won’t hold my breath.

Risk and reward go hand in hand. You can’t penalize one without considering the other.

[Bret Weinstein @BretWeinstein]

No, it’s not “Pride Month.” Not for me, and not for millions of others.

You’re welcome to be proud of whatever you want, in any month you like—because this is America. But what started in 1969 as a rebellion against persecution, morphed into a license for public depravity, and then morphed again into a weapon aimed at families and innocent children. Along the way it went from a day, to a week, and then a month and became official, and thereby effectively mandatory for all.

Enough!

If you’re gay and wondering why you are facing resistance now, the answer is that, with few exceptions, most of you didn’t stand up against the expansion and weaponization of “pride,” and the coercion that went with it. In that failure to resist, the gay community compromised any expectation that the rest of us should support “pride” at all, but especially the obscene display of hostility toward civilization and the families of which it is built, and for whom it exists.

If your hackles are raised by the idea that civilization is about families, realize that families are how civilizations persist through time. Not everyone needs to form one, but we all must respect and protect them—It is the foundation of what it means to be civilized.

For the small fraction of gays and lesbians who DID courageously stand up and resist expansion, coercion and the weaponization of “Pride,” I stand with you, and I have all along. But I won’t be celebrating, and I won’t be silent.

It’s not too late to join the voices of reason and to confront the insanity of what “pride” has become.

[Bruce McAllister @McAllisterBruce]

Based
It should always be based on merit. Full-stop.

[Jim Dinning @jfdinning]

@MarcNixon24 Oh and to ship all that product overseas, we’re going to teleport it à la StarTrek, right? To minimize carbon footprint, right? Nonsensical.

[Robert Balfour @BalfCalgary]

@MarcNixon24 Impossible. Beyond a dream fantasy. Irrationally bad & dangerous position that will hurt this country badly. So off-base. Wake up people

[Bruce McAllister @McAllisterBruce]

In case you missed it this week, @PierrePoilievre calls out the absurdity and cowardice of those seemingly offended by the notion that there might be a definition of a woman.
A simple question triggers meltdowns and procedural blocks in committee. If only more Canadians saw this kind of thing - it should lead every newscast it’s so bloody goofy. It won’t of course because main stream media is funded by the Feds but it should.
Woman = adult human female. Biology isn’t bigotry, it’s reality. Defend the category if you want to defend the rights attached to it. 🇨🇦 #cdnpoli

[William Makis @MakisMedicine]

@alleria_eh No, you do that because you are low IQ.

[Robert Balfour @BalfCalgary]

No

[Iain S @eINstigator]

Marty, & @kenBoessenkool the question every “stay” person should address is: “If Alberta were currently independent, would it join Canada under current conditions (see partial list below)?”

- Bills C69, 48
- equalization (current formula)
- unequal representation
- industrial carbon taxes
- Bills c2, 8, 9, 22, 34
- No say on immigration/culture
- Senate, SCC, Bill or Rights, BoC, Media all captured/politically biased (no-independence)

[Iain S @eINstigator]

@Tablesalt13 Torontonians are so brainwashed.

[Jasmin Laine @JasminLaine_]

@pensandpoison Correct, and if they are failing at that—perhaps it means the institutions themselves are no longer doing what they were made to do.

[Robert Balfour @BalfCalgary]

@eINstigator @awgaffney Just jealousy!

[Iain S @eINstigator]

@jonkay @globeandmail Long weekend?