First it was skulking around Alberta and Saskatchewan undercover of darkness so to speak meeting with Premiers Redford and Wall.
Then the big announcement comes from the government and Clark is nowhere to be seen.
Why?
The answer is typical Ken Boessenkool playbook strategy.
It goes something like this: When your leader is as low in the polls as Clark is, you hide her for the summer and start over again in the fall.
In Clark’s case it’s worse because even if they need to use her she can’t stay on message and so this fits with the Boessenkool strategy as well.
It’s no small wonder 77% of Albertan’s would rather have Redford as a Premier than our Clark. ( see the poll at the end of the blog written by an Albertan thanking his lucky stars that Clark is not their Premier)
Ordinarily the BC Government should have made a big deal out of Clark’s visit to Edmonton. It should have been showcased as a great stepping stone in the Enbridge project.
Instead as the blogger depicts it was more like a Mafioso Don meeting with the head of another family. I am surprised Clark didn’t hold the meeting in the back of a bakery.
Although what would you expect from a government who invites gangsters to budget meetings.
Not only that but this far into the process and after today’s big announcement they still haven’t taken a position.
Quite frankly I don’t think they will.
I think getting rebuffed by Premier Redford was part of the plan, a plan without leadership.
They will eventually say Alberta is not offering enough.
It is a plan to bow out of Enbridge without taking a stance.
But then what would you expect from a government who has no leader?
Fine, 77% would rather have Redford. What I want to know is who the hell are the 23%? Surely the Blue Boy Hotel doesn’t have that many former customers in Alberta?
Fine, 77% would rather have Redford. What I want to know is who the hell are the 23%? Surely the Blue Boy Hotel doesn't have that many former customers in Alberta?
Does this idiot have any idea about the can of worms she has opened up? When the provinces start denying the transshipment of selected goods across their borders the whole raison d’ etre for confederation goes out the window.
Note the third word in your comment. That probably answers your question.
Can you imagine the mess this will make?
Snooki and company are beyond being an embarrassment. I’ve even had Americans I’ve met out here in Eastern Canada comment on CC and the clowns when I mention that home is British Columbia. I’m not all that sure that the province can survive another 9 or 10 months of this corrupt, inept bunch.
Thankfully and hopefully Snooki gets the boot shortly!
You know, Poli, we should TRY and appreciate our government’s consistency! They never cease to disappoint.
What if they did the right thing, once in a while? The uncertainty could be nigh to unbearable — will they or won’t they? Won’t they or will they?
NAH! Never gonna happen.
It’s good to have a chuckle once in a while. With these people at the helm we all need it!
In a province where Les is more, with the keys to The BC Liquor Cabinet firmly held in the cold grasp of insiders and bagmen, a sputtering Coleman stove cooks up indigestible fare. The good Dr prepares to assist gov’t suicide as Lake Polak floods the public with a message a mile wide and an inch deep. Meanwhile, now, the illustrious Lib ‘leader’, BC’s sitting Premier, finds it within herself the need to open up about Enbridge? A poor decision on a bad day is better than no decision at all.
Ya’ know, Robbie, I used to think that it was better to do something, even the wrong thing, than nothing at all. Ms. Clark has made me rethink that idea. Maybe a poor decision is just that, it is what it is. However, a poor decision on a bad day –even if it is a double negative — never becomes a positive.
“Fair Share” now were have I heard that before oh yea Obambi…
LOL Good one!