Claudius

No you didn't say that. You said, right there in black and white completely undeniable: Then you went on to say this nonsensical babble: Which is it? your opinion or facts? Because between the two of us the only one to come forward with facts on this matter has been me. Now you've admitted you do know what I'm talking about,when only moments ago your story was, "I have not heard a single disparaging word about Alberta or Albertans that I can remember. I'm talking zero. None whatsoever." You basically aren't even man enough to admit it, instead you admit you have heard what I'm talking about before by claiming it shouldn't matter because the maritimes have received the same abuse ....the very same abuse you claim doesn't exist. Unbelievable. Just listen to yourself. Grow up. :D I proved my point, it's right there in black and white and you've pretty much admitted you know full well what I'm talking about. YOU'RE the one whose had to change their story 3 times in 4 posts, not me. Once agian, this is how the conversation went no matter how many times you stamp your feet and meekly deny it: Claudius: "Many Canadians love to hate Alberta" Bleeding Heart: "I've never ever ever ever heard a disparaging word against Alberta in my entire life from any Canadian anywhere" Claudius: Points out that's either that's bull, or Bleeding heart simply refuses to acknowledge it or see it. Bleeding Heart: Offended, reinterates, "I've never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever heard a disparaging word against Alberta in my life. How dare you tell me I have when I know full well I haven't! I think you're making it all up and you're full of it" Claudius: Makes a list of maybe 100 examples of exactly what he's talking about. Takes all of about 20 seconds to do it too. Bleeding Heart: "Ohhhhh....THOOOOSE disparaging words. Well...um....lemmie see...um, okay I got one: I think you're just being sensitive. Yeah that'll work.". Every time you post back trying to deny it you just look stupider. You think you're making me mad but all you're doing is making me laugh.

.

More childishness. I didn't quote you incorrectly. You started out with "I've never ever heard any disparaging words about Alberta", and ended up admitting you had heard them before and then claiming that they shouldn't be a big deal. Grow up and admit it when someone has a point. ----> ...no misquote there Bleeding Heart. Then you move on to try and bury the point by babbling about the Maritimes and how the maritimes has had it's fair share of abuse as well. So what? I never denied that nor does that invalidate my point -- you however have, right here, denied ever hearing the very things you now so casually accept. Now that I've proven my point you go off on your own childish mischaracterizations babbling about 'tantrums' and so on as though that's going to somehow hide the fact that I've proven my point. You can't even argue it any more all you can do is paint me as having a temper tantrum (keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about being wrong), when all I did was prove my point. Now you have your own tantrum about it. Childishness. Plain and simple. Particularly embarrassing statement on this forum since you're probably still one of the more mature posters here. Oh and then there's the Waldo who tries to pretend that posting on an anonymous forum somehow negates ego as a factor in how someone posts. Hilarious. You can tell he doesn't even believe that himself. I might as well have told you 2 + 2 = 4, listen to you deny it, then come and show you 10000 examples of how 2+2 indeed does equal 4 only to have you babble some nonsense childish "retort" of, "Oh sure...if all you're going to do is bring examples that align with your preconceptions blah blah blah" Just grow a pair and admit it when someone has a point instead of embarrassing yourself and this entire forum with this childish say-the-opposite-of-whatever-the-other-guy-is-saying mentality.

Reading stuff that aligns exactly with my pre-existing view?! LOLOLOLOL! YOU DENIED ANY OF IT EXISTED SO I PULLED SOME FORWARD TO SHOW IT EXISTS -- NOW YOU "RETORT" WITH THIS BABBLE? Unbelievable. It doesn't "align with my view" it proves it exists when only moments ago you were claiming it doesn't. For f*cksakes grow the hell up. This is honestly the most childish brain dead dishonest game-playing forum in Canada isn't it? Yes it is.

lol. Claudius: "Many Canadians love to hate Alberta" Bleeding Heart: "I've never ever ever ever heard a disparaging word against Alberta in my entire life from any Canadian anywhere" Claudius: Points out that's either that's bull, or Bleeding heart simply refuses to acknowledge it or see it. Bleeding Heart: Offended, reinterates, "I've never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever heard a disparaging word against Alberta in my life. How dare you tell me I have when I know full well I haven't! I think you're making it all up and you're full of it" Claudius: Makes a list of maybe 100 examples of exactly what he's talking about. Takes all of about 20 seconds to do it too. Bleeding Heart: "Ohhhhh....THOOOOSE disparaging words. Well...um....lemmie see...um, okay I got one: I think you're just being sensitive. Yeah that'll work.". :D :D HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Yeah. Whatever. Point proven no matter how much you try to deny it. -- Oh and sitting PM's? Yeah Trudeau literally gave the finger to the entire West and people in Ontario cheered and cheered and cheered. Heck they still do. To this day they still consider him a hero for doing exactly that. Canada maybe has another 30-50 years before it starts to break apart. Frankly I couldn't care less. uh huh. And yet there's no web site dedicated to hating the maritimes? There are about 4 directed at Alberta. By the way your comment here only backs up what I've been saying all along here while everyone else closes their eyes and denies it: regional rivalry is the biggest historical schism in Canada....I never once claimed it was only ever just Alberta. Alberta is just 'in fashion' at the moment and happened to be the subject of this thread.

Yes yes yes. You're the only one who has conversations (rolls eyes). And I'm clearly not talking about your personal life. I'm talking about the country and it's history obviously.Why would we be discussing your personal experience regarding the fabric of this entire country and hundreds of years of its' history? It wasn't my intent to insult you but if you were talking about shark attacks and I came along to tell you that I've never been personally attacked by a shark that wouldn't mean much would it? It was never my claim that you personally and your friends have the attitude in question. lol. It's not like I'm holding you responsible or something, and it's not like you could do anything about it anyways. No. That's the difference between you and I? Please. I gave you plenty of written facts and Canadian history backing up what I said. It was right there. I can easily provide more and more and 100 more pages worth if you like so don't tell me I'm not giving you facts when that's exactly what I've done while your only facts have been personal anecdotes, which, ironic to your claim here have nothing to do with the "larger discussion". If you want to partake in the "larger discussion" you might have to wade into the deep end and get beyond your limited personal experience. You're giving me personal anecdotes which are nice but useless. I'm talking about the fabric of the country and its' history and I gave you facts regarding all of this as well. Telling me I didn't is, well, just kinda silly but I can understand if you were simply miffed by the "willfully blind" comment. I could sit here and relate all the times I have heard disparaging words against Alberta and Albertans and something tells me those "facts" wouldn't impress you any more than your personal anecdotes impress me. More people care about it than your personal anecdotes that much is certain. We're talking about the country, its' history and its' social fabric. You say you've never heard a disparaging word against Alberta. (shrugs) Great. So? Is your personal experience the end all be all of a very well known and even documented phenomenon? No. It isn't. You act like someone calling Albertans rednecks is like spotting a sasquatch or something and for anyone I know in the West that's hilariously off the mark. I come to you with plenty of examples of the written history of this country to back up what I'm talking about, that you personally don't ever remember anything regarding it is moot. You may never have heard of it before but millions of other Canadians have. lol.You can start with the first post of this thread. Here's some more: "Albertans Arrogant" http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/tag/albertans-arrogant Urban dictionary entry for "Albertan": "1. Albertan A Texan who can read." "Many Albertans are rednecks, but you'll find that they are proud. " http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=albertan Nice little hate-fest from the Montreal mirror: "Five reasons to hate Alberta" http://www.montrealmirror.com/2006/020206/news2.html Here's an entire Canadian website dedicated to hating Alberta, try and count how many Canadians on that site have "disparaging words" about the province and its' people: http://amplicate.com/hate/alberta ^^ That's like all of 3 minutes of Googling. Doesn't take much to see what I'm talking about. You just have to have the will to look, see and accept. Now either you have heard/read disparaging words about Alberta or Albertans in your life or you really are willfully blind. It's either one or the other now. Regardless I've proved my point with "facts" quite a bit more than your personal experience.

And yet it was regional schisms that have made for no less than 3 threats of separation: Between Quebec and the rest of Canada, between Newfoundland and the rest of Canada, and between Alberta and the rest of Canada. The seeds of these issues were regional/cultural schisms, not wealth or social status. I fail to recall a single instance of social status or wealth schisms threatening to tear the country apart....or anything else that would even make the news. Claudius: "[regional schisms]..have been the most significant historically in this country." To wit: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/07/11/bloc-quebecois-separatism-canada-separatist_n_868435.html

Then you have been willfully deaf and blind. The accusations/characterizations of Alberta as a redneck, American-Republican-style culture, a "Canadian Texas", and more "American than Canadian" have been ubiquitous for 30+ years.

And yet it was regional schisms that have made for no less than 3 threats of separation: Between Quebec and the rest of Canada, between Newfoundland and the rest of Canada, and between Alberta and the rest of Canada. The seeds of these issues were regional/cultural schisms, not wealth or social status. I fail to recall a single instance of social status or wealth schisms threatening to tear the country apart....or anything else that would even make the news. If you don't see it, you don't see it, but it's there nonetheless and has been the most significant historically in this country.

Yet another post that can't address anything. Ahhh, like when you decide I'm telling you the Alberta government holds no responsibility in their infrastructure when all I do is simply point out that a population increase affects it? Or when you decide I'm defending Harper simply because I point out that lands are leased for resource extraction instead of sold? Whatever Waldo. The world is crying for you. If you spent half as much energy being honest as you do arguing for the sake of arguing you might actually get some respect.

I see. You simply cannot digest the contention that it's politically easier to attack Alberta than the US or China unless an MP or congressperson stands up and admits it. Why is it so difficult for you to use your brain? Or even to answer my simple question? Fact is you'd still refuse to admit the obvious even if they did because you are mentally incapable of admitting someone else might have a point.

Gotta love how you can't deny it yet feel strangely compelled to respond with nonsense anyways. No they aren't and you'd know this if you bothered to read the links I provided that you're always demanding. China's emissions are increasing at a fast rate as opposed to sinking as your claim here would suggest. By all means keep on embarrassing yourself with your juvenile need to argue under any circumstances. It doesn't remotely matter if they are opening newer plants, they're still increasing their GHG emissions with them and it's still coal, not oil that is the biggest GHG polluter.

Yes much like your claim/insinuation that Canada never had the oil sands before Harper and that before Harper there weren't any foreign companies involved in resource extraction in Canada. :lol:

Yet again Waldo is faced with a reality he can't argue and doesn't like one little bit so he goes off on an emotional personal attack rant! Two posts to me so far in supposed response that don't actually say anything at all. I love it! I especially love the copying of my own statement. Imitation is sincerest form of flattery Waldo. Clearly his fragile ego won't allow him to even attempt to answer my question with a straight face, something easy to do on the internet. He knows the obvious answer and that it supports everything I said. Once again: You're a European MP or a US congressperson. Who is easier, or less politically dangerous to attack in order to look like you're doing something at Kyoto or Copenhagen? 1. The largest economy in the world, the US, whom you do business with and owe many political favours to? 2. Your own industry and thus the very people who vote for you? THe US is not going to attack Californian heavy, in fact they made an exception for this crude in Californias anti-dirty oil import/usage laws. 3. China, the worlds second largest economy, who does business with everyone? 4. Some politically inert, tiny out of the way place that few have heard of and that doesn't have any political clout? All you had to do is answer, "Why yes Claudius, I actually do think it would be safer or as safe for a congressman from Minnesota to attack their own coal burning plants (and the voters who work there) which emit more GHG's than the entire oil sands", but even you apparently can't bring yourself to be that dishonest. Thanks for proving my point. We all know you won't deal with what is said because you can't.

lol!! Yeah they've only been promising this for 10 years now. Meanwhile China builds a new coal mine each and every week and only last November invested $6 billion in Venezuelan oil sands. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/15/china-coal-industry-mongolia-shaanxi http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/12/03/378752/china-digs-deeper-into-canadian-tar-sands-during-durban-talks/?mobile=nc

Tell yourself whatever your fragile ego needs to hear.

Fair enough. Apologies for misunderstanding.

Nope actually all you need to do is be a critical thinker. Besides, based on previous discussions with you I doubt you even understand what my claim is, but I'll play along anyways....You're a European MP or a US congressperson. Who is easier, or less politically dangerous to attack in order to look like you're doing something at Kyoto or Copenhagen? 1. The largest economy in the world, the US, whom you do business with and owe many political favours to? 2. Your own industry and thus the very people who vote for you? THe US is not going to attack Californian heavy, in fact they made an exception for this crude in Californias anti-dirty oil import/usage laws. 3. China, the worlds second largest economy, who does business with everyone? 4. Some politically inert, tiny out of the way place that few have heard of and that doesn't have any political clout? Frankly Waldo all anyone needs to do to get the specifics of what I'm talking about is pay attention to US and European media.

Okay whatever. I confess I'm not sure entirely what your point is but it sounds suspiciously like when the USSR crumbled and many pro-communists couldn't wait to claim that it "wasn't really communism". When people see China for what it is the same people jump all over themselves to claim "it was never really communism".Now I don't know if that's what you're doing, but the truth is these arguments amount to claiming that even when a pro-communist is wrong about something somehow they're still right. If the USSR was communist and it failed, even if they evolved away from someone's notion of "communism" then communism still failed them. If China was communist but they aren't now and they are in the state they are in (a 2000 year old nation that Kyoto still considers to be a "developing nation") then communism failed them too. If you want to make examples of communism "working" then you need to use countries where the people are still pretty happy and/or dedicated to it. An example I would use if I were to argue the opposite side would be Vietnam or Cuba.

Yes so you're willing to live in the utopia that is China? No, not remotely right? That's because you know full well that their system enslaves most of them. I can agree with you on Norway, but that's a social democracy, which we are as well (sort of), and so is most of Europe.

0.01% of the worlds GHG emissions. 1/44th of the GHGs emitted from US coal alone. Californian heavy is dirtier. Nigerian light is dirtier. Coal is dirtier. In other words while US citizens just love to wag their fingers at other countries if even just one(1) coal burning US state shifted to here-today alternatives like geothermal or nuclear (as opposed to the solar powered 18-wheelers of our dreams) that alone would address more GHG's than the entire oil sands from wells-to-wheels. Just sayin', you know? I think people have a hard time understanding that while global warming is not a scam (I'm not going to argue this) world conferences designed to "save the world" like Kyoto and Copenhagen most definitely are political scams; a circus of political jousting and maneuvering, and the Alberta oil sands are the favorite scape-goat/bandwagon for any European MP or US congressman to jump on to avoid dealing with their own messy businesses (i.e. their own voters) or attacking anyone else with too much political clout, a commodity Alberta has very little of compared to powerhouses like the US, China, Venezuela, etc. What's most disheartening is watching the effect it has on Canadians as so many fall prey to this myth that somehow Canada, a tiny nation barely 150 years old is somehow responsible for mankinds reconciliation with the entire Industrial Age. Europeans were polluting with coal before Canada even had a road. They were polluting with pure horse manure before we even had a city.

Yeah right. BC is destroying the salmon, as well as the rest of the province all by themselves. Don't let the oil pipelines from Alaska or Washington state that run to Vancouver (where oil tankers have been coming in and out of for 50 years without a spill) hold you back from your anti-Alberta hate.

Uh yeah except that was Klein not Harper.

Waldo I don't know what the problem is, perhaps it has something to do with using Chrome on a Linux machine, maybe my fonts are all screwed up, but when I came back here all your posts have screwed up text as quoted below... ...so I'm sure you'll understand if I just ignore it.

And yet the reality is "East vs West" is historically the biggest social schism in Canada.