Calgary
Response: Tom Milroy Wants To Deport The UCP & Wexiteers, Ban All Weapons & Restrain the Oilpatch
Green Party candidate Tom Milroy exemplifies how NOT to win friends and influence people to be more green-friendly. Among his plethora of tone-deaf tweets, and condescending facebook rants is this gem of a post:
“ I suspect that with oil going for LESS THAN ZERO we could now buy Alberta for cheap, Deport the UCP & the moronic wexiteers to the USA, start the Canadian ban on weapons of all kinds there, build solar & wind farms, restrain the oilpatch workforce and be done with this BS forever!” -@tommilroyjr
I can forgive the poor grammar, after all it’s just twitter, but his callous disregard for the real and palpable pain which Albertan’s have been enduring during the Trudeau Jr. era requires a response. Mr. Milroy is not alone with his hand wringing at the thought of the Alberta energy sector collapsing. PM Justin Trudeau is certain to be equally eager to witness Alberta’s demise, never realizing that the death of the Alberta advantage, is also the death of the Canadian advantage. Perhaps they should take eight minutes to listen to our plight HERE.
Albertans are fiercely patriotic, yet we have been abused by Ottawa to the point where many have come to the unpleasant conclusion that separation is the only way to survive. Tom Milroy clearly thinks that survival instinct is “moronic”, and that all ideas which are conservative are inherently evil. His views are largely shared by many in the Toronto/Montreal crowd which only fuels western alienation. Why would Albertans want to be hitched to a Country which economically attacks, and openly berates them? It’s only natural to consider other options.
The soapbox upon which Mr. Milroy stands is portrayed as environmental, but in fact is xenophobic. Energy workers aren’t like Tom and his friends, which is why they don’t understand them and they choose to berate them. Tom Milroy, you are an unapologetic anti-Albertan bigot with a twitter account. Your ghastly posts are a stain on the fabric of Canadian values.
His claim of moral superiority however has been thoroughly discredited by a recent documentary by..of all people, Michael Moore. In his new documentary, Planet of the Humans Michael Moore destroys the argument that solar and wind are in any way cleaner than Canadian procured fossil fuels. In fact, when you do the math, it’s clear that both wind and solar create a LARGER ecological footprint than Alberta’s Oil Sands.
Photo-Voltaic cells (solar panels) for instance are not made from “sand” as is often claimed. They are created by melting quartz and coal together in a massive furnace. Both quartz and coal are procured from mining, and mining is an incredibly carbon-intensive activity. Cobalt, and other materials which are required for windmills are mined using horrific child labour. Not only are solar and wind not clean energy, they both have a negative net yield when all factors are considered.
Heaped on top of the negative energy yield, massive mining footprint, and excessive carbon load required for “green energy”, is the human suffering which includes horrific child labour. There is nothing moral about six-year-old children working in an African Cobalt mine. Ignoring this fact is nothing short of evil.
Regardless of your beliefs on environmental issues, reacting to ideas that are contrary to your own with name-calling is not helpful, nor is it productive. It’s easy to disregard the pain of others by spouting bigoted epithets at them. It’s easy, and is a sure sign of a lazy mind. What’s difficult is to put yourself in the shoes of others in order to try to understand where they are coming from. Empathy is hard, and requires significant effort from a clear mind which is unshackled by ego. At the moment, empathy seems to be beyond the reach of Mr. Milroy.
The environmentalist groups need to take an honest look in the mirror. Being a jerk to others is not going to sway opinions. Regardless of political leanings, the vast majority of Canadians also want pristine water, clean air, and to have cleaner energy solutions. The technology exists today to achieve all of the above, but we’re just not bringing it to market. Solar and Wind have both been proven to NOT be the solution. The focus must be on reducing consumption, not on punishing production. Passenger cars can easily achieve 100 mpg, and industrial smokestacks can certainly be engineered to emit less than half of the particulates which they are currently belching. The technology has been around since the ’80s, all we have to do is use it.
Caring about the environment is important, but actually doing something about it is far more admirable than proclaiming your moral and intellectual superiority over Albertans. The common assumption is that our energy sector is dirty and immoral. Do you prefer Saudi oil? Shutting down Alberta does nothing to help the environment, all it does is displace the oil production to nations like Saudi Arabia, who throw gays off buildings, behead accused wrongdoers, and force their women to stay covered head to toe. Every sentiment against Alberta energy is a proclamation of support for the Saudi regime, and their human rights abuses.
Alberta energy workers are the highest skilled, safest, and most regulated on earth. As a result, they enjoy healthy compensation which some people bemoan so as to cloak their jealousy. Oh how fun it is to throw stones at the families of energy workers, and denigrate them for enjoying the fruits of their difficult and dangerous labour. How satisfying it must be to turn your nose up to the gun-toting, hunting, fishing, outdoor-loving Albertans who would rather explore nature in the backcountry than bang bongos at a climate change rally. Alberta energy workers have every right to be proud. They provide us all with our way of life, similar to how Soldiers protect our freedoms. Without oil, the global population of roughly 7.8 Billion would not be sustainable. Until other technologies are allowed to flourish, we’re stuck with what we got. Unfortunately Wind and Solar simply don’t fill the gap, regardless of the blind arguments to the contrary.
Mark E. Meincke
Buy the Home Seller’s Bible by clicking HERE
Buy “Why not Me?” HERE
For more stories, visit Todayville Calgary
Alberta
Calgary’s new city council votes to ban foreign flags at government buildings
From LifeSiteNews
It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.
Western Canada’s largest city has put in place what amounts to a ban on politically charged flags from flying at city-owned buildings.
“Calgary’s Flag Policy means any country recognized by Canada may have their flag flown at City Hall on their national day,” said Calgary’s new mayor Jeromy Farkas on X last month.
“But national flag-raisings are now creating division. Next week, we’ll move to end national flag-raisings at City Hall to keep this a safe, welcoming space for all.”
The motion to ban foreign flags from flying at government buildings was introduced on December 15 by Calgary councilor Dan McLean and passed by a vote of 8 to 7. He had said the previous policy to allow non-Canadian flags to fly, under former woke mayor Jyoti Gondek, was “source of division within our community.”
“In recent months, this practice has been in use in ways that I’ve seen have inflamed tensions, including instances where flag raisings have been associated with anti-Semitic behavior and messaging,” McLean said during a recent council meeting.
The ban on flag raising came after the Palestinian flag was allowed to be raised at City Hall for the first time.
Farkas, shortly after being elected mayor in the fall of 2025, had promised that he wanted a new flag policy introduced in the city.
It is not yet clear if the flag motion applies to other flags, such as LGBT ones.
Despite Farkas putting forth the motion, as reported by LifeSiteNews he is very much in the pro-LGBT camp. However, he has promised to focus only on non-ideological issues during his term.
McLean urged that City Hall must be a place of “neutrality, unity, and respect” for everyone.
“When City Hall becomes a venue for geopolitical expressions, it places the city in the middle of conflicts that are well beyond our municipal mandates,” he said.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, other jurisdictions in Canada are considering banning non-Canadian flags from flying over public buildings.
Recently a political party in British Columbia, OneBC, introduced legislation to ban non-domestic government flags at public buildings in British Columbia.
Across Canada there has also been an ongoing issue with so-called “Pride” flags being raised at schools and city buildings.
Alberta
Calgary mayor should retain ‘blanket rezoning’ for sake of Calgarian families
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson
Calgary’s new mayor, Jeromy Farkas, has promised to scrap “blanket rezoning”—a policy enacted by the city in 2024 that allows homebuilders to construct duplexes, townhomes and fourplexes in most neighbourhoods without first seeking the blessing of city hall. In other words, amid an affordability crunch, Mayor Farkas plans to eliminate a policy that made homebuilding easier and cheaper—which risks reducing housing choices and increasing housing costs for Calgarian families.
Blanket rezoning was always contentious. Debate over the policy back in spring 2024 sparked the longest public hearing in Calgary’s history, with many Calgarians airing concerns about potential impacts on local infrastructure, parking availability and park space—all important issues.
Farkas argues that blanket rezoning amounts to “ignoring the community” and that Calgarians should not be forced to choose between a “City Hall that either stops building, or stops listening.” But in reality, it’s virtually impossible to promise more community input on housing decisions and build more homes faster.
If Farkas is serious about giving residents a “real say” in shaping their neighbourhood’s future, that means empowering them to alter—or even block—housing proposals that would otherwise be allowed under blanket rezoning. Greater public consultation tends to give an outsized voice to development opponents including individuals and groups that oppose higher density and social housing projects.
Alternatively, if the mayor and council reform the process to invite more public feedback, but still ultimately approve most higher-density projects (as was the case before blanket rezoning), the consultation process would be largely symbolic.
Either way, homebuilders would face longer costlier approval processes—and pass those costs on to Calgarian renters and homebuyers.
It’s not only the number of homes that matters, but also where they’re allowed to be built. Under blanket rezoning, builders can respond directly to the preferences of Calgarians. When buyers want duplexes in established neighbourhoods or renters want townhomes closer to work, homebuilders can respond without having to ask city hall for permission.
According to Mayor Farkas, higher-density housing should instead be concentrated near transit, schools and job centres, with the aim of “reducing pressure on established neighbourhoods.” At first glance, that may sound like a sensible compromise. But it rests on the flawed assumption that politicians and planners should decide where Calgarians are allowed to live, rather than letting Calgarians make those choices for themselves. With blanket rezoning, new homes are being built in areas in response to buyer and renter demand, rather than the dictates of city hall. The mayor also seems to suggest that city hall should thwart some redevelopment in established neighbourhoods, limiting housing options in places many Calgarians want to live.
The stakes are high. Calgary is not immune to Canada’s housing crisis, though it has so far weathered it better than most other major cities. That success partly reflects municipal policies—including blanket rezoning—that make homebuilding relatively quick and inexpensive.
A motion to repeal blanket rezoning is expected to be presented to Calgary’s municipal executive committee on Nov. 17. If it passes, which is likely, the policy will be put to a vote during a council meeting on Dec. 15. As the new mayor and council weigh changes to zoning rules, they should recognize the trade-offs. Empowering “the community” may sound appealing, but it may limit the housing choices available to families in those communities. Any reforms should preserve the best elements of blanket rezoning—its consistency, predictability and responsiveness to the housing preferences of Calgarians—and avoid erecting zoning barriers that have exacerbated the housing crisis in other cities.
Austin Thompson
-
International16 hours agoOttawa is still dodging the China interference threat
-
Business14 hours agoThere’s No Bias at CBC News, You Say? Well, OK…
-
Automotive13 hours agoCanada’s EV gamble is starting to backfire
-
International15 hours ago2025: The Year The Narrative Changed
-
Fraser Institute1 day agoCarney government sowing seeds for corruption in Ottawa
-
Business1 day agoResidents in economically free states reap the rewards
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta Next Panel calls for less Ottawa—and it could pay off
-
Daily Caller1 day agoWhile Western Nations Cling to Energy Transition, Pragmatic Nations Produce Energy and Wealth


