7 Comments
User's avatar
Brad Odsen, KC's avatar

I appreciate that you meticulously present the record, and then direct the reader to form their own conclusions. I believe that process, forming a conclusion, has to start by asking the simple question:"Why?" You could go back to her campaign promises made before the last election, when virtually every single thing she said was "not on the table" is not only on the table, but well underway. Why would she say one thing, at one time, and then do the complete opposite once in power? Why would she say she wants to grow the Alberta economy and then, for all intents kill virtually all planned renewable energy projects that would have (conservatively) injected some $33B into the Alberta ecomomy?

The list of things the Alberta government (Smith) has done since their election is long and virtually none were things voters asked for or really, in most cases even wanted. Either no evidentiary rationale is provided or, if one is ostensibly provided, it is flawed. Prohibiting automated vote counters and changes to divers' licences and AHC registration are but two of many, not to forget taking what was recognized world-wide as a model of a public health care system and literally destroying it.

Why?

As you point out in your pieces, let the record speak for itself. The record for Smith is damning. More than sufficient for me to form my conclusions as to the answer to that question.

KayDee's avatar

Obfuscation, evil, greed and skill of the ringmaster will be her legacy.

Bruce Deacon's avatar

An excellent summary of reality. Thank you.

Kathleen's avatar

Interesting - as well as the lack of accounting - is the evidence Smith asked for this immigration increase. It is on the record. Perhaps her mirror is fogged? Perhaps in her cunning ways she believes no one will notice she is the author of the AB 'challenges' - not Ottawa.

Patricia Poohkay's avatar

STOP DANIELLE SMITH

Patricia Poohkay's avatar

Just a fantastic piece. Sending everywhere!

Kathleen Davidson's avatar

Albertans should certainly demand to be shown the numbers on which these various issues turn. Cost vs benefit. The ball is in Smith's court, pre-referendum.