destruction of america

[wayno]

 

 

 

 

Has Alberta’s Brexit Moment Finally Arrived? Pro-independence activists needed 177,732 signatures. They just submitted nearly 302,000. Now Ottawa faces a reckoning. Rod D. Martin May 9     by Rod D. Martin May 8, 2026 A lot of people thought the idea of Alberta independence, or even statehood, was crazy talk. Guess again. Alberta separatists just delivered nearly 302,000 signatures to Elections Alberta — roughly 70 percent more than the 177,732 required to trigger the referendum process. The signatures still must be verified, and the courts may yet intervene. But the proposed question is as direct as it gets: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be a part of Canada to become an independent state?” For daily geopolitical analysis Fox Business calls “absolutely phenomenal”, sign up as a FREE or PREMIUM Member today!   As a matter of fact, yes. Yes it should. If America is annoyed by Canadian freeloading on the American defense budget and inequities in tariff treatment, Alberta has reason to be livid. Ottawa extracts wealth from the province as though it were a colony, like some North American Belgian Congo. If Mark Carney gets his wish and Canada joins his beloved EU, it will become exactly that. Alberta is not merely another province with ordinary political grievances. It is the productive, energy-rich, conservative West, ruled by an eastern establishment that despises its industries, taxes its wealth, blocks its pipelines, mocks its values, and then demands gratitude for the privilege. For decades, Ottawa has treated Alberta not as a partner in Confederation, but as a cash cow, a colony, and a cultural punching bag. That was bad enough under Trudeau. Under Carney, it has become doctrine. Carney is not merely another Liberal prime minister. He is the perfect embodiment of the worldview Alberta should fear most: managerial, globalist, post-national, hostile to energy, comfortable with supranational bureaucracy, and instinctively more at home in Davos, Brussels, and London than in Calgary, much less Grande Prairie. Nor is Europe the end of it. Carney has sought a new strategic partnership with Communist China, announcing expanded cooperation in energy, trade, public safety, multilateralism, and culture. In Beijing, he announced that Canada and China were “forging a new strategic partnership,” and suggested that China had become a more predictable partner than Washington. For Alberta, that is not a future. It is a prison sentence. The separation petition did not appear out of nowhere. It is the predictable response of a productive people who understand they are not being governed as partners in a federation. They are being exploited, full stop. Alberta’s Brexit Moment That is what makes this Alberta’s Brexit moment. The issue has crossed the line from complaint to process. Ottawa can no longer dismiss Western alienation as background noise. Elections Alberta confirms the required threshold is 177,732 signatures — 10 percent of the votes cast in the last provincial general election. Yet nearly 302,000 have signed. The petition has been received, the boxes sealed, locked in cabinets, and stored under 24/7 security monitoring while the courts decide when verification may proceed. Ottawa’s courtiers will wave the polls and insist separation cannot win. They should ask David Cameron how that worked out. In June 2015, roughly one year before the Brexit referendum, Ipsos found Remain ahead of Leave 61–27, with 12 percent undecided. Among those expressing an opinion, that was 69–31 Remain. On an alternate wording — “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?” — Ipsos had Yes leading No 66–22, or 75–25 among those expressing an opinion.   A year later, little had changed. In May 2016, just weeks before the vote, Ipsos still had Remain leading. Its May 14–16 poll showed 55 percent Remain, 37 percent Leave, 5 percent undecided, and 3 percent saying they would not vote. Among those expressing an opinion, that was 60–40 Remain. This was obviously going to be a blowout. Brexit supporters had no chance. Even on election night, all the prediction markets said so. And yet the final result was Leave 51.9 percent, Remain 48.1 percent. The British people had their say, and the entire governing class — including then-governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney — was humiliated.   Brexit Is Glorious Rod D. Martin   ·   June 28, 2016 Read full story That is the lesson for Alberta. Ruling classes routinely mistake present polling for permanent consent. Angus Reid found earlier this year that 29 percent of Albertans would vote to leave Canada if a referendum were held immediately, with 8 percent definite and another 21 percent leaning that way. The establishment reads that number and sees a nothingburger. It ought to see danger. Political movements don’t begin at 51 percent. They begin when enough people conclude the old order has lost legitimacy. And then the campaign begins. Leger found last year that 58 percent of Albertans said federal actions could influence their view of Alberta’s political future, while 62 percent said the rest of Canada does not understand why some Albertans feel alienated. That is not settled loyalty. That is dry timber. And now someone has struck a match. Not a Nation But an Empire — And Alberta is Its Colony Western Canada has had enough. And after the recent federal election, the rage is no longer quiet. Once again, Alberta voted overwhelmingly conservative. And once again, that made no difference. The Laurentian elite held their grip on power — propped up by Quebec voters, hostile to Western interests, and smug in their belief that Alberta’s wealth is theirs to take, er, “redistribute.” For decades, Alberta — rich in oil, fiercely independent, and proudly conservative — has been treated not as a partner in Confederation, but as a colony of the East. Consider the facts: Equalization Payments: Alberta pays billions each year into a federal system that redistributes its wealth to other provinces — chiefly Quebec — despite Alberta’s economic struggles. It’s taxation without representation, and with a French accent. It renders Alberta effectively a colony. Carbon Taxes and Energy Policy: Ottawa has launched a relentless leftwing war against Alberta’s oil sands and energy sector, crippling pipelines, delaying permits, and criminalizing prosperity. Political Disenfranchisement: The House of Commons is weighted toward Eastern Canada. The Senate is a patronage backwater. And the Prime Minister’s Office governs by decree, often in open contempt of the West. This isn’t unity. It’s subjugation. From the moment Alberta entered Confederation in 1905, it was treated as an afterthought — an imperial holding ruled from the East. The so-called “national interest” always seemed to mean Quebec’s interest. And while Alberta built the pipelines, powered the economy, and filled the federal coffers, Ottawa wielded its power like a colonial governor, redistributing wealth and writing laws with no regard for the West’s values or prosperity. Albertans noticed. They noticed when Pierre Trudeau imposed the National Energy Program in 1980, effectively nationalizing Western oil and triggering the greatest economic crisis in Alberta’s history. They noticed when Stephen Harper — a rare Western prime minister — was replaced by Justin Trudeau, whose government made it a moral crusade to shut down Alberta’s oil sands while buying foreign oil from despots abroad.   They noticed the carbon taxes, the canceled pipelines, the equalization payments flowing east even as Alberta struggled through recession. They noticed that every federal program and regulation seemed custom-built to crush the very industries on which Alberta depends, all while extracting an ever-higher tax burden to support the welfare state back east. And they noticed that there was no way to stop it. Why? Because under Canada’s political architecture, Alberta pays all the bills but has no meaningful say. The House of Commons is dominated by Ontario and Quebec. The Senate is unelected and stacked with Laurentian elites. The courts, media, and civil service all lean left and east. A hundred years of democratic betrayal have taught Albertans the same lesson over and over: Ottawa is not your government. It’s your master. That is the heart of the matter. Alberta is considering independence because Ottawa has treated it like a colony — and is shocked to discover that colonies sometimes seek independence. Ottawa’s Response: Too Little, Too Late Of course, now that Alberta has leverage, Ottawa has suddenly discovered compromise. Last November, Prime Minister Carney and Premier Danielle Smith signed a Canada-Alberta memorandum of understanding that immediately suspended the Clean Electricity Regulations in Alberta pending a new carbon-pricing agreement. Ottawa also committed not to implement the oil and gas emissions cap, agreed to treat an Alberta bitumen pipeline to Asian markets as a national-interest priority, and promised an approval path that could include Indigenous co-ownership and adjustment of the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act if necessary. Fine. Better late than never. But this is not repentance. It’s damage control. Ottawa is not restoring Alberta to constitutional equality. It’s not returning a century of confiscated wealth, lost opportunity, canceled infrastructure, and political contempt. It’s not admitting that the entire Laurentian model — take from the productive West, redistribute eastward, regulate energy into submission, and then congratulate yourself for your “obvious” moral superiority — was rotten from the beginning. Carney is making tactical concessions because Alberta now has a credible exit threat. And he’s seen this play before. Even those concessions come wrapped in Ottawa’s usual net-zero straitjacket: carbon pricing, emissions reductions, carbon capture conditions, methane targets, regulatory consultation, and bureaucratic process stacked on bureaucratic process. It’s much too little, much too late. Alberta’s destiny points south, not east: energy, markets, pipelines, defense, investment, culture, and constitutional liberty. Ottawa’s ruling class points eastward to Europe, westward to China, and downward into managed decline. Independence Is the Door. Could Statehood Be the Destination? An independent Alberta would be a wealthy nation. Statehood could make it more so. This is where the debate will move next. The petition question is independence. But independence may not be the end. Once that door is opened, Alberta will have to decide what independence is for. An independent Alberta would have energy, agriculture, minerals, capital, talent, and $45 billion a year that’s currently being siphoned east. But independence is an expensive proposition. Militaries. Embassies. Intelligence services. Central banks. International organizations. Trade negotiations. Border security. Treaty disputes. All of this costs, one way or another. A landlocked country with world-class energy reserves but no sovereign route to tidewater would be independent on paper, but strategically vulnerable in practice. Moreover, as I’ve argued consistently, the only true free trade zone available is the one created by the U.S. Constitution. Just 4 percent of the world’s population creates and controls 26 percent of the world’s economy. It’s the planet’s indispensable consumer market. And that U.S. market buys an incredible 89 percent of Alberta’s exports. Why export all that through customs, across an international border? Statehood solves all of this. Alberta would keep all the benefits of being part of a larger country — a much larger country than the one it’s leaving — but minus the plunder.   Should Alberta Become the 51st State? Rod D. Martin   ·   May 10, 2025 Read full story Whatever Washington’s faults, it does not and cannot place disproportionate burdens on a singled-out state in the way Ottawa does as a matter of course. Canada can, and does. If Alberta became the 51st state of the Union, it would gain two U.S. Senators and full representation in the House of Representatives — real seats at a real table. It would gain constitutional guarantees of free speech, religious liberty, gun rights, property rights, and the rule of law, all conspicuously missing from today’s Canada. It would gain energy freedom under a federal government that’s pushing to become the world’s largest exporter. It would gain access to American capital markets, military protection, and unimpeded participation in the largest economy on Earth.   Nor is this a one-way street. The United States stands to benefit immensely from including the extremely conservative “Texas of the North.” Alberta’s oil, gas, uranium, minerals, timber, agricultural land, cattle, wheat, canola, and technological capacity would strengthen American energy security, food security, supply chains, and Arctic strategy. Alberta’s pipelines, railroads, and highways already connect to the American economy. Its people already share much of the culture of Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Texas. Drive from Calgary to Montana, and the only thing that changes is the gas prices and the gun laws. The accident of a dotted line on a map is the only thing keeping this natural union apart. Texas joined the Union for much the same reason. Independence is expensive. Inclusion in the U.S. market is valuable. Getting rid of needless trade barriers — and needless expenditures on embassies and armies — makes everyone richer. Can Alberta make it on its own? Absolutely. Should it? Will it? I hope not. It’s hard to imagine a better fit. But either way, Alberta doesn’t belong in today’s Canada. Alberta May Not Be Alone Alberta is the first mover. It’s not the only province watching the result. Western alienation is not confined to Edmonton or Calgary. It stretches across the prairie like a weather front, from the Peace Country to the Red River, from the foothills of the Rockies to the flat expanse of the Saskatchewan plain. The grievances are shared, the injuries are the same, and the values — faith, family, freedom, work — remain strikingly consistent across provincial borders. No province is more ideologically aligned with Alberta than Saskatchewan. It is similarly rural, energy-rich, Christian, and fed up. Its economy is driven by oil, gas, potash, uranium, and wheat — industries targeted by Ottawa’s green mandates and central planning. The Trudeau-Carney government has treated Saskatchewan with every bit as much contempt as Alberta, while stripping it of the means to push back. If Alberta goes, Saskatchewan has every reason to chart the same course. And if Alberta is the 51st state, perhaps Saskatchewan can be the 52nd. Manitoba is more complicated. British Columbia is more complicated still. But the Interior of British Columbia is not Vancouver, and rural Manitoba is not downtown Winnipeg. In any serious realignment, the gravitational pull will not merely be westward. It will be southward — toward the United States, toward markets, toward energy, toward constitutional liberty, toward the civilization these provinces increasingly resemble more than they resemble Ottawa. This is the larger meaning of the Alberta petition. It is not merely another Canadian protest. It is the beginning of a geopolitical realignment. A rebirth. A new American frontier, and a new birth of freedom. Canada no longer offers Alberta liberty or self-government. It offers managed decline, confiscated wealth, punished industry, regulated speech, bureaucratic contempt, and the endless demand that the West pay tribute to the East while apologizing for merely existing. America is built differently. Its Constitution enshrines the rights Ottawa buries. Its system was designed to divide power, not centralize it. It recognizes that the individual is prior to the state. That rights come from God, not the government. That property is not a privilege. That sovereignty flows upward, from the people. But whatever course Alberta chooses — independence, statehood, or something else — the first step is now a vote. Will Alberta allow Ottawa to keep ruling it like a colony? Or has Alberta’s Brexit moment finally arrived?

[Rustbin]

Rod Martin is telling a fairy tale, @wayno, there is a process required for separation to be considered.

 

 

A Long and Uncertain Road to Alberta Independence

 

Alienation Accelerated

Premier Jason Kenney has suggested that Canada is facing a “crisis of national unity” because Albertans, and other western Canadians, are feeling disrespected by the rest of the country.[1] Premier Kenney has cited a poll from the Angus Reid Institute where 50% of Albertans stated that they thought Alberta separating from Canada was a real possibility.[2] In a March 2019 poll, 56% of Albertans agreed with the statement: “Western Canada gets so few benefits from being part of Canada that they might as well go it on their own.”[3] These feelings of unease led the separatist Alberta Independence Party to participate in the 2019 Alberta general election; however, the party did not fare well in result.[4]

These developments have raised the question: how could Alberta legally separate from Canada if the people of the province chose to do so? For Alberta to achieve independence from Canada, there would need to be a “clear majority” of Albertans voting in a referendum for independence. Following the referendum result, constitutional negotiations between Alberta, the federal government, and the other provinces would need to be successful.

The Legal Framework for Separation

Following the narrow defeat of the Quebec independence referendum in 1995, the federal government asked the Supreme Court of Canada [SCC] to consider how a province could legally separate from Canada. The SCC provided a road map for legal separation in a 1998 reference .[5] Following the case, the federal government enacted a law in 2000 to provide “clarity” for how the federal government would approach a future independence referendum.[6]

The Steps to Achieve Alberta Independence

The Canadian Constitution would need to be amended for a province to separate from Canada.[7] The following steps would need to be followed:

 

1) Decide to hold an independence referendum.

While a referendum itself has “no direct role or legal effect in our constitutional scheme,” it is required to gauge “the views of the electorate on important political questions.”[8] Thus, a referendum would be necessary to understand if Albertans want to leave Canada.

 

2) Decide on a referendum question to ask the population. The question needs to be clear.

There needs to be a clear question for Alberta’s residents to vote on. The SCC stated that any referendum question must be able to gauge a “clear expression” of the will of a province’s population.[9]The Clarity Act requires the House of Commons’ input in deciding the potential question which would be posed.[10] For a question to be suitable, the House of Commons must assess if the question is direct, clear, and does not ponder “other possibilities in addition to the secession of the province from Canada.”[11] In short, the question must clearly state that independence is at issue.

The Clarity Act prohibits the federal government from entering negotiations on separation if the House of Commons determines the referendum question is not clear.[12] For this reason, it would be important for the federal and provincial governments to agree on a referendum question prior to the start of a campaign.

 

3) Conduct the campaign, hold the referendum, and tally the votes.

A campaign period would be required for the pro and anti-independence activists to advocate for their positions. The campaign would likely be divisive since the referendum would have a significant impact on the future of Alberta as well as the rest of Canada.

If the pro-independence side garners the most votes in the referendum, they must have received enough votes to show a “clear expression” of the will of Albertans to leave Canada.

 

4) The House of Commons will decide if the majority vote in favour of separation is a “clear expression” of the will of Albertans to leave Canada.

The SCC stated that considerable weight must be given to a “clear expression” of the will of a population to separate – but neither “clear expression” nor what might form a “clear majority” were defined. A “qualitative evaluation” is required to gauge a “clear expression.”[13] Similarly, the Clarity Act is ironically unclear about what would form a “clear majority” in favour of separation. The Act requires the House of Commons to determine whether there has been a “clear expression of a will by a clear majority of that province” to separate from Canada.[14] The House of Commons must consider the size of the majority, the percentage of eligible voters that voted in the referendum, and “any other matter or circumstances” considered relevant. Similarly, the Act requires the House of Commons to take into account the views of others provinces, the Senate, Aboriginal peoples, and all the political parties in the provincial legislature from the province voting to separate.[15] Only after weighing these factors does the House of Commons determine if the referendum result forms a clear expression of the will of that province’s population.

Well-known Constitutional expert Peter Hogg has stated that “if the judgment of the House of Commons is that the majority in favour of secession is not clear, then the Government of Canada is prohibited by the Act from entering into negotiations for secession.”[16] For example, if 51% of Albertans voted in favour or independence and 49% voted against, and the House of Commons determined that this margin did not show a “clear majority,” then they would be prohibited by the Clarity Act from entering negotiations. This would create a political stalemate and it is unclear what would happen next. Despite the SCC rejecting a “supervisory role” over political aspects of separation, it seems likely that the courts would need to resolve any uncertainties about whether or not there was a “clear majority” in favour of separation.[17]

 

5) Alberta, the federal government, and the other provincial governments will engage in negotiations to change the Constitution.

The SCC declared that federal and other provincial governments “cannot remain indifferent to the clear expression of a clear majority” of a provincial population voting to separate – this would lead to an obligation to negotiate independence.[18]  However, the SCC rejects that there would be a requirement to accept separation under any terms. The Court has stated that any “foregone conclusions” in result would make the negotiations hollow.[19] Thus, the parties would be required to negotiate separation in good faith, but there would be no predetermined result.

Constitutional negotiations with this level of importance would not be simply resolved. Important and contentious issues such as trade policy and dividing the federal government’s national debt would need to be settled. In this context, Hogg has explained that “there is a serious risk the participants, even working in the shadow of the constitutional obligation, would be unable to reach an agreement” on the relationship between an independent Alberta and the rest of Canada.[20]

The SCC acknowledged that negotiations could break down, but the Court refused to speculate about what would happen if this occurred.[21] The SCC expressed a clear desire to not be involved in these political negotiations.[22] However, if the negotiations did break down, the Court would likely be called to provide insight to resolve the dispute.

 

6) If negotiations are successful then a constitutional amendment will be enacted, and Alberta will gain independence. The relationship between an independent Alberta and the rest of Canada would be determined by the negotiations which led to the amendment.

 

Conclusion: A Long Road to Alberta Independence

The Quebec Secession Reference and the Clarity Act provide the legal road map for how Alberta could gain independence from Canada. The “crisis of national unity” between Alberta and the rest of the Canada make it relevant to consider how this constitutional change could occur, even if the idea of a province separating is currently only an academic exercise.

It is possible for Alberta to separate from Canada, but the process would be long, uncertain, and fraught with difficulty.

 

 

[1] Cable Public Affairs Channel, “In Committee from the Senate of Canada: Jason Kenney Speaks Out Against Federal Environmental Reform Bill” (2 May 2019) at 00h:05m:20s, online (video): CPAC <cpac.ca/en/programs/in-committee-from-the-senate-of-canada/episodes/65982332#>. For example, there is unease about the federal government’s handling of Alberta’s resource economy, including recently enacted laws to change the environmental assessment process for resource projects and to enact an oil tanker ban off the waters of Northern British Columbia.

[2] Angus Reid Institute, “Decades after Reform’s rise, voters open to a new ‘Western Canada Party’” (5 February 2019), online: Angus Reid Institute <angusreid.org/western-canada-separatism/>.

[3] Environics Institute, “Confederation of Tomorrow 2019 Survey of Canadians: Pulling together or drifting apart?” (22 March 2019), online (pdf): Environics Institute <cwf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Confederation-of-Tomorrow-Survey-2019-Report-1-Pulling-Together-or-Drifting-Apart-FINAL-REPORT.pdf>.

[4] Elections Alberta, “Provincial General Election Results” (16 April 2019), online: Elections Alberta <http://officialresults.elections.ab.ca/orResultsPGE.cfm?EventId=60>. The Alberta Independence Party ran 63 candidates out of 87 electoral districts; however, the party only won 13,531 votes or 0.7% of votes cast in the election.

[5] Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 SCR 217 .

[6] An Act to give effect to the requirement for clarity as set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Quebec Secession Reference, SC 2000, c 26 .

[7] Peter W Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada (2017 Student Edition) (Toronto: Thompson Reuters, 2017) at 5-36 [Hogg]. Hogg states: “A secession would require an amendment to the Constitution of Canada, and would have to be accomplished in accordance with the Constitution’s amending procedures.” It is important to note that it is not clear if this amendment would require the use of the general amending formula under s 38 of the Constitution Act, 1982 or if it would require the unanimous consent of all the provinces, the House of Commons, an the Senate under s 41 of the Constitution Act, 1982. For discussion on this point, see Hogg at 5-40.

[8] Quebec Secession Reference supra note 5 at para 87.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Clarity Act supra note 6, s 1(1). This section states that the House of Commons will “set out its determination on whether the question is clear.”

[11] Ibid, s 1(4).

[12] Ibid, s 1(6).

[13] Quebec Secession Reference supra note 5 at para 87.

[14] Clarity Act supra note 6, s 2(1).

[15] Ibid, s 2(2)-2(3)

[16] Hogg supra note 7 at 5-38.

[17] Quebec Secession Reference supra note 5 at para 100.

[18] Ibid at para 92.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Hogg supra note 7 at 5-41.

[21] Quebec Secession Reference supra note 5 at para 97.

[22] Ibid at para 100. The SCC state that they will not have a “supervisory role” over the negotiations and that only “the political actors would have the information and expertise to make the appropriate judgment” as to when the negotiations have finished.

[datzenmike]

Pile of steamy horseshit wayno. I told you to stop reading Rod Martin. You have a subscription don't you. This is what goes wrong when you seek out what you want to hear. It just reinforces that belief and you learn nothing. 

 

Alberta's population tops 5 million. 150,000 names is one in 33 Albertans. I'm sure there are some ass kissing Trump supporters there but 150,000 (they claim twice that) willing to separate from Canada??? Bullshit. The government should have a committee look into this subversion perpetrated by the Americans. It's not enough you fuck with Venezuela and Cuba? Attack Iran??? Threaten to take over Greenland, gut troops from NATO ??? Impose tariffs on the entire world??? Your supreme leader is delusional and out of control. He makes sleepy Joe look good. How's your gas prices wayno??

 

 

Take your MAGA hat with the tin foil lining off and stop posting Rod Martin propaganda.       

[Thomas Perkins]

On 5/8/2026 at 9:19 PM, Smoking Joe said:

I’m from the south and I too am sick of the left wing nuts calling me Racist and another name they can create to control people and

mostly politicians. My Dad sponsored Two NASCAR teams in the early 70s when it was still stock car racing. Albeit they weren’t stock cars anymore but they sure weren’t all professionally built to the exact same standards with a fictitious name slapped

on them.  Myself I loved NASCAR back then and was fortunate enough to know a number of the drivers from that era later in life.  I however was

more attracted to Drag Racing and by the grace of God I was fortunate enough to make Professional Drag Racing my career. I retired in 2004 with a pretty successful history of championships and records in the ProModified category.  I say all this because I love America and I love Jesus Christ. And I am sick of the liberal mind attempting to transform this great nation. However I do think Mr Trump has set there agenda back several years and that’s what I voted for wish he could run for another term. 

Trump is the Best.

[Thomas Perkins]

1 hour ago, datzenmike said:

Pile of steamy horseshit wayno. I told you to stop reading Rod Martin. You have a subscription don't you. This is what goes wrong when you seek out what you want to hear. It just reinforces that belief and you learn nothing. 

 

Alberta's population tops 5 million. 150,000 names is one in 33 Albertans. I'm sure there are some ass kissing Trump supporters there but 150,000 (they claim twice that) willing to separate from Canada??? Bullshit. The government should have a committee look into this subversion perpetrated by the Americans. It's not enough you fuck with Venezuela and Cuba? Attack Iran??? Threaten to take over Greenland, gut troops from NATO ??? Impose tariffs on the entire world??? Your supreme leader is delusional and out of control. He makes sleepy Joe look good. How's your gas prices wayno??

 

 

Take your MAGA hat with the tin foil lining off and stop posting Rod Martin propaganda.       

Mike is smoking Mexican  dirt weed again ya'll.Cheaper is not better.Trump did it.

[Thomas Perkins]

The reason we stopped bombing Iran is cause we ran out of bombs.Now U.K. is sailing  there war ship to help out.Gas today at Sam's is 3.69.That place and Sam's Store was packed today.I was in my wife's car.Don't ever buy a Panasonic 1200 watt inverter microwave.The magneto burns up in 2 years.So I got a G.E.Part is about 120 to replace.Microwave was 249.I am going to take apart and see if the magnet is cracked.The magneto has 2 big magnets.When they go bad.They will crack apart..A H98 code comes up and microwave  will not work.There is a code to get that code off when you are replacing that part.Has anyone ever put a new magneto in a microwave?

Edited May 10 by Thomas Perkins

[frankendat]

5 hours ago, wayno said:

 

 

 

 

Has Alberta’s Brexit Moment Finally Arrived? Pro-independence activists needed 177,732 signatures. They just submitted nearly 302,000. Now Ottawa faces a reckoning. Rod D. Martin May 9     by Rod D. Martin May 8, 2026 A lot of people thought the idea of Alberta independence, or even statehood, was crazy talk. Guess again. Alberta separatists just delivered nearly 302,000 signatures to Elections Alberta — roughly 70 percent more than the 177,732 required to trigger the referendum process. The signatures still must be verified, and the courts may yet intervene. But the proposed question is as direct as it gets: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be a part of Canada to become an independent state?” For daily geopolitical analysis Fox Business calls “absolutely phenomenal”, sign up as a FREE or PREMIUM Member today!   As a matter of fact, yes. Yes it should. If America is annoyed by Canadian freeloading on the American defense budget and inequities in tariff treatment, Alberta has reason to be livid. Ottawa extracts wealth from the province as though it were a colony, like some North American Belgian Congo. If Mark Carney gets his wish and Canada joins his beloved EU, it will become exactly that. Alberta is not merely another province with ordinary political grievances. It is the productive, energy-rich, conservative West, ruled by an eastern establishment that despises its industries, taxes its wealth, blocks its pipelines, mocks its values, and then demands gratitude for the privilege. For decades, Ottawa has treated Alberta not as a partner in Confederation, but as a cash cow, a colony, and a cultural punching bag. That was bad enough under Trudeau. Under Carney, it has become doctrine. Carney is not merely another Liberal prime minister. He is the perfect embodiment of the worldview Alberta should fear most: managerial, globalist, post-national, hostile to energy, comfortable with supranational bureaucracy, and instinctively more at home in Davos, Brussels, and London than in Calgary, much less Grande Prairie. Nor is Europe the end of it. Carney has sought a new strategic partnership with Communist China, announcing expanded cooperation in energy, trade, public safety, multilateralism, and culture. In Beijing, he announced that Canada and China were “forging a new strategic partnership,” and suggested that China had become a more predictable partner than Washington. For Alberta, that is not a future. It is a prison sentence. The separation petition did not appear out of nowhere. It is the predictable response of a productive people who understand they are not being governed as partners in a federation. They are being exploited, full stop. Alberta’s Brexit Moment That is what makes this Alberta’s Brexit moment. The issue has crossed the line from complaint to process. Ottawa can no longer dismiss Western alienation as background noise. Elections Alberta confirms the required threshold is 177,732 signatures — 10 percent of the votes cast in the last provincial general election. Yet nearly 302,000 have signed. The petition has been received, the boxes sealed, locked in cabinets, and stored under 24/7 security monitoring while the courts decide when verification may proceed. Ottawa’s courtiers will wave the polls and insist separation cannot win. They should ask David Cameron how that worked out. In June 2015, roughly one year before the Brexit referendum, Ipsos found Remain ahead of Leave 61–27, with 12 percent undecided. Among those expressing an opinion, that was 69–31 Remain. On an alternate wording — “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?” — Ipsos had Yes leading No 66–22, or 75–25 among those expressing an opinion.   A year later, little had changed. In May 2016, just weeks before the vote, Ipsos still had Remain leading. Its May 14–16 poll showed 55 percent Remain, 37 percent Leave, 5 percent undecided, and 3 percent saying they would not vote. Among those expressing an opinion, that was 60–40 Remain. This was obviously going to be a blowout. Brexit supporters had no chance. Even on election night, all the prediction markets said so. And yet the final result was Leave 51.9 percent, Remain 48.1 percent. The British people had their say, and the entire governing class — including then-governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney — was humiliated.   Brexit Is Glorious Rod D. Martin   ·   June 28, 2016 Read full story That is the lesson for Alberta. Ruling classes routinely mistake present polling for permanent consent. Angus Reid found earlier this year that 29 percent of Albertans would vote to leave Canada if a referendum were held immediately, with 8 percent definite and another 21 percent leaning that way. The establishment reads that number and sees a nothingburger. It ought to see danger. Political movements don’t begin at 51 percent. They begin when enough people conclude the old order has lost legitimacy. And then the campaign begins. Leger found last year that 58 percent of Albertans said federal actions could influence their view of Alberta’s political future, while 62 percent said the rest of Canada does not understand why some Albertans feel alienated. That is not settled loyalty. That is dry timber. And now someone has struck a match. Not a Nation But an Empire — And Alberta is Its Colony Western Canada has had enough. And after the recent federal election, the rage is no longer quiet. Once again, Alberta voted overwhelmingly conservative. And once again, that made no difference. The Laurentian elite held their grip on power — propped up by Quebec voters, hostile to Western interests, and smug in their belief that Alberta’s wealth is theirs to take, er, “redistribute.” For decades, Alberta — rich in oil, fiercely independent, and proudly conservative — has been treated not as a partner in Confederation, but as a colony of the East. Consider the facts: Equalization Payments: Alberta pays billions each year into a federal system that redistributes its wealth to other provinces — chiefly Quebec — despite Alberta’s economic struggles. It’s taxation without representation, and with a French accent. It renders Alberta effectively a colony. Carbon Taxes and Energy Policy: Ottawa has launched a relentless leftwing war against Alberta’s oil sands and energy sector, crippling pipelines, delaying permits, and criminalizing prosperity. Political Disenfranchisement: The House of Commons is weighted toward Eastern Canada. The Senate is a patronage backwater. And the Prime Minister’s Office governs by decree, often in open contempt of the West. This isn’t unity. It’s subjugation. From the moment Alberta entered Confederation in 1905, it was treated as an afterthought — an imperial holding ruled from the East. The so-called “national interest” always seemed to mean Quebec’s interest. And while Alberta built the pipelines, powered the economy, and filled the federal coffers, Ottawa wielded its power like a colonial governor, redistributing wealth and writing laws with no regard for the West’s values or prosperity. Albertans noticed. They noticed when Pierre Trudeau imposed the National Energy Program in 1980, effectively nationalizing Western oil and triggering the greatest economic crisis in Alberta’s history. They noticed when Stephen Harper — a rare Western prime minister — was replaced by Justin Trudeau, whose government made it a moral crusade to shut down Alberta’s oil sands while buying foreign oil from despots abroad.   They noticed the carbon taxes, the canceled pipelines, the equalization payments flowing east even as Alberta struggled through recession. They noticed that every federal program and regulation seemed custom-built to crush the very industries on which Alberta depends, all while extracting an ever-higher tax burden to support the welfare state back east. And they noticed that there was no way to stop it. Why? Because under Canada’s political architecture, Alberta pays all the bills but has no meaningful say. The House of Commons is dominated by Ontario and Quebec. The Senate is unelected and stacked with Laurentian elites. The courts, media, and civil service all lean left and east. A hundred years of democratic betrayal have taught Albertans the same lesson over and over: Ottawa is not your government. It’s your master. That is the heart of the matter. Alberta is considering independence because Ottawa has treated it like a colony — and is shocked to discover that colonies sometimes seek independence. Ottawa’s Response: Too Little, Too Late Of course, now that Alberta has leverage, Ottawa has suddenly discovered compromise. Last November, Prime Minister Carney and Premier Danielle Smith signed a Canada-Alberta memorandum of understanding that immediately suspended the Clean Electricity Regulations in Alberta pending a new carbon-pricing agreement. Ottawa also committed not to implement the oil and gas emissions cap, agreed to treat an Alberta bitumen pipeline to Asian markets as a national-interest priority, and promised an approval path that could include Indigenous co-ownership and adjustment of the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act if necessary. Fine. Better late than never. But this is not repentance. It’s damage control. Ottawa is not restoring Alberta to constitutional equality. It’s not returning a century of confiscated wealth, lost opportunity, canceled infrastructure, and political contempt. It’s not admitting that the entire Laurentian model — take from the productive West, redistribute eastward, regulate energy into submission, and then congratulate yourself for your “obvious” moral superiority — was rotten from the beginning. Carney is making tactical concessions because Alberta now has a credible exit threat. And he’s seen this play before. Even those concessions come wrapped in Ottawa’s usual net-zero straitjacket: carbon pricing, emissions reductions, carbon capture conditions, methane targets, regulatory consultation, and bureaucratic process stacked on bureaucratic process. It’s much too little, much too late. Alberta’s destiny points south, not east: energy, markets, pipelines, defense, investment, culture, and constitutional liberty. Ottawa’s ruling class points eastward to Europe, westward to China, and downward into managed decline. Independence Is the Door. Could Statehood Be the Destination? An independent Alberta would be a wealthy nation. Statehood could make it more so. This is where the debate will move next. The petition question is independence. But independence may not be the end. Once that door is opened, Alberta will have to decide what independence is for. An independent Alberta would have energy, agriculture, minerals, capital, talent, and $45 billion a year that’s currently being siphoned east. But independence is an expensive proposition. Militaries. Embassies. Intelligence services. Central banks. International organizations. Trade negotiations. Border security. Treaty disputes. All of this costs, one way or another. A landlocked country with world-class energy reserves but no sovereign route to tidewater would be independent on paper, but strategically vulnerable in practice. Moreover, as I’ve argued consistently, the only true free trade zone available is the one created by the U.S. Constitution. Just 4 percent of the world’s population creates and controls 26 percent of the world’s economy. It’s the planet’s indispensable consumer market. And that U.S. market buys an incredible 89 percent of Alberta’s exports. Why export all that through customs, across an international border? Statehood solves all of this. Alberta would keep all the benefits of being part of a larger country — a much larger country than the one it’s leaving — but minus the plunder.   Should Alberta Become the 51st State? Rod D. Martin   ·   May 10, 2025 Read full story Whatever Washington’s faults, it does not and cannot place disproportionate burdens on a singled-out state in the way Ottawa does as a matter of course. Canada can, and does. If Alberta became the 51st state of the Union, it would gain two U.S. Senators and full representation in the House of Representatives — real seats at a real table. It would gain constitutional guarantees of free speech, religious liberty, gun rights, property rights, and the rule of law, all conspicuously missing from today’s Canada. It would gain energy freedom under a federal government that’s pushing to become the world’s largest exporter. It would gain access to American capital markets, military protection, and unimpeded participation in the largest economy on Earth.   Nor is this a one-way street. The United States stands to benefit immensely from including the extremely conservative “Texas of the North.” Alberta’s oil, gas, uranium, minerals, timber, agricultural land, cattle, wheat, canola, and technological capacity would strengthen American energy security, food security, supply chains, and Arctic strategy. Alberta’s pipelines, railroads, and highways already connect to the American economy. Its people already share much of the culture of Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Texas. Drive from Calgary to Montana, and the only thing that changes is the gas prices and the gun laws. The accident of a dotted line on a map is the only thing keeping this natural union apart. Texas joined the Union for much the same reason. Independence is expensive. Inclusion in the U.S. market is valuable. Getting rid of needless trade barriers — and needless expenditures on embassies and armies — makes everyone richer. Can Alberta make it on its own? Absolutely. Should it? Will it? I hope not. It’s hard to imagine a better fit. But either way, Alberta doesn’t belong in today’s Canada. Alberta May Not Be Alone Alberta is the first mover. It’s not the only province watching the result. Western alienation is not confined to Edmonton or Calgary. It stretches across the prairie like a weather front, from the Peace Country to the Red River, from the foothills of the Rockies to the flat expanse of the Saskatchewan plain. The grievances are shared, the injuries are the same, and the values — faith, family, freedom, work — remain strikingly consistent across provincial borders. No province is more ideologically aligned with Alberta than Saskatchewan. It is similarly rural, energy-rich, Christian, and fed up. Its economy is driven by oil, gas, potash, uranium, and wheat — industries targeted by Ottawa’s green mandates and central planning. The Trudeau-Carney government has treated Saskatchewan with every bit as much contempt as Alberta, while stripping it of the means to push back. If Alberta goes, Saskatchewan has every reason to chart the same course. And if Alberta is the 51st state, perhaps Saskatchewan can be the 52nd. Manitoba is more complicated. British Columbia is more complicated still. But the Interior of British Columbia is not Vancouver, and rural Manitoba is not downtown Winnipeg. In any serious realignment, the gravitational pull will not merely be westward. It will be southward — toward the United States, toward markets, toward energy, toward constitutional liberty, toward the civilization these provinces increasingly resemble more than they resemble Ottawa. This is the larger meaning of the Alberta petition. It is not merely another Canadian protest. It is the beginning of a geopolitical realignment. A rebirth. A new American frontier, and a new birth of freedom. Canada no longer offers Alberta liberty or self-government. It offers managed decline, confiscated wealth, punished industry, regulated speech, bureaucratic contempt, and the endless demand that the West pay tribute to the East while apologizing for merely existing. America is built differently. Its Constitution enshrines the rights Ottawa buries. Its system was designed to divide power, not centralize it. It recognizes that the individual is prior to the state. That rights come from God, not the government. That property is not a privilege. That sovereignty flows upward, from the people. But whatever course Alberta chooses — independence, statehood, or something else — the first step is now a vote. Will Alberta allow Ottawa to keep ruling it like a colony? Or has Alberta’s Brexit moment finally arrived?

Come on down Alberta, the water's fine :)

[datzenmike]

You can't have her.

[datzenmike]

1 hour ago, Thomas Perkins said:

The reason we stopped bombing Iran is cause we ran out of bombs.Now U.K. is sailing  there war ship to help out.Gas today at Sam's is 3.69.That place and Sam's Store was packed today.I was in my wife's car.Don't ever buy a Panasonic 1200 watt inverter microwave.The magneto burns up in 2 years.So I got a G.E.Part is about 120 to replace.Microwave was 249.I am going to take apart and see if the magnet is cracked.The magneto has 2 big magnets.When they go bad.They will crack apart..A H98 code comes up and microwave  will not work.There is a code to get that code off when you are replacing that part.Has anyone ever put a new magneto in a microwave?

 

There are some parts inside the magnetron made of highly toxic beryllium.

[datzenmike]

This guy needs to be in a home.

 

 

[Thomas Perkins]

[frankendat]

18 hours ago, Thomas Perkins said:

The reason we stopped bombing Iran is cause we ran out of bombs.Now U.K. is sailing  there war ship to help out.Gas today at Sam's is 3.69.That place and Sam's Store was packed today.I was in my wife's car.Don't ever buy a Panasonic 1200 watt inverter microwave.The magneto burns up in 2 years.So I got a G.E.Part is about 120 to replace.Microwave was 249.I am going to take apart and see if the magnet is cracked.The magneto has 2 big magnets.When they go bad.They will crack apart..A H98 code comes up and microwave  will not work.There is a code to get that code off when you are replacing that part.Has anyone ever put a new magneto in a microwave?

My luck with Panasonic microwaves has been hit and miss. Even as chea.....cost conscious as I am, I wouldn't try to fix a microwave. Little ones "used to" go on sale for $100 or less. When one craps out, I pull the magnets (can't have too many magnets), throw all the screws, nuts, bolts, washers I removed to get the magnets in a can (can't have too many, screws, nuts, bolts, washers) and scrap the rest. I haven't priced microwaves for at least 4 years (it is probably getting time) Anyway, used appliances sell for cheap. The big old carousel console microwaves you can find at the thrift stores or Facebook MarketPlace, Craigslist (but Craigslist is pretty dead) Finally, Sunday is a great day to check garage sales, which often have microwave deals. I haven't paid more than $100 for a microwave in a very long time, using these methods and once or twice, over the years, picked up a microwave for free. (Stove/Oven broke years back, I would fix it or replace it, but we haven't missed it)

[Thomas Perkins]

1 hour ago, frankendat said:

My luck with Panasonic microwaves has been hit and miss. Even as chea.....cost conscious as I am, I wouldn't try to fix a microwave. Little ones "used to" go on sale for $100 or less. When one craps out, I pull the magnets (can't have too many magnets), throw all the screws, nuts, bolts, washers I removed to get the magnets in a can (can't have too many, screws, nuts, bolts, washers) and scrap the rest. I haven't priced microwaves for at least 4 years (it is probably getting time) Anyway, used appliances sell for cheap. The big old carousel console microwaves you can find at the thrift stores or Facebook MarketPlace, Craigslist (but Craigslist is pretty dead) Finally, Sunday is a great day to check garage sales, which often have microwave deals. I haven't paid more than $100 for a microwave in a very long time, using these methods and once or twice, over the years, picked up a microwave for free. (Stove/Oven broke years back, I would fix it or replace it, but we haven't missed it)

I like the one's with 1200 watts.I read the reviews on that Panasonic Inverter one like I had and many said the same things as me.Had 2 years and the magneto has went bad.This is my second Panasonic inverter.Last one only lasted 2 years but this one had a few changes on the looks.Dumb ass me bought another one and got the same results.I will take it apart when I get time and see what the magneto looks like.I have a smaller one in my shed.It works.But is small.I dont think it has the rotating plate in it.Bought it over 10 years ago when I use to hang out in my shed and watching t.v.Shed is big and looks like a living room.Easy to install a magneto in it.Watched a video on it.He put a meter on it to make sure that was the problem.He also replaced the door latch which will get grooves in it in time and cause it not to work.Another part can go bad that cost about the same as a invertor.Must get the H98 code removed before installing part.He shows how to do it.He has a print out on this model.Need to enter model number to get right magneto.I did.

[Thomas Perkins]

The H98 error code on a Panasonic inverter microwave indicates a failure in the high-voltage system—specifically the magnetron or inverter board—causing the unit to stop heating. It is a hardware fault often triggered by faulty components, power surges, or overheating. Common fixes include unplugging the unit for 10 minutes to reset it or replacing the inverter board and/or magnetron.This video explains how to fix the H98 .

[Thomas Perkins]

[Thomas Perkins]

This part and the inverter together cost as much as new microwave.This part is 139.00

Edited May 11 by Thomas Perkins

[Thomas Perkins]

[datzenmike]

I've had two Panasonics, both around >$100 and the second one was identical to the first.  I think the first just quit and it was old. The one we have now is well over 10 years old, could be 20? so long ago I can't remember and while the outside is still like new the insides are rusting out. I left the door open for hours and the bulb burned out. I got a replacement LED again a long time ago and it's fine.

[bottomwatcher]

WTF. I came to destruction of America and i find a bunch of lonely maytag repairmen?

[Thomas Perkins]

56 minutes ago, bottomwatcher said:

WTF. I came to destruction of America and i find a bunch of lonely maytag repairmen?

I have a May Tag washer and driver from Sears.About 10 years old.Knock on wood.Still working.

[Thomas Perkins]

Trump is wasting his time on Iran and their Nuclear program.They are not going to agree to stop working on it.They been working on it since 1960.Iran needs to get a new Hobby.Israel is ready to bomb them some more.I guess Israel has no Navy.Wonder how many bombs Russia has left.I bet China has a boat load saved up for us one day.They are so quiet but they will use them one day.

[datzenmike]

 

2 hours ago, bottomwatcher said:

WTF. I came to destruction of America and i find a bunch of lonely maytag repairmen?

 

1 hour ago, Thomas Perkins said:

I have a May Tag washer and driver from Sears.About 10 years old.Knock on wood.Still working.

 

Don't fucking encourage him.

[a.d._510_n_ok]

[datzenmike]

.

 

Cheapest States for Gas

The following states have the lowest average prices for regular gasoline as of today:

• Oklahoma: $3.907
• Mississippi: $3.956
• Arkansas: $3.974
• Louisiana: $3.981
• Texas: $3.996

 

What's your gas now Tommy? Provide a picture and date.

[wayno]

On 5/9/2026 at 6:20 PM, datzenmike said:

Pile of steamy horseshit wayno. I told you to stop reading Rod Martin. You have a subscription don't you. This is what goes wrong when you seek out what you want to hear. It just reinforces that belief and you learn nothing. 

 

Alberta's population tops 5 million. 150,000 names is one in 33 Albertans. I'm sure there are some ass kissing Trump supporters there but 150,000 (they claim twice that) willing to separate from Canada??? Bullshit. The government should have a committee look into this subversion perpetrated by the Americans. It's not enough you fuck with Venezuela and Cuba? Attack Iran??? Threaten to take over Greenland, gut troops from NATO ??? Impose tariffs on the entire world??? Your supreme leader is delusional and out of control. He makes sleepy Joe look good. How's your gas prices wayno??

 

 

Take your MAGA hat with the tin foil lining off and stop posting Rod Martin propaganda.       

 

Obviously I would never take this advice, Rod Martain is smarter than you will ever be, look at where he is and where you are, if you were as smart as you believe you are you would be where he is, but you're not.....