02-07-2017, 05:38 PM
(02-07-2017, 05:34 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:(02-07-2017, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(02-06-2017, 11:54 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:(02-06-2017, 11:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: NO DEAL. We'll get Alberta, and with the help of its state government, we'll shut the whole crap dirty oil machine down. No deal without Alberta!
And sorry, we are not dealing with Drump, so no artful deals.
OK, then I suppose Dan can shut this thread down. No deal = no Calexit.That's 'cause I'm the one who set up the deal, not Trump. That means California can continue to send $ Oklahoma's way. You see, I'm dealing for Oklahoma's sake. It's an exchange of slush $ California to Oklahoma for Oil transport from Alberta through Oklahoma to the Texas refinery complex. Like I said, I'm the one who is engineering this deal, not Trump, man.
No, *I* set up this thread, so it's MY deal
Okies need to be forced to fend for themselves, if they want oil. Canada/Pacifica understand that we don't need it, and that it's wrong to even use it. We need to transition out of it. The red states don't get that; this is a major reason for Calexit. If we join Canada, then we can maybe get Canada to shut the whole tar sands disaster down, man!
Which would probably spur a secessionist movement in Alberta, and maybe a couple of other provinces. One is already semi-active. Canada is a real country with its own politics and divisions, not a liberal fantasy land.
Why did Alberta vote for a liberal governor recently then?
True, not a fantasy land; just marginally sane, like California. As opposed to insane, like most American red states. If Canada were fully sane and liberal, it would just shut down the horrific tar sands itself, NOW!