Connect with us

Opinion

UCP MLA says Albertans do not want Kenney 2.0

Published

6 minute read

Article submitted by Red Deer South MLA Jason Stephan

Time for Kenney to Put His Straw Men Away

Kenney wanted a new base. The base wanted a new leader. Despite Kenney’s political games seeking to manipulate his own democratic check and balance, he lost, and popular sovereignty won.

Popular sovereignty is the principle that the authority of government is created and sustained by the consent of its people. Benjamin Franklin expressed this principle as follows “free governments, the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns”.

Alberta needs more popular sovereignty, more checks and balances on the use and abuse of power. Kenney gave a “grassroots guarantee”. The grassroots said stand up to Ottawa. Kenney said “yes” and did “no”.

Kenney is a career politician. Soon he will be able to start receiving his Ottawa gold-plated pension at 55, much more than a hundred thousand each year, for the rest of his life. Kenney has a vested interest in the status quo.

What about Salma Lakhani, Alberta’s lieutenant governor? Prior to her appointment by Trudeau in 2020, she donated over $25,000 to the corrupt Trudeau Liberal party. Was she appointed because she was one of the largest, and only donors in Alberta, to Trudeau’s party? Is her obvious support for Trudeau, the worst prime minister in Canadian history, representative of Albertans? Like Kenney, she also chose to cast aspersions on a Sovereignty Act for Alberta, but she is a figurehead enjoying privilege of a political elite, also having a vested interest in the status quo.

Great leaders lead in love and inspire the best in those they serve. They remember the principles of popular sovereignty, that their position is only “of the people, by the people, for the people.”

In his leadership review, Kenney called the people of Alberta who disagreed with him “kooks”, “lunatics” and “bugs”. How did that work out for him?

Kenney is now calling the Sovereignty Act “nuts”, “cockamamie” and “catastrophically stupid”. Is that going to produce unity? No.

Kenney says he is “not endorsing or opposing a particular candidate”. We all know that is not true.

Kenney not only engages in patterns of name calling, but also patterns of saying one thing and doing something else. Many no longer trust Kenney.

Is Kenney thinking that if he cannot win, or his intended Kenney 2.0, then he will sabotage to try to make sure no one can?

Kenney is calling the Free Alberta Strategy, the organization who formulated the original version of an Alberta Sovereignty Act, a “far right extremist group”. I participated in some of their townhalls. So did Danielle Smith and Todd Loewen. So did some of my MLA colleagues seeking to protect Alberta businesses and families from Ottawa. Kenney sounds like Trudeau. Are we now part of a “fringe minority” with “unacceptable views”?

Kenney knows it is inappropriate to intermeddle in the leadership race to replace him, so Kenney is trying to be sneaky, doing indirectly what he knows he should not do directly.

Isn’t Kenney acting like Trudeau? Doesn’t Ottawa seek to do indirectly, what constitutionally it is not allowed to do directly, such as with Alberta’s constitutional authority over its oil and gas resources? Didn’t Alberta’s Court of Appeal describe Trudeau’s carbon tax as a sneaky “constitutional trojan
horse”?

Isn’t Trudeau proposing a new carbon tax or cap and trade that singles out and disproportionately punishes Alberta? Wouldn’t that inflict more economic “chaos”, chasing out additional billions in investment and Alberta jobs with it? What is Kenney doing about it? Drafting a sternly worded letter?

Isn’t the purpose of the Sovereignty Act, to assert and defend constitutional parameters that Ottawa habitually ignores and attacks?

I know and respect each of the UCP leadership candidates. But Albertans do not want Kenney or a Kenney 2.0 and some of them need to take care to not act like Kenney, put the straw men away, and stop misrepresenting the Sovereignty Act and then attacking the worst version of it manufactured out of their misrepresentations, only existing in their minds. If Sovereignty Act is so bad, instead of fear mongering with straw men, let’s hear your ideas and solutions.

If candidates want to walk the talk on unity, stop looking the other way, and ask Kenney to do what he said he would do and be quiet. That will produce more unity and that is what Albertans want.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Trump says tariffs on China will remain until trade imbalance is corrected

Published on

MXM logo  MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Trump said Sunday he won’t make a tariff deal with China unless its $1 trillion trade surplus with the U.S. is balanced. Speaking aboard Air Force One, he called the deficit “not sustainable” and said tariffs are already driving a wave of investment back to America.

Key Details:

  • Trump told reporters the U.S. has “a $1 trillion trade deficit with China,” adding, “hundreds of billions of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem, I’m not going to make a deal.” He insisted any agreement must begin with fixing that imbalance.

  • The president said tariffs are generating “levels that we’ve never seen before” of private investment, claiming $7 trillion has already been committed in areas like auto manufacturing and chip production, with companies returning to places like North Carolina, Detroit, and Illinois.

  • On Truth Social Sunday night, Trump wrote: “The only way this problem can be cured is with TARIFFS… a beautiful thing to behold.” He accused President Biden of allowing trade surpluses to grow and pledged, “We are going to reverse it, and reverse it QUICKLY.”

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump reaffirmed his tough trade stance on Sunday, telling reporters that he won’t negotiate any new deal with China unless the massive trade deficit is addressed. “We have a $1 trillion trade deficit with China. Hundreds of billions of dollars a year we lose to China, and unless we solve that problem, I’m not going to make a deal,” Trump said while aboard Air Force One.

He emphasized that while some countries have deficits in the billions, China’s trade advantage over the U.S. exceeds a trillion dollars and remains the most severe. “We have a tremendous deficit problem with China… I want that solved,” he said. “A deficit is a loss. We’re going to have surpluses, or we’re, at worst, going to be breaking even.”

Trump touted the impact of tariffs already in place, pointing to an estimated $7 trillion in committed investments flowing into the U.S. economy. He highlighted growth in the automotive and semiconductor sectors in particular, and said companies are now bringing operations back to American soil—citing North Carolina, Detroit, and Illinois as examples.

He also claimed world leaders in Europe and Asia are eager to strike deals with the U.S., but he’s holding firm. “They’re dying to make a deal,” he said, “but as long as there are deficits, I’m not going to do that.”

Trump projected that tariffs would add another $1 trillion to federal revenues by next year and help re-establish the U.S. as the world’s top economic power. “Our country has gotten a lot stronger,” Trump said. “Eventually it’ll be a country like no other… the most dominant country, economically, in the world, which is what it should be.”

Later Sunday night, Trump doubled down in a Truth Social post, writing, “We have massive Financial Deficits with China, the European Union, and many others. The only way this problem can be cured is with TARIFFS, which are now bringing Tens of Billions of Dollars into the U.S.A.” He added that trade surpluses have grown under Joe Biden and vowed to reverse them “QUICKLY.”

Continue Reading

Courageous Discourse

Europe Had 127,350 Cases of Measles in 2024

Published on

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

US Mainstream Media Maintains Myopic Focus on Less than 1000 Cases

As the measles story in the US continues to unfold with reporting of a few cases here and there come in through mainstream media, I wondered about measles in Europe.

The WHO casually reported that the Europe Region had 127,350 cases in 2024.

According to an analysis by WHO and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 127 350 measles cases were reported in the European Region for 2024, double the number of cases reported for 2023 and the highest number since 1997.

Children under 5 accounted for more than 40% of reported cases in the Region – comprising 53 countries in Europe and central Asia. More than half of the reported cases required hospitalization. A total of 38 deaths have been reported, based on preliminary data received as of 6 March 2025.

Measles cases in the Region have generally been declining since 1997, when some 216 000 were reported, reaching a low of 4440 cases in 2016. However, a resurgence was seen in 2018 and 2019 – with 89 000 and 106 000 cases reported for the 2 years respectively. Following a backsliding in immunization coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic, cases rose significantly again in 2023 and 2024. Vaccination rates in many countries are yet to return to pre-pandemic levels, increasing the risk of outbreaks.

Many regions in Europe have lower rates of measles vaccination than the goal of 95%.

 

Less than 80% of eligible children in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Romania were vaccinated with MCV1 in 2023 – far below the 95% coverage rate required to retain herd immunity. In both Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro the coverage rate for MCV1 has remained below 70% and 50% respectively for the past 5 or more years. Romania reported the highest number of cases in the Region for 2024, with 30 692 cases, followed by Kazakhstan with 28 147 cases.

The WHO Report does not mention adjudication of hospitalizations or deaths. Presumably hospitalization of healthy kids is routine for contagion control. So if measles is so common and presumably well-handled by Europe, why is it such a big deal in the United States? Don’t look for Sanjay Gupta or Anderson Cooper to tell you that a similar size region and population handles >100K cases per year without much fanfare.

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

President, McCullough Foundation

www.mcculloughfnd.org

 

FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS as a paying ($5 monthly) or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.

Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X