Alberta Politics Thread

[Frequitude]

Edit: I thought Tom Moffatt was an MLA and that his stupid twitter comment deserved backlash. Alas, he's just a run of the mill idiot for that tweet.

[Derek Sutton]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Cross posting from the wildfire thread.

I would appreciate great backlash against this MLA for the karmic comment.

He (Tom Moffat) is not an MLA, just a staunch AB NDP supporter.

[CaptainCrunch]

NM

Tom Moffat needs a good swift kick in the balls today.

[Resolute 14]

I don't think he's an MLA. I believe he is a failed candidate.

[CaptainCrunch]

He very quickly changed his tweet, so he's an idiot and a coward. If you're going to stand on that platform at least live or die with your convictions.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

He very quickly changed his tweet, so he's an idiot and a coward. If you're going to stand on that platform at least live or die with your convictions.

Yes, God forbid anyone ever corrects their behaviour.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yes, God forbid anyone ever corrects their behaviour.

If he changed it because he had a change of heart that's one thing, but I bet it's more likely he couldn't handle the backlash

[nik-]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yes, God forbid anyone ever corrects their behaviour.

Come on ... that's damage control, not learning and evolving an opinion.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by btimbit

If he changed it because he had a change of heart that's one thing, but I bet it's more likely he couldn't handle the backlash

maybe the backlash showed him the error of his ways?

That first response to him is pretty on point.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by btimbit

If he changed it because he had a change of heart that's one thing, but I bet it's more likely he couldn't handle the backlash

Originally Posted by nik-

Come on ... that's damage control, not learning and evolving an opinion.

It's still a ridiculous sentiment to think people should stick to their guns after they've been called out for something.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yes, God forbid anyone ever corrects their behaviour.

Reading through his twitter, not that guy.

And trust me he did this for the backlash.

He's sitting at home laughing about this and feeling little to no sympathy.

I've always said that drunk or sober the reflection of a person's nature can be judged by what comes out of their mouth first.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I've always said that drunk or sober the reflection of a person's nature can be judged by what comes out of their mouth first.

Which is completely ridiculous.

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

NM

Tom Moffat needs a good swift kick in the balls today.

What did he say?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Which is completely ridiculous.

Case closed

[CroFlames]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...lobal-warming/

Apparently the Americans think the wildfire is "fueled" by global warming? I didn't know global warming was a fuel. Huh.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Case closed

It kind of is CC. What if all of your opinions on Star Wars could never adapt and everyone would only ever hold you to your first impressions, no matter how much it changed?

No one changes their mind on their opinions fast enough that a tweet becomes obsolete within a few minutes, but to assume the first thing out of someone's mouth is what they are to be judged on is pretty narrow IMO. I'm sure we've all said stupid things that we regret, or have had things taken out of context, or have actually held opinions that have now changed.

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...lobal-warming/

Apparently the Americans think the wildfire is "fueled" by global warming? I didn't know global warming was a fuel. Huh.

That comes from a wildfire researcher at the University of Alberta - so no, it's not "Americans" who think that way, unless the researcher is American. Furthermore, if you actually read the article, it explains why global warming may be a factor in the timing and intensity of the fire.

When an event like this happens, it's important for science to attempt to determine why it happened, whether it will happen more often in the future, what can be done to prevent it from happening, etc.

[Resolute 14]

You know, blaming global warming/climate change for literally every disaster is an excellent way to create a 'boy who cried wolf' scenario. As it is, virtually the entire population simply doesn't care - people might say they care, and they might turn off a bedroom light for earth hour and be all proud that they were 'helping' - but a vanishingly small percentage of the populace would actually do something significant about it. So these rush to judgment stories are only likely to make people tune out even further.

[Dogbert]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

You know, blaming global warming/climate change for literally every disaster is an excellent way to create a 'boy who cried wolf' scenario. As it is, virtually the entire population simply doesn't care - people might say they care, and they might turn off a bedroom light for earth hour and be all proud that they were 'helping' - but a vanishingly small percentage of the populace would actually do something significant about it. So these rush to judgment stories are only likely to make people tune out even further.

Maybe - I was just reacting to the "global warming isn't a fuel" comment. Seemed a little pedantic on the poster's part to completely gloss over the article's point based on the way the title was worded.

[Flash Walken]

Interesting about peat fires in that article smouldering over the winter. Never would have thought that was possible.