Why this blog?
Until this moment I have been forced to listen while media and politicians alike have told me "what Canadians think". In all that time they never once asked.
This is just the voice of an ordinary Canadian yelling back at the radio -
"You don't speak for me."
email Kate
Goes to a private
mailserver in Europe.
I can't answer or use every tip, but all are appreciated!
Katewerk Art
Support SDA
Paypal:
Etransfers:
katewerk(at)sasktel.net
Not a registered charity.
I cannot issue tax receipts
Favourites/Resources
Instapundit
The Federalist
Powerline Blog
Babylon Bee
American Thinker
Legal Insurrection
Mark Steyn
American Greatness
Google Newspaper Archive
Pipeline Online
David Thompson
Podcasts
Steve Bannon's War Room
Scott Adams
Dark Horse
Michael Malice
Timcast
@Social
@Andy Ngo
@Cernovich
@Jack Posobeic
@IanMilesCheong
@AlinaChan
@YuriDeigin
@GlenGreenwald
@MattTaibbi
Support Our Advertisers
Sweetwater
Polar Bear Evolution
Email the Author
Pilgrim's Progress
How Not To Become A Millenial
Trump The Establishment
Wind Rain Temp
Seismic Map
What They Say About SDA
"Smalldeadanimals doesn't speak for the people of Saskatchewan" - Former Sask Premier Lorne Calvert
"I got so much traffic after your post my web host asked me to buy a larger traffic allowance." - Dr.Ross McKitrick
Holy hell, woman. When you send someone traffic, you send someone TRAFFIC.My hosting provider thought I was being DDoSed. - Sean McCormick
"The New York Times link to me yesterday [...] generated one-fifth of the traffic I normally get from a link from Small Dead Animals." - Kathy Shaidle
"You may be a nasty right winger, but you're not nasty all the time!" - Warren Kinsella
"Go back to collecting your welfare livelihood. - "Michael E. Zilkowsky
Bravo!
The lefties will be shaking in their slippers
Maybe in their Birkenstocks? Possibly in their Crocs….. not sure if they even wear slippers.
Is the bill going to the people to vote for? Is there going to be a complicated clause that requires a supermajority to actually amend it?
The bill has no teethe in law. She’s just pandering to her lunatic whacko supporters. And it annoys a lot of reasonable people
Her political senses are weird.
Brad Wall would never do something dumb like this.
Your comment is weird. YOU are weird. It will have as much “teethe” as the Canadian Constitution.
To j, goulding:
So freedom and individual rights are not your thing.
You likely favor bill C 293, right?
Freedom, individual rights plus bodily autonomy and medical rights. My question is why isn’t the Saskatchewan Party adding bodily autonomy and the right to refuse medical procedures without discrimination in our provincial bill of rights? The Saskatchewan Party’s policy of segregation and discrimination based on vaccine status was a violation of human rights, they should admit and correct their error in judgment.
you have “LLB” after your name: all we need to know….ALL we need to know…
Probably fake.
You’re correct. The bill has no teeth. There’s no short cut around paramountcy. Plus, they seem to have not thought about existing case law and active changes made by recent UCP bills.
The existing property rights clause in the Alberta Bill of Rights is mostly tested against bylaws for land use planning at municipalities. Interestingly a strengthened property rights clause would probably end-run the province on solar installation limitations on private land (or engender substantial payouts). All this with no plan to overcome the constitutional reality of environmental law and regulations.
Enumerating gun rights in AB will be wiped out by the Federal Fire Arms Act (which is paramount over any AB law) https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1794/index.do
This is not the win the gun rights proponents think it is. At best it’s political theatre. At worst is solidifies the anti-gun vote in the cities and reduces the capacity of the right to win in urban Alberta.
However, the Left will be pleased that addicts will have new grounds to decline or request new forms of health care – including declining detox stays.
I believe in rights, but this is not gonna do what people think it will do.
Agreed to all of that. But any court decision based on the Charter or the Constitution can be set aside by the Notwithstanding Clause.
Sure there is a short cut around paramountcy. Just ask Quebec. And as for gun rights, remember when Quebec was going to start up its own gun registry after the gong show from Ottawa cratered? They did so by saying guns are “property”….which is within provincial jurisdiction.
Bang on!!
I’m in love with Danielle!
Now do something to establish FREE SPEECH in Canada. And get completely RID of any idiotic “Hate” speech laws.
One can hope anybody who votes NDP/Liberal/Green/or has “progressive” values who have moved to AB, because the benefits outweigh what they experienced in their previous home provinces, will move back. Please move back and you can ‘Karen’ to your heart’s content.
Any long term Albertan who feels like the LLB above can move as well.
Your anti-human ideals are not appreciated in Alberta.
Albertan born (& raised in a socialist home) who thankfully saw the light in my early 20’s.
Nice.
But the LLb. does bring up a serious issue; does the Bill have any legal weight or will it be nullified by the Federal government or the Courts?
Bodily autonomy also guarantees a woman the right to an abortion.
Sounds good, but does it make any difference?
It can be nullified by the Courts. Unless such nullification is set aside by use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
So schools won’t have the right to demand require your kids to be vaccinated?
Vaccines are scary, aren’t they?
https://www.alberta.ca/immunization-routine-schedule
Blubber douggie has one for Ontario.
The only thing holding him back is his supporters.