Sheila Gunn-Reid warns Alberta’s May 29th NDP win would trigger $87B energy transition costs, slashing GDP and jobs while federal emissions caps force production cuts—echoing Rachel Notley’s 2015 policies that killed nearly 200,000 jobs. Josh Andrus links Alberta’s economic pain to Ontario’s manufacturing exodus under high-cost Liberal energy policies, calling federal "just transition" plans a poverty-inducing failure. Gunn-Reid and Rebel News reject savior claims, framing their work as "news for normals by the normals," contrasting it with mainstream media’s elite-driven agendas like systemic racism or crypto conspiracy narratives. Alberta’s conservative push—legal challenges to Bill C-69, tougher bail reforms—could reshape federal-provincial power dynamics, with UCP projected to win 46–55 seats amid rising Western autonomy and Quebec sovereignty movements. [Automatically generated summary]
Alberta's next election is less than one week away.
What would an NDP government and their coalition with Justin Trudeau's liberals mean for affordability here in Alberta?
Not anything good.
I'm Sheila Gunn-Reed and you're watching The Gunn Show.
Albertans head to the polls May 29th, wherein we will decide the future, not just of Alberta, but also the industry that fuels the economy here in Wildrose Country and fills the coffers of the federal government.
Albertans have been innovating to provide cheap, reliable, affordable energy for Alberta, but also for the rest of the country.
It's one of those things that Albertans, I think, do best amongst the country.
And we'd love to do more of it if the federal government would just get out of our way.
But we know in 2015, then-Premier Rachel Notley of the Socialist NDP, in her allegiance with Justin Trudeau's anti-oil, anti-Western federal liberals, deeply damaged Alberta's energy sector and our economy.
It drove up the cost of living and the cost of doing business, and it saw the end of nearly 200,000 Alberta jobs.
Will Albertans repeat this collective madness?
I'm hopeful we will not plummet into it one more time, not just for our sake, but for the sake of our fellow Canadians.
A free, more prosperous Alberta is good for everybody.
Somebody has to lead the way, and I'm proud that it's often us.
So joining me now in an interview we recorded earlier is Josh Andrus from Project Confederation, whose organization argues for more autonomy and a better deal for Alberta within Confederation.
We're talking affordability, Alberta leading on the way on a whole host of issues, including bail reform and what Josh thinks is going to happen May 29th.
Take a listen.
Joining me now is Josh Andrus from Project Confederation.
He's got an excellent article in the Western Standard that we're going to talk about, but we're also going to talk about some predictions for the last anxiety-inducing week of the election campaign here in Alberta and possibly how Alberta's stance on bail reform has influenced the feds for the good, for once.
They actually responded the right way to something.
So I think we should talk about that because that's definitely a win for Albertans, but also a win for public safety of Canadians.
Josh, thanks for coming on the show.
Let's talk about your article in the Western Standard.
It's titled, What Ottawa Wants is Not Less Emissions, but Less Oil.
And I actually don't even think they want less oil.
I think they just want less Alberta oil because they're perfectly happy to import it from some of the more odious regimes of the world.
Tell us about your article.
Yeah.
So I was watching the debate and it was kind of nice to see that affordability is a key issue because it is something that comes up a lot across the board.
But it's regarding the emissions caps and the moving goalposts that the federal liberals have brought in on the energy sector to effectively handcuff the ability of our energy producers to innovate internally.
And one of the things with the emissions cap is that Stephen Guibot, our eco-radical environment minister, announced at COP27 that the Canadian government would be capping oil and gas emissions by the end of this year.
Now, because of the energy industry doesn't have the technology to bring emissions down to the levels that are expected without cutting production, an emissions cap at these levels is a de facto production cut.
We've also mentioned that the environmental goalposts have been shifting on this issue for eight years.
I mean, I remember eight years ago being upset about a carbon tax, and now it's just kind of one of those things where, well, that's really nothing if you get down to the nitty-gritty.
I mean, we're at a point where the federal government has usurped provincial jurisdiction with the Impact Assessment Act.
Eight provinces, as well as the Alberta government, or seven provinces as well as the Alberta government came out with a legal challenge against the Impact Assessment Act, which is Bill C-69, otherwise termed by you guys and others as the No More Pipelines Law, but it goes further.
The federal government has environmental jurisdiction to veto any project, whether it be a gravel pit in Stettler or a major oil sands mine in Fort McMurray or even a highway across the north from Grand Prairie to Fort McMurray, something that has been asked for for a long time.
The federal government can veto all those, which very much goes against the constitutional jurisdiction of the provinces in terms of, well, a lot of areas.
But at the end of the day, a cap on production isn't the end of the road either.
The goalposts are shifting fast as well.
I mean, we have the federal government early this year announced a sustainable jobs plan, otherwise known as the just transition, which is effectively going to legislate the oil and gas, the fossil fuel industry out of existence altogether.
And given the affordability crisis that we face, this is, in my view, an entirely inadvisable position to have because energy is the industry that powers every other industry.
If you don't have affordable energy, you don't have innovation.
And this isn't just innovation within the oil and gas industry to help bring down emissions, which they are desperately working towards.
This impacts every other industry.
I mean, take tech, for example, the computer age that we're in now.
Think about those old supercomputers that they had in the late 70s, mid-70s.
I mean, the amount of electricity used to power those would have been monumental.
And if electricity prices have been twice as much, we may not have had the innovation within that industry that we otherwise have had, where we might not be sitting on this call right now with a computer in front of us because the technology just didn't develop because we didn't have the affordable energy to do so.
And it affects people's bottom lines as well.
It stretches your wallet.
If your heating bill or your electricity bill is climbing, it makes it harder for you to pay for food or school sports or a night out to dinner.
And in some cases, with people below the poverty line, it leads to homelessness, divorce, and crime.
So these are things that we need to be concerned about.
And it's deeply concerning that the Alberta NDP seems to be really moving in lockstep in a lot of ways with the federal government on this.
The just transition was a part of their environmental plan that a group of blue ribbon academics and policy experts put together in 2015.
And they had their own just transition in places like HANA with the coal phase out.
So it's really concerning that this is the case.
And it's something that we always have to keep an eye on.
Yeah, and it's something that, you know, as Canadians, we've already seen happen.
So, you know, in the, I guess it was the early 2000s.
It seems a gazillion years ago, but when the Ontario government allegedly greened their grid, they made manufacturing so expensive because manufacturing relies on cheap energy.
And so a lot of it went to the United States.
Some of that manufacturing went to Mexico.
And a lot of it, which will never be repatriated, went to China, where energy is very, very cheap.
It's not anywhere near as clean as Canadian energy, but it's very, very cheap.
And it makes manufacturing for these companies very attractive if they relocate to China.
Well, yeah.
And I think that's one of the things that we need to be concerned about.
I mean, I don't understand how we can expect to have economic growth if we're handcuffing our economy.
And Ontario is a perfect example.
They had, under the premiership of Dalton McGuinty and then Kathleen Wynne, a very aggressive environmental policy that did bring in made electricity very expensive.
And for some of the poorer areas of the province, like, you know, some up in some of the northern reaches, there were people there that were suffering real energy poverty where they were forced to effectively choose between heating their homes or feeding their families in the winter.
And when you get to that point, that's you have to question the ethics of such a thing.
I mean, we claim to be trying to save the world, but all we're doing is causing poverty.
I don't understand how they can build back better when you're actually causing economic damage to not just industry, but also to lower class people who are just trying to get by.
Well, and the societal carnage that poverty causes, you know, it becomes just a systemic social decay.
And it actually affects men the most, although I'm sure the left will want to hear that.
And it is deeply immoral.
Divorces, suicides, when those occur, particularly to men suicide, it's normally through economic strife.
So it's not depression.
It's not any of those other things.
It's not mental illness.
For men, one of the indicators of suicidality is economic strife, not being able to be the providers of their family.
And what are we doing this for in pursuit of becoming a statistical rounding error in the fight and global warming?
Yeah.
And the other side of it, too, is even if we do move towards these goals, there's going to be issues in other parts of the world.
India and China are growing their coal and natural gas power.
Like all they're trying to do is provide affordable energy for their people.
I mean, they have massive populations.
I mean, some of their poorer areas don't have electricity in their hospitals.
Policies Across Country Impact00:15:35
So this is something that they're trying to move towards.
It's not clean energy.
It's not ethical.
I mean, these are dictated.
Well, I mean, I'm not saying India is a dictatorship.
I don't know much about their political system, but I will say that China is a dictatorship.
So these are things that we have to be monitoring as we go forward.
I mean, this may seem like a great fight to save the world, but we're just a small, small emitter.
And if you look at the amount of trees and stuff we have, we can effectively act as a carbon sink as well.
So it's one of those things where the logic behind the entire push seems to be driven by ideology more so than it is really economic means.
The Alberta, both the Alberta government and the Saskatchewan government, the two provinces that have been fighting back the hardest, do think that we can reduce emissions, but their timelines are much more realistic.
You know, you're probably going to need an extra 15 to 20 years to develop the technology, if not longer.
And I don't know.
Did I mention?
So like there were some reports out done by some agencies in Alberta.
Alberta's electricity services operator has calculated that the cost of moving to net zero electricity by 2035 will cost Alberta government $52 billion in infrastructure costs.
The lost economic activity was calculated by independent econometrics firm Navius.
They calculated that lost GDP due to increased energy costs would be $35 billion.
You add that up, that's $87 billion.
The Alberta budget usually sits between $60 and $70 billion a year.
It's more than the entire Alberta government budget, the impact of this.
And it's just in a short 12-year span.
So yeah, the costs are monumental.
And it's going to hurt Western Canada much more than it is Eastern Canada because our industries are like our industry is energy.
And if we are, we're already handcuffed, but if the Sustainable Jobs Act, once that gets rolled out and implemented, the Impact Assessment Act, if the Supreme Court rules in the favor of the federal government, which it likely will, we need to be absolutely on guard to defend our industries and defend our livelihoods.
I mean, we all lived through 2015 and 2020 there where oil prices were in the gutter, but the federal government was still hammering us with policies that really crushed our industries.
We had the tanker ban, carbon tax, impact assessment act.
I could go on.
We have these policies that are severely impacting the ability of our producers to really provide affordable energy to the rest of the country.
We've got pipeline bottlenecks that have been there for years.
We've got moving environmental goalposts that are chasing away investment and leading to major project cancellations like the tech mine.
These are really devastating policies that are really hurting the bottom line of Alberta and Saskatchewan.
And we have to do whatever we can to defend ourselves.
Well, and that's the thing.
It's us.
It's not the companies.
However, I feel for the employees at the companies, but these companies will just relocate to another part of the world where it's much easier to pay off the local warlord to build an energy project than it is to do business in Justin Trudeau.
And back in 2015, Rachel Knottle's Alberta.
We saw just companies leaving constantly.
ConocoPhillips and TC Energy changed their name to remove the stigma of Alberta.
So the companies, they've got cash.
You'll see cash flight.
But what's left behind in the wake is unemployment.
Yeah, unemployment and suicides.
And I mean, Alberta, we went through this.
Like it was one of the most depressing periods in this province's history, just in a sense that, you know, people didn't know what to do.
I mean, we had a, there was an NDP government in Edmonton that was bringing in policies that were costing them their jobs.
I mean, we had 183,000 jobs lost in Alberta during the NDP's first term.
And it wasn't just caused by low oil prices.
I mean, you had the Alberta government was bringing in policies directly trying to shut down the energy industry.
I mean, they called us embarrassing cousins of Confederation.
And when you have a government that views its primary industry as a threat to civilization, you're going to have problems with your economic activity in the province.
It's just, you know, the government isn't going to be able to transition us to a different economic barometer.
I mean, energy is the industry that powers every other industry.
And the periods where we've seen the most economic diversification are the periods where oil prices are high and the money's flowing in because Alberta is a great place to do business.
You want to come here because there's investors everywhere.
You know, there's investors on every street corner or every street in every town because they've got cash flow, they've got money, they've got, you know, they're building, they want to grow wealth.
So Alberta, the Alberta advantage is very much a real thing.
And again, it goes across economic sectors.
I mean, you innovate, affordable, reliable energy, and the ability to produce copious amounts of it is a huge benefit to the province of Alberta.
And for the provincial government or the federal government to move to eliminate that altogether is short-sighted.
And it's going to, that will have ripple effects across the country and ripple effects through the province, too.
I mean, Albertans are frustrated with the way that they're viewed with the rest of the country.
People in downtown Toronto, they don't necessarily hate Western Canada, but they don't think about us.
I mean, from their vantage point, it's everything.
The environment is everything outside of the greater Toronto area.
There might be a few pockets of people here or there, but it's just the great, you know, the Canadian Shield and the, you know, the great Canadian prairies and the mountains.
That's all they think is out here.
But there's people out here, people who have jobs and people who have families.
And that's something that, you know, it's just a fact of the matter.
I'm optimistic that minds are changing in other parts of the country just based on the economic conditions.
I mean, we're not just, affordability isn't just an issue in Alberta.
It's an issue across the country.
But it's just one of those things that as affordability gets becomes a bigger issue, which it likely will.
I mean, it's not just an energy issue, obviously.
I mean, there's monetary policy and fiscal policy as well.
And we can talk about that if you want to get into that.
But it's going to be an issue in other parts of the country too.
And the federal government has a tendency to take from the West to pay for the rest.
And if we're in a position where affordability is a really, it's challenging the federal government, they're likely to bring in some kind of a program that lead that effectively acts as another financial transfer.
I mean, every program, Danielle Smith said it best, every program that the Alberta government signs with the federal government is bad for Alberta in the sense that it acts as another transfer program.
So we have to be absolutely vigilant in what we're dealing with because we just can't afford to have a federal government that's shutting down our industries and then turning around and taking whatever money that those industries pump out and it's in their dying phases.
Now, you talked about the success of Alberta having a ripple effect across the rest of the country.
And we saw this, but not in the energy sector last week.
So the Alberta government, Premier Daniel Smith, has taken a very tough on crime approach when the feds have not.
And one of her recent policy announcements was that the provincial government would be slapping ankle monitors on people who are out on bail when the feds wouldn't.
And pretty quickly right after that, we saw the feds announce bail reform to tighten up some of their release conditions for some of the more serious offenders, not those who honked their horns and said, hold the line, but actual real criminals who are being released with pretty lax bail conditions.
I think this is a direct response to Danielle Smith pushing back and embarrassing the feds on this issue.
It's not just Danielle Smith.
This is an issue across the country.
Alberta has been a leader in standing up to the federal government.
And the one thing that I will say is that when Jason Kenney was first elected, it was just Alberta standing there.
I mean, Saskatchewan as well, but it was just the two provinces.
We've seen substantial changes.
And I think this has something to do with the federal government's tendency to want to centralize control.
As they centralize control, they take control away from the provinces.
Take the Impact Assessment Act.
Alberta government took the federal government to court on the constitutionality of the Impact Assessment Act in the sense that, number one, it does, well, I mean, it directly interferes with provincial jurisdiction on a number of issues and impacts projects that don't even cross provincial borders that are within provincial jurisdiction.
So it wasn't just Alberta that brought forward the case.
There were seven other provinces that intervened.
Interestingly, not one province intervened on behalf of the federal government.
On bail reform, I believe it was all 10 provinces sought changes to bail reform.
And it's interesting because the issues with the bail system were actually caused by a federal government law, bail reform law passed in 2018.
And there's some incredible statistics on this.
And in one single calendar year, there were 40 offenders responsible for 6,385 negative police contacts, which are defined as an interaction where someone is a suspect or chargeable in an offense.
So we're in a position where people are basically committing crimes and then getting let out on bail and going committing more crimes.
So yeah, stricter bail or stricter bail conditions was something that it was the Alberta government leading the way on.
But yeah, 10 other or all 10 provinces stood up and said something.
So we're definitely starting to see that the pressure from the provincial from Alberta is starting to really catch the attention of the rest of the country.
And everybody's got issues with centralization of power.
I mean, I don't think any province is happy when the federal government stomps on provincial rights, especially in Quebec.
And there is something going on over there, something that we aren't talking about here.
Poll numbers have support for sovereignty.
Now, that not being separate from separation.
We want to draw that distinction.
But support for sovereignty is rising at an astonishing rate.
The Parti Québécois was supposed to be left for dead because Francois Legaud was being very strong on cultural things and cultural issues.
The Parti Québécois not only stayed alive, won a whole bunch of seats, and then refused to swear allegiance to the king and caused a constitutional crisis.
And now there's questions as to whether or not the bill they passed to rectify that problem is constitutional.
I'm sure that's an issue that we're going to have.
So we're in this position where the rest of the country is starting to recognize that there are issues.
It's not just Western alienation anymore.
There's a lot of focus on having decentralization be a theme of the government.
It's something that the opposition conservatives have begun to talk about.
And I do think that that's part of the solution.
I think that the more power provinces have to handle their own affairs, the better off they're going to be because we're more nimble and responsive to local issues as they rise.
I mean, take rural crime, for example.
In the period from 2015 to 2019, I believe it did escalate in 2018 after the bail reform conditions came into effect.
But rural crime in Alberta was a severe issue.
People were really scared.
I mean, there was a gentleman's name, and he shot an intruder, and there was a big trial over that.
I can't remember.
Eddie Maurice.
Yes, that's the one.
And that captured the attention of everybody across rural Alberta in the sense that, yeah, there are concerns about safety.
And to be able to have the Alberta government address it and not wait for changes from the federal government would have given us the ability to maybe increase police force capacity, change training methods, but to really bring a made-in-Alta solution to the problem.
And I think that the concept of a made in Alberta or made in Saskatchewan or made in Ontario or made in Quebec solution is something that it does capture the attention of the politicians and it does capture the attention of the people because as the federal government centralized, they've done a bad job in governing.
And that has led to increased frustration and really a deterioration of federal provincial relations across the board.
So it's nice to finally have some allies as we move forward in this to try and get as much control over our own affairs in Alberta and across the country as we can.
I think decentralization, again, like I said, it gives us local policy priority control where we can actually focus on the problems that are important to the people.
Now, before I let you go, I want to ask you, we're in the home stretch for the provincial election.
It appears as though the battleground remains Calgary.
Although I've seen some shifting in the polls in some writings in Edmonton that I think the NDP thought were sure bets for them that might be a toss-up.
Now, of course, rural Alberta is going to go UCP.
Should conservatives be worried on election day, or should they always just be worried because that's how you get the vote out?
Yeah, I'm glad you qualified it with that second little part there because I don't want to come across as being too confident.
I am seeing some very positive signs, though, from the polling.
Keep in mind that I think if my memory serves me correctly, the polls that came out in 2019 undercut conservative support by a wide majority, by a wide margin.
It was supposed to be a lot closer than it was, and Kenny blew the polls out of the water.
Now, I don't know if methodology has changed in the last four years with these polling companies, but I will say that I have seen somewhat of a stabilization of voting preferences following the debate.
There was a lot of noise going on.
I mean, obviously, there's the Take Back Alberta stuff.
There's Art Pulowski.
But I think for most conservative voters, that's just noise.
I mean, people say stupid things.
I hope I don't.
Conservatives Coming Home00:03:33
But you end up in a position where the left is going to be hitting you on all these things.
And I think it was frustrating for a while because a lot of these were avoidable errors, you know, like unforced errors.
But I do think you're seeing in the home stretch here the conservative votes coming home.
I do think this is a conservative province.
I've seen some positive poll data out of Lethbridge East and some of these swing ridings in rural that, you know, even a month ago, we thought were gone.
So I think it's one of those things where they sure make you earn it, but the conservatives are, I think they're, I hope they're coming home.
It comes down to turnout.
I have seen, you know, the turnout, I think, was 20,000 higher for the first day of advanced polling.
So yeah, if the turnout's high, I think that's good for the conservatives because it means that the conservatives are coming home grudgingly because of all the unforced errors.
But it's one of those things where I, Yeah, I'm comforted that I'm hoping to see a 52 to 55 seat UCP majority government.
I'll take 46 if it comes.
But just in the sense that, yeah, I do think the conservative vote's coming home.
And I think that's going to be demonstrated in the results on Tuesday night or Monday.
Was it Monday or Tuesday?
29th, that is.
Monday night.
So, yeah, it'll be, I think the conservative vote's coming home.
But like I said, yeah, she here had to earn it.
And I think that debate performance was really good.
The NDP has been trying to paint the UCP as a bunch of extreme, angry, for lack of a better term, Nazis.
And Danielle, the way that she kind of handled herself, like if you're, if someone's trying to paint you as an angry extremist and you stay calm and measured, it's very difficult to do so.
I thought she, her demeanor was fantastic.
I thought she handled herself really well.
And I think that that's really one of those things where those conservative voters in South Calgary that don't necessarily buy a lot of the rural ideology, they're coming home because at the end of the day, we are there.
It is the United Conservative Party.
I don't think they were ever considering voting NDP, but they might have stayed home.
I think that, but I think that the NDP's track record, I think everybody remembers what happened from 2015 to 19.
And I don't think the province's demographics have changed substantially in that sense.
So you should, I think, yeah, I'm not panicking.
Get out and vote, obviously.
But yeah, well, I mean, hopefully nothing bad happens in the next five days and changes this.
I guess I'll just say that.
From your lips to God's ears, Josh.
That's the thing about conservatives, though, hey, is we don't blindly follow the leader like the liberals.
No.
So we are easily disgruntled and we can be disloyal, particularly in Alberta, because this is where parties fracture here.
And we fracture because you're not conservative enough.
So as you say, they did make Danielle Smith work for it.
Now, before I let you go, because I have about one minute before I need to be somewhere else, why don't you let us know how people can get involved in Project Confederation and find out a little bit more about the work that you're doing?
Yes, check out projectconfederation.ca.
Read Viewer Feedback00:03:49
There's some buttons on the top.
Obviously, our news, all of our content gets posted there.
I don't publish everything in the Western Standard because sometimes I forget to send it.
But all of our stuff's on our website at www.projectconfederation.ca.
There's a join button, a donate button at the top.
You can sign up for a mailing list.
You'll get all of our content right in your email inbox.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.
Josh, thanks so much for putting everybody's minds at ease.
Well, hang on, just panic and vote.
That's all I'm saying.
Everybody freak out.
Vote.
Yeah, everybody freak out.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
We can't act like we're the lead.
Act like you're behind, right?
Yeah.
Well, thanks so much for coming on the show.
We'll have you back on again after the election to sort of break down and do some analysis for us, if you wouldn't mind if you would be.
I'd love to do that.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
And thank you so much for your patience with me with our technical difficulties that our viewers will not see.
But boy, did you ever have them?
That's on my end.
Yeah, no, I don't apologize.
I need to figure that out.
Okay.
Thanks, Josh.
We'll talk soon.
Perfect.
Sounds good.
Okay.
Talk to you later.
Well, friends, we've come to the portion of the show where we invite your viewer feedback.
It's the reason I give out my email address right now.
It's Sheila at rebelnews.com.
Put gun show letters in the subject line so I know that you're writing in because of something you've seen in the gun show as opposed to one of my daily videos or some other work that I've done here at the network because I also write articles as well and I appear on shows and I co-host a live stream sometimes and we do Twitter spaces.
So if you put gun show letters in the subject line, I know it's about this right now.
And I do invite viewer feedback for better or for worse, because without you, there really is no Rebel News.
We don't have a sugar daddy named Justin Trudeau reaching into other people's wallets to give us money to create content that nobody could possibly care about, like the mainstream media.
And last week, I read a viewer email that was quite critical of me for actually not anything content-wise, but my appearance and my on-air demeanor.
And I read it because I wanted people to know that I do read the hate mail too, but I also wanted to address it.
And I showed you the overly, I thought, polite email that I sent back to John from, I think it was Mill Bay, BC, because I wanted to show you that I really do try to be a happy warrior.
That, you know, while the left says the right is sort of angry and disgruntled all the time and we're inarticulate and all we know how to do is like and say racist things or whatever they say that we we are, we're definitely not.
And you can respond to some pretty harsh personal criticisms without being sort of caustic and vulgar, which I think I did, or at least I hope I did.
Sometimes snark is a tougher, more toxic pill to swallow than confrontation, which I think is the case from last week's letter.
And if you want to go back and see my response, it's at the end of last week's show.
It's me responding to a very personal, appearance-based criticism from John from Mill Bay, BC, who never did actually ever send me the three candid full-body shots that I asked him for before I would accept his criticism.
Striving for Improvement00:03:20
Now, tonight's letter comes from somebody named Sean who was responding to my response of last week's letter, which I think is like a perfect Fibonacci sequence, golden ratio of viewer feedback.
But the reason I want to respond is because I sort of think it might be a little bit overcomplimentary.
And I don't want things to go to our heads here at Rebel News.
And I want to assure you that while we appreciate how much you love us, I want you to know how hard we are working to be better every single day.
So John writes to me, You folks at Rebel News are the only perfect news show in the world, particularly you, Sheila.
Now, I'm going to stop right here before I keep going because I'm very grateful and I'm thankful that you think that, but I don't think that.
And I don't think people should generally think that they're perfect or that they're perfect just the way you are.
I think that sort of talk is the wet blanket on your human potential.
I try not to compete with other people, although I do admire the work that other people are doing.
And I think I can learn from what other journalists are doing, even the ones I don't like.
Sometimes they do things right.
But I try to be better than I was yesterday.
How much harder can I work?
What can I do better?
What can I learn from what I did or didn't get done yesterday?
So I never think of the work that I did as perfect.
I think it is something that I can always improve on and I should always strive to improve.
But I take that philosophy into the whole of the company.
I think there are always things that we can improve on and tweak and we should always be working to be better as a company than we were the day before, more efficient, more streamlined sometimes too, because we do work on a shoestring budget.
And we are always cognizant of the fact that our donors are choosing to give us their hard-earned money to tell stories that they can't see anywhere else or talk about perspectives that other companies maybe wouldn't allow their journalists to talk about on air.
So while I appreciate the compliment, I don't think I'm perfect and I don't think anybody is.
Sean goes on, you are the only reason I can stand it all, it all being the corruption of the world, which you seemingly alone can illuminate.
Again, I don't think we're alone, but I think we do talk about things that maybe even other people in the conservative media sphere don't talk about.
It is your gift and you all may well be well-chosen saviors of our broken world.
I'm not a savior of a broken world.
There is but one savior through the Christian worldview, which I hold to be true.
And we are all just, we are things that he could use.
He, big H-E.
You know, like we should all strive to make the world a better place, but there is but one, one savior.
The way you folks shine a light on an issue gives me hope for the future.
Well-Choosen Savers00:01:36
My hope, someday all news shows will be made this way.
Smart, funny, but most of all true.
You know, I hope you're right about that too.
I don't like the stuffy, overly produced news.
I like when we look good, when we do a good job.
But what I'm really proud of here at Rebel News is that we are news for normals by the normals.
I think we talk about issues that you might talk about around your dinner table.
And we are, you know, we're moms.
I'm a farmer.
My husband's in the oil patch.
You know, Tamara is a mom who stays at home with her little ones and her husband is a business owner.
And, you know, we're all really kind of normal people affected by the things the government does in many of the same way that you are at home.
And so I think we might be a bit of the antidote to the people on the mainstream media who won't shut up about systemic racism and pride flags and crypto Nazis under the hood of every convoy truck.
Nobody cares about that stuff except them because they're paid by Justin Trudeau to care about it.
And you can tell that we are not.
So I think that's it.
Sean, thank you very much for the complimentary email.
I appreciate your kind words.
And I want you to know and everybody at home to know that we work hard to make tomorrow's Rebel News even better than today's was.
Well, everybody, that's the show for tonight.
Thank you so much for tuning in.
I'll see everybody back here in the same time in the same place next week.
And remember, get out there and vote if you're in Alberta.