rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Bitter Twitter commentators battle Dippers: Apparently size matters after all!

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca in its summer fundraiser today for as little as $1 per month!


Back in February 2013, then-Alberta-premier Alison Redford announced that, "recognizing the impact of falling resource revenues on our bottom line, my government will lead by example with a smaller, more focused cabinet."

At the time, the usual suspects in the provincial news media seemed to think her reduction of the cabinet from 20 to 19 was a laudable example of frugality.

Back then, only the Edmonton Journal's reporter picked up on the fact the main reason might be to skid a couple of cabinet under-performers and put tough-guy Thomas Lukaszuk, then the celebrated Mr. T. of Alberta, in place to focus on hammering post-secondary institutions with $147 million in budget cuts.

Fast-forward to 2015, and suddenly the Alberta comentariat is awash with anguish and outrage at the thought Premier Designate Rachel Notley's cabinet may be too small!

It turns out that reductions in the size of a cabinet by a Conservative premier was evidence of a laudable "new spirit of austerity," as one commentator put it, but the announcement of an even smaller cabinet by Notley proves her caucus is no good! Who knew?

"Notley's first cabinet will have just 12 members," Tweeted the Edmonton Sun's Dave Breakenridge. "Those critical of her bench depth proven right?"

"Obvious there's a shallow bench," Breakenridge clarified his views in response to another Twitterist who took issue with his commentary.

"Yes. Managerial experience lacking," chimed in still-loyal Edmonton Journal opinion-thingy David Staples on behalf of the Opposition teams.

So this reminds me of a joke, which I will just adapt the slightest bit to local conditions:

Rachel Notley and Jesus are in a rowboat in the Sea of Galilee… No! Make that South Cooking Lake. Notley is rowing, and Jesus is sitting in the back chatting, wearing one of those nice Tilley hats.

Well, the wind starts to blow up, and Notley says to Jesus, "Say, Jesus, you should probably put the chinstrap on or your hat will blow away!"

Jesus smiles, and just then a gust of wind picks up his hat and carries it about 20 feet away from the boat, where it lands in the water with a plop and sits bobbing on the waves.

Notley gives Jesus a reproachful look, puts down the oars, stands up, steps out of the boat and walks over to the hat. She picks it up, walks back to the boat, steps back in, shakes the water off the hat and hands it back it to Jesus.

Jesus thanks her and puts the hat back on his head, this time with the chinstrap firmly under his chin. Notley picks up the oars and begins rowing back toward the dock.

So, how do Breakenridge at the Sun and Staples at the Journal cover this story? The answer: "IT'S OFFICIAL! NOTLEY CAN'T SWIM!"

Meanwhile, yesterday, Calgary Herald political columnist Don Braid worked himself into a frothing swivet because the NDP used a reference to a public swearing in ceremony on the steps of the Legislature on Sunday as a hook to request a donation from supporters. Request. Donation. Supporters.

Is nothing sacred? "The method appeared to be a blatant exploitation of a government event for partisan fundraising purposes," Braid hyperventilated, passing on tidbits from Wildrose Leader Brian Jean.

Well, in his outrage, the columnist got this right: the email referred to a public event.

You could almost imagine Jean's head bobbling in agreement. "Obviously, it's unseemly," Mr. Braid quoted the designated Opposition leader exclaiming. "It's blurring the line between government and party!"

Jean, until recently, was a Member of Parliament for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's federal Conservative Party, standing in the 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2011 federal elections. Since 2006, the federal Conservatives have used $750 million in public funds for partisan advertising to help candidates like Jean get elected.

Now that's blurring the line between government and party!

Am I missing something here? I don't think so.

This post also appears on David Climenhaga's blog, AlbertaPolitics.ca.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.