— FEATURED —
The Man Who Laughs: grotesque Victor Hugo potboiler was the basis for The Joker
Eurovision 2013: An American in London
The Twelve-Fingered Boy - mesmerizing YA horror novel
ADVERTISE AT BOING BOING!
— COMICS —
Tom the Dancing Bug
TOM THE DANCING BUG: The Truth Behind the Nixonian Presidency of Obama
Brain Rot: Hip Hop Family Tree, Compton, Lonzo Williams and the Wreckin' Cru
Real Stuff: Bad Trip
— GUATEMALA SPECIAL SERIES —
Guatemala: protests condemn annulment of Rios Montt trial, while ex-president Portillo extradited to US
NYT Editorial Board: "Justice Interrupted in Guatemala"
Guatemala's Genocide on Trial: Kate Doyle
— RECENTLY —
Black Code: how spies, cops and crims are making cyberspace unfit for human habitation
We Can Fix it! - a graphic novel time travel memoir
The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek
Odd Duck: great picture book about eccentricity and ducks
Scatter, Adapt, and Remember: How Humans Will Survive a Mass Extinction
Illustrator William Stout's Legends of the Blues - exclusive excerpt
Hackers prepare for first "national holiday" in their honor
Review: Disunion, the VR guillotine simulator
Mousetronaut: kids' picture book about mouse in space, written by a Shuttle pilot
Review: Pebble e-paper watch
— FOLLOW US —
Boing Boing is on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to our RSS feed or daily email.
— POLICIES —
Except where indicated, Boing Boing is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution
— FONTS —
Rob Beschizza at 7:01 am Mon, Feb 18, 2013
Why did he respond in the conditional? The syntax implies that the question was “were someone to query whether …”
This would be should be maybe fuffle kind of response is a creeping sickness on clarity. The responder seems to feel, through some misty logic, that they are avoiding accountability for their response, whereby they would later reply to a challenge to that response that they responded in the conditional. It’s a bit of a mindfuck.
So his answer should have been: ”My answer is no … Fucking asshole.”
Then I can start to make sense of it all.
It’s elliptical: “[If I were to deign to answer your question,] the answer would be no.”
More complete answer, for those unfamiliar with Canadian politics: “The answer would be no, given that Alberta’s oil and gas industry will never tolerate more than token regulatory oversight from Ottawa, especially when our own boy is PM. Why even ask, you fucking eastern asshole.”
Although no one really knows, the signs suggest Canada’s big guys are unlikely to be bought outright by foreign state-owned companies. It’s ok for US companies – ExxonMobil – to do that sort of thing, but not Asian companies.
Just look at the delays and near misses from the CNOOC-Nexen and Petronas-Progress deals.
all i can think of is this: http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=250
Our government’s quite willing to sell off everything we value to the highest bidder. Or the first bidder…
I think the word “Encana” was supposed to be in this sentence somewhere. That “its” is just hanging out all by itself.
Monty Python’s Flying Circus!
Christ what an…