Talking point case-in-point

The only thing that ties Robert Redford to the province of Alberta is that he shares his name with the provincial premier. Yet here he is in the Globe and Mail spouting off the standard talking points about the dirty tar sands and the evils of the Keystone XL and all the rest. If the guy cared so much, he wouldn’t have made all those other faux environmentalists fly their private jets to his precious little film festival in the middle of Buttfuck, Utah.

Robert Redford is big. It's the pictures that got small.

But my beef isn’t with Redford; he’s a clueless aging starlet who’s desperately trying to hang on to relevance at the twilight of his career. I have to hold the G&M to account, however. Any anti-everything dipshit could have written the same op-ed with the same authority as Redford. They might as well used professional Greenpeace gadfly Mike Hudema if the latter wasn’t so busy with the Occupy Edmonton movement as I saw on that city’s local news last weekend. After all, Hudema has a knack for the theatrical, even if he’s never accomplished a damn thing in his entire life.

Honestly, what fool would suddenly change their point of view on such a matter just because a celebrity wrote it? “By golly, Betty Sue, if Robert Redford feels so strongly about it, then that settles it!”

Maybe the paper just wants to sell more papers, and a former movie star can move a lot more ink than one of those commie enviro-wackos who have trouble creating coherent messages for a placard. But I have to believe that having a celebrity spouting off the cause du jour has got to turn more reasonable people off than persuade them to follow along blindly.

Maybe I’m just being naive, but then again, considering the recent election results — both federally and provincially — I feel that there remains some sense of intelligence or good judgement in our wonderful Dominion. Too bad that our supposed national paper of record refuses to acknowledge this.

%d bloggers like this: