Conan for President
TV is a wacky medium. Take a couple of weird, and I mean truly weird, stories as examples.
First, there's the case of Conan O'Brien
"unduly" influencing elections in Finland. Or as one publication chose to describe it,
"Creepy American perv applies to inspect women's saunas" (ok, so that's from the Sault St. Marie online news--not really prime time reporting--but wow, what a headline).
For those who don't watch Conan, or have missed how Conan has emerged as a Finnish legend, a quick summary. Finland's president, Tarja Halonen (the "Conan" on the right of the picture above), was recently re-elected. Apparently, this was no big shocker. But some delusional observers are crediting her success to a series of night spoof campaign ads used by Conan on his late night show to support a woman he says has a "dynamic personality ... quick mind, and most importantly — my good looks."
Almost as ridiculous as that story is the news of Al Michaels, Monday Night Football's legendary announcer, being
traded to NBC Sports (note: that link is from the North Korea Times. Yes, North Korea. I guess Al is just as big in red Korea as Conan is in Finland. Who knew?). Details of the trade were not released. Oh, wait,
they were (remind me not to read North Korean news if I want to get the full story on things. Once again, who knew?). Let's break out the score card.
Going to NBC is: Al Michaels.
Going to ABC/ESPN is: Monday Night Football promos will run on NBC Sunday night games for the next five years; ESPN gets live rights to four Ryder Cups and Olympic highlights; and, finally--I can't make this up--ABC/Disney regains the rights to Disney's pre-Mickey Mouse cartoon
Oswald The Lucky Rabbit, for some reason owned by NBC for quite some time. My in-depth archival research (i.e., none) revealed that Oswald's departure from Disney was the result of his disappointment in seeing Mickey get a hot braud like Minnie to spend time with, while Jessica Rabbit, the "fox", if you will, of the rabbit world was never actively recruited by Disney management. Unfortunately, Oswald was unavailable for comment when I tried to contact him (tip: don't call Disney headquarters trying to speak with fictional characters...they're not big on that).
'Canada to Shield 5 Million Forest Acres'
You can call me a tree-hugger, fine. But that's not the issue.
The issue is that I learned about this
story on the New York Times website. The night before it's supposed to be announced by the BC Government. An American newspaper. Not Canadian.
What's wrong with this picture? (the rhetorical one, you know, not the pretty one on the right)
State of the Union 2006 "Hon Candidates"
Here are just a couple of highlights from the January 31st State of the Union 2006 (insert dramatic echo and lasers for effect) that caught my eye:
Keeping America competitive requires us to be good stewards of tax dollars. Every year of my presidency, we've reduced the growth of non-security discretionary spending, and last year you passed bills that cut this spending. This year my budget will cut it again, and reduce or eliminate more than 140 programs that are performing poorly or not fulfilling essential priorities. By passing these reforms, we will save the American taxpayer another $14 billion next year, and stay on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. (Applause.)
The keyword there is "non-security". At last count--the actual 2006 number should be released on Monday--the US is looking at a roughly $400 billion deficit. I'm sure the American taxpayer is peeing their pants in joy at the prospect of $14 billion in savings thanks to further social program cuts. According to Richard Cogan (no relation to Justin), some policy guy who spoke with
MSNBC, those 'underperforming' programs which should be cut include higher education grants for low-income Americans, housing assistance for those with disabilities, and health centres in poor neighbourhoods. I'm going to assume that these cuts are necessary (why would I have a reason to question the White House). And even if they're not, don't worry, the poor kids who get cut off can just go sign up for the military. I think they're looking for people to sign up--that could just be a rumour, though. I'll just take
Rummy's word on that one.
Next...
...we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world. The best way to break this addiction is through technology.... To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission coal-fired plants, revolutionary solar and wind technologies, and clean, safe nuclear energy. (Applause.)
Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. (Applause.) By applying the talent and technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our environment, move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past. (Applause.)
Here, I have to commend the President. Not for his actual plans--if someone could please guide me to a "zero emission" coal plant or an entirely "safe" nuclear waste site, that would be greatly appreciated--but for his determination. See, it takes a man of great character to admit he has a problem. Good for you, George, for admitting that the US is addicted to oil. That twelve-step recovery program for alcoholics you tore through while rediscovering Christ seems to have killed two birds with one stone.
Step one: admit you have a problem. On to step 2. According to
Dr. Phil (PhD in psychology, not MD, in case you were wondering), we're supposed to move on to "think rational thoughts instead of denial."
Oops. No one told this to the
Department of Energy. Just one day after Georgie's epiphany, Bush's officials immediately went into denial. Apparently, reducing oil imports from the Middle East was "purely an example" that Bush used in his speech so that "every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands." To use a cute analogy, the State of the Union was kind of like that heart-warming scene in March of the Penguins. You remember that part where the parents hunt, digest, and regurgitate food for the baby penguins to eat? Well, it's kind of like that. Only this time, the food was lies (tastes great, less filling).
P.S. Just a technical note. I can't take credit for inserting "(applause)" in the quotes above. That's straight from the White House website where I grabbed the speech. Apparently, transcripts now include dramatic cues. Why stop there? I would like to have seen a more realistic interpretation if we're already in the mood to add ambience. I want to
feel it, baby. Something like this would have been nice (the quotes are real, by the way):
"As we look at these challenges, we must never give in to the belief that America is in decline, or that our culture is doomed to unravel." [President Bush pauses, then, in the only way he knows how, shifts his facial features to his trademark smirk, evoking strength, vision, and, yes, we'll admit it, supreme arrogance]
OR
"Fellow citizens, we've been called to leadership in a period of consequence. We've entered a great ideological conflict we did nothing to invite." [At this time, a low grumble begins to form among the audience... whispers are caught on tape: "Hey, wait a minute, did he just say we did nothing to invite this ideological conflict? I'm confused. Didn't we go and invade..." President Bush, blessed be his soul, realizes the foolishness of his last remark, yet refuses to acknowledge the error and soldiers on, pun intended.]
I'll let you know next year if they are listening.
Liberal Race: Rae of light or Death-Rae?
OK. My political nap is over. From cookies to candidates...
Seems like Bobby Rae (I don't think he minds if I call him Bobby) is being touted as a potential candidate to lead the federal Liberal Party (
link). That's right, the
opposition Liberal Party. (I don't mean anything by that word stress, I just haven't ever had the opportunity to write that. That felt, um, different.)
"To test the appetite for his candidacy, Rae is being urged to declare that he is considering throwing his hat in the ring and then go on a cross-country tour to talk to party members."
I guess it's not that big a deal that Rae is thinking of switching sides. He hasn't technically been an NDPer since 1998 and last time I saw him he was working with Mike Harris at the Goodmans law firm in Toronto. Considering Rae's
proposals for post-secondary educations--i.e., let students pay more, tuitions go up--I'm not entirely surprised.
I don't doubt that he's a smart man. He's a lawyer, Rhodes scholar, etc. Which sets the stage for quite a battle for the liberal leadership against, well, I don't really know at this point, but chances are at least one other smart man will be involved: Michael Ignatieff (Kyle, I'm sure you're salivating at the prospect of debating Ignatieff's merits).
To begin the debate on the Liberal leadership, which I'm sure will last forever as the Grits try to steal the limelight from "Harper and the Hounds" (I just coined that, props to me), I'd just like to inform everyone that a personal story might develop if Rae and Ignatieff plan on running against eachother.
See, Bobby and Mikey were roommates in university, I believe at Oxford (though they first met at U of T). I can see it now, the leadership debate to beat all leadership debates:
Ignatieff: Hence, therefore, ergo (insert Harvard word here) Bobby is a schmuk. I made out with his girlfriend during Frosh.
Rae: Mike is an ass. He never cleaned the dishes. Would you vote for an ass?
If I had a PVR, I'd be setting it up right now. But I don't. So the above will have to do.
Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Anchovies Have Got to Go!
Cough, cough...um...this thing on?
Oh, hey there. Guess so.
My name is Gabe. And I have returned. Yes, thanks to the lovable Kyle Lambert, a man filled with pure idealism and the utmost respect for politics as day dreaming, B2D has been reborn. Here, here.
Shall we begin? Let's shall...
I'll save the election analysis for someone else, for, like most Canadians, I need a political nap. You know, like the ones in kindergarten. And now that I mention it, why don't we throw in a cookie too. Yes! Every Canadian deserves a cookie.
But that's not going to happen. Why? Because Canada is in a food crisis. Well, more like a pizza crisis. And it's only in Toronto. Er, make that specifically Queen St. (FYI everyone, I moved back to TO--that's right, this is now officially a long distance blog...minus VIA Rail of course). The details don't matter. What matters is, to borrow a phrase, is that pizza is on the march.
Chanting inspirational slogan's such as "No Justice, No Pizza" (
link 1,
link 2) a group of former employees and their supporters have taken it to the streets, a la the Doobie Brothers, outside Queen West 's Amato Pizza to pressure the pizzeria's owners to pay 7 former employees roughly $82,000 in back pay allegedly owed to them.
There's a lot of mud being slung right now. Luckily, early reports suggest that none has landed on any deliveries. I'll keep you posted.
Good to be back.
G
UPDATE: Apparently, this
story is older than I thought...we're talking August 2005! That is some persistent pepperoni protesting. (OK, I promise I'll stop with the cheesy puns...ah! there's another!)
Oh, Uncle Sam, You're Such an Angel
Chalk up another point for the political realists, rationalists, and security gurus of the world. Every time I sit down and dream of a world where governments do things simply because they are the right thing to do, I get a face full of American strategic policy. What's up this time? Tsunami relief funding.
Apparently, Dubya has rounded up daddy along with his papi's old nemesis, Bill "how
you doin'?" Clinton, to drum up funds for relief efforts in Southeast Asia and other affected areas. It sounds, well, pretty innocent, right? Just two former foes coming together to help millions of victims in a time of need.
Not so fast. Looks like America is using its head instead of its heart in rushing to help. The tsunami disaster is now no more than just another stop on the Terrorism Express.
Instead of saving the lives of hundreds of thousands stranded survivors for reasons of -- oh, I don't know... -- humanitarian compassion, the prez and his "posse" (see
"Prez Posse To Lead Aid Pu$h") are relocating military resources to the region as if the war on terrorism -- a term which, for some unknown reason, everyone still talks about even though we have to continually throw in "so-called" before its use -- has branched out into the realm of natural disasters.
Think I'm kidding? Colin Powell himself yesterday called American aid money "an investment in national security'' (take a look at the Guardian news story
here).
C'mon, does
everything have to be an investment in national security?! Clearly, I'm not a retired general, but am I really supposed to believe that Osama bin Laden was sitting in his mountain lair on Dec 26 giddy with the news of thousands of dead muslims? Furthermore, are you telling me that I should expect those lucky few who survived the tsunami to suddenly take some time out of their ruined lived to contemplate the state of world affairs, realize that America is evil, and proceed (on a dirt road that doesn't exist anymore) to their nearest Al Qaeda "chapter"?
For once -- just once! -- can we just help people for the sake of helping people?
Other news Links:
ABC News - Australia
SMH News - Australia
A Sombre Welcome Back
Hello again. I hope that everyone had a pleasant holiday break.
As we all know, though, many of our friends halfway across the world could not experience such fortune. Please, if you haven't already done so (or would like to do it again),
donate whatever you can to the relief effort. Let's try our best to keep this disaster from being kicked off the front pages of the newspapers, as has happened with so many tragedies before it.
And remember, every dollar donated by individual Canadians before Jan 11 will be matched by the Canadian government. So get on your horse, people.
Majorities Don't Whisper
Well, Kyle, apparently Ralph Klein heard what you had to say... but didn't care to listen. When asked to comment Friday about the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage, King Ralph replied :
"I don't know what the percentage of the majority is, but the majority of people are opposed to same-sex marriage."
Riiiight. Next thing you know, Ralph will stand up and say: "Shhh. Can you hear that? That's the 'silent' majority of people who reject same-sex marriage. What? You can't hear that? You must be crazy, they're everywhere." Sorry Mr. Premier, your superhearing is, well, superficial. There is no silent majority -- just an obnoxiously loud minority.
This is just another variation of what Rick Salutin of the Globe and Mail (Dec. 3) refers to as the most offensive phrases in public life: "Mr. Speaker, Canadians know..." and "Mr. Speaker, Canadians are tired of hearing..."
It's a good thing that Canadians rarely listen to what politicians have to say, otherwise we might have to tell them the truth: we're tired of
them.
Hard time vs. game time, pt. ii
Some time has passed since I talked about video games in jail (click
here for a refresher). Time for reflection and introspection… and a round of James Bond 007 on Nintendo GameCube…
(45 minutes later)
Well, I’m back from a ‘healthy’ shoot ‘em up gaming session of the 007 variety. I thought that if I engaged myself in the issue, i.e. playing violent video games, I might have a better perspective on which to base my opinions.
Overall, I’ve gotta say, I feel pretty good. I killed about 104 enemies, made 2 stunning escapes, and went through thousands of rounds of ammunition. Not bad for a rookie. “James” would be proud.
I also learned many valuable lessons from my play time, including:
(1) If you’re ever in a jam, just blow things up.
(2) Bikini-clad women adore it when you kill ‘bad’ guys.
(3) Life is easy, just remember to save your game.
Definitely the type of things we should be advocating to those in our correctional system who, one hopes, will soon reintegrate into normal society. Right?
Not if you ask the Governor of Kansas. According to this article in the
Kansas City Star, he’s not so pleased that several correctional facilities in the U.S. not only allow, but also aid in the purchasing of violent video games for use by inmates.
Interestingly, such purchases – funded by the inmates but administered by the facility – were approved to provide inmates with peaceful recreation activities. Notes one Kansas corrections worker:
It has a good effect on helping us run the prison and make sure they're busy and not trying to work on ways to escape or harm others…That's kind of our bottom line — public safety.
That’s absolutely ridiculous. If inmates want to play FIFA Soccer in their spare time, I’m all for that. But there is no reason why inmates should be allowed to practice their skills in robbery, assault, or even murder while behind bars.
The fact that these actions are taking place in a cartoon world is irrelevant. May I remind everyone that the majority of soldiers in the U.S. Army fight countless virtual wars in simulation war games before they are sent away to participate in the real thing. Such would not be the case if the military wasn’t convinced that
virtual killing is adequate training for
actual killing.
If people are up in arms all the time about children being exposed to violence in video games, how is it that we don’t seem to be too concerned about violent games within our jails?
This isn’t a question about the rights of inmates. This is about the toleration of violence in an environment where violence must be condemned. It’s simply unacceptable.
Lay out the red carpet, Kyle has arrived
In light of Kyle's inaugural post (see below), I think I speak for Adam -- I must, because for all I know Adam has eloped along with his Compaq PC never to return again -- when I say, "Welcome, Mr. Lambert, to the crystal beaches of B2D."
May I also remind all 3 (thousand!) readers who peruse this online intellectual orgy that Kyle is much more than a friend and hockey player. He is a friend and hockey player
who can play both forward and defence. It goes without saying, then, that Kyle brings a certain 'global' perspective to the B2D kingdom.
I value this perspective and rest assured that such wisdom will grace our not-so-global village, if you will, for quite some time.
Welcome!
Nicaragua, our home and native land
Bush came, he saw, he...was kind of witty?
I'm not kidding. On his reception upon arriving in Ottawa on Tuesday: "I want to thank the Canadian people who came out to wave,
with all five fingers, for their hospitality". (Cue the laugh track -- i.e. the American press corps)
Cute, very cute. But how could he have known that some of us, Canadians, may not wish him a welcome stay? Hmmm... Maybe, just maybe, he saw it on CNN:
I think, you know, Canadians are nice people, it's a nice country, but it's a country in the grip of a national insecurity complex. Canada needs the United States for trade, for a lot of reasons. Without the U.S., Canada is essentially Honduras, but colder and much less interesting. And I think that that makes Canadians -- the dependence that Canada has on the United States makes Canadians understandably resentful.
That's Tucker Carlson talking on CNN's Crossfire last night, in case you were wondering. Discuss.
And for the record, yes, I resent these comments.
Is Microsoft listening to the ING guy?
I’m not naïve. I understand we live in a capitalist society. But if the National Football League can put a cap on player salaries, why can’t the government put a cap on corporate earnings? (an aside: perhaps Ralph Goodale should put a cap on secret budget surpluses, as witnessed today, but I digress.)
First off, let me start this off with a disclaimer: No, I am not a commie. All I’m saying is isn’t there some cut-off point when exorbitant profit figures just fade away into oblivion? Does any of it go into someone’s pocket? Sure, Billy Gates rakes in millions from the Windows empire, but that’s peanuts compared to the company’s yearly profit numbers (FYI Microsoft posted a US$2.9B profit in Q1 alone as of October 21).
So where does the money go? Back into the company? Some of it, of course. But all of it? I couldn’t tell you. I have no clue. And I bet even those tall white guys in suits don’t know either, otherwise they’d want a piece of the pie.
Granted, I am by no means an expert in business. The only business fact I know for sure is that Canadians have much prettier bills than the Yanks. But as a student trying to piece together some sort of savings for the rest of my life, I’m proud to say I have at least rudimentary skills in the art of finance. Yet I remain baffled – where do profits go?
In my case, when I earn more than I spend, I put my money towards good use by saving (that Dutch/German/Swedish ING spokesman was hard to say no to). Is that what Microsoft does? Is Microsoft, the person (remember that in the eyes of the law, a corporation is considered a person—credit to the documentary
The Corporation), saving up for retirement, dreaming of a nice little cottage by the lake to settle down in?
Just think of the fabulous retirement Mr. Walmart – oh wait, there’s already a few rich Mr. Walmart’s out there – could plan for with his US$2.29B 3rd quarter profits (as of October 31). And let’s not forget our friend Bell Canada Enterprises. BCE could probably nail down a nice lot beside Kurt and Goldie with its C$484M 4th quarter profit (as of November 3).
All of which makes me wonder: would I be better off if I changed my name to Gabe Corp.?
When did hard time turn into game time?
Apologies for the lack of material this past week. Don’t worry, you’ll get your fill of U.S. election talk, media bashing, and general cynicism in due course.
You can chalk up my absence to nothing more than, er, research. I wasn’t here online because I was somewhere a bit scarier: jail. No, no, no…don’t worry about me. Everything is ok. I was only VISITING jail. I wasn’t there to visit any friends or family. Honest. It was strictly for business (I know what you’re thinking, and no, I’m not talking about Monopoly here. I really did have some business at a jail).
Details aside, my experience has got me thinking about a few things. First, how scary jail really is. I can’t imagine such a life of confinement and solitude... and violence, forgot to mention violence. These men are no strangers to violence and aggression – my Holmesian skills tipped me off to this -- and the thought of living life in constant fear for one’s safety, which I’m quite certain is a relentless threat while incarcerated, no doubt exceeds the physical punishment of confinement.
That led me to think about what society deems acceptable punishment. Clearly, I’m scared shitless of jail, but I’m your typical white, middle-class geek, so that should come as no surprise. I’m not the one supposed to be scared. Criminals are the ones supposed to be scared.
So is it a good message to send to the dark underworld of society if some convicted criminals serving time own a Sony Playstation? That’s right, you heard me, I said Playstation. Don’t believe me? Well, it’s true. TV’s, stereos, video game systems…they’re all in our jails. What’s more, they’re in our jail cells.
How can this be? Why should, for argument’s sake, a convicted auto thief be entitled to test his occupational skills playing Grand Theft Auto? Aren’t we simply reinforcing criminal behaviour? Even worse, could we be rewarding injustice?
Valid questions, no doubt. But let me first explain the circumstances behind this rhetorical enquiry, after which, please, feel free to have your say (I’m not just asking Adam to think about this, I want you to join the discussion by clicking on the comments link at the end of this post).
Here’s a quick backgrounder: According to
Canadian law, prisoner’s have the right to keep certain personal belongings with them during their time in jail, and in particular cases, in their cells. In addition, you should know that inmates are allowed to earn income during incarceration. Depending on the type of work performed and various other considerations, an inmate earns a daily wage of roughly $5 a day or higher. These wages are intended to help prisoners land on their feet if and when they return to civilized society.
So, technically, there's nothing stopping an inmate from buying a personal video game system to help kill the time. And why not? Does time in jail invariably mean time without anything from normal society? Should we really take everything away from the convicted? What about lifers who have no “liberation day” to save for? On the other hand, can it not be argued that some of these criminals have taken so much from society -- and I can't help but think of murderers -- that they deserve to live life without anything?
I can see that you are shaking in anticipation of my take on this issue. But I’d rather switch things up a bit. In the wake of the democratic (or republican, you choose) events of the past few days, I give you, our loyal audience, the floor. I'll check back in later to finish my thoughts, but for the time being, the conch is now yours.
Turning green in the face, but nowhere else
“You hear that Mr. Anderson?... That is the sound of inevitability... It is the sound of your death... Goodbye, Mr. Anderson...”
Sound familiar? Ah yes, it’s from The Matrix, the 1999 sci-fi thriller depicting the destruction of the world at the hands of evil “machines” behind curtains of illusion.
Funny, though, that this Hollywood blockbuster might well have been a transcript of the political falling out between Captain Martin and one former environment guru, Mr. David Anderson...
PM: “Mr. Aaaannnddderrson. We’ve been watching you. Driving around in your little Toyota Prius … how ‘human’ of you, trying to save the environment. You are nothing more than a virus.”
DA: “Woah Paul... I know Kung Fu.”
PM: “I don’t care for your Feng Shui, Mr. Anderson, or composting, for that matter. You cannot win the war with industry.”
You get the idea. And yes, I probably exaggerated a little. But considering that Canada has no active plan to achieve its Kyoto targets – targets that relative to other nations are very high, with deadlines creeping closer ever so quickly -- who knows, maybe this isn’t so far off.
In a recent Canadian Press article (see link below), Anderson smacks the Martin government for bowing to industrial interests when it comes to environmental protections. Specifically, he criticizes the government’s easy stand on the auto industry, where Mr. Anderson’s 2002 plan to cut vehicle emissions by 25% in cooperation with automakers has been
slashed in half. To make matters worse, Anderson notes, automakers are lobbying the government for extra funds, essentially threatening to cut jobs and production facilities without public funding incentives. Anderson's response: “Well bugger that.”
Bugger that indeed. It’s time Canada stood up for environmental protection.
What if Canada were to make hybrid engine technology mandatory for every new car coming off the lot? Sounds ridiculous. You can’t tell industry what to do! Wrong again, Agent Smith. It’s about time government told big business what to do… and you know what, it’s worked in the past. Remember leaded fuel? Maybe not, because the government banned that a long time ago, coupled with the introduction of catalytic converters. And by the looks of it, that turned out pretty well.
Realistically, what is the downside to banning non-hybrid combustion engines for personal vehicles? Hybrid car technology is thriving. Toyota can’t produce enough next-generation Priuses to keep up with demand. Are you telling me that’s bad for business?
Everyone would be better off. First, it goes without saying that our air would be cleaner and healthier (which would not only have health benefits, but also positive economic ramifications cutting across all areas of life). Better yet, Canada might just become a bastion for the development of leading-edge green technology, exporting our knowledge across the globe.
We, as a planet, have no choice in the matter -- either we go green or, in a perverse twist of fate, become the latest non-renewable resource. Why not start the revolution right here at home?
Two minutes for political shenanigans
First off, although my ideals and opinions may lean to the left of the political spectrum, I am by no means a card carrying member of the NDP -- and for that matter don't intend to be (ever).
But back to the fun... Adam, it upsets me that you seem OK with our elected officials playing poker within the halls of democracy.
"Sticking it to the Liberals," unfortunately, is NOT Stephen Harper's job.
When Stephen Harper stands in the House and calls for more tax cuts to boost the economy, that's his job. When he calls for increased military spending, that's his job. When he calls for more transparency in government -- his endless criticism of the Liberals' lowball budget forecasting is a great example -- that's all OK, because it's his job. He is obligated to provide alternative ideas to the Prime Minister in the interest of Canadians.
Threatening to shatter the democratic process because he thinks he can intimidate the Prime Minister is, without question, NOT his job.
I am convinced that the millions of Canadians who voted Conservative did not vote for these shenanigans. Sure, they would've liked to have seen him in 24 Sussex, but after years of political manoeuvring and campaigning, is a coalition with the Bloc really how they envisioned leading the country? I didn't think so. So why waste our time?
As much as I hate to admit it, not everything in Canada is like hockey. Politics is one such exclusion.
Please, someone sound the buzzer already.
The "people's commons", a farce
Last week, Parliament Hill, the people's commons, was turned into a giant game of Risk, with armies of strategists and advisors running about threatening to take over the world. (cue eery music…)
The setting was simple enough. The Bloc and the Conservatives weren't happy. Bigshot Martin, they claimed, never listened to the little ol' opposition. "That's not fair!", they cried. So in a streak of ADD-inspired anxiety, the Bloc and Conservatives set out for revenge. They put an amendment to the Speech from the Throne before the House of Commons that threatened to bring down the minority Liberal government in a vote of confidence (an ironic term for political support considering that one doubts whether any Canadian has confidence in politicians at all!).
The stage was set: if the amendment passed, a couple of renegade white men in conservative suits would claim victory and walk down to Rideau Hall to appoint Stephen Harper as Canada's new leader -- worse still, there could even be a new election called, after only three days in session; if the amendment was defeated, and the government retained the confidence of the House, all would be forgotten… perhaps a few white hairs here or there, but Canadians could go to sleep that night knowing that the government they voted into office was still there.
Tensions were high. Party officials scrambled to wheel in all the MP's who apparently couldn't get up from the cafeteria's sensational roast beef dinner (I can't verify that beef was on the menu, but it was definitely dinner time).
The media was loving it. Reality television at its finest. Why cover the story of a fat, naked guy getting kicked off a deserted island on Survivor when you can cover a fat-cat Liberal government getting kicked out of a country of 30 million?
So what happened? I'll tell you what happened: NOTHING. The boys all met for a little heart-to-heart and everything was taken care of just in time to get the word out to all Members that the government was willing to let the amendment pass. In the end, the Bloc got what they wanted (a semantic modification along the lines of inter-jurisdictional affirmative action) and the Conservatives got what they wanted (essentially, to say "boo" so loudly that Martin would shit his pants). And what did the Canadian public get? Like I said before, absolutely nothing. Unless you count a mountain of egos, in which case we got a lot of that.
There is no doubt that Harper knew that Martin would cave and cater to opposition demands. And for this, I've lost a lot of respect for the Harper. Despite my concern with some of his policies and ideas, I've always respected his intellect and political sense. No more. This pseuo-coup merely served to demonstrate how low Harper is willing to go to burn the Liberals. Instead of trying to prove himself as a productive force in a minority Parliament, Harper has descended into the ranks piracy.
For a man who rides on slogans of renewing accountability and honesty to government, Harper's dash for the captain's chair has revealed himself as no more than just another in a long line of phony beacons of integrity in Canadian politics.
If only I thought of it sooner
As reported in the Globe & Mail's fantastic "Social Studies" briefs (Oct. 7):
Anthony Wilson, 43, of Branson, Mo., has changed his name legally to
They. The inventor says he became the mythical person cited as "they
say" for the fun of it, and also: "It's important to be an individual.
But this is a reminder that the sum of all of us is greater than the
individual."
That's awesome.
Today's not the problem, 2 years ago is the problem
Clearly, the Concordia controversy is complicated to dissect.
Adam, you bring forward some good points, the most powerful, of course, being that freedom of speech should never take second place to violence, or fear of violence for that matter. I agree. Wholeheartedly.
But the circumstances surrounding this controversy skew the possibility of a simple moral verdict such as “it is wrong to deny freedom of speech”. The fact of the matter is that history is quite significant in analyzing this situation.
Two years ago, violence erupted when Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at Concordia. It was a most unfortunate incident. Obviously, this reality had a profound effect on Concordia’s decision. And you know what, it should.
Concordia has an obligation to ensure a safe and secure learning environment. Based on the facts on the table at this point, I accept Concordia’s choice not to hold the event in question because of security concerns.
However, my acceptance is contingent on the reliability of the facts before me. If Concordia did indeed do everything in their power to try and accommodate the former Prime Minister in partnership with the proper authorities (RCMP, Montreal police, etc.) – and more importantly, did not use political concerns to influence security evaluations – then I am comfortable with their decision.
That doesn't mean, though, that I think Concordia is entirely in the right. While I don’t necessarily disagree with Concordia’s recent decision, I strongly question its decision in the days, months and two years separating this event with that of Netanyahu’s visit.
Concordia had two whole years to plan for something like this -- two years to beef up security on campus, two years to sit down with the authorities as well as with the major players in this debate (Adam, you’re right, everyone knows who’s involved by this point) and lay out procedures and strategies to facilitate peaceful political events on campus. Not doing so shows a blatant disrespect of its students, its staff, as well as those informally associated with the institution, such as citizens in the surrounding neighbourhood.
I doubt, as you suggest Adam, that Concordia is scared of legitimate debate. What they’re scared of is another PR disaster. That’s simple. What is perplexing, however, is trying to understand how the administration didn’t see this coming. For this, no apologies can be made.
But another factor in this controversy must not be ignored: the inexcusable obstinance of both Palestinian and Jewish groups involved. Much like the story in the Middle East, neither side of the conflict is willing to open lines of communication to discuss a potential resolution. Apparently, talking things over is futile. Fine, but if you’re looking for sympathy, you won’t get it from me. If neither side shows a willingness to discuss their differences – I take the verbal assaults carried out by both groups as evidence of this — then neither side should be allowed to claim a moral high ground. Period.
If you want real freedom of speech, on campus or in society in general, it takes a lot more than just security fences and keynote speakers. It takes respect and tolerance. And, regrettably, neither Concordia’s pro-Israel nor its pro-Palestinian populations can claim an understanding of even the faintest idea of such a crucial element of democracy.
Save me from this liberal world
According to Bush & Co., Rather-gate has taught us one important thing: the world is too freakin' liberal.
I doubt it. See below...
Sept. 28 article in the Toronto Star by Antonia Zerbisias on the topic of Rather-gate:
By the way, the chair of Viacom, which owns CBS, told a business audience in Hong Kong last week that the company was firmly in the Bush camp.
According to the Asian Wall Street Journal, Sumner Redstone said that "from a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal. Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on."
Clearly, this Redstone guy, a multi-billionaire who eats up media companies around the world as if they were trail mix, hates Republicans. What, you can't see it?
Mansbridge, my idol--sometimes
First off, how could I honestly argue against the talents of one Peter Mansbridge? He's practically my second dad, I listen to him so much.
But to be honest, I didn't watch the one on one with Gary Bettman on The National (followed by a sit-down with Bob Goodenow the next night). Purposely.
A twelve year-old could come up with the answers those two spinmeisters are coming out with these days. Don't believe me? Let's recap...
Bob: I didn't start it. He started it. We WANT to play. They locked us out first. (scrunches into seat and mopes)
Gary: Na-uhh......We want a season. It's the players' fault.
Bob: No it's not.
Gary: Yes it is!
The whole thing makes grade 3 recess look like a board meeting.
It's just sad that Peter got sucked into this garbage instead of asking probing questions to people that actually matter.
...and on the topic of Making the Cut: Gratch, you're sad. At least while watching professional hockey you can live vicariously through people with actual talent. Now, you've resorted to living through scraps of reality television (a topic for another day I'm sure). Viewing numbers are diminishing because people are starting to realize how ridiculous it is to sit and watch what essentially is a minor-league tryout. If you are so eager to have your taste of hockey, why don't you go down to your community rink and watch a REAL tryout where people might actually care about the game instead of some last-ditch cry for attention.
Bienvenidos...
Welcome to Beg(2)Differ. Welcome to the discussion...heck, welcome to October!
This should be the start of something fun. You see, this ain't your average blog. We, Gabe (a.k.a. G.Money) and Adam (a.k.a. Gratch), aren't your average bloggers either. To be honest, we're rookies at this game. We're not here to uncover some grand conspiracy (I see you there, Drudge!), and we're not here to try and pretend that we're right all the time -- we're here to PROVE that we are right all the time. The problem is that, often, we think we're both right, and god knows that never works out. The answer? Beg(2)Differ. Or as I just figured out in my head: "B2D".
B2D is a chance for two young thinkers (and their supporters) to duke it out, keyboard to keyboard. Just think of it as the "Thrilla in Manilla"... sans Manilla.
True, there's nothing stopping us from agreeing. And we do -- sometimes. But what's the fun in agreeing, really? You might as well just kiss if you like each other that much. And we all know, kissing is for wusses.
Don't agree? Fantastic. That's what we're looking for. Go on, get upset with us. Feel free to post some comments to any of our rants/analysis/lunacy. Scared? Don't worry. Just remember the words of good ol' Georgey Boy at the State of the Union back in Oh-3: "We have no desire to dominate, no ambitions of empire." Um...ditto. We don't bite.
The ice is now officially broken.
Gabe and Adam
