I have rather consciously neglected my blog of late. It's been pretty tough to keep up the writing with work being what it is. I have been exceptionally busy. Today, however, I am prompted to write. I have been watching a TV special on Mordechai Richler, who is probably, by critical consensus, Canada's most talented author of the late twentieth century (although some would give that title to Atwood) and the quintessential unrepentant Montreal anglo. He is known not only for his fantastic novels, which so eloquently captured the soul of the city he loved, but for his forays into polemic writing. Richler fought the nationalists in Quebec relentlessly, dragooning his formidable talents into service to ridicule their pretensions and point out the inherent contradictions of their credo. In the late eighties and early nineties, while the Feds were flirting and unwisely pandering to the separatists, Richler railed against the injustices he saw around him. He saw beneath the surface of "civic nationalism" and exposed the "siege mentality" and the paranoid and obsessive nature of the sovereignty movement, which sought to limit the rights of others in order to safeguard their own way of life. As a French-speaking Anglophone with many nationalist friends who has lived in Montreal, I have my own perspective on the "Quebec question". Simply put, you can dress it up in the garb of "civic nationalism", but the heart of the sovereignty movement is ethnic identity and the duty of minorities to conform to the wishes of the ethnic francophone majority. It is an attitude that proclaims "You may live here, and you may associate with us, but unless you adhere to our philosophy, unless you adopt our language and our ways, you will never be one of us". This is a view entirely at odds with the fundamental beliefs of most Canadians, and it manifests itself in many noxious forms: separatism, anti-semitism, xenophobia. I recall Parizeau and Landry post-referendum eructations on the eve of their defeat ("Money and the ethnic vote"?)and more recent indiscrete remarks, glimpses into their dark hearts. When one reads
Oh Canada! Oh Quebec, one sees that Richler, as so few others did, understood the nature of the fight for the soul of his Province in the late twentieth century.

OK, I'm off my politics kick. The system is broke. First past the post excacerbates regional cleavages. Canadians don't reject the West, but our system sure makes it look like we do. We need to fix it. End of story.

Onto lighter fare. Saw Spidey 2. Loved the heck out of it. I was never a big fanboy as a teenager. I read maybe a two dozen Spider-man comics as a teen, mostly during the McFarlane craze. The Spider-man I am more familiar with is the cartoon from the seventies with the cheesy animation and a very old-sounding Peter Parker.

I loved the first movie because it wasn't the story of a superhero who occasionally adopted an alter-ego to walk among us, but the story of a young man who occasionally had to put on some red and blue tights and fight the bad guys between college classes. It was as much the story of Peter Parker making his way in this big scary world as it was a "superhero flick".

I figured that the one way that Sam Raimi (one of my favourite directors) could botch his second crack at Marvel's flagship franchise would be to focus too much on the spider and not enough on the man this time around. Thankfully, Spiderman 2 is as squarely focused on the trials and tribulations of young Peter as its predecessor. So much more than a summer popcorn flick, it is the compelling story of a kid coming to terms with the life he has chosen, and the price he must pay because of this choice.

One of the best things about this movie is the cast. The performances are universally strong across the board. In his second outing as Spidey, Tobey MacGuire hits his stride. his performance is note perfect. Although Kirstin Dunst would not have been my first choice as MJ, she is growing on me in the role. James Franco: I like the guy alot, but his brooding Harry Osborne is in a holding pattern in SM2, There is, however, a promise of great things in future installments, if this franchise steams along for a couple more movies --as I'm sure it will. Alfred Molina does a kickass job as Doc Ock. Smart and scary and bad, but without being really evil, if that makes any sense. Great supporting turns from Rosemary Harris, J.K. Simmons, and of course a fantastic cameo by Bruce Campbell, my personal messiah!

Because I hate it when people give away the plot of movies, I will say no more. The effects are light years ahead of what we saw last time around. The plot, unburdened with the task of all that exposition that usually hampers any first film in a series, is a big improvement on that of first flick. The dialogue is comic-bookish without being ridiculous, and Sam Raimi, using his trademark whip-pans and funky innovative camera moves, directs with all the gusto he mustered in his classic Evil Dead films... only now, 20 years later, people are giving him bags of money to do his thing. Watch this flick, and I guarantee you'll leave the cinema with a smile on your face, looking forward to the next visit from your friendly neighbourhood Spiderman!

Holy crap!

What happened?

A number of things:

The attack adds worked.

Scary Stephen frightened all the soccer moms in the 905.

Ontario flinched, held its nose, and voted for the devil they know.

BC turned its back on the Conservatives.

Jack Layton's used car salesman schtick went over with a fair number of non granola-crunching Canadians.

Gilles Duceppe proved that you don't have to flog a referendum even if you are a separatiste.(take note Landry)

and Quebec kicked Poll Marton in the balls so hard he'll be feeling until sometime after Christmas, possibly even well into next year (maybe now that his Quebec support has evaporated, people will stop calling him Paul Mar-tain... the guy is from Windsor, for chrissakes).

I said:

BQ would take 57. As of midnight, they are at 53. I figured Lapierre was toast. Shows what I know.

NDP would take 26. As of midnight, they are at 21. I didn't count on Toronto turning chickenshit.

I was WAY OFF about the Liberal and Conservative totals. CBC has it at 137 to 96 at midnight (I didn't count on the rest of Ontario turning chickenshit, for that matter).

Alot of close races... some may not be resolved for days, maybe even weeks, but no doubt about it... the NDP and the Bloc are the big winners tonight. They can say what they like about being a new party, but you gotta figure the Conservatives are disappointed.

The traitors win big, with possibly their highest total of seats ever (we'll see after the inevitable recounts), and the commies now hold the balance of power in our parliament... I suppose it could have been worse... I could have been the reverse. (can you imagine a parliament --with a 50-member NDP caucus no less-- where the Liberals have to grovel before the separatists? Gak!)

Hell... who knows, maybe some good will come out of this Liberal-NDP minority thing!

My predictions on election day -- because it's fun to speculate and then make excuses for why you were wrong!...

These are completely unscientific. They are based on nothing more than my general impressions, gleaned largely from polls, pundits, and a good old fashioned gut feeling about the way things will go down. I am adopting the Steyn-Coyne nomenclature for the major parties (with terms for the Liberals and Conservatives stolen from the last election in France)

Party Seats

Fascists (CPC): 114
Crooks (LPC): 110
Traitors (BQ): 57
Commies (NDP): 26
Freaks (Green): 1

I really believe that if it is anywhere near as close as I am calling it, and if the Liberals get a higher percentage of the popular vote than the Conservatives (as alot of people are predicting), Paul Martin WILL try to govern with a minority (recent comments about "common sense" notwithstanding).

What does this mean? Mr. Martin prepares for the inevitable fallout within his party, tries to reconcile with the Liberal left wing, cozies up to the NDP and maybe even the Bloc, and staggers along for a few months until the next election, which will be sooner rather than later. After the way his people mishandled his campaign and squandered the lead that the Liberals' enjoyed when the election was called, the question is: will Paul be around to lead the next campaign?

Yet another tedious update...

Visit Coyne. He is now writing about a permanent change in the Canadian political landscape. As the Liberal's grasp of Ontario and Quebec slips through their fingers --Several reasons for that, including a couple I mentioned in previous posts (the social and fiscal conservatism of new Canadians, the disenchantment of Canadians with "their" traditional governing party...)-- Mr. Coyne brings up the idea that Stephen Harper's ultimate goal may in fact be the establishment of a permanent (American style!!!) two-party system in Canada...

As I watch a chameleonesque shipping magnate Paul Martin aggressively court NDP voters as he attempts to re-cast himself as a left-leaning warm-and-fuzzy politician, I'm starting to think that Andrew may be on to something...

Update:

HERE, in contrast, is a reproduction of the NP's editorial endorsing the Conservatives. Agree or disagree, you have to admit, it is not a "qualified" or "conditional" endorsement.

This version comes courtesy of the Belinda Stronach site.

Belinda Stronach: Potentially, the hottest Cabinet Minister in Canada's history... damn, she is fine!

I'm addicted to election coverage.

I love the way people like Judy Rebick talk about the horror of "Reagan-Bush-style Government" if the Conservatives come to power. Some people just can't resist kicking the yanks in the nuts every chance they get.

Alan Greenspon has basically admitted that the Globe could have gone either way in their endorsement op-ed. He said the editorial board went 55-45 on the endorsement. It may be an endorsement of the Liberals, but I doubt any Liberals will be crowing about it from the rooftops.

Here is an actual excerpt from this editorial --Remember this is an editorial endorsing another Liberal Government:

To put it succinctly, Paul Martin, or whoever is inhabiting his body, has proved a monumental disappointment since becoming Prime Minister six months ago. His pronouncements have displayed all the consistency of Pablum. Intent on winning every vote in the country, he lived in fear of offending someone, somewhere, somehow. On Iraq and Kyoto, he was incomprehensible. On same-sex marriage, he swung both ways. On missile defence co-operation, first he was openly for it, then secretly for it. He had two Supreme Court openings, but boxed himself into a process corner.

He made enemies of the meritorious (witness Stéphane Dion) and promoted the mediocre (come on down, Jean Lapierre). The only difference between his political manipulations and those of his "friendly dictator" predecessor was that the latter didn't leave bloodied fingerprints at the crime scene.

On health care, we have heard much rhetoric. But Mr. Martin's ideas for shortening waiting lists remain fanciful. As a general rule, he has beseeched voters to count on his reputation for solutions rather than proposing any.

The National Post has highlighted the "outlandish contradiction" of this election:

Many voters, otherwise sensible, believe that the one federal party proven to be irresponsible is the only responsible choice. That would be the Liberals.

Jonathan Kay of the National Post on CBC in response to Alan Greenspon and the Globe's Editorial: "Do you want to give this monumental disappointment another mandate?"

Well, do ya?

Today's lesson: If you and your dog are nice to people, they might just think twice about killing you and everyone in the immediate area...

So please be a nice person! My life may depend on it.

I wonder...

If the day after the election, Paul Martin finds himself at the head of a minority government, will he suddenly develop an allergy to taking on the Democratic Deficit? It's easy to talk about reforming parliament when your majority is so large you don't have to worry about a few renegades breaking ranks once in a while... My guess is that the whips will come out and some Liberal MPs will end up with nasty welts on their backs if they go wobbly on the big guy.

Since Martin's accession to the Liberal throne way back in December, Paul "Porkpie" Wells has been doing a fantastic job of chronicling our PM's early efforts at ending the democratic deficit on his blog. Check out his archives. (it's a fine blog, Paul, don't worry about what mean people say!)

If he gets his job back, I'm sure we can expect more of the same from this champion of democracy.

OK, let me get THIS straight... we need to re-elect Martin because Stephen Harper's party "isn't ready"? I guess them country bumpkins is slow learners, huh?

We wish Mr. Martin had afforded himself the opportunity of an 18-month tryout before going to the polls. Now the voters have the opportunity to impose a probationary period themselves. Whichever party prevails Monday, a minority looks the most likely outcome. We believe Mr. Martin represents the less risky proposition and deserves a second chance to prove himself. We further believe the Conservatives could use more time to pull their new party together and make their positions and predispositions clearer.


... and so, the Globe & Mail reaches the nadir of arrogance.

Michael Moore's lardy posterior is still smarting from the monumental boot-torquing that Chris Hitchens delivers in his review of Fahreinheit 911 (no, I won't dignify the website for this film with a link... it's my blog, and I can do what I like). Read it. Now.

I still plan on seeing the damn film... I am fascinated by demagoguery and propaganda in all its forms.

What do I think of the election campaign?

Well, being the "right-wing reactionary" (my dad's term) that I am, I am encouraged.

That's not to say that politics in Canada is taking a hard-right turn, regardless of what the yank-bashers and guardians of Canadian culture would have you believe. The centre has proved to be a surprisingly spacious piece of political real estate, notwithsanding the efforts of the Liberal Party-- the party of "da Canadian Values" -- to extend their lease there.

I am encouraged because in the wake of the Alliance-Conservative shotgun marriage something surprising happened. Rather than swallowing the rump PC holus-bolus as the Tory old guard of that moribund party (Clark, Stevens, et al)predicted, the giddy newlyweds found that they could accomodate each other. This "hostile takeover" ended up pulling the Western rednecks and social conservatives kicking and screaming over into moderate right-of centre territory, miles away from the goose-steppers and Jesus freaks with whom they had previously been lumped by Canada's liberal media.

I discovered, to my astonishment, that there is more than one "establishment" in Canada. There is, of course, the "Liberal Establishment"... you know, the folks who created the "Trudeaupian" state, as Steyn calls the Canadian polity that has evolved since the late sixties. They have had the run of the joint in Federal politics for most of the last forty years (except for that eight-year Mulroney interregnum of constitutional and free trade squabbles that still makes most good Canadians shudder). With their Charter, their Multiculturalism, their vigorous anti-Americanism and wtheir well-intentioned degradation of Canada's proud military, the Libs put the Canadian identity in a powerful submission hold and squeezed until the monarchists and detaxers tapped out (I was just watching Wrestling, cut me some slack).

Thing is though, there is another establishment kicking around; "The Man" that the hippies warned us about: The Bay Street Boys, the sinister right-wing conspiracy, the old-Canada Cabal: during the nineties, a bunch of middle-aged cranky white guys kept electing fellows like Mike Harris and Ralph Klein at the Provincial level. In spite of having extirpated the Mulroneyites au federal, the Liberals never could deliver the coup de grace to the conservative breed once and for all. Sure, some interesting populist permutations evolved at the Federal level during the nineties, folks who seemed to be more suited to some carny side-show in Saskatchewan than the sombre halls of power of Ottawa, but in the provinces, there remained a right wing establishment, and darn it all if those guys didn't hang in there, and even flourish.

Maybe it was the return of smilin' Brian for the unveiling of his official portrait that signalled the Conservative resurgence. Maybe it was the courtship of Peter McKay and Stephen Harper. Heck, maybe it was the candidacy of BELINDA!... whatever it was, sometime in the last few months, Canadians discovered that a "conservative" was not some odd breed of American that had stolen the 2000 elections from Al.Gore, version 2.0, but honest-to-goodness flesh and blood humans who lived up here among us! Sure, they liked their hunting rifles and hated the Senate and high taxes, but some of them had some pretty interesting ideas about things like eliminating government waste and improving accountability. Most interesting of all, they consort with people we may dimly remember from the eighties, those Crosbies and MacDougalls that used to hang out with Ben Mulroney's dad.

Canadians have finally discovered that the Liberals do not have a monopoly on the Canadian identity. They have a vision of it (or do they? Coyne might dispute that) The Conservatives have a different vision. So do the NDP, for that matter, as bizarre and repugnant as it may seem. Nothing wrong with different visions. In fact, selecting between competing visions for the country isn't a half-bad way of deciding how to govern the country and who should do it. The Liberals seem alarmed that Harper's "Alliance-Conservatives" may have a hidden agenda... if by that they mean a "non-Liberal agenda", they have reason to worry. Harper has been admirably frank about his desire to take the country in a different direction. Polls seem to indicate that there is segment of our society that may be willing to give his version of Canada a whirl. The Liberals may be surprised that some of their "natural" constituents are turning their backs on their benefactors, but you can't have it both ways. If you are going to bring immigrants into Canada and encourage them to preserve their "traditions", you can't get snotty when they politely inform you that their traditions don't include Abdul and Mohammed getting married, or having young Bai Wen saunter home from the abortion clinic and finishing her calculus homework while smoking a big fatty.

That is where the Liberals get caught. They staked out a big spot in the centre, they cast a wide net, and now after one scandal too many, they are finding that in spite of their desperate assurances, they can't hold on to everyone. Is it any wonder that they are bleeding supporters left right and centre?

Question is... are the Conservatives close enough to the centre to pick off just enough disaffected Liberal voters to make this thing interesting? My gut tells me they are... but what will that mean on election night? Stay tuned.

Something was eating at me as I read Dan Brown's novel The Da Vinci Code.

I couldn't quite put my finger on it... I had read the reviews and heard the raves, but somehow, the book just didn't do it for me.

The other day, I was looking up some articles on this controversial work of fiction and it all came together. The reason I didn't like The Da Vinci Code was because, as articles like this one and this one and this one point out, it tries to pass off conjecture as fact. It rewrites early Christian history so comprehensively, that anyone with a passing knowledge of the beginnings of this religion is left shaking their head. Read the aforementioned articles if you don't believe me...

This book didn't so much disappoint me as a reader as offend me as a history lover. I highly recommend this book to everyone and encourage them to read it and enjoy picking out the factual errors...and believe me, there are a lot of 'em.

AW COME ON!

First England blows it in extra time against the hated French, now perenial underachievers Spain limp to a tie with Greece? It's almost enough to make a guy stop following Euro 2000.

The pundits are calling last night's debate a draw... but we know better, don't we, Stevie? Better call the movers, Paul.

DAMNIT!

Anyone know if there are clumps of that balding bastard Zidane's hair on e-Bay?...

I'm making a Voodoo doll.

Started my new job last week... I now work HERE. When people hear that I used to work HERE, they make a funny face... but when they find out that before that, I worked HERE, they curse at me!

New job is fantastic... It is the kind of job that keeps me so busy, that before you know it, it is 6pm and I have to go home. I often have to force myself to leave because I am so into what I am doing.

Am I becoming a workaholic?...

60 years ago today a bunch of 20-25 year old Canadian boys were asked to do the impossible. They were farmboys from around Prince Albert, clerks from Winnipeg, lumber workers from New Brunswick and students from Montreal. The came from all walks of life and from all over Canada. They were not professionals. They were volunteers. Most were probably confused and scared shitless. But they jumped out of the planes, and waded ashore as the mortars fell and the machine guns fired. Alot of them died. Those who didn't had to watch as their friends collapsed and expired, choking on their own blood or crying out for their mothers. It must have been just about the worse thing you could ask someone to do... yet they did it, and they got farther inland than either the Americans or the Brits on that first day of Europe's liberation. Why? Because they had honour and they believed in something.

We owe them so much, and yet we can't repay them... only remember and honour them.

I finally finished putting the photos from my trip online... those of you who want to see them can send me an e-mail and I'll give you the link. I have now started my new job, and my trip feels like something that happened years ago, even though I have been back in Canada for less than a week... if I didn't have the photos and this blog I might almost wonder if I had even gone to Europe...surreal!

After spending so much time in old churches and art galleries, I have developed an interest in the history of the early Catholic church. I noticed that certain individuals who figure so prominently in the religious art of Italy are often represented with the objects of their martyrdom: Saint Peter crucified upside down on a cross, Saint Sebastian tied to a tree and pierced with arrows, or Saint Lawrence holding the grill upon which he was roasted, for instance. There are numerous sources of information on martyrs available on the Web and the details of their gruesome deaths make for fascinating reading... if you have a strong stomach.

Some martyrs appear to have suffered martyrdom willingly, even eagerly. In Westminster Cathedral, on a beautiful mosaic, I read the words that Saint Andrew is supposed to have spoken as he was about to be crucified. He said:

O bona crux que decurem et pulcritudinem de membris oni susepsti. Accireme ab hominibus et redde me magistro meo ut per te recipiat qui per te me redemit,

which in English translates roughly as:

Oh precious cross, which the members of my Lord have made so fair and Godly. welcome me from among men and join me again to my master, that as by thee he redeemed me, so by thee also he may take me unto himself.

That a person would accept and even embrace such horrible torment is almost incomprehensible to us today... but by such incredible faith and devotion was the early church sustained. Is it any wonder it has endured 2000 years?

On my last day overseas, I visited Westerham, the birthplace of Winston Churchill and James Wolfe, whose monument I had seen the day before in Westminster Abbey. I also hung out at a local pub, nd had the best dinner of the trip at a fantastic restaurant run by Corrado, friend of my cousin and her fiance. (It was a Neapolitan restaurant, not an English one). Now I am at Gatwick, reflecting on the fact that all good things must come to an end, sooner or later. I am a bit sad, but I am also looking forward to getting home, and facing whatever th future has in store for me....

The flight from Madrid to Gatwick was a piece of cake (more like an "air-taxi" than a real trip), and upon arrival in Bromley, a suburb of London, I had the pleasure of meeting my cousin Sara and her fiance. It was really was like meeting Sara for the first time, since the driven career woman with the wry sense of humour I got to know a bit last night bears no resemblance to the surly teenager with whom I butted heads when I was 14, literally half a lifetime ago. Danilo, her fiance, is a fantastic guy and a great cook to boot. He worked some strange alchemy on some chicken with lemon and wine that had me considering kidnapping him and bringing him back to Canada to teach how to make food taste halfway decent.

After a few drinks, we called it a night early so that I could head downtown with Danilo today and spend the day doing the tourist thing. London was exactly as it was the last time I was there... seething with people and absolutely mad. There's no way I'm going back there tomorrow, which will be a weekend. Still, I managed to see Westminster Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, and hang out around Trafalgar Square. True to form, I also visited the National Gallery which, gasp, does not charge an admission fee (they "suggest" a donation of 4£, however). This museum is extremely impressive, and what it may lack in depth (it does not appear to have a substantial collection of any one's artist's works... or at least, not the sections I saw) it makes up in breadth, covering every area of Europe and every century from the 13th to the 20th. Definitely a must-see for anyone planning a trip to London... I'm almost ashamed of myself for not having been the first time I was in London three years ago.

Tomorrow is my last full day in Europe...