To all those progressive Americans who have decided to leave George Bush's USA and head North to live in the Dominion of Canada in the wake of your recent elections. You are most welcome! However, before you pull up stakes, there are a few things you need to know about this country and how we differ from the United States... we wouldn't want you to have any nasty surprises when you get here, so here goes:
Our taxes are higher... deal with it. Many of you are well-educated and have
the potential to secure high-paying jobs -- For this temerity you will be penalized most severely(incidentally, you better be employable, or we won't let you in as
skilled workers, wink wink). In our northern socialist paradise, we like to level the playing field, so think of this as your opportunity to allow others to experience the utopian health care system you have dreamed of for the U.S. --thanks to the
income taxes that will decimate your disposable income. Hey, at least you'll get your flu shot!
We grow the best dope in the world. BC Bud. And it is decriminalized, which means you can get fined, but you won't go to jail. Also, if you are gay, you can get married in several provinces. That's all I will say about those two little nuggets.
Except in BC (which is barely part of Canada) our winters are really bloody cold --and not Aspen ski holiday cold, or a blustery-Nantucket-in-January cold-- I'm talking bone-cracking, mind numbing, fingers-turn-black-and-fall-off cold. You will undoubtedly find this hard to take... but you may find comfort in the fact that our miserable mosquito-plagued summers are mercifully short.
We are more "British" than you, in the sense that we have a Queen, a Westminster-style
Parliament, and we are generally more subdued and less individualistic
than you... (Peace order and good government, is our credo rather than life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) but we are in denial about it, in the sense that we have
constructed an identity for ourselves as a multicultural nation, so that we can
pretend that we weren't basically a colony of Britain until the 1930s. Hell, we
didn't even have our own flag until the sixties!
We consider ourselves a mosaic, not a melting pot. In the U.S. a Chinese person who immigrates becomes a Chinese-american. In Canada, a Chinese person who immigrates to Canada is considered Canadian by the Government, but identifies themselves as Chinese to everyone else. Some people say we couldn't be a melting pot because we don't have anything for people to melt into. The anglo side of this bicultural nation is notiorious for its insecurity over its identity, we identify ourselves by what we aren't not what we are.... hence our occasional juvenile outbursts of antiamericanism, masquerading as nationalism....as for the French side... I'm not even gonna go there.
None of your f*cking guns. We really really mean it. Shit, I mean, we've spent over a billion dollars on a gun registry that doesn't event work! That's how serious we are about gun control in this country... and we sure as hell don't have any second amendment type garbage in our constitution. You better not bring anything more dangerous that a BB gun up here or we will confiscate it on your ass. Guns are for cops, soldiers, and the occasional hunter out in the boondocks... That's it. Which raises the inevitable question: Are Canadians a bunch of pussies? Well, that is a complex question.
We like to think that we are a kinder, gentler, country (to borrow a phrase from Bush Sr.)... and yet in our favourite sport (that's hockey... just hockey... not ICE-hockey)bloodletting is a mundane occurence. Also, we have some pretty macho national icons like the mountie, and the voyageur, and the lumberjack... One thing for sure, we USED TO BE tough... real tough. We had the best army fighting in World War I, we had the world's fourth largest Navy in World War 2 (which started, for us, in 1939, NOT in 1941, thank you very much). We once even defended ourselves from invasion by your ancestors (War of 1812) and burnt down the goddamn White House in retaliation --it used to be painted pink. Now, we think our military is for peacekeeping, and only when the U.N. says it is OK. I suppose we have largely forgotten our fathers, but we wear a poppy every November 11, and pretend we remember. In Quebec they do remember (je me souviens), but what they remember is 1759, and the Battle of the Plains of Abraham, which is still being fought today. They are winning.
Finally, our beer is.... different. Our beer is to yours as Aston Martin is to Pinto, as sirloin is to ground chuck, as diamonds are to cubic zirconia.... in short, Democrat beer lovers, to their delight, will reap the unexpected reward of their political choice in the form of access to our vastly superior brews. If that isn't incentive enough to move to Canada, I don't know what is!
Once again, welcome... but you've been warned.
Friday, November 05, 2004
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Magnanimity in victory, dignity in defeat
I'll say this... in spite of the nastiness of the campaign, the finale to this election has renewed my faith in the American political process.
In his concession speech, Kerry was the opposite everything his critics accuse him of being: He was warm (emotional, even!)and down-to-earth, he was succinct, he was he was direct and straightforward. It was a heartbreaking glimpse of the statesman he could have been.
In his victory speech, Bush displayed thoughtfulness, humility, and gratitude. Even his detractors must admit that he displayed none of the arrogance and cockiness that sometimes bubbles to the surface in his moments of triumph.
Before the nation descends back into the bitter partisan bickering that has characterized the political landscape for the last few months, I'm just going to enjoy the moment...
I'll say this... in spite of the nastiness of the campaign, the finale to this election has renewed my faith in the American political process.
In his concession speech, Kerry was the opposite everything his critics accuse him of being: He was warm (emotional, even!)and down-to-earth, he was succinct, he was he was direct and straightforward. It was a heartbreaking glimpse of the statesman he could have been.
In his victory speech, Bush displayed thoughtfulness, humility, and gratitude. Even his detractors must admit that he displayed none of the arrogance and cockiness that sometimes bubbles to the surface in his moments of triumph.
Before the nation descends back into the bitter partisan bickering that has characterized the political landscape for the last few months, I'm just going to enjoy the moment...
Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Looks like the Republicans have put the boots to the Democrats in Nebraska after all...
The Democrat's chosen one, Barak Obama, comes highsteppin' into the endzone and does a funky touchdown dance to celebrate his Senate seat in Illinois. Someone to watch in the years to come.
10:40... Ay Dios mio! Bush is winning the hispanic vote in Florida? Kerry may go southcentral on the fool's ass on the left coast, but in the nubby-state, the barios are painted red, ese!
It is 11:30. As it stands right now, Bush is ahead in the popular vote, but the electoral college is what counts. Shades of 2000 (the damn election looks like a carbon-copy of the last one anyway)... looks like we have to wait for the decision.
I'm going to bed!
If Bush ends up winning this thing.... the pundits are shaking their well-coifed heads. I mean come on! The economy is lethargic, Iraq, if not a quagmire, is certainly not a pretty picture. The intelligentsia, Michael Moore, Hollywood, minority groups, the media, your uncle Jerome, your yuppie neighbours... they are all against Bush. Any half-decent Democratic candidate should have handed George his ass. How could this happen? Who are these people that may be giving the White house back to Bush? I know! Let's pin it on the religious right! Maybe these supposedly-outside-the-mainstream turned out to vote in droves? You remember, of course... These are the people that made the Passion of the Christ a $500 million box office smash after the Liberal elite had written off the "art flick" as lacking in mainstream appeal and consigned it to box-office oblivion. Apparently, there are alot more rght-wing wackos out in the heartland than the Democrats thought. If Bush wins, is the mainstream about to be redefined in America?
The Democrat's chosen one, Barak Obama, comes highsteppin' into the endzone and does a funky touchdown dance to celebrate his Senate seat in Illinois. Someone to watch in the years to come.
10:40... Ay Dios mio! Bush is winning the hispanic vote in Florida? Kerry may go southcentral on the fool's ass on the left coast, but in the nubby-state, the barios are painted red, ese!
It is 11:30. As it stands right now, Bush is ahead in the popular vote, but the electoral college is what counts. Shades of 2000 (the damn election looks like a carbon-copy of the last one anyway)... looks like we have to wait for the decision.
I'm going to bed!
If Bush ends up winning this thing.... the pundits are shaking their well-coifed heads. I mean come on! The economy is lethargic, Iraq, if not a quagmire, is certainly not a pretty picture. The intelligentsia, Michael Moore, Hollywood, minority groups, the media, your uncle Jerome, your yuppie neighbours... they are all against Bush. Any half-decent Democratic candidate should have handed George his ass. How could this happen? Who are these people that may be giving the White house back to Bush? I know! Let's pin it on the religious right! Maybe these supposedly-outside-the-mainstream turned out to vote in droves? You remember, of course... These are the people that made the Passion of the Christ a $500 million box office smash after the Liberal elite had written off the "art flick" as lacking in mainstream appeal and consigned it to box-office oblivion. Apparently, there are alot more rght-wing wackos out in the heartland than the Democrats thought. If Bush wins, is the mainstream about to be redefined in America?
Some random musings on election night in the U. S. of A....
seven-thirtyish... I'm watching CNN. They are going to great pains to tell us that they will absolutely, positively NOT CALL ANY STATE until they are 100% sure of which way it is gonna go... and just because they are NOT CALLING A STATE, that does not necessarily mean that the state is "too close to call". Gotcha. Consider that ass covered.
Terry McAuliffe, that obnoxious DNC jerkoff, has a vague, slightly annoying accent I can't place. Sorta sounds Midwestern. You know, the people who say "sari" when they mean sorry, and call hockey "ice-hackey" SHUDDER!
I'm oblivious... Until tonight, I had no idea that Red is for REPUBLICAN and Blue is for DEMOCRAT. I thought it was vice versa... like up here in the great white north where tories have always been BLUE, unless they are RED tories, meaning conservatives who are social liberals --I dunno, the whole bleeding heart thing? Isn't there some kind of association there?
The Liberal party has always been les rouges, as far as I know. The Green party is green, of course, the NDP is, uh, green too, but more of a pukey green, and the Bloc is... who cares.
CNN reiterates that they will no call any state unless... yeah, yeah, I heard you the first time, Judy!
Candy Crowley of CNN: Like Otto from the Simpsons would say... "uh, you used to be a dude, right?"
8:25 pm... Everyone is so enthusiastic about the early returns! The Democrats are thrilled, the Republicans are confident... I see some burst bubbles in someone's future.
sidebar - Vanessa Kerry: She looks like her dad in drag... except her eybrows actually move.
8:40 pm... President Bush carries the old Dominion of Virginia, as expected, and North Carolina (home state of John Edwards!) but Pennsylvania still hangs in the balance
9:15... rumours of another Miami-Dade cock-up abound. Election threatens to drag for days....
9:40 bush Punks out Kerry for one of Maine's electoral college votes, but Kerry puts the kibosh on that gambit by taking one of Nebraska's... end result. nil gain for either candidate.
So far, nothing but speculation and wishful thinking from my usual web haunts....
seven-thirtyish... I'm watching CNN. They are going to great pains to tell us that they will absolutely, positively NOT CALL ANY STATE until they are 100% sure of which way it is gonna go... and just because they are NOT CALLING A STATE, that does not necessarily mean that the state is "too close to call". Gotcha. Consider that ass covered.
Terry McAuliffe, that obnoxious DNC jerkoff, has a vague, slightly annoying accent I can't place. Sorta sounds Midwestern. You know, the people who say "sari" when they mean sorry, and call hockey "ice-hackey" SHUDDER!
I'm oblivious... Until tonight, I had no idea that Red is for REPUBLICAN and Blue is for DEMOCRAT. I thought it was vice versa... like up here in the great white north where tories have always been BLUE, unless they are RED tories, meaning conservatives who are social liberals --I dunno, the whole bleeding heart thing? Isn't there some kind of association there?
The Liberal party has always been les rouges, as far as I know. The Green party is green, of course, the NDP is, uh, green too, but more of a pukey green, and the Bloc is... who cares.
CNN reiterates that they will no call any state unless... yeah, yeah, I heard you the first time, Judy!
Candy Crowley of CNN: Like Otto from the Simpsons would say... "uh, you used to be a dude, right?"
8:25 pm... Everyone is so enthusiastic about the early returns! The Democrats are thrilled, the Republicans are confident... I see some burst bubbles in someone's future.
sidebar - Vanessa Kerry: She looks like her dad in drag... except her eybrows actually move.
8:40 pm... President Bush carries the old Dominion of Virginia, as expected, and North Carolina (home state of John Edwards!) but Pennsylvania still hangs in the balance
9:15... rumours of another Miami-Dade cock-up abound. Election threatens to drag for days....
9:40 bush Punks out Kerry for one of Maine's electoral college votes, but Kerry puts the kibosh on that gambit by taking one of Nebraska's... end result. nil gain for either candidate.
So far, nothing but speculation and wishful thinking from my usual web haunts....
Saturday, October 30, 2004
It is official. Barring any unforseen complications, I will be moving to a new place at the end of this month. It is a lovely little flat in a 6 story building in the heart of Sandy Hill, and only a 20 minute walk from work. I don't really have much of a choice, since the next occupants of my current place will be arriving at the begining of the month.... they have a really interesting plan for remodelling the building. You've heard of open concept? Well they are going to do "open air concept"... basically, they are going to gut the apartment and tear it down to the foundations. How avant-guard! They are levelling half of my block to build condos. I thought the building boom was over and that the housing market had levelled off, but a walk around my neighbourhood would disabuse you of that notion. Centretown is being transformed as heritage buildings and delapidated houses like mine make way for condos and townhouses way out of my price range.
Moving in December is going to be such fun, what with the snow and bitter Ottawa cold and all! On the bright side, my minimalist tendencies mean that I really don't have that much stuff to move. I suppose that one day, in the distant or not-too-distant future I will become a much more efficient and voracious consumer, stockpiling massive quantities of products, furniture and appliances, in a desperate search for fulfillment. For now, I subscribe to Tyler Durden's philosophy about material goods: "The things you own... end up owning you"
Moving in December is going to be such fun, what with the snow and bitter Ottawa cold and all! On the bright side, my minimalist tendencies mean that I really don't have that much stuff to move. I suppose that one day, in the distant or not-too-distant future I will become a much more efficient and voracious consumer, stockpiling massive quantities of products, furniture and appliances, in a desperate search for fulfillment. For now, I subscribe to Tyler Durden's philosophy about material goods: "The things you own... end up owning you"
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
When I was a member of the The "Lake Sups", a Reserve Infantry Regiment in Thunder Bay, I trained with guys from a number of different units, including The Loyal Edmonton Regiment. The Loyal Eddies, and many other proud Canadian Regiments, bear this name proudly on their battle-scarred Regimental colours:
ORTONA
This week, Canadians REMEMBER
"It wasn't hell. It was the courtyard of hell. It was a maelstrom of noise and hot, splitting steel...the rattling of machine guns never stops ... wounded men refuse to leave, and the men don't want to be relieved after seven days and seven nights... the battlefield is still an appalling thing to see, in its mud, ruin, dead, and its blight and desolation (...) With the fall of Ortona, the battle of the Moro river is over, and there is a new name to add to the list of great deeds of the war...neither in this war nor in any other has there been anything more bitter and intense. The Canadians beat two of the finest German divisions that ever marched in a long fury of fire and death ending in the appalling week of Ortona."
Matthew Halton
ORTONA
This week, Canadians REMEMBER
"It wasn't hell. It was the courtyard of hell. It was a maelstrom of noise and hot, splitting steel...the rattling of machine guns never stops ... wounded men refuse to leave, and the men don't want to be relieved after seven days and seven nights... the battlefield is still an appalling thing to see, in its mud, ruin, dead, and its blight and desolation (...) With the fall of Ortona, the battle of the Moro river is over, and there is a new name to add to the list of great deeds of the war...neither in this war nor in any other has there been anything more bitter and intense. The Canadians beat two of the finest German divisions that ever marched in a long fury of fire and death ending in the appalling week of Ortona."
Matthew Halton
Thursday, October 21, 2004
The REVIEWS are in!... 3 out of 4 critics agree: TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE is one funny f***ing movie!
I can't remember the last time I laughed so hard at the cinema. This is a repugnant, reprehensible nasty little bastard of a puppet flick. If you are a Michael Moore dupe, you will probably be deeply offended. If you are a chest-thumping neo-con, you will be outraged. If you are a sceptical observer who unapologetically appreciates clever satire laced with liberal doses of obscenity and juvenile potty-humour like me, you will love every minute.
Kudos to Matt Stone and Trey Parker for delivering a sorely needed kick to the nuts to moronic celebrity blowhards, brain-dead profiteers of patriotism, and cliche Hollywood action flicks.
PAUL WELLS of Macleans says: Team America: World Police is certainly the most insightful political movie of 2004. I could not agree more.
I can't remember the last time I laughed so hard at the cinema. This is a repugnant, reprehensible nasty little bastard of a puppet flick. If you are a Michael Moore dupe, you will probably be deeply offended. If you are a chest-thumping neo-con, you will be outraged. If you are a sceptical observer who unapologetically appreciates clever satire laced with liberal doses of obscenity and juvenile potty-humour like me, you will love every minute.
Kudos to Matt Stone and Trey Parker for delivering a sorely needed kick to the nuts to moronic celebrity blowhards, brain-dead profiteers of patriotism, and cliche Hollywood action flicks.
PAUL WELLS of Macleans says: Team America: World Police is certainly the most insightful political movie of 2004. I could not agree more.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Once in a while, reading STEYN is like having the veil of ignorance, stupidity and complacency lifted from my eyes. Why accept the status quo? Why accept political ideology as gospel? Here is an excerpt from one of his latest articles, from The Western Standard:
(...) what’s fascinating to me is that, no matter how inept the nanny state is, no matter how bad the health care system gets in reality, Canadians are still unwilling to give up on its utopian virtues – universal lack of access, equality of non-care. We believe it’s more moral to take poor government health care than to make arrangements for our own.
The Canadian system is supposedly designed for the weakest in society - the unfortunate person who needs medical treatment but, without the state, would have difficulty gaining access to it. But, by treating all of us as the weakest in society, the state softens us – and softens itself. When health care is the government’s responsibility, it becomes its principal responsibility. Imagine if we had as many high-profile conferences on national security as we do on health. But we don’t. Because the minute you make government the provider of health care, you ensure that, come election time, the electorate identifies health as its number one concern. Thus, in a democracy, the very fact of socialized health care seduces government away from its prime responsibility – the defence of the realm. In the Canadian cabinet, the Health portfolio is more prestigious than Defence. Think Donald Rumsfeld would regard it as a promotion if he were moved to Health?
You may not agree with his view... but it certainly makes you think....
(...) what’s fascinating to me is that, no matter how inept the nanny state is, no matter how bad the health care system gets in reality, Canadians are still unwilling to give up on its utopian virtues – universal lack of access, equality of non-care. We believe it’s more moral to take poor government health care than to make arrangements for our own.
The Canadian system is supposedly designed for the weakest in society - the unfortunate person who needs medical treatment but, without the state, would have difficulty gaining access to it. But, by treating all of us as the weakest in society, the state softens us – and softens itself. When health care is the government’s responsibility, it becomes its principal responsibility. Imagine if we had as many high-profile conferences on national security as we do on health. But we don’t. Because the minute you make government the provider of health care, you ensure that, come election time, the electorate identifies health as its number one concern. Thus, in a democracy, the very fact of socialized health care seduces government away from its prime responsibility – the defence of the realm. In the Canadian cabinet, the Health portfolio is more prestigious than Defence. Think Donald Rumsfeld would regard it as a promotion if he were moved to Health?
You may not agree with his view... but it certainly makes you think....
I watched Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind last night --alone and exhausted from a crazy week of picket-line duty and 10-hour days. The Public Service Alliance of Canada was on STRIKE this week, and I ain't a member... I'm considered part of the excluded "management" category right now. That means I had to do employee liaison duty --basically stand outside my building with a bright orange panel vest from 6 am to 10 am, and stop people from sneaking into the building. Anyway, after the week I had, perhaps I wasn't in the right frame of mind to watch a movie like Eternal Sunshine, because I can't say I enjoyed it. Incidentally, I also rented The Punisher. It brought back fond memories of reading the nihilistic comics as an angry teen and it was right up my alley.
The bizarre cinematography and quirky style of Eternal Sunshine got on my nerves after a while, but more annoyingly, I couldn't figure out why Joel, Jim Carey's character, became so desperate to hold on to his memories of the character played by Kate Winslet. I guess it was the sentimentality of the character, and the realization that he really didn't want to forget his "Tangerine" after all, once he recovered from the sudden trauma of the breakup... but Clementine, as portrayed by the usually lovely miss Winslet, seemed to me to be an insufferably obnoxious, selfish and pretentious hippy slob with a real mean streak, not at all worthy of the male lead's heartfelt devotion. There must have been something special about her, but I think that the filmmaker failed to show enough of her sweet side to make her seem like someone worth hanging onto. Maybe I'm just a cynical bastard (OK, I admit it, I AM a cynical bastard), but, having taken the extreme step of decided to erase memories of his ex-girlfriend from his head (OUCH!), and seeing how most of the memories seemed pretty bad anyway, I couldn't figure out why the despondent Joel changed his mind halfway through the memory-erasing procedure, particularly since Clementine had had the procedure done first! --In the movie this cruel decision on her part is supposed to be excused because she is "impulsive"... excuse me? Jetting off to New York City for the weekend is impulsive... deliberately erasing someone from your brain is... well, something else entirely.
More to the point, and I speak from personal experience now, a person may indeed have many good memories of someone after a breakup, but sometimes, if there are enough bad memories, the bad ones can colour the whole experience, even taint the good memories enough so that in hindsight, the entire relationship may come to be viewed with some degree of ambivalence. That isn't to say you end up despising the person for all time... just that you can be philosophical about the whole thing and say "Well, on balance, that was a pretty lousy experience..." In time, you may come see the benefits of having had the experience, because you learn from it, don't you? And it makes you the person you are today. Still... what you don't do is look back and say "Wow, I'm really glad I have all these memories of this person!"...at least I don't-- you just try to salvage something good and do your best not to dwell on the bad. By that measure, the idea of rapid memory-erasing in order to accelerate the healing process, which is the central conceit of the story, isn't an entirely illogical one... although it is probably grossly unethical to tamper with peoples' brains the way they do in the movie.
I have had people ask me if I have any bitterness or rancor towards an ex girlfriend that treated me particularly shabbily some time ago... and I can say with some degree of pride that I do not. You see, I underwent some memory-erasing of my own. Not through some unnatural procedure... just by the slow passage of time. I lost contact with that person completely and somehow, whether it happened by design or by accident, both good and bad memories of that time in my life, so raw and painful for some time after the break-up, have faded to the point that I scarcely remember our relationship. Viewing the period now with the clinical detachment of hindsight, am I sad that I can't really remember much? Not really. I guess that is just the way my brain works. I have a vague sense that I may be depriving myself of something by either having repressed the memories or having lost them quite by accident, but then again, my head is always full of other good memories, because I try to make them every day.
The bizarre cinematography and quirky style of Eternal Sunshine got on my nerves after a while, but more annoyingly, I couldn't figure out why Joel, Jim Carey's character, became so desperate to hold on to his memories of the character played by Kate Winslet. I guess it was the sentimentality of the character, and the realization that he really didn't want to forget his "Tangerine" after all, once he recovered from the sudden trauma of the breakup... but Clementine, as portrayed by the usually lovely miss Winslet, seemed to me to be an insufferably obnoxious, selfish and pretentious hippy slob with a real mean streak, not at all worthy of the male lead's heartfelt devotion. There must have been something special about her, but I think that the filmmaker failed to show enough of her sweet side to make her seem like someone worth hanging onto. Maybe I'm just a cynical bastard (OK, I admit it, I AM a cynical bastard), but, having taken the extreme step of decided to erase memories of his ex-girlfriend from his head (OUCH!), and seeing how most of the memories seemed pretty bad anyway, I couldn't figure out why the despondent Joel changed his mind halfway through the memory-erasing procedure, particularly since Clementine had had the procedure done first! --In the movie this cruel decision on her part is supposed to be excused because she is "impulsive"... excuse me? Jetting off to New York City for the weekend is impulsive... deliberately erasing someone from your brain is... well, something else entirely.
More to the point, and I speak from personal experience now, a person may indeed have many good memories of someone after a breakup, but sometimes, if there are enough bad memories, the bad ones can colour the whole experience, even taint the good memories enough so that in hindsight, the entire relationship may come to be viewed with some degree of ambivalence. That isn't to say you end up despising the person for all time... just that you can be philosophical about the whole thing and say "Well, on balance, that was a pretty lousy experience..." In time, you may come see the benefits of having had the experience, because you learn from it, don't you? And it makes you the person you are today. Still... what you don't do is look back and say "Wow, I'm really glad I have all these memories of this person!"...at least I don't-- you just try to salvage something good and do your best not to dwell on the bad. By that measure, the idea of rapid memory-erasing in order to accelerate the healing process, which is the central conceit of the story, isn't an entirely illogical one... although it is probably grossly unethical to tamper with peoples' brains the way they do in the movie.
I have had people ask me if I have any bitterness or rancor towards an ex girlfriend that treated me particularly shabbily some time ago... and I can say with some degree of pride that I do not. You see, I underwent some memory-erasing of my own. Not through some unnatural procedure... just by the slow passage of time. I lost contact with that person completely and somehow, whether it happened by design or by accident, both good and bad memories of that time in my life, so raw and painful for some time after the break-up, have faded to the point that I scarcely remember our relationship. Viewing the period now with the clinical detachment of hindsight, am I sad that I can't really remember much? Not really. I guess that is just the way my brain works. I have a vague sense that I may be depriving myself of something by either having repressed the memories or having lost them quite by accident, but then again, my head is always full of other good memories, because I try to make them every day.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Watching George and John in matching suits and ties rounding out the trilogy of debates. Will this be "Return of the Jedi"; the crappiest installment of the three and a letdown to the fans?... or will it be "Return of the King", a fitting climax to an epic conflict? (end of cheesy analogy) Since I missed the second installment (the townhall, widely seen as a draw), I am really struck by the different tone of this one... Bush has his face under control, for one... no more grimaces on the split screen. He also seems less angry, almost subdued. Johnny-boy is still doing the smug grin. He has the look of someone who has this thing in the bag, and who knows it... not so fast, Jack... polls have the race at a dead heat... and we know that the Republicans traditionally poll low compared to their election night numbers.
At one point, George talks about the importance of religion in his life. It is a poignant moment... but I suppose the sneering intelligentsia will gobble this up as one more example of his irrationality. But wait, Kerry is talking about religion too? Oh, OK, now he is talking about schools... he had me confused for a second there! Nice segue.
George and John seem a bit more relaxed... Bush even makes a crack about his scowling and slouching ... Kerry jokes about "marrying up" and taking himself too seriously. They have played it safe and sober.
Some may have found the debate dull, but I was impressed by some of the thoughtful comments I heard tonight... it is almost enough to make you renew your faith in the inherent goodness and rightness of the Great Republic, as Churchill called the U.S. Sure, some of it might be just be campaign trail boilerplate, but I'm impressed by the rhetoric all the same. More than ever, I fail to understand some of the instinctive anti-americanism to which I am constantly exposed. Canadian politicians, who seem to wallow in the petty brinksmanship of their profession, and seldom show true leadership, could take a page from the yankee book.
We'll see what happens with the undecideds. After tonight, I must admit I am optimistic. I am also convinced that whichever of these two guys wins the election, America will be in pretty good hands. In a sense, from my point of view, John Kerry has won a major victory... he may just have convinced people who think like me that he wouldn't make such a bad commander-in-chief.
But lets just see how this thing plays out...
At one point, George talks about the importance of religion in his life. It is a poignant moment... but I suppose the sneering intelligentsia will gobble this up as one more example of his irrationality. But wait, Kerry is talking about religion too? Oh, OK, now he is talking about schools... he had me confused for a second there! Nice segue.
George and John seem a bit more relaxed... Bush even makes a crack about his scowling and slouching ... Kerry jokes about "marrying up" and taking himself too seriously. They have played it safe and sober.
Some may have found the debate dull, but I was impressed by some of the thoughtful comments I heard tonight... it is almost enough to make you renew your faith in the inherent goodness and rightness of the Great Republic, as Churchill called the U.S. Sure, some of it might be just be campaign trail boilerplate, but I'm impressed by the rhetoric all the same. More than ever, I fail to understand some of the instinctive anti-americanism to which I am constantly exposed. Canadian politicians, who seem to wallow in the petty brinksmanship of their profession, and seldom show true leadership, could take a page from the yankee book.
We'll see what happens with the undecideds. After tonight, I must admit I am optimistic. I am also convinced that whichever of these two guys wins the election, America will be in pretty good hands. In a sense, from my point of view, John Kerry has won a major victory... he may just have convinced people who think like me that he wouldn't make such a bad commander-in-chief.
But lets just see how this thing plays out...
Wednesday, October 06, 2004
The UK sold us JUNK, critics have been saying for some time. In the wake of THIS tragedy, I expect the Government to come under fire like never before... The Chief of Defence Staff said "absolutely" when asked if he still believed that we should have bought the defective subs...
How many of us agree with him?
How many of us agree with him?
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Thursday, September 30, 2004
Presidential debate night... I'm gonna kinda provide something of a running commentary, without getting carried away with the details... just the general impressions of a reactionary right-winger... so now that you know about my political leanings:
JFK starts the off by kissing Jim Lehrer's ass... GWB starts off looking very sombre, on his first point he sounds like he's trying to level with the American public on Iraq... On the split screen, Kerry looks bemused by George, who starts to a do a little head-bob whenever he is being particularly emphatic. Kerry makes it clear in his rebuttle to GWB's first point that he is gonna through down the military card tonight.
Kerry is getting in some good early shots. He is all over Bush's handling of the War On Terror (WOT). Bush is being clever, say "I" did this, and "I believe"... swatting away the insinuation that he has been manipulated by people around him, a central tennet of the Bush-hater's creed. Turning the tables on the dems who accuse him of being simplistic in his conduct of the WOT, Bush is telling us that it is a multi-front war. Kerry counters by saying that Iraq is not even close to the centre of the WOT.
Kerry talking about body armour? Wasn't this the guy that voted against the 87 billion for appropriations? Iraq is getting worse, he says. Whap! Bush nails him with voting against the use of force. Bush keeps harping on steadfast, resolved... Kerry says he can succeed but Bush can't. both of these guys have been well coached and they are staying on message.
JFK is looking more expressive than I've ever seen him! He must have given up the botox. Was that an eyebrow twitch I just saw? Now he's getting a bit pendantic, as is his tendency. Bush addresses homeland security with what I have come realize is a central point of his philosophy: Stay on the offense. Fight the enemy abroad so that we don't have to fight them here. Bush looks a bit petulant during portions of the debate, and nowhere near as comfortable as he did during the Republican National Convention in NY last month.
A free Iraq will... a free Iraq will.... vs. "help is on the way"... once again, both bangin' home those messages. On the famous 87 billion, Kerry scores a bullseye: I made a mistake saying I voted for it before I voted against it... my opponent made a mistake going to war. Ouch.
Bush says the coallition is strong, Kerry continues to shit on it, cynically holding the line because Brits Australians and Poles don't vote in American elections... plans to do some fence-mending next February when he an Ter-ray-sa move into the White House, I guess.
Everyone kept describing both of these men as formidable debaters but neither of them seems particularly on their game tonight. Both seem halting, unsure at times. Maybe when they start speaking to each other a bit more they will go for each other's throats.
On his long term plans for Iraq, Kerry sounds sure, confident... he knows where he is going... he may be terribly wrong in his approach, but I don't think anyone can say he doesn't have a plan. Bush takes him to task for his comments on Alawi (the "puppet" PM) after Kerry's statement about changing the "dynamics on the ground". I love it when Bush talks about "enforcing doctrine" like some policy wonk... kinda puts paid to the Bush is a moron assertion.
Why does Kerry keep crapping on allies? "Outsourcing" the war on terror? "coallition of the bribed and coerced?" Is this his nuanced approach to foreign policy we keep hearing about? Bush looks genuinely puzzled about the statement that "pre-emptive action must pass the global test"... The look on his face is "Global test? WTF is this guy talking about?" You and me both, George...
GWB seems strongest when he talks about beliefs... and that is where he and Kerry differ. You may not agree with Bush but you know where he stands. He is categorical. He is certain. Kerry takes issue with Bush's certainy "You can be certain and wrong". What bothers Bush about Kerry is precisely the opposite: In Bush's opinion, Kerry changes positions because of politics and pressure --and in his mind, you just can't do that when you are president. You must be steadfast. Bush believes Kerry will wilt under pressure because he is unsure of his core values.
The comments on weapons of mass destruction, each man's approach to North Korea and Russia and particularly, their closing comments reveal a central truth: Americans are faced with the starkest choice between presidential candidates in half a century. Few men differ so fundamentally on so many issues. I think that the United States is in a unique historical position. At the present moment, it is perhaps the most dominant nation to ever exist... and now the world awaits the choice of its citizens.
JFK starts the off by kissing Jim Lehrer's ass... GWB starts off looking very sombre, on his first point he sounds like he's trying to level with the American public on Iraq... On the split screen, Kerry looks bemused by George, who starts to a do a little head-bob whenever he is being particularly emphatic. Kerry makes it clear in his rebuttle to GWB's first point that he is gonna through down the military card tonight.
Kerry is getting in some good early shots. He is all over Bush's handling of the War On Terror (WOT). Bush is being clever, say "I" did this, and "I believe"... swatting away the insinuation that he has been manipulated by people around him, a central tennet of the Bush-hater's creed. Turning the tables on the dems who accuse him of being simplistic in his conduct of the WOT, Bush is telling us that it is a multi-front war. Kerry counters by saying that Iraq is not even close to the centre of the WOT.
Kerry talking about body armour? Wasn't this the guy that voted against the 87 billion for appropriations? Iraq is getting worse, he says. Whap! Bush nails him with voting against the use of force. Bush keeps harping on steadfast, resolved... Kerry says he can succeed but Bush can't. both of these guys have been well coached and they are staying on message.
JFK is looking more expressive than I've ever seen him! He must have given up the botox. Was that an eyebrow twitch I just saw? Now he's getting a bit pendantic, as is his tendency. Bush addresses homeland security with what I have come realize is a central point of his philosophy: Stay on the offense. Fight the enemy abroad so that we don't have to fight them here. Bush looks a bit petulant during portions of the debate, and nowhere near as comfortable as he did during the Republican National Convention in NY last month.
A free Iraq will... a free Iraq will.... vs. "help is on the way"... once again, both bangin' home those messages. On the famous 87 billion, Kerry scores a bullseye: I made a mistake saying I voted for it before I voted against it... my opponent made a mistake going to war. Ouch.
Bush says the coallition is strong, Kerry continues to shit on it, cynically holding the line because Brits Australians and Poles don't vote in American elections... plans to do some fence-mending next February when he an Ter-ray-sa move into the White House, I guess.
Everyone kept describing both of these men as formidable debaters but neither of them seems particularly on their game tonight. Both seem halting, unsure at times. Maybe when they start speaking to each other a bit more they will go for each other's throats.
On his long term plans for Iraq, Kerry sounds sure, confident... he knows where he is going... he may be terribly wrong in his approach, but I don't think anyone can say he doesn't have a plan. Bush takes him to task for his comments on Alawi (the "puppet" PM) after Kerry's statement about changing the "dynamics on the ground". I love it when Bush talks about "enforcing doctrine" like some policy wonk... kinda puts paid to the Bush is a moron assertion.
Why does Kerry keep crapping on allies? "Outsourcing" the war on terror? "coallition of the bribed and coerced?" Is this his nuanced approach to foreign policy we keep hearing about? Bush looks genuinely puzzled about the statement that "pre-emptive action must pass the global test"... The look on his face is "Global test? WTF is this guy talking about?" You and me both, George...
GWB seems strongest when he talks about beliefs... and that is where he and Kerry differ. You may not agree with Bush but you know where he stands. He is categorical. He is certain. Kerry takes issue with Bush's certainy "You can be certain and wrong". What bothers Bush about Kerry is precisely the opposite: In Bush's opinion, Kerry changes positions because of politics and pressure --and in his mind, you just can't do that when you are president. You must be steadfast. Bush believes Kerry will wilt under pressure because he is unsure of his core values.
The comments on weapons of mass destruction, each man's approach to North Korea and Russia and particularly, their closing comments reveal a central truth: Americans are faced with the starkest choice between presidential candidates in half a century. Few men differ so fundamentally on so many issues. I think that the United States is in a unique historical position. At the present moment, it is perhaps the most dominant nation to ever exist... and now the world awaits the choice of its citizens.
Monday, September 27, 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
