A Joy to Behold

I was at a Christmas party held by a local community centre. A significant percentage of the children there, and their parents, are of the Muslim faith, as is the lady who runs the community centre. For contrast, my family is decidedly not Mulsim. In fact, my little family have a number of religious views / faiths.

The party was too big to hold at the community centre itself, so it was held at a local French Catholic Church. There were children of other faiths there, also. It was a true pleasure to see all the kids playing together and having fun. No politics, no issues caused by different faiths and religions. Just a bunch of kids having fun together and learning from each other.

After a while, it was announced that Santa Clause was about to appear. All the kids joined together to sing a song. "Jingle Bells", I think it was. When Santa appeared, all the kids were excited, even the Muslim ones. And the parents were happy to see the smiles on their kids faces. It really was something special to see. Not a sign of anyone indicating that this was wrong because their faith doesn't believe in Christmas, Santa Clause, etc. Just a bunch of families from the local community, all together, celebrating the occasion, the season, whatever. And I was glad I was able to be a part of it.

What I saw tonight, which I already knew anyway, is that the world would be a whole lot better of a place to live if we could all get along, and see each other, as our children do. They don't see each other as Muslim vs. Christians vs. Hindu vs. whatever. They don't see skin colour. All they see is friends and playmates. We could learn a lot from our children.

When I see how my son interacts with other children in our neighbourhood from different ethnic backgrounds, I know that the future is full of hope and promise, and a great deal of potential for peace on Earth.

Modern Slang

In modern parlance, saying something "sucks" means that it is bad or defective. For example, "That new song by so and so really sucks!".

However, if you have a vacuum cleaner that is defective, what can you say? "This vacuum cleaner really sucks!" is not actually a bad thing. You want your vacuum cleaner to suck.

Sometimes, a word is not usable in every context.

I just had to get that off my chest. Does anyone else have these weird thoughts?

The Harpy's Latest Mistake

Today, "The Harpy" made a big mistake. He booted former Conservative MP Garth Turner out of caucus. The Honourable Member from Halton will now be sitting as an Independent MP. Here was a guy who was not afraid to speak his mind, even when it was against his own party. Of course, The Harpy couldn't have that. Mustn't have any MPs violating the "Cone of Silence" surrounding this Conservative Government. Everyone is supposed to keep their mouths shut, and tow the party line, only saying and doing as The Harpy commands. So much for that whole "open and transparent" government that The Harpy wanted us to think he would give us.

In my opinion, The Honourable Garth Turner is the only MP in the current government who actually deserves the "Honourable" title. He is the most progressive MP in Ottawa today, and the Reform, I mean Conservative, Party doesn't deserve to have him as part of their ranks.

Mr. Turner, I salute you. Keep up the good work of representing your constituents. And keep up the great job of being a thorn in The Harpy's side.

I should mention that he is neither my MP, nor am I a supporter of the Conservative Party of Canada.

I only hope that The Harpy won't kick me out of Canada for speaking my thoughts and opinions. If my next posting is from some tropical locale, then you'll know what happened.

Media Censorship

As an adult, censorship in the media offends me greatly. As an adult I am perfectly capable of deciding for myself what I do or do not find offensive, and I am perfectly capable of changing the channel if I see or hear something on the television that I find to be offensive to me. I do not need any corporate overlords deciding for me what they think I will be offended by.

As a parent, I am perfectly capable of deciding what my child should or should not watch, based on his age. Yes, I know this is a form of censorship, but I only do it to keep him from being exposed to things he shouldn't be exposed to when an adult is not there to explain things to him in a way he'll understand. I believe in restricting him from things that are not age appropriate, such as shows with violent content, abusive language, etc. This is only because he is not old enough to fully understand what he is seeing. Even though he knows it is not real, I wonder if he really gets it sometimes. I'm sure he does, but I choose to err on the side of caution.

All that having been said, though, I do not plan to censor his viewing options forever. At some point in the not too distant future, I expect that the multitude of information and entertainment available on the television will be completely available to him. And I hope that by that time, he will understand the difference between reality and entertainment, and not think what he is seeing on most television shows is not real, including what is often portrayed by the news broadcasts.

Censorship in society is harmful to the citizenry of the world. We learn and grow as a society by being exposed to many different ideas, even those that are offensive. If we are prevented from being exposed to those ideas, usually by a small minority of narrow-minded people, then we as a society suffer.

Online Censorship

Recently, on a blogging site, a friend's account was configured in such a way such that any comment I made to postings on her blog, or comments to other comments, were automatically screened. Screening is when a comment is not visible to the general public until the owner of the blog gives the comment his or her blessing, and only then can the comment be seen by those viewing the blog.

I guess she didn't like the comments I left as a reply to the blog entry.

I have a problem with censorship, be it online chat rooms, blogs, television shows, books, magazines, or whatever form of media I am currently engaged with. As an adult, I feel that I have the right to be able to say whatever I am feeling, without being censored by anyone. In fact, a lot of people have died in more than one war, to guarantee me that freedom. When I get censored, I feel like my rights are being suppressed, and that those brave men and women fought in vain.

If I say something that is factually wrong, or emotionally inconsiderate, or I am merely being an ass, then others also have the right to tell me I am wrong, preferably with some proof, or to tell me I'm being an inconsiderate ass, or whatever the other readers think of what I am saying. And I am fine with that. That is what living in a free and democratic country is all about.

What does offend me is when my comments are censored, and no one is given the chance to publicly tell me I'm being an ass, or I'm wrong because I didn't know about some piece of information that proves me wrong. Or even more offensive, having my comments simply deleted, because the owner of the blog, or the moderator of the chat room, or whomever is in control of the site I am posting to, decides arbitrarily that my comment offends them in some way.

Freedom of speech means freedom to be offensive. It also mean the freedom to be wrong. In either case, censorship takes away my rights, and the rights of others, and I will always be strongly against adults of any society being censored.

Update:

It seems that there was a problem with my friend's blog, and somehow those who were supposed to have unfettered access didn't, and those who were supposed to be blocked / censored weren't. The problem got corrected and everything is well again. The sentiments above are still valid, even though this particular incident was accidental and not actually a case of censorship.

Stephen Harper and the AIDS Conference

I am going to jump on the bandwagon also, and condemn Mr. Harper for not attending the AIDS conference recently held in Toronto. Yes, I know that Tony Clament, the Minister of Health was there, as he should have been. However, this is not just some discussion group we are talking about. This is a major, internationally attended, event. Bill Clinton could find time to attend. Bill Gates could find time to attend. But Mr. Harper couldn't find a single day to make an appearance. He didn't even have to attend the entire event. That is what Mr. Clament should be doing. But why couldn't he make an appearance, shake hands with Bill and Bill, make a speech, and then head back to Ottawa and the business of running the country.

This will rank up there, in my mind at least, as being only slightly less dumb of a PR blunder as when Former PM Jean Cretien decided not to attend the funeral of Jordan's former king, King Hussein.

Stephen Harper and the GST reduction

I would like to personally and publicly thank Mr. Harper for the 1% reduction in the GST. I have given him a hard time here in this blog, but I will give credit where credit is due. He said he would reduce the GST, and he has done it. 1% doesn't amount to a whole lot of extra money in a person's pocket, but every penny counts. For example, my morning coffee is now 1 cent cheaper. You may be thinking, "Wow. You can take that early retirement now" in a sarcastic manner. However, in the course of a year, given that I drink a coffee pretty much every day, and occasionally, twice a day, then that works out to 2 or 3 free coffees per year.

It may not be a lot, but I'll gladly take it, with a warm "Thank you!" to our Prime Minister.

McCain Fruit Smooth-eez

I have recently seen the commercial for the McCain Fruit Smooth-eez product. This may be a good product (I haven't tried it yet) , but I have to say that the commercial itself is quite offensive.

The commercials are usually divided into 2 segments, where one person does something upsetting to the other. For example, a man stepping on a model airplane being built by a young boy, presumably his son. The father is shown rushing to the kitchen, plopping the ingredients for a Fruit Smooth-eez into a blender, mixing it up, pouring it into a glass, and giving it to his son, before he had a time to react negatively. This is apparently done to appease the child, to keep him from getting upset.

Way to go, McCain. You've set back the fight against childhood obesity by 20 years. In case you haven't noticed, the idea is not to perpetuate the myth that giving treats everytime someone is upset is a good thing. This is how obese kids are created. Nothing like encouraging people to shove your products into their kids mouths whenever they are upset.

This is what they are referring to when they talk about a corporation acting irresponsibly. As a Canadian, I am ashamed of what this Canadian company is implying in their ad campaign.

Added on June 13th:

I had an idea last night, on how to show the McCain's marketing people who came up with this ad campaign why it is stupid. I could beat the crap out of them with a baseball bat, and then afterwards, give them a Fruit Smooth-eez drink and let them decide for themselves if it makes them feel better or not.

First Anniversary

Today marks the first anniversary of this blog. It was 1 year ago today, on my 40th birthday, that I started this. The entries haven't always been frequent, but I hope that what entries I have made have been worth reading to all 2 or 3 of you who actually read these.

Flags at half-staff on the Peace Tower

There is a lot of discussion lately on when the government should lower the flag to half-staff on the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill. Here is the official description of the times it is appropriate, from the Government of Canada web site:

Flags on federal government buildings, airports, military bases and other establishments are flown at half-mast when directed by the Department of Canadian Heritage. The following are examples of the practice:

• across Canada and abroad, on the death of the Sovereign or a member of the Royal Family related in the first degree to the Sovereign (spouse, son or daughter, father, mother, brother or sister), the Governor General, the Prime Minister, a former governor general, a former prime minister, or a federal cabinet minister;
• within a province, on the death of the Lieutenant Governor, the Premier or another person similarly honoured by that province;
• within his/her own riding, on the death of the Member of the House of Commons, or the Member of the Provincial/Territorial Legislature;
• at his/her place of residence, on the death of a Senator, a Canadian Privy Councillor, or a Mayor.

Apart from occasions when flags on all government buildings and establishments across Canada are flown at half-mast, the flag on the Peace Tower of the Parliament Building at Ottawa is flown at half-mast:

• on the death of a Lieutenant Governor;
• on the death of a Canadian Privy Councillor, a Senator, or a Member of the House of Commons;
• on the death of a person whom it is desired to honour.

In effect, the Government of Canada can lower the flag on the Peace Tower to half-staff for anyone it chooses to honour.

It should also be noted that the description talks about lowering the flag to half-mast. This is technically incorrect, since half-mast is a naval term, where the tradition started. At sea, on naval vessels, flags are indeed lowered to half-mast. However, on a land-based flag pole, the proper term is half-staff.

Subway Guilty of False Advertising

I was in a Subway Restaurant recently, and they had a sign on the glass where they show the different bread choices, advertising a NEW garlic bread. I thought this sounded tasty, so I asked if I could have my sandwich on garlic bread. I was then told that there was no garlic bread, only a garlic spread they can put on whatever bread you want. The sign clearly said "Garlic Bread", not "Garlic Spread". To me, this is false advertising.

Just a few minutes ago, I was watching a comercial for Subway, and interestingly enough, it was advertising several new sadwiches, and they mentioned the garlic bread. The very same garlic bread that does not actually exist. Do they think we are stupid, and won't figure out they are lying to us when we ask for a sandwich on garlic bread, and then get told that there is just a spread, not an actual garlic bread?

This is just another example of corporations treating their customers like complete morons, and showing a complete disregard for their loyal customers. Not exactly a sound business practice, is it?

Here is a picture of the sign in my local Subway store.


Have I misunderstood something? Does "New Freshly Made GARLIC BREAD" mean something different than I think it does?

Pondering Imponderables

If a man opens his mouth, and his wife is not present, is he still wrong?

Creative Parenting

I have managed to pull off the parenting coup of the year. My son, who is 5 years old, was having trouble getting to sleep at night, because of his fear of the scary monsters in his bedroom. This went on for weeks and weeks, until I finally had enough of it.

A few nights ago, I convinced him that the monsters were not bad monsters, out to harm him. I told him that they were really nice monsters, despite their scary appearance, and that they were merely keeping an eye on him for me, and letting me know if he was in trouble. And that they would come downstairs with me to watch television after he was asleep.

He seemed to understand this idea, and decided that they should no longer be called monsters, because they were not bad beings. From now on, he decided, they would be called "nicers", because they are nice, not scary. So, according to my son, a nice monster is a nicer. This is working so well that he told me this morning that he didn't have any scary dreams last night, since he named them "nicers", only good dreams.

Can you tell that I am rather pleased with myself for this little bit of creative parenting?

The Decline of the (North) American Empire

There is a fundamental problem in America today. At last year's Superbowl half-time show, Janet Jackson showed a mostly naked breast. This caused an uproar of gigantic proportions. The US Government went ballistic, the right-wing nut jobs had a fit, and the FCC went apoplectic over this, and suddenly, all media was being watched like a hawk, with censorship running rampant. This year, there was a concerted effort to keep the Superbowl half-time show G rated, even to the point of censoring Mick Jagger on three separate occurances while he performed songs.

Now, contrast this with the fact that you can see violence in the news, on television, in the movies, etc., in large doses, on a daily basis. You can see advertisements for Grand Theft Auto: Vice City on television all the time, and see shows depicting murder, beatings, dismemberments, and rape in prime time. But show a nipple, and the titty cops will be all over you for obscenity violations.

Does this sound rational to anyone? Something beautiful, like a woman's breast, is immoral and bad and should be censored, but a gang member raping and killing a woman? Show it on prime-time television! That's the stuff of great cop shows! Can't censor that!

People need to get a grip, and figure out what the real harm to society is. If I had a choice between my son seeing some woman's naked breast, and him seeing some gang-banger killing some innocent by-standers in a drive-by shooting, guess which I'd choose? The choice is an easy one. And if you think this problem is limited to the borders of the US of A, guess again. We get a spillover effect up here in Canada. Since we watch a significant amount of American television shows and sporting events, what they show or don't show affects us equally, and that is not a good thing.

I Wanted To Be Wrong

Do you know what bothers me most about the new Prime Minister? I had always distrusted this Conservative from the West. I thought he was a slimy snake from the moment I first heard of him. I'm not even entirely sure why I didn't like him, but I didn't. It could have been because he reminded me of a Bush wannabe. Who knows. I never thought he was fit to run the government, certainly not in the way he claimed he wanted to run it. But you know what? I really, really, wanted to be proven wrong. Never before had I wanted to be wrong about something as much as I wanted to be wrong about Stephen Harper. And in his first week in office, I feel he has proven me right. I desperately wanted to be wrong. But I wasn't. And I am really saddened and disappointed about that.

It Needs To Be Said

Just remember one thing, folks. David Emerson, former Liberal and now a Conservative MP and Minister of International Trade, and Michael Fortier, who didn't even bother to run in the election, and is now the Minister of Public Works and Government Services (where the sponsorship scandal started in the first place) have something in common with David Dingwall, the former head of the Royal Canadian Mint: they seem to believe that they are entitled to their entitlements.

This honeymoon seems to have ended faster than a one night stand in Las Vegas.

An Inside View of Canadian Politics

I have just discovered the blog of an elected Conservative MP from southern Ontario, Garth Turner, MP. His blog is called The Turner Report. It gives an interesting perspective of the turmoil and other goings on inside the Conservative Government. I encourage everyone to give it a read.

Different Party, Same Lack of Ethics and Morals

It looks like the Conservatives will continue with the hypocracy that started the day of the swearing in of the new government. According to a CBC new article, which can be found here, David Emerson has no intention of stepping down and running in a bi-election. To quote him directly,

"No, I'm not going to quit."

"We've got at least three, perhaps more, members of Parliament who have crossed the floor or opted to sit as an Independent. Frankly, my circumstances are not any different than those. As, and when, Parliament changes the rules to apply to all members of Parliament, I will abide by those rules," he said after getting off a flight at the Vancouver airport.

This is what we have to look forward to for the next couple of years. No matter what the Conservative Party has said in the past is wrong, and shouldn't be done, they will do it themselves, simply because they can. Never mind that they campaigned on a platform of government reform and cleaning up government corruption and immorality. Now that they are elected, they have shown that they are no different than the Liberals that they are replacing.

They say this is different, because he didn't cross the floor to prop up a government looking at a possible non-confidence vote, with the promise of a nice Cabinet portfolio. I disagree completely with this. This is exactly the same. Emerson was enticed to cross the floor, with the promise of a nice Cabinet portfolio to help prop up the government. The only difference is that Stephen Harper didn't wait until the vote was imminent before starting the enticement game.

I'll give Prime Minister Harper credit where credit is due. He is certainly no procrastinator. It only took him a few days to make people think he has no parliamentary ethics at all, and that he'll do whatever it takes to hold on to power, now that he has it. Gee, why am I having a feeling of deja vu all over again?

Congratulations, Mr. Prime Minister. You've proven to everyone that a businessman from the West can be just as shady and underhanded a leader as lawyers from Quebec have been. I can't wait to see what he does next to make people wish they had voted for the Liberals or the New Democratic Party.

The New Conservative Government

Stephen Harper is the new Prime Minister of Canada. Last night, he spent his first night at 24 Sussex Drive, the official residence of the Prime Minister. He has been Prime Minister for less than a week, and already, he has done things he has previously spoken out against.

For example: On many occasions, he has spoken against appointments to the Senate, desiring to reform Senate. So what was one of his first acts of office, just after being sworn in? He appointed someone to Cabinet who did not even run in the previous election, never mind actually wanting to run for a seat. And to give this guy some political legitimacy, Harper appointed him to the Senate. This was his first few hours as Prime Minister.

Another example: On the same day, in the same time as he was doing the above act, he announced that he had coerced someone who got elected as a Liberal to cross the floor and get sworn in as a Conservative Cabinet Minister. I seem to recall that he was quite upset when Belinda Stronach, a member of his own party, did this to him last year. I recall that he declared that this was an ethics violation, though not against the rules of the House of Commons. So let me ask you this, Mr. Harper. Is it more ethical when you do it than when then Prime Minister Paul Martin did the exact same thing?

I am left to wonder if we are in for more of the same sort of governing that we got from the Liberals. We wanted to send the Liberals a message that we are tired of the same old politics as usual act we've been getting for years. Apparently, Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party didn't get that message either.

The End Of Speeding?

Could we see the end of motor vehicles exceeding the speed limit whenever the driver feels like it? Not only is this possible, but we could see it happen in our lifetimes. All you would need to accomplish this would be a good GPS system, with access to information about what the acceptable speed limit is for any given road, which likely already exists. Put this GPS system in an automobile, have it be able to communicate with a computer that can control the accelerator, and suddenly you cannot exceed the posted speed limit on any road in any area serviced by the GPS system. Emergency vehicles would simply not have this device attached, and would thus be able to go as fast as necessary to get to the scene of the emergency.

Think this is merely science fiction and the mindless rantings of a delusional blogger? Think again. All the necessary technology exists today. The only missing component is legislation mandating that such a setup be installed in all new vehicles, and it would be a done deal.

We may not see this system become mandatory in the short term, but who knows what tomorrow could bring. Reality can often be stranger than science fiction.

More gouging at the "service" station

Yesterday, I went to a "service" station, to put some air into the tires of my vehicle. When I got there, lo and behold, there was a new pump, with a slot in it, and a sticker proclaiming that, for the privilege of using some air, it would cost 50 cents. I don't know how long the 50 cents would have given me to put air into my tires. I didn't stick around to find out. I am sure there must be some station somewhere that doesn't want to gouge me further for some air. What's next? Charging me for using a squeegie to clean my windows? A surcharge for the use of the water in the squeegie holder? Where does it end?

I remember a time, not that long ago, where air was free, and these places actually tried to make you feel like they cared about your business. They would pump your gas, check your oil level, top up the windshield washer fluid, check your air pressure in your tires if they looked a little low, and even put more air in, if you asked nicely and it wasn't too busy at the pumps at that time. Today, all you get is a person behind the cash register at the self-pump station, and 50 cent shots of air for your tires.

It seems to me that every day, the oil companies are looking for more and more ways to take the "service" out of service station. I guess that is why they are now being referred to as gas bars. Any day now, they will implement a cover charge, like some regular bars do. Then, you will be forced to pay just to get to the pump. Maybe charge a fuel pump rental fee too. Where will their greed and need to gouge the customer end?

Each day, as I look around me, I see the term "customer service" mean less and less. Soon it will be a completely meaningless phrase. That will be a sad day indeed.

Another Pet Peeve

This is another of my pet peeves. Every week day, I drive 70 - 100 km to and from work, most of that being on highway 417. When it is raining heavily, and cars are throwing up lots of mist into the air from their tires, it can be a bit difficult to see the cars ahead of you. Especially since most of them are not intelligent enough to turn on their lights. They seem to think that their daytime lights are sufficient. And they would be, if I could somehow, magically, see the front of their vehicles from a position several hundred feet behind them. It is even worse when these same idiots are driving a car that is about the same colour as the mist, or a wet road. That makes the contrast easy to see. Can you feel the sarcasm dripping?

In the future, please turn on your lights. Everyone around you will appreciate it. And it will make it easier to make an insurance claim when you get run into. If the insurance adjuster finds out you didn't have your lights on, then you will be found to be partially at fault, and therefore won't get fully reimbursed for everything you feel you should be entitled to.

Plus, it is the logical and courteous thing to do.