I leave you with this redeemable study, indicating that young people today are less intelligent than they were 30 years ago. For any of my students that might be reading this.... this is why I mark you so hard!
Greetings from the Porter airport lounge at the island airport in Toronto. I am writing to you on my brand spankin' new Asus Eepc, the latest in ultra-light, ultra-portable, ultra-cheap computers. Here's a pic of me taken on the pc webcam, as I struggle to figure out its features:
I bought this device to leave with the Guyanese people. But I just discovered --to my horror!-- that the Eepc does not come with a CD drive! This makes it useless to the people in Guyana. Oh well, guess I have to keep it :-)
Yes, I'm still woefully ill (as I hope is conveyed in the poor photo above). And I'm buried beneath a mountain of work. So to those whom I owe stuff --sorry, I'll get to you soon!
Last night I attended the mid-run cocktail party for the Toronto International Festival of Authors. Lots of fun. I met Amitav Ghosh, my old acquaintance Austin Clarke, Richard Gwynn and a nice Danish family whose names I forget.
Sorry, no pics. Well, that's not entirely true. I do have one embarrasing pic, which I will post later.
Want to know how much of a fanboy dork I am? I just finished watching UFC 90, the one with the disappointing match between Anderson Silva and Patrick Cote, and had to dig up this marvelous Youtube clip of Silva's highlights:
For those not in the know, Silva is considered by many to be the best fighter in the world, an entire generation beyond anyone else in his weight class. If mixed martial arts were viewed with more respect by mainstream media, Silva would be mentioned in the same breath as Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky and Michael Jordan as transcendant athletic geniuses.
In two weeks I head back to Guyana as part of a team sent by Veahavta, a Jewish philanthropic organization, to engage in some mother-infant health projects in the interior. This means having to get my fat ass into some kind of shape, and overcoming my distaste for sleeping in a tent. Right now, I'm shopping for a pair of comfortable yet functional snake boots, appropriate for lowland jungle usage. See, Guyana is beset with 5 species of poisonous snakes, one of which --the labarria, a type of fer-de-lance-- really likes to bite people. So if anyone knows anything about buying snake boots, let me know ASAP!
In the mean time, I have some random election-themed images for you. First, courtesy of EK Hornbeck, here's a behind-the-scenes look at the Sarah Palin stripper-lookalike-contest in Vegas:
Speaking of Ms. Batshit Crazy Alaskan Governor, here she is on that fateful day when she realized the full extent of her international affairs experience:
And can you believe the Republican strategy for addressing the global economic meltdown? More breaks for the rich? It's that ridiculous Reaganomics nonsense again: trickle down economics. Oddly, it was Michael Moore (who pisses me off a lot) who said it best, last night on Larry King Live. He said, in the days since FDR, America attained its wealth through the production and selling of goods. Then, in the Reagan era, they switched to making money from money, essentially through the manipulation of currencies and securities. There is no innate value in such speculation; ultimately a nation's wealthy comes down to its resources and production capacity. Hence, today's final image is a summary of the Republican's tired and wrong policy of trickle-down economics:
I am deathly ill today, and yet must heave my growing ass onto an airplane in a couple of hours. So I have nothing of particular depth for you today. Instead you get a few random things. First is this very interesting photo of Barack Obama's maternal grandparents:
There is a touching description of the relevance of this photo here. And here is an interesting summary of the family lineages of both major candidates.
In the spirit of equal airtime, here's a fascinating and powerful video from French TV showing John McCain in his POW days:
Next, here's a very rare David Bowie song that he refuses to acknowledge today. Behold, the Laughing Gnome:
The above photo is of 14 year old Rajiv Dharamdial, known as Ravi, who was stabbed to death last week while walking home from school in Brampton (which is pretty much a part of Toronto, for those of you reading this from outside Canada).
Rajiv was sort of a distant cousin of mine, though not a blood relative; at least not to my knowledge. I'd never met him, nor even knew that he existed. But the singular tragedy and consequence of his departure is not lost on me.
This blog post will be automatically reproduced on my Facebook page, where some of Rajiv's true blood relatives will see it. To them, I offer nothing but sympathy and shared rage. A lot of crime, while detestable, is sort of understandable. Child murder is certainly not in the "understandable" category.
Rajiv was stabbed to death by two Black youths. This is relevant because the defining curse of all things Guyanese is the mindless and futile discontent between Indians and Blacks. It is one of the many reasons so many of use emigrated from the violence and poverty-plagued land of our birth.
While Rajiv's death may or may not have had a racial dimension to it, given the history of racial strife intrinsic to the legacy of all Guyanese, even those --like Rajiv-- who were born abroad, it is necessarily an issue that comes to mind, awash in the grief of his violent end. Thus it behooves us to acknowledge the potential role of race as this case unfolds; to do otherwise serves no good purpose.
So let us hope for four things: (1) that Rajiv's murderers are brought to justice; (2) that we find out that race was not an issue in the event, lest we conclude that Guyana's sins have migrated north; (3) that nothing like this ever happens again; and (4) that Rajiv's parents are miraculously granted some degree of peace in the wake of such unimaginable tragedy.
You know, for about 30 seconds I thought about "live blogging" the McCain/Obama debate last night. Then I realized it would mean sinking to an all new "I have no life" low.
McCain's only shot was to come out swinging --which he did. But in doing so, he was unprepared for Obama's excellent defense, which was simply to relax and be presidential. The frustration eventually got to McCain, causing him to seem incredulous and petulant, as in the above clip. McCain just isn't a media friendly guy, as shown in the following image from Andrew Sullivan's site:
Want to know where John McCain got his debate talking points? Click here.
And unsurprisingly, someone has already Youtubed McCain's various facial ticks and contortions:
The BBC has a nice summary of people's reactions from around blog land. But I think what sums it up best is that America is angry and frustrated... but that doesn't mean the American voters want a President who's also angry and frustrated, which is what McCain projects. They appear to want one who's calm and dedicated to getting them out of their quagmires.
But hey, anything can happen in the next few weeks.
In Other News...
Time for some nerdotry. Ever read Wil Wheaton's recaps of the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation? Do so here.
Entertainment Weekly has a defensible list of the top 10 ST:NG episodes here. I think they're wrong about the ranking, though. "The Inner Light" is the best, and possibly one of the best episodes of American TV ever.
EW gets this completely wrong, however: 17 Sc-Fi Misfires. They include the near perfect Bladerunner on that list? What are they smoking?
In preparation for tonight's 3rd (and final) Obama-McCain debate, check out the following PailinAsPresident.com website. Seriously, check it out.
And thanks to Cousin Ajay for news of Larry Flynt's latest opus, Nailin' Paylin [sic], a porn version of Sarah Pailin's quest for the White House. With such quotable lines as "Drill, baby, drill", this was inevitable.
Here's the star:
I'd vote for her.
Now, on to last night's election results...
With a very low voter turnout (something marginally over 50%), the Conservatives predictably walked away with a "strong" minority government. I don't know what can ever be considered "strong" about a minority government: either it's vulnerable or it isn't, and a minority government is always vulnerable.
Canadians no longer vote the issues. They don't even vote their local candidates. They now vote the personalities of the leaders of the federal parties, American style. Of the top four choices, Elizabeth May seemed genuine but amateurish, Jack Layton seemed ridiculously old-school partisan, Stephane Dion seemed confused and desperate, and only Stephen Harper remained calm and kingly the whole time. Combined with two factors --voter apathy and the splitting of the votes from the Left of centre-- Harper's persona won him another victory.
As discussed yesterday, however, this will not be accepted as a victory by Harper or the Conservatives. What's the point of calling an election if you simply retain the status quo? This was their one chance to get a majority government, and they failed. There is a very good chance that Stephen Harper will walk away from his throne in coming months. And there is a better than good chance that, come May, we will see a new Liberal leadership race.
What does this mean? Another election in 1-2 years, possibly involving two brand new front-runners.
So here are the results, as of 3:AM Wednesday morning (some ballots are still being counted):
Conservatives - 143 Liberals - 76 BQ - 50 NDP - 37 Green - 0 Other -2
Based on my predictions from yesterday, this gives me a total deviation of 50 seats.
My nemesis in this endeavour was Nasty Nicky B who, in the comments of yesterday's post, offered his own prediction:
Nick's total deviation from the actual results is 29. So I guess he wins this particular contest. But I'll get you next time, Barrowman. You know I will....
Today is election day in Canada. I'd made up my mind not to vote, since both ridings in which I could are pretty much locked up by the candidates I would have voted for. But at the last minute, I decided to exercise my franchise and vote in Ottawa.
Now, none of my ID has my Ottawa address on it. So I went to the polling booth, produced my driver's licence (with Toronto address) and a letter I'd just received from the Canada Council for the Arts, with my name and Ottawa address typed on front of the envelope. Believe it or not, this was sufficient to allow me to vote in Canada's federal election.
Huh? Neither of those items proved that I am a citizen of Canada. And the letter from the Canada Council was in no way official; the address was typed on the front of the envelope, not inserted beneath the plastic window, which is the usual imprimatur of officialdom. I wonder how much election fraud actually takes place in this country, given how easy it is for an unqualified person to vote.
But I guess it can be argued that the problem in Canada isn't unqualified people voting, but not enough people voting at all! However, I'm one of those people who'd rather see a low voter turnout, consisting of informed citizens, than a high turnout of people who have no idea why they're voting.
Now, this is a peculiar election. Stephen Harper's Conservatives called it during a minority tenure with hopes that they could transform their tenuous government into a majority with a real mandate. But amazingly, the Liberals have threatened to take that minority away from them. So, if the Conservatives do anything other than win a majority government, they will be perceived as having lost.
It's unclear how the current economic crisis will affect things. I think the cold, dispassionate economist (Harper) wins out over the excitable professor (Dion) and the constantly-spouting-talking-points Other Guy (Layton). Thus, I present you with my prediction for this evening:
Conservatives - 124 Liberals - 100 Bloc Quebecois - 50 NDP - 32 Green - 1 Other - 1
I'm being generous to both the Greens and the Liberals, but a guy's gotta take a chance sometimes. And yes, Elizabeth May beats Peter McKay.
When I was a kid growing up in the early 70s, there was no cable TV, we only got a handful of stations on our clunky old black and white television, and children's programming was a rarity. When I was 5 or 6, I used to watch a few imported Japanese cartoons (what today would be recognized as the origins of modern anime) that had been altered for American audiences.
One such show left me a snippet of theme song that has lingered with me these past 35 years. Over the decades, the tune and the words have mutated, so much so that I had no idea what it was actually all about. The snippet that remained was the line, "Toe boy, the eight man." It made no sense, of course. I eventually concluded that I was singing, "Tarzan, the ape man", filtered through a toddler's recollection.
But yesterday, by virtue of the magic of the Internet, my decades old mystery was finally solved. The song that I'd been humming for 35 years was the theme to a mostly forgotten, but somewhat historically important, Japanese cartoon called, "Tobor, the Eighth Man."
See, Tobor ("robot" spelled backwards) was a cyborg who wore a business suit during the normal hours of the day, but became the superhero "Eighth Man" when danger arrived. I can finally die in peace, my friends. Want to see the world through this 5 year old's eyes? Check out the intro of "Tobor, the Eighth Man":
In Japan, the show was called "Eitoman". For a comparison between the Japanese and American versions, check out this clip:
Another cartoon from that era that rings warmly in my childhood memory is one called "Prince Planet". I remember fondly watching every episode, in which unerringly the heroic Prince would see his power levels drop dangerously low (as indicated by the giant "P" on his chest). Always a tense moment for a toddler. Check out the opening segment from this forgotten but fantastic Japanese cartoon:
Now, I cannot begin to express to you how well engraved these random images of Prince Planet are in my temporal lobes. Of course, through my infantile cognitive filter, the Prince appeared mightily heroic and important. Those rock creatures in the opening segment haunted me for years as horrific incarnations of evil and terror.
Seeing it now, I'm rather embarrassed that these silly stories and images had such a lasting impression on me. But that's life, no? I guess the lesson is to realize that children process images and narratives in a much different way than adults do, and that we should never minimize the impact of seemingly innocuous or disposable children's programming and products.
(Today's subject heading is an homage to internet wrestling legend Chris Hyatte, who may have just got married. With Hyatte, one can never tell what's fact, what's fiction and what's delusion.)
Shout out to resident Deonandia villain Darth Vadum, who tapes his first appearance on the Daily Show this morning! We don't agree on anything politically, but I hope he kicks some ass on TV, 'cause he's actually a good dude.
Here in Canada, we are four days from Election Day. Depending on which pollster you ask, we are on the verge of another Conservative minority, a Conservative majority or a Liberal minority government. You'll have my prediction, as usual, on Monday.
Recently, Liberal leader (and francophone) Stephane Dion appeared on the Right-leaning CTV network for an interview. As you can see from this following video, he seemingly stumbled on one of the questions, asking for clarification several times:
The Conservatives are making much of this event, as evidenced in this Western Standard blog post. But if you watch carefully, it's evident that the problem wasn't in Dion's comprehension (though that plays a part), but rather in the changing and poor phraseology of the question.
The interviewer first asks, "If you were Prime Minister now what would you have done about the economy and this crisis that Mr. Harper has not done."
Then, he asks something to the effect, If you were Prime Minister now, what would you have already done differently? Huh?
Most politicians would have resorted to their standard talking points about the economy. I think it's to Dion's credit that he struggles to understand the specifics of the question in order to provide a specific response. I also think that most native English speakers would not have been able to understand the specifics of that question, either, since most couldn't parse a sentence or formulate a complex verb tense to save their lives!
Dion's request for clarification is completely reasonable from a non-political standpoint: how much time would he had been Prime Minister before the crisis hit? A few days? Years? The time frame makes a difference to the quality of his answer. Or at least it would for someone trying to give a truly reasoned response, rather than the canned answer we'd expect from Harper or Layton. (In particular Layton, whose standard talking points are really starting to grate on me.)
In any case, Dion's inability to answer the question speaks both to his poor grasp of idiomatic English and to his highly analytical thought processes. But it also speaks to the journalist's inability to ask clear and specific questions, and even his inability to rephrase when asked to do so. My impression of Stephane Dion went up as a result of this event, since it showed me that he does not try to avoid tough questions, but instead seeks to understand them.
Shame on anyone who attempts to portray this interview as an example of Dion's poor intellect or weaseling politician ways. The polar opposite could not be more true.
These Presidential debates are amazing things. Beforehand, the campaigns put out ridiculous statements aggrandizing the other guy, and minimizing expectations for their guy. Regardless of who actually did the best job, afterwards the spinners take to the town, trying to convince everyone that either their guy scored a knock-out punch, or the format was biased against them. (Example here.) And when it's all said and done, every viewer perceives the event through the reality filtering lens of his own political stripe.
A quick scan of the blogosphere sees Right-wing sites, like the Western Standard, saying things like: "Every time [Obama] talks, he reminds me of a smooth, condescending 'expert' coming down to the level of the not-as-smart folks he's trying to explain the world to. I can't get past his presentation style which reeks of phony to me."
Meanwhile, Democratic sites, like Daily Kos, report that "McCain was ridiculously bad all night."
My take? McCain was ridiculously bad all night. I think he read the audience all wrong. Today, for the first time in a long time, Americans seem to have lost their sense of humour. Their economy is decaying and they're not doing well in two wars. They want a smart guy to talk seriously to them, not to hand them platitudes and bromides. McCain kept handing them platitudes and bromides, and sank to negatively portraying his adversary more frequently than did Obama; the crowd did not seem to enjoy that.
In one particularly head-slapping moment, Brokaw asked the candidates whether health care was a responsibility or a right. A more soft-ball question I could not imagine. Obama answered correctly; whether he believes it or not, the right answer is that every citizen has a right to be healthy. McCain answered it with foolhardy candour: that it's a responsibility. Now, I get that he was trying to suggest that the government has a responsibility to offer health care, but that's not the way it came across, and that's certainly not the most salable message.
Obama's policies were well explained. McCain's were vague, and peppered with far too many "my friend" suffixes. I sensed that a lot of people --myself included-- felt spoken down to. On that topic, the blogsophere will make much of the following quote from McCain, in which he referred to Obama as "that one". It was the most glaring example of the disdain that was seething from McCain's pores:
Intended or not, the phrase will ring with racist overtones for a lot of people. Hence the following:
Now, Obama voiced a number of policies that I soundly disagree with, particularly his bellicose foreign policies. I want to reiterate something I've blogged earlier. By Canadian standards, Barack Obama has more in common with Stephen Harper than he does with the platforms and beliefs of any other major federal leader in this country. But as the furthest-most Left voice in maintstream American federal politics at the moment, I gravitate toward his candidacy. Let us make no mistake, however: if/when Barack Obama becomes President, I expect to take great exception to many, many, many of his policies.
Tonight, Obama appeared relaxed, thoughtful and Presidential. McCain appeared frustrated, a tad exercised and maybe angry, but definitely desperate. To me, this evening was a resounding success for Barack Obama. But many things can happen between today and election day.
In the mean time, don't forget to take our poll on the side bar to the right!
My friend Richard Von Erlac took this magnificent photo from the Yukon a few weeks ago. Pretty impressive, no?
EK Hornbeck sends us this English translation of a speech by the Prime Minister of Iceland, with dire warnings about the world economy. End of Days, indeed.
Here's some other interesting news: a man is fighting paying child support because he claims he was asleep when his child was conceived, and thus it was done against his will. As one Fark.com commenter, named "Drew Hates Boobies", put it: "I think I'd just have to pay the child support. Better that than admitting that I was the king of lame."
Know how John McCain keeps berating Barack Obama for having opposed the so-called "surge" in Iraq? 'Cause, you know, the surge has been all success and roses? Here's a perspective that makes the surge look a little less salable.
Deonandia resident villain Darth Vadum appeared on Faux News's "The O'Reilly Factor" last night. Here's the clip.
If you're curious about what O'Liely may have looked like as a devil child, check this out:
Meanwhile, the Other Ray sends us this article about John McCain's record. And not to appear too biased, here's a discussion of how the Veep debate was unfair to conservatives.
Further to my earlier post about the Ninja Cat, the Other Ray sends us this video. Apparently, if you understand American Sign Language, it's quite interesting. I don't, so I have no idea what's going on. But I'm here to share. So that's what I'm doing.
But a more eerie video is the send-up by SNL. Weird how I can no longer tell the difference between the real Sarah Palin and her parody played by Tina Fey:
Speaking of the debate, legendary journalist Robert Fisk pipes up about the Veepers' inability to use appropriate language with respect to the Israel question.
And Andrew Sullivan has this discrepancy between what Sarah Palin said suring the Veep debate, and what she said while running for governor of Alaska.
Meanwhile, film critic Roger Ebert pipes in with his take on the Veep debate, strictly from the perspective of a cinema buff.
If I've not yet mentioned it, those of us in Canada can now registered our phone numbers with the national Do Not Call List!
Our Antipodal man "Amphibious" sends us the following trivia question: which is the only country not to print its name on its postal stamps? If you know, include it in the comments below.
Don't forget to vote in the poll to the right. So far, our results mirror those in the official polls, with Obama beating McCain at just above 50% of votes.
I'd meant to try to be fair and post something bad about Obama. I found this, apparently proof that Obama stole a speech from Deval Patrick:
Certainly, the low brows at the Western Standard Blogs have been salivating over this "discovery". But, it turns out, Deval Patrick and Barack Obama had the same campaign manager, so it's perfectly understandable that the latter would take cues from the former. Furthermore, it turns out that he had tacit approval to use the words. So who knows.
I will say this, though. To my American friends: you must understand that Canada is essentially to the Left of pretty much every political movement in the USA. If Barack Obama were Canadian, his policies would resemble more those of the Right-leaning Conservative party than those of our Left-of-centre parties. Thus, I find it strange that Conservative voices here are so anti-Obama.
The most glaring issue with which Obama and the US Democracts agree with Canadian Conservative thought is the war in Afghanistan. I think it's useful to read Eric Margolis's latest column, in which he argues convincingly for everyone to get the frack out of Afghanistan:
"The current war is not really about al-Qaida and "terrorism," but about opening a secure corridor through Pashtun tribal territory to export the oil and gas riches of the Caspian Basin to the West. Canada and the rest of NATO have no business being pipeline protection troops. Canada's military intervention in Afghanistan has jeopardized its national security by putting it on the map as an anti-Muslim nation joined at the hip with Bush and his ruinous policies... As the great Benjamin Franklin said, 'there is no good war, and no bad peace.'"
Well, I didn't watch the Canadian English leader's debate. Why should I? We all know what would happen. The four least power-crazy candidates would (predictably and understandably) gang up on the blue-eyed Devil Child, Stephen Harper, and end up making him look more Presidential in the process. Notice that I did not say "Prime Ministerial". Harper runs his government as if he were a neocon American President, not a populist PM responsive to the entire Parliament.
No, instead I watched the ridiculous display that was the American VP debate. Before, I get into it, here's one prediction of how it would go down:
Well, what can I say? How sad is it that in what is supposed to be an open job interview for the chair next to the most powerful position in the history of humanity, one can declare success if one has simply failed to make a bleeding idiot out of oneself? Imagine if you went into a job interview and you just barely avoided an intellectual meltdown; would you expect to get the job? Yet this is how the spinners are portraying Sarah Palin's performance.
This is what Sarah Palin represents: the final absolute lowering of expectations.
In Canada, we (thank Zod!) still have a sense of wanting to be led by men and women who are better than we are: more eloquent, more learned, stronger, bolder, more robust and certainly more experienced in matters of import. In general, we don't care if our leader shops at our stores or if his kids play hockey with our kids. What we most care about is that he (or she) is the best our society can produce. I think it's fair to say that most nations view their leaders the same way.
Yet that is most certainly not the case in the USA. Joe Biden clearly had to hold himself back from outshining Palin, lest he be perceived as being too mean on the "little lady". She, on the other hand, peppered her delivery with so much awful, folksy pablum that I actually spat out my coffee at several moments. "Doggone it"? "Joe Six Pack"? Sending a "shout out" to her peeps? Winking at the camera? Is "also" the Alaskan equivalent of "eh" or "uh"? And how many times did she refer to herself and John McCain as "mavericks"? Fifty? A hundred? All so bloody sickening.
A lot of her defenders are claiming that she isn't dumb, she's just inexperienced. Well, I'm sorry. The definition of "dumb" has clearly been changed since I first learned it. There are lowered expectations all around, it seems. This woman is governor of an American state, and possibly two steps away from being the freaking President of the United States of America. For people who have her ambition and pedigree, we apply a more stringent definition of "dumb".
If she were one of my undergrad students, I'd give her a C+ for her demonstrated understanding of issues. The "+" is because I'm known to be generous. She clearly doesn't understand economics. (Neither does McCain, for that matter.) She doesn't seem to know the names of the Generals she keeps quoting. I don't recall a single time she actually spoke in a full sentence, or for that matter answered a question directly.
But the biggest, scariest moment for me was when she professed to agree with Dick Cheney, that the Vice President is more a part of the legislative body than the executive body. Luckily, Biden slapped her down hard on that one. The last thing America --and the rest of us-- needs is another Vice President eager to exert power beyond his or her tiny mandate.
Republican Kathleen Parker has a nice post mortem on the debate, aptly titled "She Won Fersure, Also." And Guardian writer Oliver Burkeman live-blogged the debate with some hilarity here.
But by far the funniest --and saddest-- post-debate moment is Faux News' attempt at questioning a "focus group". Watch carefully. This is no focus group. It's a bunch of paid (poor) actors who've been poached from an infomercial!
And my grade 9 English teacher, Harold Lass, sends us this:
So who won? Does it matter? I'll say this: of the four candidates involved in the current struggle for the White House, it's clear to me that Joe Biden is the most Presidential, and Sarah Palin is the least.
It's a weird time for elections, no? New Zealand is entering election mode. Here in Canada, we are knee deep in an election most people don't care about. And the big show, the US elections, has as its main event, not the heavy weight match between Obama and McCain (part 2!) but the freak show that is Palin/Biden, scheduled for this evening.
Canadian Federal Debate
But before we get there, believe it or not there was a federal debate in Canada last night. A lot of people don't realize this because it was in French. It was a weird, surreal exchange, with the leaders of all five recognized federal parties meeting in a civilized manner around a bizarre egg-shaped table, sort of like one of those European talk shows no one watches. (Well, except for me.)
Like a lot of Anglophones, my French is halting. I understand best when another Anglophone is speaking French, and least when a native speaker is waxing profundity. Hence, I fully expect the majority of the country to rate the performances of Stephane Dion and Gilles Duceppe poorly --unfairly so. But frankly, this debate was for Quebec ears and eyes; the rest of us were incidental.
Here's my take on what happened last night: Duceppe was in his element and clearly showed what a magnificent speaker and politician he is. It's a shame he has no interest in being Prime Minister or even in advocating for the interests of all Canadians. (For my non-Canadian readers, Duceppe is leader of the Bloc Quebecois, essentially a party whose only mandate is to advocate for the needs of the people of Quebec, ultimately toward secession!)
Jack Layton, who was otherwise on the ball, really screwed up by delving into health care. See, in Canada health is a provincial matter, though guidelines are set by federal law. In Quebec in particular, any suggestion of federal meddling in provincial matters is a grave sin.
Elizabeth May, the Green Party leader, was embarrassing. But I enjoyed her French the most because it's closest to my own: barely out of high school.
Dion, the only hope for we Harper-haters, was abysmal to my ears. I'm told that in French he came off as quite eloquent. But his body language was overly eager and a bit desperate. I don't think he made much headway last night.
The big winner, as much as it pains me to say, was the blue-eyed devil child Stephen Harper. He appeared so convinced of his divine right of rule that he was relaxed and kingly. The fact that the other "debaters" spent almost all their time focusing their bile against him and him alone actually strengthened his position as the strongest person in the room. We are doomed.
Now, as for the spectacle tonight...
The Upcoming US VP Debate
Well, well, well. Will this not be the most entertaining spectacle of the whole year? After disastrous performances during interviews with lightweight interviewers like Sean Hannity and Katie Couric, Sarah Palin was whisked into hiding by her handlers. Think about this for a second, will you? If she's afraid to face a bunch of preening, overpaid TV journalists, how will she ever face a real political beast, like Vladimir Putin?
As many others have said, what we may see here is an example of the worst kind of sexism. America doesn't like to see its "girls" beat up on. Meanwhile, they expect full competency from their "boys". If Biden rips Palin's throat out on live TV, it is he who will come across poorly, not her. Because of this, I fully expect Biden to be soft and accommodating. I also expect him to phrase all his comments with respect to John McCain, and not Sarah Palin. His job is to attack McCain on behalf of Obama, not to further expose a laughably idiotic minor politician from state few Americans ever think about.
And before we Obama/Biden supporters get too cocky, let's remember that Joe Biden isn't all cherry trees and boy scout badges, either. This article lists his sins. In particular, he's of the Hillary school of excuses for the Iraq War. You know what I'm talking about. He regrets his decision to support the war, but claims that he and "everyone else" thought that Saddam really had WMDs there.
I call/called/continue to call bullshit! No thinking person was ever convinced that there were WMDs in Iraq. The data were clearly shallow, especially when weapons inspectors Scott Ritter and Hans Blix failed to give the hawks the rationale they needed. So Joe Biden, either you're lying or you're an idiot. Either way, you don't get a pass from me.
Don't forget to take the poll on the right. Tell us who you think will win the US election. As for the Canadian election, it's a done deal. Harper's conservatives will win. The question is: minority or majority?
No, this is not real. And yes, I stole it from a link provided by Andoo who stole it from Zod knows where. But it's funny, dammit, so international copyright laws don't apply. Click to enlarge:
Remember stories about Sarah Palin's email being hacked? Well, why not read it?
And here's a nice documentary about the wilds of Guyana, where I am off to again next month:
Now here's a bit of retardedness. That bastion of reasoned thought, the Western Standard Blogs (I hope you sense the sarcasm) republished a snippet from the National Review, which stated:
"The four major agencies tracking Earth’s temperature, including NASA’s Goddard Institute, report that the Earth cooled 0.7 degree Celsius in 2007, the fastest decline in the age of instrumentation, putting us back to where the Earth was in 1930. The climate is changing, but not in the direction Al Gore thinks."
On the face of it, this seems like strong evidence that the Climate Change deniers might finally have some science to back up their ideology and dogma. But, as one reader, "Fact Check", wrote:
"So the Western Standard reports that the National Review says that some business magazine claims that NASA says the earth is cooling fast and down to 1903 levels. Sound like the right-wing global warming deniers version of the telephone game? Perhaps it is."
"The year 2007 tied for second warmest in the period of instrumental data, behind the record warmth of 2005, in the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) analysis. 2007 tied 1998, which had leapt a remarkable 0.2°C above the prior record with the help of the 'El Niño of the century'. The unusual warmth in 2007 is noteworthy because it occurs at a time when solar irradiance is at a minimum and the equatorial Pacific Ocean is in the cool phase of its natural El Niño-La Niña cycle."
What a surprise. A right wing, pro-business publication blatantly misrepresents published data. Another right wing, pro-business website reprints the misrepresentation. A series of right wing, pro-business blogs amplify the lie in the fabled "echo chamber" of conservative online repetition. And even when the error of their propagation has been shown to them, they refuse to accept the fiction of their claim. Unbelievable.
In other news, I got to meet former Premier David Peterson last week, when he dropped by Ottawa to push the glory of the University of Toronto at one of their swanky alumni affairs. Here's me and a friend (Julia) enjoying the free goodies:
Man, I'm looking old and fat these days. Peterson gave an excellent speech about how wonderful and perfect my alma mater is. (All university Chancellors give the same speech, after all). Here he is, courtesy of the U of T alumni office:
Funny thing is, he actually said: "25% of all Ontario high school graduates who go to University, go to the University of Toronto."
I then muttered to Julia: "Yeah, but that means that 75% don't go to the University of Toronto. How is that good?"
Sometimes being a numbers guy sucks the fun out of things.
