We gotta put the puck in the net.
We have to put our skates on and make a game of it.
When the game is over, the only thing that matters is what's on the scoreboard.
Our defence didn't play as well as our offence.
We've all gotta dress for the game.
You have to step up to the plate.
etc., etc., ad nauseum...
What's with all the empty sports cliches happening these days? Sure, they've always been around, but what is the difference between what's going on now, and what we had before? Of course, there were the classics from Yogi Berra like, "It ain't over 'til it's over," or "This is like deja vu all over again." Sayings that have weaseled their way into our popular culture lexicon. But I think his '-isms' were probably seen as less empty, because there were fewer cliches out there. I wonder if it's more bothersome now because media outlets have to get a sound bite from everybody and anybody that is remotely associated with sports. That's probably because twenty years ago, you didn't have much choice in where you could get your sports news.
On network TV, you'd have the 10 minutes of sports during the nightly newscast, or the weekend afternoon sports programming. ESPN and TSN started the change, because then you had sports specialty programming, but now you have niche sports programming like OLN and The Golf Channel. Golf Channel?!?!? 24/7/365 of nothing but golf programming? Is this for the golf enthusiast, or a way for insomniacs to fall asleep? Why am I paying for this channel? I don't even play golf, so I certainly don't want to watch it! Why should I pay for it?
Yes, I think that all these sports channels have fed a need for people (mostly men I think, but I suspect more and more women are into it) to watch sports, instead of participate in them. Are people getting lazy as they get older, or are they trying to dive more deeply into the sports they're interested in? Whatever the case is, I wish professional athletes would come up with better sound bites. Hey, what if we protested by not watching these programs?!?!?!?! Drive the viewership down so that there will be some consolidation in the sports channel marketplace. Let the broadcasters know that they shouldn't entice us back unless they can come up with some quality programming....wait...that won't work. Especially when there's a guy in my gym that has two TVs on two different sports channels when he's on the treadmill, one of them being The Golf Channel, and then he ends up talking to the guy running next to him anyway. No, guys like him will never make this suggestion work.
Write to the networks? The cable/satellite companies? Your MP? The Prime Minister? No, I think we're stuck. Sports channels are here to stay and not all professional athletes are Mensa members. I guess I'll have to read the paper when the sportscast is on and continue paying for channels I never use (in fact, they're not on my favourites list, so they get skipped when I'm channel surfing).
Yup, I guess when it comes to sports cliches, Yogi Berra was right. The future ain't what it used to be.
Wings Over The World
March 31, 2006
March 29, 2006
(il)legal immigrants
Lately, the Canadian and American governments have been cracking down on illegal immigration. The U.S. Government estimates that there are currently 11 million illegal immigrants, many Hispanic, in that country, rising by tens of thousands each year. While Canada isn't quite seeing those numbers, it too has many illegal immigrants.
The U.S. is dealing with the problem by introducing a bill to better control this illegal immigration, mainly due to crossings through the U.S.-Mexico border. No amnesty, just better control. Canada is dealing with it by just deporting these people. Of course, the media is getting a lot of mileage from a couple of Portuguese families that were deported last week. They had been in Canada for several years, working in the construction industry, and even apparently had Social Insurance Numbers and were paying taxes!
I don't have a problem with good, law-abiding, hard-working people that come from other countries, looking for a better life for their families. At one point or another, all of our families did the same. That is not the issue. The issue is the method by which they entered Canada.
My understanding of the Canadian immigration system is that anybody that applies for emigration to Canada, must apply at their home country's Canadian Embassy or Consulate. When their application is processed, they are given points for such things as education, experience, English (and presumably French) -speaking ability, whether they have immediate relatives already in Canada, etc. The score they receive, and Canada's quota for particular skill sets, will determine whether, and how soon, somebody would be allowed to enter Canada. A process that could take two or three years. A long time to wait for someone that wants a better life. Apparently, some potential immigrants are fast-tracked if they have sufficient money to invest in a business in Canada and hire a number of Canadian employees. As you can see, this system favours educated and financially well-off people. But what about the hard-working, blue-collar stiff? Certainly there's a place for those without money, post-secondary education and/or strong English/French-speaking ability?
How about a system that identifies businesses and trades, such as day labourers, construction workers, kitchen help, and other jobs, where there is a worker shortage? This shortage likely comes from the low wages that these jobs typically pay and lack of desire for Canadian workers to perform them. Surely someone from another country would be willing to work in these positions, given the opportunity. It's happening now, but it's more than likely underground, and business owners are probably taking advantage of the situation these workers are in.
I have a suggestion. What about a government run "virtual" equivalent of a Union Hall. The government can sign up businesses and/or identify jobs where there is a significant shortage of workers. The government can translate this need into immigration quotas for the skills, or lack of, required. Businesses that have owners/workers that predominantly speak a particular language can target countries that speak that language. For example, last week, the deported families were from Portugal and worked in the construction industry. So, tell the Canadian Embassy in Portugal to fast-track construction workers looking to emigrate to Canada. The government can even have quotas for totally unskilled labourers, looking for an opportunity, to do manual labour like digging ditches and the like.
By having this "Union Hall," the government can control the number of unskilled and semi-skilled immigrants to the country, as well as keeping track of their progress as they work as day labourers, part-time, temporary, or even full-time. At this point, they are landed immigrants. Prior to being granted citizenship, they would have to show progress in holding a steady job, improvement in language skills (which the government can help administer), and any other criteria the government deems necessary.
The result? Everybody wins. Immigrants that may otherwise not be allowed to come to Canada because of lack of education, or English-speaking skills, would have the opportunity for a new life for their family. Businesses wouldn't face such a shortage of labour, and the Canadian Government would get a legal taxpayer to add to the Canadian coffers. In addition, the government will likely spend less money trying to track down and deport illegals, because there would be fewer of them. Sounds like an ideal situation doesn't it?
This sounds too simple for it not to be instituted by the government a long time ago. Am I missing something? Could I be oversimplifying the problem? I hope I'm not because maybe this would be a win-win-win situation for everyone.
Wings Over The World
The U.S. is dealing with the problem by introducing a bill to better control this illegal immigration, mainly due to crossings through the U.S.-Mexico border. No amnesty, just better control. Canada is dealing with it by just deporting these people. Of course, the media is getting a lot of mileage from a couple of Portuguese families that were deported last week. They had been in Canada for several years, working in the construction industry, and even apparently had Social Insurance Numbers and were paying taxes!
I don't have a problem with good, law-abiding, hard-working people that come from other countries, looking for a better life for their families. At one point or another, all of our families did the same. That is not the issue. The issue is the method by which they entered Canada.
My understanding of the Canadian immigration system is that anybody that applies for emigration to Canada, must apply at their home country's Canadian Embassy or Consulate. When their application is processed, they are given points for such things as education, experience, English (and presumably French) -speaking ability, whether they have immediate relatives already in Canada, etc. The score they receive, and Canada's quota for particular skill sets, will determine whether, and how soon, somebody would be allowed to enter Canada. A process that could take two or three years. A long time to wait for someone that wants a better life. Apparently, some potential immigrants are fast-tracked if they have sufficient money to invest in a business in Canada and hire a number of Canadian employees. As you can see, this system favours educated and financially well-off people. But what about the hard-working, blue-collar stiff? Certainly there's a place for those without money, post-secondary education and/or strong English/French-speaking ability?
How about a system that identifies businesses and trades, such as day labourers, construction workers, kitchen help, and other jobs, where there is a worker shortage? This shortage likely comes from the low wages that these jobs typically pay and lack of desire for Canadian workers to perform them. Surely someone from another country would be willing to work in these positions, given the opportunity. It's happening now, but it's more than likely underground, and business owners are probably taking advantage of the situation these workers are in.
I have a suggestion. What about a government run "virtual" equivalent of a Union Hall. The government can sign up businesses and/or identify jobs where there is a significant shortage of workers. The government can translate this need into immigration quotas for the skills, or lack of, required. Businesses that have owners/workers that predominantly speak a particular language can target countries that speak that language. For example, last week, the deported families were from Portugal and worked in the construction industry. So, tell the Canadian Embassy in Portugal to fast-track construction workers looking to emigrate to Canada. The government can even have quotas for totally unskilled labourers, looking for an opportunity, to do manual labour like digging ditches and the like.
By having this "Union Hall," the government can control the number of unskilled and semi-skilled immigrants to the country, as well as keeping track of their progress as they work as day labourers, part-time, temporary, or even full-time. At this point, they are landed immigrants. Prior to being granted citizenship, they would have to show progress in holding a steady job, improvement in language skills (which the government can help administer), and any other criteria the government deems necessary.
The result? Everybody wins. Immigrants that may otherwise not be allowed to come to Canada because of lack of education, or English-speaking skills, would have the opportunity for a new life for their family. Businesses wouldn't face such a shortage of labour, and the Canadian Government would get a legal taxpayer to add to the Canadian coffers. In addition, the government will likely spend less money trying to track down and deport illegals, because there would be fewer of them. Sounds like an ideal situation doesn't it?
This sounds too simple for it not to be instituted by the government a long time ago. Am I missing something? Could I be oversimplifying the problem? I hope I'm not because maybe this would be a win-win-win situation for everyone.
Wings Over The World
March 28, 2006
Islamic Crusades?
Are we seeing a modern day Crusades? Have Islamic fundamentalists driven their followers into being those that they despise most, Crusaders?In Afghanistan, Abdul Rahman (see picture) was to be tried for converting to Christianity from Islam. Apparently, under Sharia law, this is apostasy, i.e. abandonment of religious beliefs, and is punishable by death. My understanding is that this law resulted from the time of Muhammad's death and the splintering of Islam. I know this is an oversimplification of the facts, but I would like to keep the history brief, so that I can concentrate on my point.
Because of the outcry from Christian countries that are supporting Afghanistan's fight against the Taliban, the government used a loophole to free Mr. Rahman and he is now presumed to be in hiding for fear of his life.
This incident bothers me because of what I stated in one of my early posts. My understanding of the Islamic religion is that it preaches peace and brotherly love. Sure, some Islamic ways are different from those of other religions, but overall, they are similar. So why do Islamists insist on the persecution of converts away from Islam?
Yes, this may have happened during the Middle Ages, when Christian Crusaders stormed through the Holy Land killing Muslims who did not convert to Christianity, but this is hardly an excuse to continue the practice in modern times. I understand that in Africa, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the area because converted Christians became disillusioned with their situation. What if the shoe was on the other foot and these Islamic converts were to be tried for apostasy? The prisons would be filled with people to be put to death because they felt the Islamic religion served their faith better than Christianity did. Certainly, Islamic leaders would not stand for it. Why should they support the same practice under Sharia law? In fact, I've seen a report that religious teachings are not even clear that apostasy is punishable by death and that it is a particular interpretation of the Qu'ran.
No. State punishment for conversion from one religion to another is wrong. Religion is deeply personal. It should not be imposed on anyone, nor should one follow a particular religion because not doing so would be punishable by death. This is a matter for religious heads, and religious heads should not have the capability to offer state punishment. What happened to the separation of church and state? It's not always practiced, but it certainly should be more practical.
It's obvious that religious zealousness is affecting good government. Not only in the Middle East, but in the West also. Don't subscribe to it. It's becoming a modern day Crusades. It reminds me of the old saying, "those that do not study history, are condemned to repeat it."
Wings Over The World
(photo credit: www.ctv.ca)
March 27, 2006
Freedom of (Dis)Information Act?
Only a short time in government and already he's doing the things he said he wouldn't do. You know, the things that other governments have been doing. Well guess what. He's done it again! That's right, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is restricting media access to his caucus. Only he and cabinet ministers can address the media, BUT the cabinet ministers can only speak to the media with the approval of the PMO, and only on the pre-approved five topics of his government's agenda. What is the Prime Minister trying to hide?
He did it during the election campaign. Keep the fringe, extreme right members away from the media. You know, the ones that were against gay marriages, abortions, and other sinful acts. Well, apparently doing it just through the election campaign wasn't enough. Now he feels he has to keep them on a tight leash during their Minority Government rule.
What did Prime Minister Harper's Director of Communications, Sandra Buckler, have to say about it? "I don't think the average Canadian cares as long as they know their government is being well run." WHAT?!?!? Is she trying to tell us that we don't need to know what's going on, as long as the Conservatives don't get their hand caught in the cookie jar? Does Ms. Buckler have such a short memory? The Conservatives campaigned on ousting the Liberals because of the sponsorship scandal. Something brought to light well after the fact by a courageous whistleblower. The scandal happened on Mr. Chretien's watch and he was well into private life before that mess became very public and Mr. Martin had to pick up the pieces. Is Ms. Buckler telling us that the media should not scrutinize the government on the Canadian people's behalf? What kind of self-entitlement does the Conservative government think they have? When is the last time that the Canadian people trusted their government so implicitly? When has any population of any country trusted their government so completely?
No, Ms. Buckler. You're wrong! Maybe you think the Conservatives are doing a wonderful job. But the fact is, there is trepidation in Canada about whether the Conservatives can run the country under Mr. Harper's stewardship. Why do you think you only have a Minority Government stake. In fact, you have a slimmer minority than the Liberals had. Does that sound like implicit trust to you?
The Canadian public wants to know what's going on. We want the media to be our eyes and ears because we can't spend all day in Ottawa watching over your shoulders. If you want the Canadian people to put you into a Majority Government situation in the next election, giving you up to five years of uninterrupted rule, then you're going to have to be transparent in your actions. Don't hide how you're running the government, and don't put your caucus members on a short leash. Let's hear what they have to say and we'll be the judge of what's important to us as constituents.
And what can you do as a Canadian voter? Show the Conservative government that you want them to be open in how they govern. They campaigned on a platform of accountability, well make them stick to that promise! What can you do? What every Canadian has the right to do, write to your MP. It doesn't matter which party they're a member of, they work for you. Make them earn their pay. If you want to make sure Mr. Harper gets your message, then write to his office:
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900
Or better yet, e-mail him at pm@pm.gc.ca.
Let Prime Minister Harper know that he's going to have to put up, or shut up. Either he's going to have to let the media have access to EVERY Conservative MP on the hill, or he's going to have to shut up about accountability and telling us that he's different from the Liberals...because right now he's not!
So, it's up to you, dear reader. Do you think the Conservative government is doing a good job?
Wings Over The World
He did it during the election campaign. Keep the fringe, extreme right members away from the media. You know, the ones that were against gay marriages, abortions, and other sinful acts. Well, apparently doing it just through the election campaign wasn't enough. Now he feels he has to keep them on a tight leash during their Minority Government rule.
What did Prime Minister Harper's Director of Communications, Sandra Buckler, have to say about it? "I don't think the average Canadian cares as long as they know their government is being well run." WHAT?!?!? Is she trying to tell us that we don't need to know what's going on, as long as the Conservatives don't get their hand caught in the cookie jar? Does Ms. Buckler have such a short memory? The Conservatives campaigned on ousting the Liberals because of the sponsorship scandal. Something brought to light well after the fact by a courageous whistleblower. The scandal happened on Mr. Chretien's watch and he was well into private life before that mess became very public and Mr. Martin had to pick up the pieces. Is Ms. Buckler telling us that the media should not scrutinize the government on the Canadian people's behalf? What kind of self-entitlement does the Conservative government think they have? When is the last time that the Canadian people trusted their government so implicitly? When has any population of any country trusted their government so completely?
No, Ms. Buckler. You're wrong! Maybe you think the Conservatives are doing a wonderful job. But the fact is, there is trepidation in Canada about whether the Conservatives can run the country under Mr. Harper's stewardship. Why do you think you only have a Minority Government stake. In fact, you have a slimmer minority than the Liberals had. Does that sound like implicit trust to you?
The Canadian public wants to know what's going on. We want the media to be our eyes and ears because we can't spend all day in Ottawa watching over your shoulders. If you want the Canadian people to put you into a Majority Government situation in the next election, giving you up to five years of uninterrupted rule, then you're going to have to be transparent in your actions. Don't hide how you're running the government, and don't put your caucus members on a short leash. Let's hear what they have to say and we'll be the judge of what's important to us as constituents.
And what can you do as a Canadian voter? Show the Conservative government that you want them to be open in how they govern. They campaigned on a platform of accountability, well make them stick to that promise! What can you do? What every Canadian has the right to do, write to your MP. It doesn't matter which party they're a member of, they work for you. Make them earn their pay. If you want to make sure Mr. Harper gets your message, then write to his office:
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900
Or better yet, e-mail him at pm@pm.gc.ca.
Let Prime Minister Harper know that he's going to have to put up, or shut up. Either he's going to have to let the media have access to EVERY Conservative MP on the hill, or he's going to have to shut up about accountability and telling us that he's different from the Liberals...because right now he's not!
So, it's up to you, dear reader. Do you think the Conservative government is doing a good job?
Wings Over The World
March 24, 2006
Clucking Cellphone Users
Today's post is aboout (ring, ring)... just a sec...
Hello?...
Oh, hi....
I'm busy with something right now, can I call you back?....
Ciao.
Where was I? Oh yeah, the ubiquitous cellphone conversation. They're everywhere. Many people have them. Most others are annoyed by them. True, cellphones have made life easier for many of us. They put us in contact with our companies, customers, families, friends and the occasional wrong number. But to others overhearing those conversations, it's simply a nuisance.
I do not take issue with cellphones themselves, or the convenience that they bring. I take umbrage when I have to listen to someone talking about their personal, medical, or family problems, usually at a high volume. Some cellphone users seem to be oblivious to the fact that anybody within 50 feet can listen in on their conversation. It's not so bad when you're walking down the street, but what about when you're in a store, or on a bus? Especially when you have no option but to stand there and take it. Do I really need to know about the boil on your butt oozing pus? Will my life be better for knowing this information? Or do I have to know that Diane slept with Sam on the first date, and that she is such a sl_t for doing so? I think not.
What about the hazard these people are creating? The people that just continue talking on and on while driving, creating havoc in their wake. Or the fact that they may actually be in the presence of someone and they would rather speak on the phone than converse with the person next to them. Many times, I've seen people carrying on conversations, while they have someone walking right next to them. Is their telephone conversation more engaging than the one they would have with the person right beside them? How about the ultimate. Something I witnessed not too long ago. I saw, through the windows of a car, that both the driver and passenger were talking on their cellphones! And this was on a Sunday night. True story! Aside from the danger posed to other drivers, were they that bored with each other on a Sunday night drive that they felt the need to talk to someone else...anyone else? It boggles the mind.
Yes, cellphones are ubiquitous, and yes, they make our lives easier. I'm sure you can find Miss Manners or other suggestions for cellphone etiquette, but how about I give you some common sense (you would think) tips for cellphone use:
1. When driving, make it quick. If you're driving and you receive or have to make a call, pulling over is the best option. If that's not practical, make it quick. One minute or less should be enough to say I'll call you back, or meet me at such and such a place. Anything longer, wait until you can pull over so you can concentrate on the conversation. Better to be late 5 minutes for an appointment, than to pay $2,000 in car repairs.
2. Be considerate of others. Don't yell into the phone when there are people around you. They're not interested in what you have to say and it just contributes to the noise pollution. Try to talk at a volume where the person on the other end of the conversation can hear you well enough, not that they have to move their handset six inches away from their ear.
3. Leave the gossip for home phone calls. If you want to just spend time on the phone gossiping, or having inane conversations, wait until you get home or are in a private place. Strangers don't want to know about what socks you bought last week, why subject them to the conversation. Better yet, get together with your friend to discuss these things. It's more personal and sociable.
4. Keep cellphone conversations brief, when someone is with you. Terrible faux pas when you'd rather be on the phone than talking with the person next to you. It sends the wrong message. Do you really want that person to know that you would rather be talking someone else? However, I guess that's one way to ditch a "friend," if that's what you want to do.
5. Actually turn off your cellphone, when appropriate. How often have you been in a movie theatre and some idiot's cellphone starts ringing during a crucial moment in the story. And this after the theatre staff reminds everyone to turn off their cellphones, or at least turn off the ringer. Do everyone a favour and turn off the ringer, or the cellphone altogether, during movie, stage productions, or any other event where it would be distracting to those around you.
There you have it. Some quick and simple rules to live by when using cellphones. I'm sure there are a number of others, but at least this is a good start. Being considerate of others means we can all get along.
Now that I'm finished...who was it that called?
Wings Over The World
Hello?...
Oh, hi....
I'm busy with something right now, can I call you back?....
Ciao.
Where was I? Oh yeah, the ubiquitous cellphone conversation. They're everywhere. Many people have them. Most others are annoyed by them. True, cellphones have made life easier for many of us. They put us in contact with our companies, customers, families, friends and the occasional wrong number. But to others overhearing those conversations, it's simply a nuisance.
I do not take issue with cellphones themselves, or the convenience that they bring. I take umbrage when I have to listen to someone talking about their personal, medical, or family problems, usually at a high volume. Some cellphone users seem to be oblivious to the fact that anybody within 50 feet can listen in on their conversation. It's not so bad when you're walking down the street, but what about when you're in a store, or on a bus? Especially when you have no option but to stand there and take it. Do I really need to know about the boil on your butt oozing pus? Will my life be better for knowing this information? Or do I have to know that Diane slept with Sam on the first date, and that she is such a sl_t for doing so? I think not.
What about the hazard these people are creating? The people that just continue talking on and on while driving, creating havoc in their wake. Or the fact that they may actually be in the presence of someone and they would rather speak on the phone than converse with the person next to them. Many times, I've seen people carrying on conversations, while they have someone walking right next to them. Is their telephone conversation more engaging than the one they would have with the person right beside them? How about the ultimate. Something I witnessed not too long ago. I saw, through the windows of a car, that both the driver and passenger were talking on their cellphones! And this was on a Sunday night. True story! Aside from the danger posed to other drivers, were they that bored with each other on a Sunday night drive that they felt the need to talk to someone else...anyone else? It boggles the mind.
Yes, cellphones are ubiquitous, and yes, they make our lives easier. I'm sure you can find Miss Manners or other suggestions for cellphone etiquette, but how about I give you some common sense (you would think) tips for cellphone use:
1. When driving, make it quick. If you're driving and you receive or have to make a call, pulling over is the best option. If that's not practical, make it quick. One minute or less should be enough to say I'll call you back, or meet me at such and such a place. Anything longer, wait until you can pull over so you can concentrate on the conversation. Better to be late 5 minutes for an appointment, than to pay $2,000 in car repairs.
2. Be considerate of others. Don't yell into the phone when there are people around you. They're not interested in what you have to say and it just contributes to the noise pollution. Try to talk at a volume where the person on the other end of the conversation can hear you well enough, not that they have to move their handset six inches away from their ear.
3. Leave the gossip for home phone calls. If you want to just spend time on the phone gossiping, or having inane conversations, wait until you get home or are in a private place. Strangers don't want to know about what socks you bought last week, why subject them to the conversation. Better yet, get together with your friend to discuss these things. It's more personal and sociable.
4. Keep cellphone conversations brief, when someone is with you. Terrible faux pas when you'd rather be on the phone than talking with the person next to you. It sends the wrong message. Do you really want that person to know that you would rather be talking someone else? However, I guess that's one way to ditch a "friend," if that's what you want to do.
5. Actually turn off your cellphone, when appropriate. How often have you been in a movie theatre and some idiot's cellphone starts ringing during a crucial moment in the story. And this after the theatre staff reminds everyone to turn off their cellphones, or at least turn off the ringer. Do everyone a favour and turn off the ringer, or the cellphone altogether, during movie, stage productions, or any other event where it would be distracting to those around you.
There you have it. Some quick and simple rules to live by when using cellphones. I'm sure there are a number of others, but at least this is a good start. Being considerate of others means we can all get along.
Now that I'm finished...who was it that called?
Wings Over The World
March 23, 2006
S.O.S. (Save Our Seals)?
The queen of animal activism, Brigitte Bardot, has received a lot of media attention the past couple of days because she was in Ottawa, trying to get a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The subject was the seal hunt to be conducted off of Canada's East Coast. This headline grab came shortly after Paul McCartney and his wife actually visited an ice floe for some photo ops with the cute little things (see picture).I have to admit, I'm a tad conflicted with this issue. On the one hand, the seal population is so large that it can, and has, adversely affected the East Coast fisheries stock. On the other hand, the clubbing of seals is not exactly a humane way of harvesting them, although the Newfoundland Fisheries Minister states that only about 10% are killed this way. The rest are killed with a bullet to the head.
Why are they being killed? For their fur, of course. Nothing different than mink, fox, or any of the other furs that are highly sought after. The difference, I think, is that seal pups are cute and they're in the wild. I'm sure if there were seal farms where everything was hidden from view and the seal pups were actually quite hideous, there wouldn't be such an outcry (take note that they are actually killed when they're older and not as cute as in the picture). Lambs are cute, but when's the last time you saw a celebrity protest the killing of them? When's the last time you went to a restaurant and ordered some? I had some recently and it was quite delicious. However, I believe that most of the seal carcasses are left on the ice flow because the seals' remoteness doesn't allow the economic usefulness of the entire kill.
I suppose that it comes down to this. I learned in Economics 101 that economies are based on supply and demand. For there to be a supply, there has to be a demand. This applies to anything. Food, guns, drugs, seal pelts. The greater the demand and the less supply, the higher the price. The people that conduct these hunts come from economically depressed areas, so this is a way for them to make some money, instead of being on unemployment.
Do you truly want the the killing of seals for their fur to end? Make the wearing of their fur unfashionable. Don't buy them. Don't let your friends buy them. If the demand dries up, the killing will stop, or at least make it uneconomical to do so. That doesn't solve the fisheries problem, but maybe you'll sleep better. However, be prepared that the seal hunt won't stop overnight. Seal hunt protests have been going on for decades and the hunts continue. That's the economic reality. Instead of trying to stop the hunt, maybe you can at least lobby to make it more humane.
Now, stopping the drug trade (including marijuana -- no it's not a victimless crime), there's a cause for protest!
Wings Over The World
(photo credit: www.ctv.ca/ Tom Hanson)
March 21, 2006
Hip Hop Lemmings
Lemmings. That's the word for them. Hip Hop Lemmings.
When I look at kids, especially those 'kids' that are in their twenties and maybe even thirties, dressing up like their favourite Hip Hop star, I can only shake my head and snicker to myself. Wear a bandana (usually red or blue); wear your basketball shorts or jeans so low, no one is really sure there are any pant legs (except to see them bunched at the ankles); wear a sock on one foot but not the other; one pant leg raised to the knee, the other down to the ankle, etc. ad nauseum. Wear Nike, or Adidas, or whatever-the-latest-brand-craze-is. Do made-up, puffy-haired, bare-stomached, teenage-hooker-wear-clothed-Christina-Aguiliera-wanna-bes really dig these looks? What motivates people to emulate their favourite Hip Hop star?
Why do people do it? To look cool? Because the rapper is their hero? Keeping up with Jones' mentality? I remember seeing a report where a teenager spent about $1,000 a month on clothes that he sees his favourite rappers wear. He has a part-time job just so that he owns clothes that sometimes, he doesn't even wear. He had about 70 pairs of sneakers! His reason for doing it? It looks cool, and because he's the first in school have it. Sounds like insecurity to me.
And what's with the latest 'grillz' phenomenon? Why would you spend as much money as it would cost to buy a small car, for jewellery that you stick in your mouth? It became fashionable when Nelly came out with his Grillz video. I say that it's about as fashionable as a lot of gold chains on top of a hairy chest that we see beyond the unbuttoned shirt. And just like that craze, along with disco platform shoes, white suits and parachute pants, this too will pass (I hope).
Busta Rhymes and P. Diddy (don't get me started on his constant name changes) recorded Pass The Courvoisier after which people went to their local watering hole and ordered it, not knowing what it was! How stupid is that? I think that they only did it because the lyrics to the song made it sound cool, and everyone wants to be cool, right?
So I ask you again, why do people do this? Why do they buy things, sometimes not knowing or caring what it is? Is it cool? Do they have a need to be the first on the block to have it? Do they want to attract the ladies? Maybe it's because Hip Hop stars are anti-establishment and even if you can't sing like them, at least you can dress like them...what a load of BS! If you think rap artists are anti-establishment, why are they wearing and singing about name brands, and often being paid by the brand maker to do so. Sometimes manufacturers will even approach rap artists to write a songs about their products, or at least incorporate their names in the lyrics. Does that sound anti-establishment to you?
I'm sure there are many of you that tape shows off network TV so that you can fast forward through the titles and commercials. I do it. It saves at least 10 minutes of my time for every hour of programming I watch. Or you go to the fridge or washroom during the commercials. Advertisers and networks know this. That's why networks usually charge a premium for spots right at the beginning and end of a commercial break. Advertisers are getting around you not watching their TV commercials by looking for other ways to get the message across. The Internet, is just one example. A few years ago, you wouldn't see a whole lot of advertising on web pages, except for some sites, if you know what I mean. Then pop-ups became de rigueur. The reaction? Get software that blocks pop-ups. Ok, find another way. How about flashing or video advertising. Ignoring that. The latest? Have advertising actually crossing text that you're trying to read. No way to get around that except to wait for it to clear, or look for the "close" button. Somebody will find a way to stop it, and when they do, advertisers will find another method to grab your attention...
Hey, wait a second...Let's use rap stars. Yeah! They have a herd of sheep following them. We'll make a bazillion dollars!
You avoid watching TV commercials. You scan the radio to avoid commercials, or even pay a monthly fee to get commercial free satellite radio. You buy pop-up filters for your computer. Why the heck would you buy something just because a Hip Hop star mentions it?
Stop the madness! Don't give in to those advertisers because they're making millions banking on you buying the stuff they're hawking, trying to make it look cool. Stop being a lemming and find your own style. Don't adopt someone else's. People have been hurt or killed because they wore something that someone else wanted, or because they wore the wrong 'colours.' Don't give into the hype. Make it fashion non grata. Or at least don't run to the fashion store as soon as a music video comes out. Show manufacturers and advertisers that you will not be swayed by a music video.
When you've accomplished this, sit back in your leather La-Z-Boy, watch the game on your Sony plasma TV, smoke a Montecristo cigar, and drink a glass of 18 year-old Glenfiddich. Ahh, that's the life...
Wings Over The World
When I look at kids, especially those 'kids' that are in their twenties and maybe even thirties, dressing up like their favourite Hip Hop star, I can only shake my head and snicker to myself. Wear a bandana (usually red or blue); wear your basketball shorts or jeans so low, no one is really sure there are any pant legs (except to see them bunched at the ankles); wear a sock on one foot but not the other; one pant leg raised to the knee, the other down to the ankle, etc. ad nauseum. Wear Nike, or Adidas, or whatever-the-latest-brand-craze-is. Do made-up, puffy-haired, bare-stomached, teenage-hooker-wear-clothed-Christina-Aguiliera-wanna-bes really dig these looks? What motivates people to emulate their favourite Hip Hop star?
Why do people do it? To look cool? Because the rapper is their hero? Keeping up with Jones' mentality? I remember seeing a report where a teenager spent about $1,000 a month on clothes that he sees his favourite rappers wear. He has a part-time job just so that he owns clothes that sometimes, he doesn't even wear. He had about 70 pairs of sneakers! His reason for doing it? It looks cool, and because he's the first in school have it. Sounds like insecurity to me.
And what's with the latest 'grillz' phenomenon? Why would you spend as much money as it would cost to buy a small car, for jewellery that you stick in your mouth? It became fashionable when Nelly came out with his Grillz video. I say that it's about as fashionable as a lot of gold chains on top of a hairy chest that we see beyond the unbuttoned shirt. And just like that craze, along with disco platform shoes, white suits and parachute pants, this too will pass (I hope).
Busta Rhymes and P. Diddy (don't get me started on his constant name changes) recorded Pass The Courvoisier after which people went to their local watering hole and ordered it, not knowing what it was! How stupid is that? I think that they only did it because the lyrics to the song made it sound cool, and everyone wants to be cool, right?
So I ask you again, why do people do this? Why do they buy things, sometimes not knowing or caring what it is? Is it cool? Do they have a need to be the first on the block to have it? Do they want to attract the ladies? Maybe it's because Hip Hop stars are anti-establishment and even if you can't sing like them, at least you can dress like them...what a load of BS! If you think rap artists are anti-establishment, why are they wearing and singing about name brands, and often being paid by the brand maker to do so. Sometimes manufacturers will even approach rap artists to write a songs about their products, or at least incorporate their names in the lyrics. Does that sound anti-establishment to you?
I'm sure there are many of you that tape shows off network TV so that you can fast forward through the titles and commercials. I do it. It saves at least 10 minutes of my time for every hour of programming I watch. Or you go to the fridge or washroom during the commercials. Advertisers and networks know this. That's why networks usually charge a premium for spots right at the beginning and end of a commercial break. Advertisers are getting around you not watching their TV commercials by looking for other ways to get the message across. The Internet, is just one example. A few years ago, you wouldn't see a whole lot of advertising on web pages, except for some sites, if you know what I mean. Then pop-ups became de rigueur. The reaction? Get software that blocks pop-ups. Ok, find another way. How about flashing or video advertising. Ignoring that. The latest? Have advertising actually crossing text that you're trying to read. No way to get around that except to wait for it to clear, or look for the "close" button. Somebody will find a way to stop it, and when they do, advertisers will find another method to grab your attention...
Hey, wait a second...Let's use rap stars. Yeah! They have a herd of sheep following them. We'll make a bazillion dollars!
You avoid watching TV commercials. You scan the radio to avoid commercials, or even pay a monthly fee to get commercial free satellite radio. You buy pop-up filters for your computer. Why the heck would you buy something just because a Hip Hop star mentions it?
Stop the madness! Don't give in to those advertisers because they're making millions banking on you buying the stuff they're hawking, trying to make it look cool. Stop being a lemming and find your own style. Don't adopt someone else's. People have been hurt or killed because they wore something that someone else wanted, or because they wore the wrong 'colours.' Don't give into the hype. Make it fashion non grata. Or at least don't run to the fashion store as soon as a music video comes out. Show manufacturers and advertisers that you will not be swayed by a music video.
When you've accomplished this, sit back in your leather La-Z-Boy, watch the game on your Sony plasma TV, smoke a Montecristo cigar, and drink a glass of 18 year-old Glenfiddich. Ahh, that's the life...
Wings Over The World
March 17, 2006
Driving For The Uninitiated
I was driving in town the other day, on a road that was three lanes in the direction I was going. I was in the middle lane and a small car was just slightly ahead and in the right lane. The right lane was going to turn off into a parking area, and the driver of the car obviously wanted to continue on, because he changed into my lane without signalling. This was not surprising. It's happened to me many times. What was unusual was that it had a Driving School licence attached to the rear of the vehicle! Was it a student who forgot to signal? No, the driver was alone, so I can only assume that it was the instructor. Because it was a driving instructor, his driving habits caught my attention at the time (don't worry, I was still keeping my eye on the road). A very brief time later, he changed into the left lane so that he could make a left turn. Although I wasn't watching his every move (since I was also driving, remember), not only did he not signal, but it appeared that he didn't even look over his shoulder either. Both being habits of defensive drivers. After witnessing this spectacle, I marvelled that someone who teaches future drivers, has such bad driving habits himself. No wonder there are so many bad drivers out there, so many accidents, and my insurance rates continue to climb even though I don't make any claims.
I feel it's about time I talk about one of my pet peeves...bad drivers.
Yes, they're out there. You've seen them, or maybe you are one whether you're aware of it, or not. I marvel at how bad some drivers are. Just when I think I've seen it all, someone proves me wrong. I've heard reports on how driving schools will teach their students to pass the exam, rather than how to be a defensive driver. Apparently, anyone can get a licence to be a driving instructor. You don't have to have any special knowledge or training. Just fill out the forms, pony up the cash and hang a shingle. If you haven't taken a reputable driving course, go out and get one. If your children are about to learn, send them to a proper one, not a 'friend of a friend' who will give you a good deal. But if you think you're too old to go back to school, at least continue to read on.
This is my contribution to making the streets safer for drivers everywhere. Here is Wing Over The World's Driving for Dummies (with apologies to the "...For Dummies" publishers for using their title), tips for the driving uninitiated:
1. Stay out of the left lane whenever possible. When you're on a multi-lane highway or expressway and you're in the left-most lane, and the traffic isn't bumper-to-bumper, if you're not passing anyone, move over into the right lane. This applies to anyone going at any speed. So often, I see people driving at the speed limit, with a line up of cars behind waiting to pass. Even when you're going 20% above the speed limit, it won't be long before someone comes up behind you and indicates they want to pass. It's been my experience and observation that whatever speed you travel at in the left lane, someone will come along and want to go faster, so move into the right lane.
2. When you want to pass someone in the left lane, be polite. This is the other side of the coin of Tip #1. So often, people have come up behind me, wanting to pass and they're one or two feet from my rear bumper. BACK OFF! I'm a responsible driver. I'm doing my best to get over into the right lane. I don't need you 'pushing me'. We could both get into an accident if the car in front me decides to brake hard. For those that are not followers of Tip #1, how about you flash your highbeams or use your left turn signal to get them out of the way. It is said that the current etiquette from Europe is to use your left turn signal since flashing your highbeams is considered impolite. Might I suggest you use your left turn signal to start. If after sufficient time and opportunity, the car in front of you doesn't get out of the way, then flash your highbeams. Many cars have a flip feature on the turn signal arm that allows you to flash your highbeams.
3. When turning or changing lanes, signal. Strangely enough, a survey just came out and a significant number of drivers said they don't signal because it's too much work or that they're busy with other things to bother. What?!?!?!? How stupid is that? I say, if it's too much work to signal, then why the heck are you driving? As for being too involved with other things: get off the cellphone, or stop putting your make-up on and concentrate on driving. And when you do signal, give a little notice. Don't wait until you're actually making the lane change or turn to give one flash of the turn signal.
4. Take a look in your mirrors and over your shoulder when changing lanes. Again, it seems like people are too lazy or concentrating on their cellphone conversations to notice that I'm in their blindspot and they cut me off. A few recent examples saw me narrowly escape providing my insurance information because I was quick enough with the brakes or steering wheel.
5. If you have to talk on your cellphone while driving, make it quick. Better yet, pull over. That's the best option. If you're one of those road warriors that have to be on your cell all day, invest in a hands-free system. If you're the type that just gabs away with their friends during the morning or afternoon commute, quit it! Too often I've seen people almost get into accidents because they were more interested in the cellphone conversation and oblivious to what's going on around them. Granted, women seem to be better at multi-tasking, but they have been just as guilty at almost causing accidents.
6. Keep your eyes on the road. Your one hour commute should not include reading, writing, eating your breakfast, putting on your make-up, or any other of a myriad of things that people do while they're driving. Do that stuff anywhere except behind the wheel, willya?
7. Stop rubber-necking when there's an accident! I can't stress this one enough. There is usually a long line up behind an accident, made worse because rubber-neckers slow down to see the flashing lights. What are you hoping to see? Blood? Body parts? Emergency crews usually cover up quickly. This also happens when no lanes are blocked. An example I experienced a couple of years ago was that an accident happened on the opposite side of the highway, on the right shoulder, with three cement barriers in between -- about nine lanes away! Yet people slowed down to look! What could they see? The flashing lights on top of the fire trucks! That's it! Get with the program people. There's no need to slow to crawl if no lanes are blocked, just so you can look at some crumpled metal. If that's what turns you on, go to a junk yard. Plenty there.
8. Don't cut people off. It seems that there are drivers out there that have to be where they're going two or three minutes earlier, because they have the propensity to weave and cut people off (see Tips #3 and #4). Sometimes they're just oblivious to what's around them. What you're doing is playing Russian Roulette with your insurance rate. Have a look, and be patient.
9. Don't force your way into the lane. There are some people that just must get into a lane during rush hour traffic. Because they are very aggressive, or do not follow Tip #10, many drivers will not allow them the space. I know, because I've also jockeyed to not let these people get away with this. Not a very defensive driving thing to do, but if I've contributed to their education, it's worth it. If I'm on the other end and have run out of lane, if someone doesn't let me in, I wait until someone does. I will not 'force' my way in.
10. Don't use the acceleration/deceleration lanes of on/off ramps to pass people. This is one of my major pet peeves. Especially those people that use the acceleration lane to make it look like they're just getting on the highway, just so that they can get a dozen cars ahead. I will sometimes actually keep an eye on who does this and make a point of not letting them in. I've seen other people do the same. A few months ago, a semi, sans trailer, was actually driving on the shoulder to try to get in front me, playing a kind of 'chicken' to get me to put on the brakes so that he could get in front of me. Doing this, in combination with the Tip #9 faux pas will probably only save you five minutes on your trip. Is it worth adding hundreds of dollars to your insurance bill, angering a bunch of drivers and encouraging other drivers to do the same to you?
I've probably missed a number of bad habits. Maybe people can submit their own pet peeves or experiences, with recommendations on what the proper etiquette should be.
Want to keep your insurance rates down? Stop contributing to the problem by following the above tips. Can't do it? Maybe you should leave the driving to someone else. Car pool, take transit, or ride a bike to work. Maybe insurance rates won't go up so quickly, fewer cars will be on the road, and we'll have lower pollution levels. At the very least, you'll save a few bucks, maybe catch up on some reading, and certainly save your sanity.
Wings Over The World
I feel it's about time I talk about one of my pet peeves...bad drivers.
Yes, they're out there. You've seen them, or maybe you are one whether you're aware of it, or not. I marvel at how bad some drivers are. Just when I think I've seen it all, someone proves me wrong. I've heard reports on how driving schools will teach their students to pass the exam, rather than how to be a defensive driver. Apparently, anyone can get a licence to be a driving instructor. You don't have to have any special knowledge or training. Just fill out the forms, pony up the cash and hang a shingle. If you haven't taken a reputable driving course, go out and get one. If your children are about to learn, send them to a proper one, not a 'friend of a friend' who will give you a good deal. But if you think you're too old to go back to school, at least continue to read on.
This is my contribution to making the streets safer for drivers everywhere. Here is Wing Over The World's Driving for Dummies (with apologies to the "...For Dummies" publishers for using their title), tips for the driving uninitiated:
1. Stay out of the left lane whenever possible. When you're on a multi-lane highway or expressway and you're in the left-most lane, and the traffic isn't bumper-to-bumper, if you're not passing anyone, move over into the right lane. This applies to anyone going at any speed. So often, I see people driving at the speed limit, with a line up of cars behind waiting to pass. Even when you're going 20% above the speed limit, it won't be long before someone comes up behind you and indicates they want to pass. It's been my experience and observation that whatever speed you travel at in the left lane, someone will come along and want to go faster, so move into the right lane.
2. When you want to pass someone in the left lane, be polite. This is the other side of the coin of Tip #1. So often, people have come up behind me, wanting to pass and they're one or two feet from my rear bumper. BACK OFF! I'm a responsible driver. I'm doing my best to get over into the right lane. I don't need you 'pushing me'. We could both get into an accident if the car in front me decides to brake hard. For those that are not followers of Tip #1, how about you flash your highbeams or use your left turn signal to get them out of the way. It is said that the current etiquette from Europe is to use your left turn signal since flashing your highbeams is considered impolite. Might I suggest you use your left turn signal to start. If after sufficient time and opportunity, the car in front of you doesn't get out of the way, then flash your highbeams. Many cars have a flip feature on the turn signal arm that allows you to flash your highbeams.
3. When turning or changing lanes, signal. Strangely enough, a survey just came out and a significant number of drivers said they don't signal because it's too much work or that they're busy with other things to bother. What?!?!?!? How stupid is that? I say, if it's too much work to signal, then why the heck are you driving? As for being too involved with other things: get off the cellphone, or stop putting your make-up on and concentrate on driving. And when you do signal, give a little notice. Don't wait until you're actually making the lane change or turn to give one flash of the turn signal.
4. Take a look in your mirrors and over your shoulder when changing lanes. Again, it seems like people are too lazy or concentrating on their cellphone conversations to notice that I'm in their blindspot and they cut me off. A few recent examples saw me narrowly escape providing my insurance information because I was quick enough with the brakes or steering wheel.
5. If you have to talk on your cellphone while driving, make it quick. Better yet, pull over. That's the best option. If you're one of those road warriors that have to be on your cell all day, invest in a hands-free system. If you're the type that just gabs away with their friends during the morning or afternoon commute, quit it! Too often I've seen people almost get into accidents because they were more interested in the cellphone conversation and oblivious to what's going on around them. Granted, women seem to be better at multi-tasking, but they have been just as guilty at almost causing accidents.
6. Keep your eyes on the road. Your one hour commute should not include reading, writing, eating your breakfast, putting on your make-up, or any other of a myriad of things that people do while they're driving. Do that stuff anywhere except behind the wheel, willya?
7. Stop rubber-necking when there's an accident! I can't stress this one enough. There is usually a long line up behind an accident, made worse because rubber-neckers slow down to see the flashing lights. What are you hoping to see? Blood? Body parts? Emergency crews usually cover up quickly. This also happens when no lanes are blocked. An example I experienced a couple of years ago was that an accident happened on the opposite side of the highway, on the right shoulder, with three cement barriers in between -- about nine lanes away! Yet people slowed down to look! What could they see? The flashing lights on top of the fire trucks! That's it! Get with the program people. There's no need to slow to crawl if no lanes are blocked, just so you can look at some crumpled metal. If that's what turns you on, go to a junk yard. Plenty there.
8. Don't cut people off. It seems that there are drivers out there that have to be where they're going two or three minutes earlier, because they have the propensity to weave and cut people off (see Tips #3 and #4). Sometimes they're just oblivious to what's around them. What you're doing is playing Russian Roulette with your insurance rate. Have a look, and be patient.
9. Don't force your way into the lane. There are some people that just must get into a lane during rush hour traffic. Because they are very aggressive, or do not follow Tip #10, many drivers will not allow them the space. I know, because I've also jockeyed to not let these people get away with this. Not a very defensive driving thing to do, but if I've contributed to their education, it's worth it. If I'm on the other end and have run out of lane, if someone doesn't let me in, I wait until someone does. I will not 'force' my way in.
10. Don't use the acceleration/deceleration lanes of on/off ramps to pass people. This is one of my major pet peeves. Especially those people that use the acceleration lane to make it look like they're just getting on the highway, just so that they can get a dozen cars ahead. I will sometimes actually keep an eye on who does this and make a point of not letting them in. I've seen other people do the same. A few months ago, a semi, sans trailer, was actually driving on the shoulder to try to get in front me, playing a kind of 'chicken' to get me to put on the brakes so that he could get in front of me. Doing this, in combination with the Tip #9 faux pas will probably only save you five minutes on your trip. Is it worth adding hundreds of dollars to your insurance bill, angering a bunch of drivers and encouraging other drivers to do the same to you?
I've probably missed a number of bad habits. Maybe people can submit their own pet peeves or experiences, with recommendations on what the proper etiquette should be.
Want to keep your insurance rates down? Stop contributing to the problem by following the above tips. Can't do it? Maybe you should leave the driving to someone else. Car pool, take transit, or ride a bike to work. Maybe insurance rates won't go up so quickly, fewer cars will be on the road, and we'll have lower pollution levels. At the very least, you'll save a few bucks, maybe catch up on some reading, and certainly save your sanity.
Wings Over The World
March 13, 2006
Valentine's Day Isn't Just On Feb 14th
Valentine's Day isn't just on February 14th.
I know I'm a little late with this, but maybe it will have more impact now, then it would a month ago.
I long held the belief that Valentine's Day was just a way for the greeting card, chocolate producing and flower picking companies to get their balance sheets in the black. A way to guilt people into buying stereotypical presents for their significant (and maybe not so significant, but hot, want-to-sleep-with) others. For years, I raged against the conventional wisdom. My argument? Why should just one day be set aside to show your partner that you love them? You should be doing the romantic thing throughout the year. Not some all or nothing play in the dead of winter. If you get it right, all is well in the (romantic) world. If not, damnation from your partner for the next six months, where the start of every conversation had the potential to degenerate into accusatory tones and reminders because of a miscue during that fateful romantic day. Or worse, the passive aggressive behaviour that ensues. Nope. I would be the contrarian. I would show my partner that I'm different. Valentine's Day is for the herds of sheep to the commercialization slaughter.
I'm a hypocrite.
Yes, I too fell into the trap. Don't get me wrong. I DO show my partner that I love them throughout the year -- little love notes, the buying of their favourite goodie or flowers for no particular reason other than to show them they're the one I'm thinking of -- but, I also bought heart-shaped chocolates, those hot cinnamon candies, and not just one, but two Valentine's Day cards! Why did I do it? Maybe it was because you can only get those cutesy heart-shaped goodies during this time of year. Or could it be that I wanted to support the money-making machine? (I could have waited until after Valentine's Day and gotten these items cheaper, but that would just be tacky) What if I was trying to 'keep up with the Jones'? No, I think it's because I love my partner and I wanted to show them I do. Not just by kissing, or making love to them (something we do often, but is no less special each time we do it), but with a materialistic trinket that could be eaten in one glorious gulp, or displayed with pride on the mantelpiece.
Did I want something in return? I thought I didn't, but during that fateful morning on the fourteenth day of the second month of the year, I came to a realization. While still lying in bed, I presented my partner with their second card (the first having being presented on the Saturday night before, when they least expected it). As my partner read and appreciated the card they received, I kept waiting and waiting to receive mine, to no avail. I dutifully got out of bed, completed my morning routine and went off to work as usual. All day I considered the emptiness I felt at not receiving a card...anything that showed me they loved me. That evening, I returned home to an empty house, because my partner had another engagement that night. As I went into the bedroom, there it was! Sitting, propped on the pillow, a card! I opened it with glee. Savouring every printed word and graphic line. As I read the hand written note, my heart melted and emotion welled up in me. A tear almost came to my eye. Yes, I too had become one of the sheep. BUT, something more than just one of the heard, I say. Because I will still show my partner that I love them throughout the year, just as I had previously vowed. Indeed EVERY day is Valentine's Day! I later found out that my partner had chosen this particular card months previous, which had significance because of an ongoing banter between us. Yes, I was...no, AM in love.
So my friends, whether this is a snub at the money grubbing chocolatiers and greeting card makers, or just some helpful hints to those that want their romantic relationships to be that much more special, I give to you Wings Over The World's Tips to Lovers (no guarantee of results are implied):
For Women:
1. If your man is watching his favourite sport or show on TV, don't interrupt unless it's during a commercial and you finish talking by the time the commercials are finished. They don't mind if you talk to them, but your time is more flexible than the game or show they're watching.
2. Yes, sometimes men tune out when you're talking at length about something. Don't get mad, they're just not conditioned to listening to long dissertations about the latest Hollywood gossip, what the latest spring fashion is, or what friend A did to friend B. If the conversation isn't about one of their favourite subjects, be it sports, cars, or themselves, chances are they're going to zone out once in awhile.
3. Give HIM something that he'll appreciate. Not necessarily a cute stuffed animal, or a tie. And it doesn't have to be expensive either. Even if you just pay for dinner once in awhile, he'll appreciate it, unless he's old school and insists on paying when you go out. In that case, you'll have to find something else that will show him you care.
4. Dress up when you greet him at the door. You don't have to be in an evening gown, but something that shows off your curves. Maybe even a tight pair of jeans, a revealing top and high heels. Bonus points when he finds out you're wearing sexy underwear underneath after he throws you on the bed for a little early evening loving.
5. Make him his favourite dinner and serve it to him. You don't have to do this all the time, but when you do, he'll appreciate it. Bonus points if this leads to sex (also see Tip #4).
6. If your man is into sports and you're not, learn a few of the basics of his favourite one and get him talking about it. Watch the occasional game with him. If it's one you can participate in with him, do so. It's a way for the two of you to bond on his terms.
7. Give him what I call a Thai massage. Dress in something skimpy and tight, and give him a "full body" rub down. But be prepared, this DOES lead to sex! Bonus points for wearing high heels and doing a little bit of role playing.
8. If he takes lunch from home with him to work, prepare it for him. Maybe even spice it up with something that he doesn't normally take, but likes to eat. (also, don't forget Tip #10)
9. If you make plans to have lunch or dinner together, surprise him with a side trip to the local motel for some intense lovin'. Better yet, treat him to a night of debauchery at a swanky hotel. This might include morning room service to regain your strength. You won't be able to wipe that smile off your face when you see him in a blissful daze and with a wobble in his walk.
10. Leave him little love notes. By e-mail or little paper ones. Just to show him you're thinking about him.
For Men:
1. Getting your woman flowers is not just for special occasions or when you're in the doghouse. Buy her some just because. She'll appreciate them more when she doesn't expect them.
2. Don't be afraid to show affection in public (kissing, holding hands). So what if people are watching. You'll be making them jealous and your woman will appreciate that you're willing to show the world that you love them.
3. If your partner is talking about something, anything, try to concentrate on the conversation and not about how you're going to 'do' her. There's a time and place for that. Sometimes she just wants you to listen to her. How about it? Besides, you'll get bonus points for listening to her in the middle of a crucial football game.
4. If you can't afford, or don't have the energy to go out dancing, or to a nice restaurant, go for a walk, stop in at the local ice cream shop and buy her a cone of her favourite ice cream. You don't have to spend a lot of money. She just wants you to be with, and pay attention to, her.
5. When you go out for that walk, talk to her about the things she's interested in. Listen to what she has to say. Ask questions. Get involved in her interests. Actually, this tip can be applied any time, but doing it when there are no other distractions will allow you to focus.
6. Prepare her favourite dinner and serve it to her. You don't have to be a great cook. She'll appreciate the effort, as well as the pampering. Zero points for cheating and buying it already prepared. Make it from scratch, lazy bones! (also see Tip #8)
7. Massage her. It doesn't have to lead to sex. Sometimes she just wants her back or feet rubbed and have a few relaxing moments afterward. After your finished, if she's feeling relaxed and wants some quiet, let her have it and go into another room. But if you're going to watch TV or listen to music, keep it down.
8. Greet her at the door in an outfit she likes to see you wear. It doesn't have to be your best suit. Sometimes, a tight pair of jeans will do it. By the way, they may not admit it, but they DO like to look at guys' butts.
9. Buy her little things that mean something to her. Whether it's her favourite chocolate bar, a cute key chain, or the book she's been meaning to read. Giving her those unexpected little things endear you more and more to her because it shows you're always thinking of her.
10. Give her little love notes. With the advent of e-mails, it takes just a minute to whip something up and press 'send'. You don't have to be Cyrano de Bergerac. Just a few words expressing how you feel, even if it's just "kiss kiss". Of course, the adventurous might try their hand at writing a short poem and leaving it in a place where she'll find it when she's at work. She'll melt right in the office...guaranteed!
It doesn't end there. These were just a few suggestions to get you started. Be creative. Get to know your partner better, so that you can romance them all the better. Maybe if every couple made the effort throughout the year, there would be less marital strife and fewer divorces. Hey, we may even put Dr. Phil out of business. Wouldn't that be great!
If this has helped you, I'm glad to have made a difference in you and your partner's lives. If not, I hope that you will find your way because knowing the pure love of someone is better than any material possession you could hope to have.
Wings Over The World
I know I'm a little late with this, but maybe it will have more impact now, then it would a month ago.
I long held the belief that Valentine's Day was just a way for the greeting card, chocolate producing and flower picking companies to get their balance sheets in the black. A way to guilt people into buying stereotypical presents for their significant (and maybe not so significant, but hot, want-to-sleep-with) others. For years, I raged against the conventional wisdom. My argument? Why should just one day be set aside to show your partner that you love them? You should be doing the romantic thing throughout the year. Not some all or nothing play in the dead of winter. If you get it right, all is well in the (romantic) world. If not, damnation from your partner for the next six months, where the start of every conversation had the potential to degenerate into accusatory tones and reminders because of a miscue during that fateful romantic day. Or worse, the passive aggressive behaviour that ensues. Nope. I would be the contrarian. I would show my partner that I'm different. Valentine's Day is for the herds of sheep to the commercialization slaughter.
I'm a hypocrite.
Yes, I too fell into the trap. Don't get me wrong. I DO show my partner that I love them throughout the year -- little love notes, the buying of their favourite goodie or flowers for no particular reason other than to show them they're the one I'm thinking of -- but, I also bought heart-shaped chocolates, those hot cinnamon candies, and not just one, but two Valentine's Day cards! Why did I do it? Maybe it was because you can only get those cutesy heart-shaped goodies during this time of year. Or could it be that I wanted to support the money-making machine? (I could have waited until after Valentine's Day and gotten these items cheaper, but that would just be tacky) What if I was trying to 'keep up with the Jones'? No, I think it's because I love my partner and I wanted to show them I do. Not just by kissing, or making love to them (something we do often, but is no less special each time we do it), but with a materialistic trinket that could be eaten in one glorious gulp, or displayed with pride on the mantelpiece.
Did I want something in return? I thought I didn't, but during that fateful morning on the fourteenth day of the second month of the year, I came to a realization. While still lying in bed, I presented my partner with their second card (the first having being presented on the Saturday night before, when they least expected it). As my partner read and appreciated the card they received, I kept waiting and waiting to receive mine, to no avail. I dutifully got out of bed, completed my morning routine and went off to work as usual. All day I considered the emptiness I felt at not receiving a card...anything that showed me they loved me. That evening, I returned home to an empty house, because my partner had another engagement that night. As I went into the bedroom, there it was! Sitting, propped on the pillow, a card! I opened it with glee. Savouring every printed word and graphic line. As I read the hand written note, my heart melted and emotion welled up in me. A tear almost came to my eye. Yes, I too had become one of the sheep. BUT, something more than just one of the heard, I say. Because I will still show my partner that I love them throughout the year, just as I had previously vowed. Indeed EVERY day is Valentine's Day! I later found out that my partner had chosen this particular card months previous, which had significance because of an ongoing banter between us. Yes, I was...no, AM in love.
So my friends, whether this is a snub at the money grubbing chocolatiers and greeting card makers, or just some helpful hints to those that want their romantic relationships to be that much more special, I give to you Wings Over The World's Tips to Lovers (no guarantee of results are implied):
For Women:
1. If your man is watching his favourite sport or show on TV, don't interrupt unless it's during a commercial and you finish talking by the time the commercials are finished. They don't mind if you talk to them, but your time is more flexible than the game or show they're watching.
2. Yes, sometimes men tune out when you're talking at length about something. Don't get mad, they're just not conditioned to listening to long dissertations about the latest Hollywood gossip, what the latest spring fashion is, or what friend A did to friend B. If the conversation isn't about one of their favourite subjects, be it sports, cars, or themselves, chances are they're going to zone out once in awhile.
3. Give HIM something that he'll appreciate. Not necessarily a cute stuffed animal, or a tie. And it doesn't have to be expensive either. Even if you just pay for dinner once in awhile, he'll appreciate it, unless he's old school and insists on paying when you go out. In that case, you'll have to find something else that will show him you care.
4. Dress up when you greet him at the door. You don't have to be in an evening gown, but something that shows off your curves. Maybe even a tight pair of jeans, a revealing top and high heels. Bonus points when he finds out you're wearing sexy underwear underneath after he throws you on the bed for a little early evening loving.
5. Make him his favourite dinner and serve it to him. You don't have to do this all the time, but when you do, he'll appreciate it. Bonus points if this leads to sex (also see Tip #4).
6. If your man is into sports and you're not, learn a few of the basics of his favourite one and get him talking about it. Watch the occasional game with him. If it's one you can participate in with him, do so. It's a way for the two of you to bond on his terms.
7. Give him what I call a Thai massage. Dress in something skimpy and tight, and give him a "full body" rub down. But be prepared, this DOES lead to sex! Bonus points for wearing high heels and doing a little bit of role playing.
8. If he takes lunch from home with him to work, prepare it for him. Maybe even spice it up with something that he doesn't normally take, but likes to eat. (also, don't forget Tip #10)
9. If you make plans to have lunch or dinner together, surprise him with a side trip to the local motel for some intense lovin'. Better yet, treat him to a night of debauchery at a swanky hotel. This might include morning room service to regain your strength. You won't be able to wipe that smile off your face when you see him in a blissful daze and with a wobble in his walk.
10. Leave him little love notes. By e-mail or little paper ones. Just to show him you're thinking about him.
For Men:
1. Getting your woman flowers is not just for special occasions or when you're in the doghouse. Buy her some just because. She'll appreciate them more when she doesn't expect them.
2. Don't be afraid to show affection in public (kissing, holding hands). So what if people are watching. You'll be making them jealous and your woman will appreciate that you're willing to show the world that you love them.
3. If your partner is talking about something, anything, try to concentrate on the conversation and not about how you're going to 'do' her. There's a time and place for that. Sometimes she just wants you to listen to her. How about it? Besides, you'll get bonus points for listening to her in the middle of a crucial football game.
4. If you can't afford, or don't have the energy to go out dancing, or to a nice restaurant, go for a walk, stop in at the local ice cream shop and buy her a cone of her favourite ice cream. You don't have to spend a lot of money. She just wants you to be with, and pay attention to, her.
5. When you go out for that walk, talk to her about the things she's interested in. Listen to what she has to say. Ask questions. Get involved in her interests. Actually, this tip can be applied any time, but doing it when there are no other distractions will allow you to focus.
6. Prepare her favourite dinner and serve it to her. You don't have to be a great cook. She'll appreciate the effort, as well as the pampering. Zero points for cheating and buying it already prepared. Make it from scratch, lazy bones! (also see Tip #8)
7. Massage her. It doesn't have to lead to sex. Sometimes she just wants her back or feet rubbed and have a few relaxing moments afterward. After your finished, if she's feeling relaxed and wants some quiet, let her have it and go into another room. But if you're going to watch TV or listen to music, keep it down.
8. Greet her at the door in an outfit she likes to see you wear. It doesn't have to be your best suit. Sometimes, a tight pair of jeans will do it. By the way, they may not admit it, but they DO like to look at guys' butts.
9. Buy her little things that mean something to her. Whether it's her favourite chocolate bar, a cute key chain, or the book she's been meaning to read. Giving her those unexpected little things endear you more and more to her because it shows you're always thinking of her.
10. Give her little love notes. With the advent of e-mails, it takes just a minute to whip something up and press 'send'. You don't have to be Cyrano de Bergerac. Just a few words expressing how you feel, even if it's just "kiss kiss". Of course, the adventurous might try their hand at writing a short poem and leaving it in a place where she'll find it when she's at work. She'll melt right in the office...guaranteed!
It doesn't end there. These were just a few suggestions to get you started. Be creative. Get to know your partner better, so that you can romance them all the better. Maybe if every couple made the effort throughout the year, there would be less marital strife and fewer divorces. Hey, we may even put Dr. Phil out of business. Wouldn't that be great!
If this has helped you, I'm glad to have made a difference in you and your partner's lives. If not, I hope that you will find your way because knowing the pure love of someone is better than any material possession you could hope to have.
Wings Over The World
March 10, 2006
Follow up: Did God create evil? (Mar 3)
I have some good news that I'd like to pass on. It's about the little Afghani boy I wrote about in my blog entry for Mar 3rd.
It was reported last night that he is currently undergoing treatment in a Pakistani hospital for a cancerous tumour he has on his face. Surgery was conducted and the tumour was found not to be as bad as first thought. The boy is undergoing a round of chemotherapy and one of the doctors (an oncologist) reports that the he has a 60-65% chance of surviving. The boy's grandfather was visibly happy, and grateful for the news. A far cry from the expectation that the boy would not see his sixth birthday.
What was the difference? A Canadian soldier in Kandahar writing to his church back home, where they raised $13,000 to pay for the boy's treatment. A small price to pay for an innocent little boy's life. Also a small price to pay to show his family and neighbours that there is good in the world. That complete strangers were willing to help. That violence for violence sake is unnecessary.
I can only imagine what this little Afghani boy will do with his life. Will he become a doctor? A great politician and peacemaker to bring strength to his country? Or maybe a suicide bomber? Only time will tell. I like to think that the showing of kindness towards him will give him the opportunity to 'pay it forward' and he will lean towards the first two options, rather than last one. History will be his judge.
In the meantime, let us continue with this. Let us commit to performing good deeds. Let us reduce the opportunity for evil to flourish. It made a difference in a little Afghani boy's life. Are you willing to help the battered wife down the street? Help fund the cure for cancer? Stop the fighting in the Middle East? Whether your act, however small, helps your community, your country, or the world we live in...it's worth it.
Allow me to repeat the previously posted quote from Edmund Burke:
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Do something good. Anything.
Wings Over The World
It was reported last night that he is currently undergoing treatment in a Pakistani hospital for a cancerous tumour he has on his face. Surgery was conducted and the tumour was found not to be as bad as first thought. The boy is undergoing a round of chemotherapy and one of the doctors (an oncologist) reports that the he has a 60-65% chance of surviving. The boy's grandfather was visibly happy, and grateful for the news. A far cry from the expectation that the boy would not see his sixth birthday.
What was the difference? A Canadian soldier in Kandahar writing to his church back home, where they raised $13,000 to pay for the boy's treatment. A small price to pay for an innocent little boy's life. Also a small price to pay to show his family and neighbours that there is good in the world. That complete strangers were willing to help. That violence for violence sake is unnecessary.
I can only imagine what this little Afghani boy will do with his life. Will he become a doctor? A great politician and peacemaker to bring strength to his country? Or maybe a suicide bomber? Only time will tell. I like to think that the showing of kindness towards him will give him the opportunity to 'pay it forward' and he will lean towards the first two options, rather than last one. History will be his judge.
In the meantime, let us continue with this. Let us commit to performing good deeds. Let us reduce the opportunity for evil to flourish. It made a difference in a little Afghani boy's life. Are you willing to help the battered wife down the street? Help fund the cure for cancer? Stop the fighting in the Middle East? Whether your act, however small, helps your community, your country, or the world we live in...it's worth it.
Allow me to repeat the previously posted quote from Edmund Burke:
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Do something good. Anything.
Wings Over The World
March 08, 2006
Bring the Roman Catholic Church Into The 21st Century
I felt it was time to discuss this subject, given the latest revelation of Irish priests sexually abusing at least 350 children since 1940.
I have thought about this subject whenever a like news item hits the wire and I've come to the conclusion that the Roman Catholic Church must enter the 21st Century in order to survive. First, I must say that I have a great deal of respect for this religion, as I do many other of the organized religions out there, but I believe that it has become somewhat of a dinosaur. Don't get me wrong, it has many admirable facets. However, I don't think the church is able to meet the needs of its shrinking congregation. Although I say shrinking, there have been reports that churches are reporting increased numbers during mass, but the church is also seeing a drop in priest population because of declining numbers following this "calling," as well as the existing ones aging. Lets look at a couple of teachings that I find particularly onerous, that I believe they should change their policy towards, in order to reverse this trend.
Priests are to remain celibate. Quite an unreasonable requirement. Given that priests are human and suffer from human failings, it is unreasonable to ask them to not have sex for the remainder of their lives. Especially considering the life expectancy of a person has more than doubled over the past millennium. The result? Well, if a priest does feel the need to obtain sexual gratification, they can't very well go to a bar to pick up a woman (or man, for that matter), or even hire a prostitute. Too public and the chances of being caught in the act, too great. Sleeping with each other? If one approaches the other, the other may 'out' them and they could potentially be excommunicated. So, where does that leave them? Sexually abusing the children that are left in their charge. An act very easy for them to get away with, since the children are less likely to tattle on them because of their position, and there would certainly be opportunities to be alone with them. Why is celibacy a requirement for priesthood? Does it have something to do with devotion to God? How is the sexual abuse of children serving that purpose? Maybe someone can edify me on what the Church/Vatican says why priests must remain celibate.
Birth control. Any kind of birth control is not allowed amongst Catholics. I'm not sure if this also includes the Rhythm method, but lets assume it does, because it is a conscious act of not getting pregnant. I can understand that this teaching would be of interest during the dark ages, when infant mortality rates were high and life expectancy was low. But now, with lower infant mortality rates, longer life expectancies and booming world population (6.5 billion at the most recent estimate. Seems like only yesterday we were at 5 billion), the need (and want, in the Western world) for high birth rates is unnecessary. Our expanding population is competing for fewer finite resources. This has to be slowed. A friend told me that when he was going through the marriage course at his church, the priest stated that the church denies its congregation the use of birth control....but these are the methods available anyway. Good for this priest! Despite the archaic edicts from the Vatican, the priest recognized the needs of his congregation and followed his conscience. If the Vatican saying no birth control is just so that they can boost Catholic numbers, then it's for the wrong reason. People can change religions, almost as easy as they can change gyms, so this isn't the way to keep the numbers up (in fact, sub-Sahara Africa, a traditional stomping ground for Catholic missionaries, is seeing Islam as the fastest growing religion).
I think you know where I'm going with this by now, but I'll state it anyway. The Vatican should allow priests to marry and allow birth control. I'll even go further and say that gay priests should be allowed to marry (I didn't want to get into the gay issue in this entry, but suffice to say, the Church should accept that it's out there and it's not an abomination). The result? Fewer instances of priests sexually abusing children, so the Church won't have to sell off their holdings to pay for reparations. Their congregation won't have to feel guilty about having 2 children, instead of 10. They will likely get a rising number of men entering the priesthood. But most of all, I think, the Church will see a growing number of people filling the pews. I'm sure there are a number of people out there that are Catholic in name only and don't attend mass. Loosening up some of the more archaic rules would turn this around. I thought with the election of the new Pope, this might be accomplished, but to no avail. He's old school.
I think it's high time that the Roman Catholic Church enter the 21st Century. It's unlikely it will happen under the leadership of the current Pope, but maybe the next one will be more progressive. Roman Catholicism is definitely due for a makeover. Maybe not an extreme one, but a makeover nonetheless.
Wings Over The World
I have thought about this subject whenever a like news item hits the wire and I've come to the conclusion that the Roman Catholic Church must enter the 21st Century in order to survive. First, I must say that I have a great deal of respect for this religion, as I do many other of the organized religions out there, but I believe that it has become somewhat of a dinosaur. Don't get me wrong, it has many admirable facets. However, I don't think the church is able to meet the needs of its shrinking congregation. Although I say shrinking, there have been reports that churches are reporting increased numbers during mass, but the church is also seeing a drop in priest population because of declining numbers following this "calling," as well as the existing ones aging. Lets look at a couple of teachings that I find particularly onerous, that I believe they should change their policy towards, in order to reverse this trend.
Priests are to remain celibate. Quite an unreasonable requirement. Given that priests are human and suffer from human failings, it is unreasonable to ask them to not have sex for the remainder of their lives. Especially considering the life expectancy of a person has more than doubled over the past millennium. The result? Well, if a priest does feel the need to obtain sexual gratification, they can't very well go to a bar to pick up a woman (or man, for that matter), or even hire a prostitute. Too public and the chances of being caught in the act, too great. Sleeping with each other? If one approaches the other, the other may 'out' them and they could potentially be excommunicated. So, where does that leave them? Sexually abusing the children that are left in their charge. An act very easy for them to get away with, since the children are less likely to tattle on them because of their position, and there would certainly be opportunities to be alone with them. Why is celibacy a requirement for priesthood? Does it have something to do with devotion to God? How is the sexual abuse of children serving that purpose? Maybe someone can edify me on what the Church/Vatican says why priests must remain celibate.
Birth control. Any kind of birth control is not allowed amongst Catholics. I'm not sure if this also includes the Rhythm method, but lets assume it does, because it is a conscious act of not getting pregnant. I can understand that this teaching would be of interest during the dark ages, when infant mortality rates were high and life expectancy was low. But now, with lower infant mortality rates, longer life expectancies and booming world population (6.5 billion at the most recent estimate. Seems like only yesterday we were at 5 billion), the need (and want, in the Western world) for high birth rates is unnecessary. Our expanding population is competing for fewer finite resources. This has to be slowed. A friend told me that when he was going through the marriage course at his church, the priest stated that the church denies its congregation the use of birth control....but these are the methods available anyway. Good for this priest! Despite the archaic edicts from the Vatican, the priest recognized the needs of his congregation and followed his conscience. If the Vatican saying no birth control is just so that they can boost Catholic numbers, then it's for the wrong reason. People can change religions, almost as easy as they can change gyms, so this isn't the way to keep the numbers up (in fact, sub-Sahara Africa, a traditional stomping ground for Catholic missionaries, is seeing Islam as the fastest growing religion).
I think you know where I'm going with this by now, but I'll state it anyway. The Vatican should allow priests to marry and allow birth control. I'll even go further and say that gay priests should be allowed to marry (I didn't want to get into the gay issue in this entry, but suffice to say, the Church should accept that it's out there and it's not an abomination). The result? Fewer instances of priests sexually abusing children, so the Church won't have to sell off their holdings to pay for reparations. Their congregation won't have to feel guilty about having 2 children, instead of 10. They will likely get a rising number of men entering the priesthood. But most of all, I think, the Church will see a growing number of people filling the pews. I'm sure there are a number of people out there that are Catholic in name only and don't attend mass. Loosening up some of the more archaic rules would turn this around. I thought with the election of the new Pope, this might be accomplished, but to no avail. He's old school.
I think it's high time that the Roman Catholic Church enter the 21st Century. It's unlikely it will happen under the leadership of the current Pope, but maybe the next one will be more progressive. Roman Catholicism is definitely due for a makeover. Maybe not an extreme one, but a makeover nonetheless.
Wings Over The World
March 07, 2006
Academy Award Conspiracy?
Is there a conspiracy in Hollywood? Have members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the ones that hand out the 'Oscars', colluded to wring more money from our pockets?Witness the latest round of awards Sunday night, for the 2005 film year. The following were awarded in the top six categories:
Best Picture: Crash
Best Director: Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain)
Best Actor: Philip Seymour Hoffman (Capote)
Best Actress: Reese Witherspoon (Walk The Line)
Best Supporting Actor: George Clooney (Syriana)
Best Supporting Actress: Rachel Weisz ( The Constant Gardner)
Notice something? No? Let me give you a hint. The following were awarded to the top six categories in the previous four years:
2004: Million Dollar Baby - 4 out of 6
2003: Lord of the Rings - 2 out of 6; Mystic River - 2 out of 6
2002: Chicago - 2 out of 6; The Pianist - 2 out of 6
2001: A Beautiful Mind - 3 out of 6
Still don't see the pattern? Okay, okay, I'll tell you. In this year's Academy Awards, no single picture got more than a single Oscar! Why do you think that is? I think that Hollywood is trying to make more money. Sound crazy? Look at the evidence:
1. In the previous four years, at least one film was awarded two or more Oscars.
2. When George Clooney was awarded the Best Supporting Actor Oscar Sunday night, he quipped that he guessed it meant he won't be getting the Best Director award.
3. Box office numbers were down significantly last year, despite big budget releases.
4. Hollywood box office has to compete with other entertainment outlets, of which many people are flocking to.
5. Films, even bad ones, make plenty of money in DVD sales, or from selling to rental outlets, some going on to achieve cult-like status with audiences.
6. Oscar winning films are usually re-released at the box office to benefit from Oscar wins, or at the very least, their DVD sales spike significantly.
7. During the Oscar ceremonies, there were at least two separate comments about advocating seeing movies in theatres, rather than on DVD.
Was Clooney a part of a greater plot? If not, was he just aware of Hollywood's dirty little secret? Is it the worst kept secret amongst those in the industry?
Although they may not have overtly rigged, or manipulated the results, since they use the auditing services of PriceWaterhouseCoopers to count the secret ballots, I believe that members of the Academy quietly influenced voters to spread the wealth. Why not? It's the movie industry that supports the Academy, why shouldn't they scratch the other's back? Bad box office? Boost DVD sales of as many movies as possible. Everyone wins...except maybe audiences.
Now, I'm not advocating that you bootleg copies, or do anything else that may be illegal. However, I do suggest that you not get taken in by this charade. If you didn't want to see it at the box office, you probably don't want to see it on DVD, unless you're of the ilk that likes to go through those six hours of "extras." If you do want to see it on DVD, then I suggest renting, rather than buying. In fact, wait until it's off the newly released rack. Cheaper for you. You're not stuck with a bad movie, if you don't like it, and your not saddled with a DVD format that may become obsolete in a year or two. Show Hollywood that they can't get away with this manipulation.
By the way, does anybody know who to contact for "The Razzies"? I have a new category: Most thinly-veiled attempt at separating viewing audiences from their money.
And The Razzie goes too...
Wings Over The World
March 06, 2006
Coming home
A sombre ceremony occurred over the weekend. The bodies of two soldiers of Canada's Afghanistan contingent were repatriated. Although their deaths were not a result of combat (they were in fact killed as a consequence of a traffic accident with a civilian vehicle), this reminds Canadians that they must play an international role, whether its through diplomacy, peacekeeping, or peacemaking.This is a scene that has been witnessed by many Americans over the past couple of years, with soldiers having died in Iraq, as well as Afghanistan. As the truth comes out about the reason for invading Iraq, there is less and less American support for its presence there. Whether you agree or not that America should have invaded Iraq, I believe Afghanistan is a different story.
When the Soviets ended their occupation of Afghanistan (with help from the American CIA, no doubt), there was no leadership from other countries to assist Afghanistan to develop a 'normalized' democracy. Consequently, a power vacuum formed such that a small insurgent group, the Taliban, become the dominant ruling group. What happened next? It has been reported that terrorist training camps were set up, so that terrorism could be exported to other countries. Freedoms were restricted, mainly because of the religious fundamentalists in power. Women were not educated, and in fact had to cover themselves head-to-toe in clothing called burkhas. Sons were trained to become suicide bombers. Then, the attack on the World Trade Center in New York on Sept 11, 2001, changed all of that. As a result, Americans entered Afghanistan to restore some semblance of democracy, or at least curtail terrorist attacks on its citizens. Gains have been made, but there is still a significant insurgency. A simplistic explanation of what has occurred, but I don't want to get bogged down with a history lesson.
Coming back to the honouring of Canadian fallen comrades, there is some rising discontent over the country's involvement in Afghanistan. As more Canadians are killed, more questions arise. Of course, diplomacy and negotiation are the best methods to resolve differences, but how do you negotiate with a group that flies no flag, has no permanent home, thrives on chaos, solves its problems by killing non-combatants - women and children? This reminds me of the famous scene in which British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, after returning with an accord signed by Adolph Hitler in 1938 declared, "My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time...Go home and get a nice sleep." The truth is, World War II occurred with tens of millions dying as a result. Had it not been for the British military progressively building up its forces in the time leading up to the war, the world could have been a different place.
Let the Taliban have Afghanistan to do with as they wish? Allow them a place to plant their flag so that diplomatic negotiations can be conducted? Consider what life was like under the Nazi regime: curfews, executions without trials, extermination camps - not just killing Jews, but anyone that the state felt was a threat even if it was because of sexual orientation. Consider what life would be like if Europe and North America were ruled by those that ruled Afghanistan. Any criticism of the government, you would quietly disappear. You would be forced to practice the religion that they deemed the correct one. Your sisters and daughters would not be allowed to get any education. Your sons would be trained to kill innocents, by gun or suicide bomb, to further the regime's cause.
Yes, killing is wrong, but sometimes it has to be done to overthrow a despotic regime. World history is littered with such regimes. Western democracy is not perfect, but at the moment, it's the best system available. The father of one of the fallen Canadian soldiers said that he was proud that his son died serving his country. Whether you agree or disagree with the Canadian presence in Afghanistan, do not sully his, nay any, Canadian soldier's sacrifice. They do it for the benefit of all citizens. Not just Canadian, but world citizens, including those in Afghanistan that want freedom. Remember the poem In Flanders Field.
If I have not swayed you yet, then let me leave you with this. Read my previous post, Did God create evil? (Mar 3, 2006) Then consider this quote by Edmund Burke, from the late eighteenth century:
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Let us not get a good sleep in our homes until the absence of good is no more.
Wings Over The World
(photo credit: www.ctv.ca)
March 03, 2006
Did God create evil?
I received this recently:
Did God create evil?
Did God create everything that exists? Does evil exist? Did God create evil?
A University professor at a well known institution of higher learning challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?"
A student bravely replied, "Yes he did!"
"God created everything?" The professor asked.
"Yes sir, he certainly did," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything; then God created evil. And, since evil exists, and according to the principal that our works define who we are, then we can assume God is evil."
The student became quiet and did not respond to the professor's hypothetical definition. The professor, quite pleased with himself, boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "May I ask you a question, professor?"
"Of course", replied the professor.
The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
"What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?"
The other students snickered at the young man's question.The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460F) is the total absence of heat; and all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued, "Professor, does darkness exist?"
The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality is the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it.
How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said. We see it everyday. It is in the daily examples of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil.
Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down.
The young man's name -- Albert Einstein
I'm not asking that you send this to ten people so that you will get some great reward. This isn't a chain blog. Neither am I saying that you should embrace religion, if it's not your way. But, just because you do not follow or practice a particular organized religion, doesn't mean that you shouldn't follow some of their teachings. Most of the major religions preach things like being kind to others, be charitable, be good to not only your family and friends, but to strangers too.
No, my friends. I'm only posting this anecdote to illustrate that evil exists in the absence of good, not the other way around. George W has it wrong. There are no evil-doers in this world, just people that fail to do what's right.
Consider this. In Kandahar, Afghanistan, Canadian soldiers 'adopted' a little Afghani boy who had been turned away from three other medical facilities in the area (see picture). Desperate, his grandfather brought him to the Canadian's camp. The boy's problem? He had a large, cancerous facial tumour that was beyond successful treatment. The response? Canadian doctors gave him medicine to make him more comfortable. One of the soldier's church congregation back home raised money so that the boy could be sent to a Pakistani hospital to live out his final days in relative comfort. The grandfather was grateful. Where was the father during all of this? Oblivious to his son's situation because of an opium addiction. The Canadian reaction? This boy needed help and should not suffer from his father's failings. No judgements. Just make a difference in a little boy's life, however long that may be.
How can you make a difference? You say that you can't afford to give money, or you don't have the time. How much does it cost to donate a couple of cans a food during a food drive? What's the matter? Can't go without buying that Starbucks vente Cafe Americano for one morning? If you can go without three or four in one month, give to your favourite charity. If you have the time, volunteer somewhere -- a hospital, a senior's home, a day care centre. Even if you can't do any of these things, open the door for someone - man or woman, handicapped or able. And when someone does it for you, say 'thank you.' Initiate a good deed. And when you're the recipient of a good deed, pay it forward.
I've only scratched the surface of the problem. This post can be applied to anything. Sit back for a few moments and consider what I've written. Then maybe, just maybe, there will be less evil in the world because there is more good.
Wings Over The World
photo credit: www.ctv.ca
March 01, 2006
Turn Your Head and Cough (up some money!)
Do these guys need to have their heads examined?I've decided. Access to private health care for some 'non-emergency' health care is wrong! It's a slippery slope that Canadians must not engage in.
The issue: Hospital wait times. Canadians are waiting far too long for non-emergency surgeries, such as for knees, hips and cataracts.
The Solution? Recently, the Premier of Quebec, Jean Charest, announced that his government would allow access to private health care, at the government's expense, if a patient has to wait longer than six months for their surgery. Ralph Klein, Mr. Charest's counterpart in Alberta (is it me, or does Ralph look like the puppet alien from the TV series Alf?), is also allowing for private health care to stand beside the public system for non-emergency care.
There is no doubt that hospital wait times in Canada are far too long. They exacerbate the suffering people must endure when they seek medical help. Having observed the system, it certainly has changed over the years, but wait times? Not for the better. What is the problem? What has gotten the system into this mess?
People often cite lack of funding. Or could it be doctor's aren't paid sufficiently for their services? Many doctors have headed south for greener pastures because provincial health care plans have capped their fees in order to control spiralling costs. Could it be that the population is expanding and growing older, but the medical training system has failed to keep pace with the growth? Should Canada actively recruit and fast track to citizenship, immigrant doctors for the specialties that are needed? How do we know how to tackle the problem, if we don't know what the problem(s) truly is/are?
Adding a parallel private system is not the answer. It treats the symptoms, not the cause. It just applies a band-aid to an open gash. What we need to do is sew up that gash. Instead, that band-aid will transform into gauze packing, then a tensor bandage, and on to a cast. But of course, that will only happen if you can afford to pay for the cast. Those that can't, will bleed to death waiting.
Consider this analogy. Your house is on fire and the fire department arrives on the scene to put it out. They have three hoses trying to douse the flames with water. Your neighbour comes over to the firemen and tells them that their roof is getting hot and that they will pay them $100 to take one of the hoses to keep the roof cool. He accepts. Now there are only two hoses on your fire. Your other neighbour does the same. Now only one. Then the two neighbours get into a bidding war over the last fireman...whoops, get out the garden hose. But the water pressure is down...get a bucket brigade going...ran out of water, start throwing sand...no more sand, start spitting on those 30 foot flames! The end result? Your neighbours who could it afford it, saved their homes. You? Owner of a pile of ashes.
No, health care shouldn't go to the highest bidder for non-emergency surgeries such as hip and knee replacements, because that could lead to paying for organs, blood transfusions and other life saving medical treatments. If there are only so many surgeries that can be accomplished because of the number of knees and hips that are available, or operating room time, who do you think they will go to? The patient that relies on a capped fee from the Provincial system, or someone that's willing to pay a few thousand dollars more for faster service? The waiting lists for the government system will get longer, and people that cannot afford private health care will suffer longer. Don't believe me? Look at the American system of private health care and HMOs. Many people do not even have the benefit of an HMO, bad as it is.
Should we just throw billions at the problem? Probably not. But I do propose a good start. Let's do something that businesses do. General Electric was very successful with their Six Sigma program. An improvement program that identified deficiencies and corrected them, saving GE billions of dollars over the years, becoming part of the company's success. Why can't this be applied to the health care system? Who better to fix the problem than the health care professionals themselves? Train them in Six Sigma. Local hospitals will have their own Six Sigma teams. As well, provincial and federal levels will have teams tackling issues at their levels. All of this can be lead at the federal level so provincial activities can be coordinated. Best of all, a database of knowledge can be held so that all health care professionals across the country could benefit from the results. Each hospital won't have to reinvent the wheel. This way, the health care wound will get sewn up. Sound like a plan?
Every Canadian wants better health care, especially as the Baby Boomers age. Should one get better health care than anyone else because they have more money in the bank? No. That's not the Canadian way, eh? The health of people does not discriminate because of financial ability, why should the health care system?
Wings Over The World
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)