222 Aspirin

For my headaches, I use an over the counter aspirin called 222. Powerful stuff.

For you Americans, that's basically Tylenol laced with caffeine and codeine.

It's not available in the U.S. since it contains codeine and codeine is considered a controlled substance down there. I believe you can only get it through a doctor's prescription. Here, you open a file with a pharmacist and voila.

I kinda like how Canada handles pharmacies. I find our pharmacists to be quite knowledgeable. So much so, there's a debate as to whether we should allow them to prescibed medicine.

I say go for it.

Anyway.

Apparently, it's technically illegal to carry 222's over the border. Sounds as though you're at least allowed one bottle of 50 pillls per person.

I Said...

Thinking of...selling nuts on the streets?

Business Blacklist Updated

I guess, sigh, I'll have to add the following businesses on my "No sale" list for politicizing shopping with a short sighted 'Ici on commerce en francais' sticker on their window.

Nothing screams 'know your place' than that little, idiotic message.

They are:

Best Buy
Future Shop
Centre Hi-Fi

No sale boys. You should be in the business of making money. Not politics.

I will gladly take my money to Ebay or Plattsburgh.

Canada's Welfare State Clip

CBC radio clip from 1949 about the welfare state in Canada.

Love this stuff.

I don't think the argument in the clip has been settled.

What I don't get is despite it all, millions of Canadians remain without a GP (a must in the type of system we have) and try as we might to egalitize, poverty remains.

***

In America, it was trading liberty for security. In Canada, initiative for security.

Patron Saint For Maids

Did you know there was a patron saint for domestic servants?

Yup.

Here name was Zita and she died on this day in 1272.

Remember this the next time you meet a maid named Zita.

Summertime Blues

On this day in 1960, rocker Eddie Cochran died at the age of 21 in a car crash.

Figures Of The Past: Ganelon

The traitor Ganelon - who betrayed Roland and Charlemagne - is mentioned in footnotes and a symbolic figure (mostly with Mordred) in Arthurian legends and even makes an appearance in Dante's Divine Comedy, Canto XXXII.

Ganelon's fate and treachery is immortalized in the Song of Roland.

Image found here.

Public Health And Education

I realize this is a provacative video on the conservative side, or even 'extremist' to those who believe in public institutions, but it does bring up valid points some of which I've heard parents and teachers begin to question.

It's a video starring Will Ferrell and Alec Baldwin look alikes.

There are definitely points to be made in favor of both sides of the debate.

***

A couple of things they bring up that may be up for debate some (American) readers can probably shed light upon:

-The Department of Education in the United States contributes 10% of its budget to schools. Yet, it controls the direction of what's being taught in those schools.
-One of the panelists asserted since its arrival on the seen, test scores have been in steady decline. Indeed, we've often heard and read about the fall of quality education. I have no citation for it.

***

Points I agree on:

-We tend to scoff of vocational education and apprenticeship programs. When I was in high school, councilors would coil in horror if you wanted to go to mechanic or electrician school. Today, plumbers make more money than someone in with a university degree working in a bank. In Europe, they're far better at indentifying vocational candidates and offering them jobs. They seem to be more pragmatic as to who should go to university. Here, we consider it a "right" to go to school and even demand society pay for it.

-In Canada, professor salaries can go up to $200 000 per year despite low tuitions. The balance of payments to cover the salary (excluding the actual cost of tuition) comes from, I reckon, taxpayers.

-The irony of public education - particularly for liberals (or any person free of ideology for that matter) who rightly rail against the loss of independent free thinking - is that it's actually a propaganda tool since it dictates and coerces the curriculum being taught. Sheep, sheep, sheep!

Schools should be treated as self-sustaining organisms where the needs and objectives of each is determined by educators and parents. No bureaucrat removed from the intricate equation of this reality should dictate otherwise. For example, a private school near my house with an excellent reputation was revoked its permit because it had the audacity to market itself as bilingual. It took parents, mostly French-Canadians, to leave their work to go and fight this nonsense. It was eventually rectified in the school's favor. The point being, why face the unnecessary stress? Why is the government intervening in what parents want for their children? How was the stare "improving" our education by playing politics?

Another example is when the government forced an "ethics"course on private schools built on strong religious identities. Again, it's a simple case of if parents send their children to this school then it's their business. The state should not be telling a Jesuit school to cease teaching religion. It's paternalistic, wrong and even immoral. If parents pay for it, it's none of our business.

The weight of the ministry on schools is unbearable and the results speak for themselves. It's not the teachers fault. They know what needs to be done but can't do it since it's against the law.

The best type of education system is one in which every school is free to control its destiny. Parents would then have the choice to pick which they like best. The crappy ones would go out of business and the best ones would stand alone.

The problem with this model is what to do with those who can't afford such schools - unless the market caters to it specifically. My suggestion is public education must remain so long as the government's input is limited. There's no reason to be able to give school's latitude even if they're publicly funded.

Furthermore, we can surely come up with innovative ways to get under privileged people a shot at education if they truly need it and have the interest in it. No? Better them than a bunch of sheep who merely worked the system against their will.

We just have to manage human resources better.

Question: What or when was (if ever) the last true innovative idea copied everywhere in education to come out of Canada?

***

Finally, Peter Theil is mentioned. Theil is definitely a character. I read about his bubble theory a while back and thought to comment about but let it go so I'll do it here. We do cling on to the ideal of public education - and here in Canada public health.

That's fine.

The problem is whenever people want to make meaningful and necessary changes, they are dubbed 'extremists' for merely bringing up the discussion.

The state of public education and health, in my opinion, is mediocre. Why not work to improve it? We can only do so if we actual begin to talk about it.

By the way, building a super hospital, while the current system is in turmoil is NOT a solution. It's sweeping things under a rug and quite frankly, Quebec's track record on grandiose projects is abysmal. Forgive my cynicism.

Identifying Soccer Talent Still An Issue In North America

If you're not a soccer fan, best you be moving along for this post.

I don't know what the etiquette is about copy/pasting comments from other sites but I've done in the past and will do so here.

As usual, the FIFA world rankings stir way too many emotions for its worth. It's just a ranking based on a formula of games played over a period of time. Too often people forget it's a concrete (and imperfect) equation meant to be objective and a ranking where a group of people subjectively subject who they thing should be #1 like they do with the BCS or college basketball. If Portugal is ranked ahead of the USA it means precious little. It does provide some insights into the consistency of a program but I tend to look at the long-term coefficients for that (like you would for a mutual fund or any investment. I don't care who is number 1 for three months. I want to see how they've done for 40 years).

FIFA doesn't publish those but ELO does under 'Strongest football nations.' since 1970.The top three are of no surprise. They do one better, they calculate and break it down per decade going back to the 1910s.

***

Back to the comment. I post it because I think he's accurate with his argument. It's one I definitely witnessed and experienced.

"To many of you people try to down the MLS. To be perfectly honest i currnetly play proffesional soccer in norway second division and have also playing 2nd division in italy for 3 years and there is almost no difference if any in the quality of players with the MLS and other leagues in eroupe what makes the game so poor in MLS is not the players but the coaching the training the tactics of our game we are tought the game incorrectly our youth system is so messed up and this is the main reason why gusieppe rossi left for italy... He was a good friend of my we played youth soccer together and he was not chosen for youth state team which was a joke. Coaches here are terrible...it makes me sick college soccer is even more of a joke..."

It's worse in Canada. At least the Americans can compete with the likes of Mexico, Brazil and Argentina and are consistently ranked in the top 20 and even made appearances in the top 10.

About his mention of Rossi. Canada did the same with Owen Hargreaves. The program failed him even though he was good enough to play for Bayern Munich's (one of the world's great clubs) youth academy. Following this, he ended up with another soccer giant in Manchester United and then was in the starting eleven for England.

Somehow Canada missed this?

Better yet, we then call him a 'traitor' for our own stupidity!

How a country so hard up for talent can let him go?

Simple. The chap above explains it well.

When I was playing the progress of soccer was reverse in Canada's favor vis-a-vis USA. It always baffled me how the quality of players on Team Canada was so poor - subpar tactics, ball movement and technique - since the local soccer parks were filled with highly skilled albeit raw talent screaming to be developed. We used to joke we can put together a local team and give Team Canada a run for their money.

***

When I was playing, players like me - big on vision, small on physical strength - being overlooked was the rule and not the exception. It just the way it was. The main prevailing tactic, if you can call it that, was to tell players to run like madmen and be "aggressive" on the ball. All the coaches would do is yell as if that would motivate players. Basically it was a hockey mentality in a soccer setting.


They never showed you to play without the ball or how to pace a game. That was left to chance if a coach cared enough to take the time to teach but it was always independent of any developmental strategy. 

I still marvel at how good we were with scant proper instruction. It was pure, raw, tupelo honey.

It's a bit better now. I see Canada's talent is finding its way into the national team (it's nice to see short passes with some purpose now) but I still think we're a long way off.

Finally, it's pleasing to see the team reflect its cultural makeup a little more now as well.

Mexican Drug Lord Bust

Can't seem to find the embed code on youtube anymore. Anyone know why?

In the meantime, this video showing a raid on a Mexican drug cartel lord is pretty wild.

Ever wonder what a billion dollars looks like?

Question: Is Mexico a failed state?

Sir Gawain And The Green Knight

An anonymous, epic Arhturian poem and tale.

More here.

Filled with symbolism.

Quebec's Grading Meddling

Once again, in their infinite wisdom, the paternalistic brains running the education ministry have chimed in with a piece of grand work. I don't know what their fetish is for constantly tinkering with how to grade students. They messed up the last time they did it leaving parents with a blank Homer Simpson stare and a "I see. But is my kid an idiot or not?"

Was talking to a few teachers over the last few days, some of whom have over 40 years experience, and they concluded it was another dud from the government. All it does is confuse parents further and complicates a teacher's life trying to explain the convoluted process. We're doing a massive disservice to parents. In fact, no one asked for it to be changed the first time around. If parents and teachers didn't ask for it, then why is the government forcing a change?

To prove they exist? To justify their jobs?

Free Speech? What's That?

I saw (and still see) the repression of free speech all the time. University was one of the worst offenders. I couldn't get out of it fast enough. If I had balls, I would have quit to get away from stupid is and stupid does. But hey, I needed the piece of paper for...whatever.

Will never forget the student who was upset at a professor for having the temerity to not only refuse which books to focus on in the syllabus, but the chapters as well! She was entitled to a road map with destination 'A' apparently.

Will also never forget one guy's response, clearly annoyed: "Or you could just read the books."

Question

Would a woolen burqua be popular in Canada?

Positively A Great Song

Very weird that I would have to find Bob Dylan's 'Postively 4th Street' here.

Anyway.

I don't know why Dylan wrote this song, but it doesn't get more stark than this on the subject of naked hypocrisy.

Man, many a musician covered this beaut gem of a song.

The vastly under rated and largely forgotten rock legend Johnny Rivers (ne Ramistella) made a brilliant cover.

With a mug like that, no wonder he was an idol.

Couldn't embed either of these clips.

Paying Volunteers Is The Best They Got In The Halls Of Ideas?

This is wrong. Just plain wrong. Wrong on so many levels. Wrong.

Not everything needs to have a monetary value attached to it.

If you can't see anything wrong with this, then you lost your sense of independence. Of what a volunteer in a free society offering their time to enhance their community.

It's another wrongheaded, misplaced statist idiocy that rips the soul out of what we should be as free-thinking, acting and rational players in the social realm.

The government is bent on removing what precious little is left of our personal dignity.

Actually, it's telling of where our mindset is these days for suggesting paying volunteers is a good idea for society.

***

The above article got me thinking about an old and wise adage oft repeated in sports: A good official or referee is one in which you never hear or see. I'd expand it by adding, a good team is one that is not overcoached.

A referee is there to simply enforce the laws or rules of a sport or game. He (or she) are not there to intrude and intervene in every action to ensure those laws are observed. If they did so, there would be no flow. In fact, it usually leads to unnecessary frustration and flare ups that could have been avoided.

They're merely there to preserve the integrity of the game and league to which the participants collectively agreed to be a part of. Not influence it. A ref is not there to determine who ought to win, or how they should win, or make sure everyone is a winner.

Let the players decided.

A classic and inevitable aspect of sports is the "settling" of accounts. Everyone knows this exists. Let the players decide.

Why pretend it doesn't happen?

The greatest games are those by which the players play within the rules and as such govern themselves in a mysterious but symbionic poetic pace. A lot of shit will happen but you can't penalize everything right? You can't save everyone right? Sometimes you just have to let things go. A lesson we're unwilling to heed when it comes to letting corporate bums fail as natural selection would.

A ref's interference screws and skews the contest.

***

Today, there can be no doubt, quite frankly I can't see how anyone can argue otherwise (read the link), that politicians and the state interfere way too much into the daily actions of the citizens it is expected to govern.

A leader not heard or seen is the best leader. Civil servants of which politicians are included, are the refs of society. They are there to protect and preserve the integrity of our institutions. Not interfere in everything (and coopt with special interest of whatever kind) in our lives from how much salt we eat to whether we lock up our own liquor cabinets. The biggest lie heaped upon us all is the concept of "protecting us from ourselves."

I do happen to think if you leave people alone, they will perform not unlike two teams competing on the pitch, field, court or ice. Ironically, a true sense of socialistic cooperation would have a better chance at succeeding (with smaller populations of course). After all, are teams sports nothing but (Darwinistic) socialism in an athletic setting?

Jam us up with insidiously numerous state laws and ordinances and all you've done is confuse the issue by frustrating people who just want to get on with it. Not spend time going back and forth sometimes arguing with different levels of government to stick a fence on their land or start a business. Or even be able to sell food on the streets without a "feasiblity test."

Nothing can't be done within the prescribed limits of a few pieces of paper within one or two departments.

The rest is just inefficient and pointless bullshit dressed up as improving the 'greater good.'

The greater good.

A myth.

How come know one talks about the 'greater bad?'

Canadian Democracy

The Green party is running 308 candidates in all 308 ridings but weren't allowed to partake in the national leaders debate. Meanwhile, a regional and parochial party bent on breaking up Canada, the Bloc Quebecois, gets to play 'let's reduce all issues to Quebec' in front of the country.

Seems to me the Greens deserve a spot.

How do we spell 'joke' again?

Daycare Update

We're only a few days but we didn't open with the kids I expected. My waiting list is stacked towards August, September.

Bittersweet.

I'm not subsidized. We'll see.

***

This report from the Montreal Economic Institute is BANG ON and one I surmised quickly in the daycare industry.

"But before we try to replicate Quebec's child-care model coast to coast, Ottawa should take a close look at what that model has brought Quebecers. The answer: high costs, little choice, mediocre quality.



The stated goal of Bill C-303 is to "ensure the quality, accessibility, universality and accountability of [child-care] programs in order to promote early childhood development and well being." Is this goal really being met in Quebec?


One of the few extensive studies on the quality of Quebec child-care facilities reported in 2005 that 61% had an overall quality rated as minimal (with scores of 3 to 4.9 out of 7), while 12% were rated as inadequate and 27% as good. Government subsidy and regulation, clearly, does not ensure high quality."

$7 dollar a day was a pipe dream from the start. It sheltered people from the true costs of running a daycare. It's actually more advantage for people to pay a private daycare up front than pay $7 which usually results in mediocre services. Worse, it created an artificial demand of which I'm learning about. People, like sheep, are conditioned to look for $7 without realizing the cost to quality effect.

"Meanwhile, those with incomes between $25,000 and $40,000 are actually worse off financially than they would be using nonsubsidized child care at, say, $26 per day, given the overall effect of the government's program on their taxable incomes. So much for universality and accessibility.



The $7-a-day child-care system also results in unfair competition for unsubsidized private daycare operators, further limiting parents' choices. Since 1997, their market share has become negligible. They accounted for just 1.7% of all spaces in 2006."

How many times have we read about from learned people who know and understand business, government interventionism puts everything out of whack. What usually follows, once they mess things up, is a paternalistic approach. Also known as a crack down. Mme. Courchesne did a great job in education. She should do fine in daycare. The link applies to subsidized daycares.

Cough.

"Thousands of centres in Quebec are subsidized to the tune of $33 a day per child."

Parents are charged $7. Who is paying the balance of $26?

MEI tackles the government's crack down on extra fees:

"Last year, with the stated aim of preventing "two-tier" child care from emerging, the Quebec government prevented subsidized private daycare centres from engaging in extra billing for supplementary activities. This coercive measure comes as a logical outcome of the centralization and standardization mindset that took over a decade ago. A group of parents is currently challenging this policy in court."


It's group think.

"The costs of the new child-care system seem high in comparison to what private unsubsidized daycare operators charge, and to what is charged in other provinces. One measure of subsidies is the daily basic allowance given by the government. In formal child-care facilities, this comes to about $40 per child - not even including the $7 parental contribution. In regulated private daycare centres, by contrast, the corresponding cost is $33."


And this cost figure is EXACTLY what I've observed and experienced. Basically, the base price a private day care should charge is maybe $38 to make some money.

Parents who think a daycare charging $40 or $45 is too expensive are unaware of what's going on. They should do extra research and visit as many daycares as they can to get a feel for how things work. It's the only way. Listening to only the government option is not enough.

No Knock Out Punch

Conclusion after last night's debate?

In order to beat the defending champ in boxing, it usually takes a knock out. The Liberals took a chance in pushing a non-confidence vote. Michael Ignatieff needed to knock Harper out and he didn't.

What remains to be seen is if Harper can earn a majority.

If he doesn't and gets a third minority in succession, Frik and Frak may see this as yet another chance to try and bother us with another election somewhere down the road. And still more possible coalition nonsense between the irksome NDP and pointless Liberals. Don't expect fiscal responsibility either.

***

The thing is, Harper is a smooth chess player. He put his opponents in a corner with his coy budget. He put many things in there they wanted and they reacted by calling an election and then proceeded to attack him in the debates for not doing what he put in the budget. Follow? They misplayed the whole thing.

They were left to going after his iron-fist political behavior and kept hammering out how they want a "Democratic" government. Please. Quebec and the Bloc aren't bastions of "Democracy," the NDP are socialists and prefer coercion to individual choice and the Liberals under Chretien were a benign dictatorial state.

It was a hollow game.

Last, as a side note, the Harper conservatives have spent more than any Tory government in history.

***

The conservatives are the only government since I've been voting that actually cut cheques out to families. The Liberals, who cut services massively and never cut taxes, talked about it but never acted on it.

Hey, $100 bucks is $100. If you have more kids, more for you.

***

A local Bloc candidate is described as a "militante souvereigniste." A militant sovereignist.

Leave it to them to use military terminology to describe their intentions.

Imagine if mainstream parties used such language.

It does wreak of "pitchforks" and "axes" doesn't it?

Militant. Please.

How about getting serious about more social pressing needs, eh? Get Quebecers to stay in school, smoke less and exercise more, work harder, fix health and education, lower the damn taxes, scale back the enormous size of the civil service of which the crushing weight of its costs is destroying the tax base, weaken the unions, and produce some wealth outside state run monopolies.

Oh, get the bus drivers to smile more and privatize the fricken SAQ. I'm fed up of paying $28 hourly wages ( for something the state has no business running. $28! Go on the free market and see how much they're really worth.

Maybe then I'll take them seriously.

La faute d'Ottawa mon oeil.

Changes Are Needed

At least Francois Legault is offering his thoughts and solutions to problems that face us all.

I don't see much englightened ideas coming out of the left when it comes to rejuvinating public services. Just "how dare he" and "don't privatize" reaction to men like Legault. Who, to me anyway, is just calling a spade a spade: We plain suck.

And the facts prove it. Just google Quebec's record on public health and education.

Dismal.

Ignatieff Is Right

Roll back payroll taxes!

Too expense. I have to tack on an extra .16% on the hourly wage. For start ups, that's an extremely expensive proposition. For example, if I have to pay someone $15 an hour it actually costs me something closer to $17. And that's not including woker's compensation through CSST.

It's worse for businesses in manufacturing and resources. A friend of mine (from my hockey pool)  is a CFO of multi-million dollar resource company and he was telling me a $23 wage costs hims $36.

Fronting that kind of money means I have less to PUT INTO THE BUSINESS. The quicker I put it back into the business, the more rapidly I can hire thus increasing the speed of stabilizing the business. Once done, I can then work on paying debts back. At which point, I can look to open a SECOND business. More employment for the economy.

But I'm raped up front. This means the length of time to recover is drawn out.

It's not rocket science. It really isn't.

Note To Mr. Duceppe

Nice try.

The mess Quebec finds itself in with regards to public education and health is our own fault. Not Ottawa's.

We alone must take responsibility for our failed measures.

Thank you.

Bellamy Salute

Children saluting the Pledge of Allegiance. Always remember, Hitler looked to Rome.

We're Not Envied

No, no, NO!

No.

NOOOOOOO!

Just heard Layton claim our public health systems is "envied all over the world."

Typical parochial Canadian BS.

If you travel you know two things. Europeans and Americans DO NOT envy our model which consistently under performs in the OECD.

Europeans have been at the public health game longer than us. One thing is for sure, their system is nowhere as rigid as ours.

Just keeping it real folks.

The NDP platform is simple: Expand services and programs.

Long-Form Poo-Poo

Still watching.

Ignatieff repeats the same misleading bull about the long-form census. He described Harper as trying to "take it away." No, he proposed to make it voluntary. Big difference.

Just realized something. The Liberals have gone back to back with professors as leaders.

The NDP Are Sickening

Watching the debate. The exchange between the NDP and Bloc Quebecois in particular about Bill 101.

The NDP, as proposed by turncoat Thomas Mulcair, are tabling a motion to expand Bill 101 into Federal institutions.

This is a national party!

Idiots.

They deserve to wallow in obscurity.

Don't Quit Your Day Job

Wo, wo, wo! Wo! I said wo, camel!

I know Ignatieff is confused about his voting record in two other countries (UK and USA) but this is getting ridiculous. Now he's blurring his work as a politician with acting? Who knew he'd play the role of the evil madman Alexei Volkoff so well?

Let Women Choose Free Of Pressure

The push to have more women in everything seems somewhat artificial to me at times.

I don't know to what extent gender discrimination goes but the premise seems to be A) women are conditioned to be less forthright and B) there's a bias, subtle or otherwise, against women on the job market.

But one little thing I'm learning rarely mentioned is the fact some women actually want to be mothers. Societal pressures on women not ready to drop their kids at daycare is heavy and causes stress to mothers. Never mind the whole whithering of the family as a primary institution for humans angle.

Maybe a majority of women don't want to go into politics or be cops or play with hammers.

It is, after all, a dirty rotten game for scoundrels.

Let them be mothers if they so choose and spare the "we must be equal to men on all levels" crap. Women give birth and are the principle caregivers to children. It's not only biologically healthy but the base root of a healthy world. There is no greater responsibility (and honor) a person can be given.

If they choose a career, so be it too. But let's not group all women into one boat. Each has its own "maternal instincts" clock. By this virtue, there will always be a smaller labour pool with women.

Nothing sucks more than having to live for someone else's personal ideals of what life should be.

I invite women to kick in with some thoughts. Screw the men.

Erm. Figuratively.

I'll stop. Here.

Innovation Index

According to The Economist. Click on the 'full report' in the article for a complete report and methodology.

The United States pretty much remain the kings even though growth in innovation is expected to dip slightly - -.6%- in the next five years. Canada, which does fine on the list (weak R&D though), finds itself on a similar growth trend (-.3%) as its neighbour to the south.

China and India are gaining steam but each have major obstacles in their way before they reach American levels. Nonetheless, 11% nd 8% growth for each are on the horizon. America's main competitor is resource-challenged Japan. Its growth is expected to be even.

As for Europe, growth numbers are in North America's range with Belgium (1.2%) and Croatia (5.1%) among the leaders.

***

Here's yet another index from INSEAD - this one a 456 page comprehensive breakdown for each country.

***

A link to a business innovation site.

Music On A Late Saturday Night

Jet Airliner:



Great as it is, the Steve Miller Band version wasn't the original. Paul Pena wrote it:

Canuckian Rock

A Foot In Cold Water with 'Make me do anything you want.'



Quebec singer Michel Pagliaro (Pag) with 'Lovin' you ain't easy.' Pagliaro sings mostly in French but is versatile and has released hits in English.

Daycare Udate: Monday April 11, 2011

Is the offifical opening.

Blogging While Buzzed

Ever have a bunch of food items in the pantry and fridge about to go to waste? It's especially tough for a guy like me since my wife is allergic to...well, let's just say it's shorter to not get into it.

So I have to buy bread in a weel I think I can use it. My daughter is too young (and thus inconsistent) to count on to help me consume.

I took some basil, celery, yellow pepper, garlic and onion and began to make a tomato sauce. Add some pancetta (Italian bacon) and pepperoni (the real stuff not that mechanically seperated crap) and I got sumting brooing.

What to use it with? Didn't fell like pasta. So I looked into the freezer and spotted some grilled Southwestern style panini. Grabbed some mozzarella and made a 30-second pizza in the microwave.

Instant pizza.

Dee-lish.

***

Tomorrow we're going for some Smoked Meat. A Jewish contribution to food history.

And we thank them for it.

New Installment

I think I'm gonna run with a new installment called "Blogging While Buzzed." Stay tuned.

It took me longer than usual to type the above sentence.

Blogging while buzzed is a challenge.

Original sentence:

i Thil I'M goNNA ruy witj a bew untianllement called 'bLogging wi

Forget it.

Libya Conversation

A different kind of conversation on Libya over at Man of Roma.

Canada Should Face Its Racism

As I've spoken about in the past, any honest student of Canadian history comes to terms with a fact: Canadian racism existed and continues to persist.

We don't speak much about it because Canadians have done a wonderful job cleaning up its image without confronting its past. We speak passionate of American race issues and stand strangely silent with our own.

From the eugenics movement of the early 20th century, to the internment of Japanese, Italian, German and Ukranian Canadians to repressive language laws in Quebec (of which the disgraceful and pathetic NDP a national party supports), Canada is no stranger to prejudicial and racial behaviour.

One of the worst offenses, of course, is what went on in Residential Schools and the murder of Natives.

Genocide the way Natives see it.

America stares its racial problems in the face. Canada looks away.

Iggy Pop Punks American Idol

Something is going on.

I don't know what but it is.

Iggy Pop....on American Idol? Guy is just plain far out. Love it. His raw image is pure "fuck you."

First Steven Tyler and now the punk man who fronted The Stooges?

Who next? Pink Floyd and Rush together covering some Zep tunes?

Have I asked enough questions?

I think I'll walk without my shirt all day.

Italy And Libya

An interesting article at InThese New Times.

Some excerpts:

"...Let’s set the record straight: only a gullible person might think that the current attack on Libya by some NATO member countries could actually be motivated by “humanitarian” concerns. Of course, Gaddafi is a merciless dictator with his enemies, but he’s not any fiercer than most of the dictators in other Arab countries, some of whom have been already overthrown (Ben Ali and Mubarak), while others are still governing and are stoking the flames of war (the autocrats of the Arab Peninsula)..."


"...Barack Obama on 19 March 2011: “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries … The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.” Since then, Gaddafi has surely had recourse to planes against the rebels, though the numerous journalists have been unable to document any attacks against civilians. Same story for the allegations of “mass graves”, based on a single picture portraying four or five open tombs in an identifiable cemetery of Tripoli, which was immediately shelved due to its scarce credibility..."

"...Let’s start from the beginning. Before the riots erupted, Italy enjoyed a privileged relationship with Libya. First of all, Italy is Tripoli’s largest trading partner, constituting the main market for Libyan exports and the first exporter to Libya. Italy buys almost 40% of Libya’s exports (its second main buyer, Germany, gets only 10%) while selling to Libya 18,9% of its total imports (the second main seller, China, provides not much more than 10%). Libya’s trade dependence on Italy is strong, but this relationship represents an even greater strategic value for Rome than for Tripoli.



Libya owns the biggest oil reserves (good quality oil) on the whole African continent and is geographically close to Italy, therefore it is naturally Italy’s main, or one of the main, energy supplier. Italian state company ENI extracts from Libya 15% of its total oil production; through the Greenstream pipeline in 2010 Italy received 9,4 billion cubic meters of Libyan gas. ENI’s contracts in Libya are still valid for 30-40 years, and despite Italian behaviour, which we are about to analyze, Tripoli confirmed them on March 17th through the voice of oil minister Shukri Ghanem. Currently Libya grants all contracts for infrastructure building to Italian companies, assuring billions of orders that impact positively on Italy’s employment market. Lastly Libya, which is a relatively rich country thanks to its energy exports (it has the highest per-capita income in Africa), invests in Italy most of its “petrodollars”: currently it is involved in business transactions with ENI, FIAT, Unicredit, Finmeccanica and other companies. A fundamental contribution of capitals in a trend characterized by a lack of liquidity, after the financial crisis of 2008..."

"...Therefore, the real reasons for the intervention are strategic and geopolitical: humanitarianism is just a pretext. On this site, it is possible to glean the real reasons motivating France, the US and Great Britain. Reasons that, after all, are easy to guess. Here, we will dwell on the choices made by the Italian Government..."

"...So Italy arrived at the outbreak of the Libyan crisis as an ally of Tripoli, tied to Libya by the clauses – written down in black and white – of a treaty, stipulated not a hundred years ago but in 2009, and not from a former government but from the incumbent one.


"The Italian attitude, during the last weeks, has been uncertain and embarrassing. At the beginning Berlusconi stated that he didn’t want to “disturb” colonel Gaddafi (February 19th), while his Foreign minister Frattini was haunted by the spectre of an “Islamic emirate in Benghazi” (February 21st). Very soon, though, the riots seemed to overcome the authority of the Jamahiriya and the Italian attitude changed: Frattini inaugurated the hike-up of the alleged victims, announcing 1000 bodies (February 23rd) while Human Rights Watch was still counting a few hundreds; Minister of Defence La Russa (we don’t know by what specific area of expertise) announced the suspension of the Italian-Libyan Friendship Treaty, a totally arbitrary and illegal measure (February 27th)."

"...Whatever will be the outcome of this conflict, Italy has already lost its Libyan campaign. Italian leaders celebrated the 150 years of unity with a glaring about-face towards Libya: a tragicomic new edition of the tragedy of September 8, 1943. This time it won’t be Italy, but its former “friend” Libya’s turn to descend into a long and painful civil war, which could have been ended in a few days without external intrusions."

Spelling Not A Strongpoint For Some

What's Worse Than 'Ruinous'?

The above article is above Paul Ryan's budget cuts proposal, but I'm using it for something else and strictly related to the title.
 
I was at my daughter's kindergarten "report" day on Thursday. Kid's an ace. It's a good sign when the teacher says, "I don't have to show or tell you anything, you already know what to do, honey." She's outgoing and a leader. Already knows some math, reads ahead of her age and grasping the geography lessons I'm giving her. In short, she's nothing like me when I was her age. I was a blathering idiot. I had to wear a helmet just to avoid hitting my head on a Tonka truck - the plastic and not the metal ones. Whoa!
So what's 'ruinous?'

A mother in a book lying on a table in the classroom thanking the teacher speeling 'speechless' as 'speechlious.' I'm going to assume she's not from around here and English is not a first language. I hope.

How delishess!

The ruinless of society.

Quebec Bluegrass

I listen to American bluegrass.

Quebec modern bluegrass too. Mes Aieux (My Ancestors) is, I guess a neo-traditional band. The song is called "Degeneration" and points (as I interpret it) to how we're actually going backwards as a society:


Mes Aïeux : Dégénération par HeinConnu

I think this video - which translates the lyrics and well worth a peak for all North Americans - puts in stark words how "progressive" we are.

We DID trade in our individualism for state security and as the song points out, to become civil servants.

I loved their astute comment about RRSPs. Brilliant.

Smile!

The happiest companies in America.

Ok, a Rabbi, Priest, Imam and Minister walk into a strip joint selling pork...

I betcha these companies also outperform on stock indices.

Putting The "F" In Art!

But is it art?

Yes it is. Because I said so.

Now where's my grant or whither culture.

Terms I Hate

"Society is in sad decline."

As readers of history will know and observe, we've been in "sad decline" since Rome.

Apparently.

Obama's Failing Libyan Policy

Two things I'm a little tired of hearing about President Obama. One, he's "fixing" things. No he's not. He's confirming them. Two, he's "smart." Very subjective. I'm going to go ahead and safely assume if you're leading a country you possess some amount of intelligence. The question is, is he as "smart" as people push him to be? I'm not convinced.

Oh. There's a third one: He's a socialist. He's a socialist because he spends and brings in Obamacare? Actually, they (and you know who you are!), term this by the grating and irritating "progressivism."

Aside from the fact he doesn't quite fit the classic profile of a socialist (though he's been firmly established as a  liberal based on his modest track record), last I checked, Republicans spend too (as conservatives are apt to do up here) and one of the Union's first health care plan was introduced byMitt Romney (R) in Massachusetts.

***

One thing he ain't is a military strategist. FP claims a failing Libya policy imminent.

From Foreign Policy:

"Obama's Libya policy has been marked by an erratic, improvisational, and amateurish character. Already the administration is quietly warning that the war may drag on through the rest of the year, if not beyond it."

Question

On getting "tough" on crime in Canada:

Should society publish the names of youths who commit heinous crimes?

***

On illegal immigration in the United States:

Does it encroach on civil liberties or prejudicial to enforce established immigration laws (of any nation) to protect its territorial integrity?

Head Trauma More Serious Than First Thought

Study from UNC raises serious issues for professional CFL and NFL players who suffer head trauma during their careers.

Average lifespan is 55 years old?

Wow.

I wonder if the bozos running the NHL and its backward apologists are listening - starting with the Roman Triumvirate of Bettman, Campbell and Murphy.

***

Soccer players aren't immune. I read not too long ago a neuro-surgeon asserting the elbows to the head and heading of the ball can pose serious brain trauma problems.

Silly Season For True

Canadian democracy. Let's see.

Green party leader Elizabeth May can't take part in a debate with the leaders because a "consortium" won't or can't allow it based on a criteria we know little of. Now, a student can't attend a conference with PM Harper as its speaker because she's been "flagged."

Saweet!

Teacher Threatens Republicans

Charges are being laid against a Wisconsin teacher for threatening GOP politicians. 

"A 26-year-old woman was charged Thursday with two felony counts and two misdemeanor counts for allegedly making email threats against Wisconsin lawmakers during the height of the battle over Gov. Scott Walker's budget-repair bill."

More here.


Not so long ago, there were charges against conservative right-wingers threatening politicians from the Democratic party. Not one charge, to my knowledge, was made.

However, because charges weren't laid doesn't mean it didn't happen. In fact, it's highly probable it did. Considering people threaten journalists and celebrities on a daily basis it's not a stretch to believe politicians of any and all stripes are targeted.

I just found it interesting actual charges were laid and no one seems to have picked it up.

If someone can correct me please do.

Question

Just gotta ask:

Do the Parti-Quebecois and Bloc Quebecois truly believe all Quebecers are the same?

Are they (largely) bigoted or xenophobic political parties, despite calls for the contrary, when you get down to it?

***

All I know is I've been told since I'm a private business, don't bother calling a PQ/BQ rep since they're basically hard left when it comes to business.

Gee.

You think?

Lack Of Attention On The Streets

This iPod, texting, thing is becoming a serious issue.

I spend a lot of time in my jeep driving back and forth and everywhere and let me tell you, the amount of kids not paying attention at cross walks or intersections is scaringly on the uptick. I count at least two a day. Why, just the other day we were at a stop and began to make our left turn while a young guy was diagonally crossing the street looking straight down on his phone. We literally stopped in the middle of the street waiting for him to realize his stupidity. It was all in slow motion I swear. We just stared at him in astonishment until he looked up...smiling. Probably not realizing that if I was an aggressive and irresponsible driver he would have been hit by a car.

Being Informed Not Simple

I get what political philosopher Jason Brennan is saying. I just don't think it's realisitc enough. Just by way of our education and interactions with people not all of them are political animals and therefore will not seek the political knowledge on issues he speaks of.

Nothing is clear cut though.

It seems we put quite a bit of the onus upon the voter but what about the system to which we are given and the pool of leaders to choose from?

Access to information essential to public transparency is limited. Something voters and citizens should pressure officials to change. Another problem is the creation of unelected and unaccountable bureaucracies like the CRTC and the Human rights commission. Are we just supposed to believe those people are properly and carefully selected like coffee beans? I don't. Too much patronage and nepotism in Canada - the record is clear on that front. Canada functions like an old boys network when it comes to this sort of stuff.

Still another hindrance is the party chooses its leaders. Unlike in the United States were party primaries give voters a shot at a leader. Politics is a personality cult affair; not an intellectual one.

Equally important is the campaign promises fed. A vote may base their decisions on, say, a party promising lower taxes only to find out they turn around and raise them after a massive spending spree due to unforeseen changes on the political landscape. What may be a pragmatic shift in policies looks like a lie to voters.

Equipped with these obstacles, we're then asked to be informed?

Anyone who thinks they know everything is a liar. No one does. Soon after the Americans decided to try suspected terrorists in a military court as opposed to a civil one, Attorney-General Eric Holder stood by his belief the civil courts were feasible:

"He castigated lawmakers in the U.S. Congress for interfering with the executive branch's decision, saying they were not privy to all the intelligence and legal strategies for prosecuting Mohammed and his alleged co-conspirators."

A little arrogant but the point is made we're not all privy to the juiciest of information. Heck, I have friends in politics and they don't even know sometimes.

***

The best we can do is know the issues and rationalize them the best we can since we can't possibly know answers to them all as there are too many competing values and beliefs injecting itself into creating a 'universal' truth.

Politics is a social science, not a science science. It's not a math equation.

And what is "smart" anyway?

Hollywood's King Arthur

The Arthurian legends have always pulled me. I have invested quite a bit of time exploring the Middle-Ages (man, do people butcher the history of the Crusades or what?) and it's impossible to not cross hairs with King Arthur.

Aside from the literature, Malory's La Morte d'Arthur and the epic Sir Gawain and the Green Knight were the first book and poem respectively I read on the subject, the greatest film I've seen to date about King Arthur was the British film Excalibur (1981). I haven't seen one that's come close since. Although I'm not sure if the French, who basically invented the Arthurian romances thanks to one Chretien de Troyes (who I am actually starting to read tonight), have tackled Arthur at the movies.

So, with much tepid exhuberance, I sat to watch the stoically titled King Arthur (2004) starring Clive Owen.

Let me start by saying it wasn't that bad. But it wasn't great either. It lacked the romantic and grand spirit of the Arthurian myth.

In other words, they didn't work what makes King Arthur legends the story - Excalibur, Merlin (who came off more as a political than wizard), the Round Table, the Arthur-Lancelot-Guinevere love triangle, Camelot, the Holy Grail, and Lady of the Lake were all kept to a distant if mentioned at all. To say nothing of no mention of Sir Percival.  Remove all this and you're left with just another "freedom and axes" movie. Indeed, I had to pinch myself to make sure I wasn't watching Braveheart.

I guess one can interpret the film as the Star Wars prequels in that it establishes the King Arthur fable. I understand they chose to take another route. It took a modern approach while casting aside the traditional story lines. It was an interesting twist to take, that is Arthur (who is the son of a Roman officer and Celtic mother in the film though the accepted belief is he is the son of Pendragon King of Britain) and his Knights seeking their freedom from Rome in the 5th century and battling the Saxons to protect their homeland, but it wasn't convincing to the extent of how we view the mystical Arthur.

Last I checked, the universal themes of love, loyalty and betrayal were the essence of the Arthurian legends, not freedom. The knights came off as Montana libertarians more than anything.

Certain things can't be messed around with. Just like you can't mess with a song's melody, the same can be said with a movie. If you do, you'd better make it memorable and I'm not sure it succeeded.


One thing I didn't like was the treatment of Guinevere. Enough already with the post-modern take on the Middle-Ages. Seeing her in battle among the Woads (in the film she's a Woad - used to describe Picts; a point of contention for historians - but in early accounts she is of Roman heritage) was a bit much. No evidence whatsoever suggests she ever picked up a sword. I wasn't a fan of the reworking of Bors turning him into a, well, a boorish whore. He was nothing of the sort.

As for Lancelot, you couldn't get more pedastrian for what is perhaps the most legendary of all the Knights of the Round Table.

I suppose, like all Hollywood films, the use of historical facts, religion and military weapons were also used liberally but not the point of this post.

Bottom line is if you're not invested in the historical value of King Arthur and could care less that Merlin and Lancelot actually made their respective entrances in the Arthurian legends later on, then this is a decent, entertaining movie. If you're a stickler for traditionalism and accuracate facts. Move along. It's not for you.

Put Your Money In An RRSP

As you can tell, it's election time in Canada so I'm just posting (and uselessly commenting) on election promises. NDP (I shiver in cold hard fear each time I type that word) head taco Jack Layton "has been urging the Conservative government to double CPP and QPP payouts from 25 per cent to 50 per cent of pre-retirement income, increasing the monthly benefit to a maximum of $1,817 from $908."



The plan would be phased in over seven years. Employers would initially pay nine cents more per worker per hour, an amount that would increase by an additional nine cents per year.



A worker who makes the workers earning the average industrial wage of $47,000 per year and currently contributed approximately $185 per month to CPP would see that contribution rise to $292 per month over seven years.


But Mr. Layton said it is a savings plan, not a tax. “It’s like putting money in your RRSP,” he said.

If employers have to dish out 9 cents has is this not a tax?
 
One thing I learned this past year while offering jobs is that payroll taxes are a major drag. It ate into my margins enough for me to shift and offer self-employment contracts to save on taxes. Why should I have to pay .15% on top of the hourly wage? Fronting that cash when you're starting out has a major impact on your bottom line. No wonder people work for cash.
 
The other part to note is about RRSPs. RRSP's were invented in the 1960s precisely because the government knew it couldn't meet its pension obligations. Why not just have workers give more to an RRSP? An RRSP can be effective and offers options for guaranteed investments. A misconception is RRSP isn't "guaranteed."

Jesus, nothing is in life but this is misleading proving RRSP's are still, sigh, misunderstood. Government promising a guaranteed or supplemental income stream these days is just plain unrealistic and unreasonable. Take YOUR money, for example, and if you're risk tolerance is low, invest it in bonds, GICs, and other fixed income securities.
 
Use it as a complement to your federal and provincial pensions.
 
In fact, I argue it's a found more financial route to take. You can control where you put your money in terms of investment. The government shouldn't make CPP mandatory and let people opt out and place their money in an RRSP. Heck, it may even free some money up for an RESP for education for their children!
 
Seems to me this is a very early 20th century idea by the NDP in the modern era. I honestly believe these folks have no clue what small-medium business goes through.

Enough already with the coddling and seize control of your (financial) life.
 

Fed Judge Derails May

"The consortium does what it wants to, and in my view, the CRTC is in error in not regulating them in this respect. And that's what we tried to get the Federal Court of Appeal here to require of the CRTC," Rosenthal told CTV News Channel, after the decision.



The broadcast consortium organizing the debates had argued there was not enough time for the court to fully consider the issue before the April 12 English-language debate. (The French-language debate will take place two days later.)"

Ah. The CRTC once again manages to stick its unelected nose in the democratic process.

The "consortium." Go suck on a lemmon.

This is so stupid no words can describe this bull shit.

LET HER DEBATE. I want to see what she's about.

Integrity Lost

Integrity Commissioner?

It is to laugh.

As Daffy would say.

***

I propose a change since this portfolio has been tainted. How 'bout Minister for Dignity Affairs?

Er, Right

The sport non-sequitur maybe of all time?

A Michael Jackson statue at Fulham's football stadium?

Not even The Simpsons good spoof this image.

Greens Fighting Gangs; The Bleh NDP And Churchill Falls Dispute

Green party candidate Jessica Gal promises to fight youth gang problem.

She didn't volunteer to actually blend in with fisticuffs. Which, begs the question. How will they fight the gangs? With eco-friendly organic "Nice" spray?

"Hey you...pish, pish, pish"
"Did you just spray me with that crap?"
"Er....no?"

***

All kidding aside, I don't know why every year there's a hoopla about allowing Green party leader Elizabeth May debate with the other leaders. For the love of God, are we a democracy or not? Let her in on the action.

*** 

Heck, we let the NDP debate, no? Jack Layton and Thomas Mulcair co-habitate with the most unsavory of people and ideologies.

NDP hypocrisy is...well, blah, blah, bleh.

All they do is shmooz with union bozos, the Quebec solidaire (in all its anti-Israel communistic separatists and boring cheeseballs.

Gag.

***

We keep hearing about how drunk on power Harper is. It seems to me the real cynics are the Liberals and the NDP in their attempt to wrestle power during a minority government in a tenuous economic environment under the guise of doing right by Canada.

Get bent.

***

About Labrador. Long story short, technically, it belongs to Newfoundland and it came with it when the Newfies joined Confederation in 1949. It's a messy one firshir.

A former client of mine lived in Labrador. He lived in a tent as a land surveyor. When he learned of my departure he offered to send me frozen caribou meat. It was a kind gesture but carbou is too pungy for my taste.

***

Why mention Quebec and Newfoundland in the same post without bringing up the Churchill Falls dispute?

Quebec signed the deal of the century thanks to Newfoundland's naivite and stupidity. A deal is a deal. So Quebec says. And they're right. Too bad, they don't practice what they preach with, I don't know, Confederation?

Quebec has it good:

"If Hydro-Quebec has a return on equity of 14.5 per cent today, it owes this essentially to the Churchill Falls agreement, to its exceptional hydroelectric resources and to the fact that it is not taxed on its net profit."

Politics From Outer Space

I ask one shot to debate Liberal candidate Marc Garneau. To have a chance to say:

Marc Garneau: We need to increase taxes across the board to create a better life!
The Commentator: What? Are you spaced out?

Light chuckles.

T.C.: I'm outta here!

Garneau is an astronaut.

'I Already Got Your Money'

I didn't know Charlie Sheen was going on tour to 'tell the true story' about, I reckon, his now infamous rants.

Apparently his show in Detroit was a bomb.

Humans, as in all of us, are wretched little creatures. People paid to go watch Sheen in hopes of getting a glimpse of his lunacy live. And this mentality is different from attending the Coloseum how?

Maybe it's just me. Maybe I just know to what point I feel entertainment ceases to be such.

Sheen's tour also shows the inherent unfairness of life and how the attempt to equalize it is foolish and bound to disappoint.

Two and a half men was an enormously popular show and his actions cost a lot of people their jobs. People who can't go out and sell their services like he can. It's all good for Sheen.

After all, he already got your money."

Question

If a police force was removed from society would crime increase, decrease or stay the same?

***

Policing in the United States:

"In 1845, New York City became the first city outside the British Empire to adopt a police force based on the London model. With a long-established antipathy for uniforms, the original officers objected to wearing special costumes. Worried that the uniforms infringed on traditional American freedoms, opponents feared the dangers of a standing army. So a compromise was reached in which New York City police officers wore eight-point star-shaped copper badges over their left breasts instead of a complete uniform—hence their identification as the “star police,” “coppers,” or just plain “cops..."

"...Perhaps the greatest development in federal law enforcement, the creation of the U.S. Secret Service in 1865, was a last-gasp attempt to counter the longstanding counterfeiting problem. During the service’s first year of operation, field offices were set up in eleven cities and were credited with establishing a measure of monetary stability in the decade following the war. However, not until after two more presidential assassinations after Lincoln’s (Garfield in 1881, McKinley in 1901) did the Secret Service become officially responsible for protecting the president..."

"...Beginning in the 1970s, research in several cities demonstrated that increasing the number of police officers on random patrol or increasing the speed of their response had little effect on crime reduction. Since the inception of the London bobbies in the 1820s, routine police patrol had been considered a hallmark of modern preventive policing. The notion that crime could be prevented or at least suppressed by a highly regular and visible police presence was a long-held belief. Beginning in 1972, a one-year study was conducted in Kansas City to test this conviction. The controversial Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment report of 1974 found that police patrols, whether stepped up or diminished, had no significant impact on crime...."

If you read this interesting piece about the evolution of the American police, you notice police forces were created in reaction to changes in society (which is normal enough I reckon. I don't think it would make sense to build a force for a crime not yet problematic) from immigration and urbanization to bootlegging to counterfeiting. As a new crime arose, the police grew in size.

Which brings us back to the question aforementioned. Of course, it's far more complex than just what the police can and can't do. In New York City, so violent for so long, crime fell under Mayor Giuliani. Law enforcement took credit for the clean up of NYC. However, as Malcolm Gladwell argued in The Tipping Point and in the essay Power of Context of Bernard Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime, perhaps other forces were (and are) at work.


***

As for Canada, it all began with the North-West Mounted Police (who later became the RCMP) who were charged to make sure the west was settled peacefully. Of course, one of its most famous officers was a soldier named Sam Steele - the man who brought peace and order in the north during the Klondike gold rush.

These days, Canadian police forces are facing the same issues and scrutiny its American counterparts are.

Dumb Laws

Of which there are plenty.

This site compiles them.

I would take it lightly. For example, it says in Canada "there are no right turns allowed." Actually, right turns were forbidden in Quebec. The other provinces I visited (B.C., Alberta, Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia all permitted it). If memory serves me right.

It changed a few years ago but still only applies in certain places outside Montreal.

Lame. I know.

Of Innocence And Sports

Something losing its innocence is a cliche. America apparently lost its innocence. Twice. First in Vietnam and then on 9/11. It's like saying a girl lost her virginity twice.

Music not having the 'same soul' of an era long gone as Bob Seger once sang, deals with this too. Sports also are filled with cliches. So much so, I think it may as well be a statistic.

Mentioned this piece in The American Scholar titled Baseball's Loss of Innocence  in my last post about baseball and how different eras have sometimes left fans and writers disillusioned. Serves us right for romanticizing professional sports. Sheesh. What did we expect? Sports is filled with moments that spat in the faces of fans. Baseball lost many innocents. The Black Sox, the strike, steroids - to name a few.

Appropriate time to put this up with opening day under way.

***

Are we born innocent? If we can lose innocence, does it exist in the first place?

***

Liked this bit:

"...Witness the August 2010 Associated Press report that the Pittsburgh Pirates, who had just clinched their 18th-straight losing season, are doing surprisingly well financially. A “small market” team that benefits from the league’s revenue-sharing policy aimed at maintaining competitive balance, the Pirates used $69.3 million in revenue-sharing proceeds to book a profit of $29.4 million over a recent two-year stretch. The Los Angeles Angels, a competitive, “big market” team, profited only $17.8 million over the same period, while paying out $31 million in revenue sharing."

At first, I was surprised when I heard this. Then, upon further reflection, it made perfect sense. Some teams are bad because they manage money badly. The Pirates are bad on the field in order to keep profits up. They actually know what they're doing. The irony of course is they play in a division where perhaps as little as 88 wins (at least in the last few years anyway) fetches you a post season ticket.

"Obviously the Pirates haven’t used their revenue-sharing money to improve their team. They have the lowest payroll in baseball, don’t offer salaries that attract free agents, and don’t offer contracts to their players once they become stars. In 1992 they won their third straight division title with a trio dubbed the “outfield of dreams”—Barry Bonds, Bobby Bonilla, and Andy Van Slyke. All were soon released to free agency while still in their prime, and the Pirates haven’t had a winning season since. In 2010, Pittsburgh’s opening-day payroll was just $2 million more than in 1992."

If you're going to use other people's money may as well make good use of it, right? So much for The Extra 2% rule in Pittsburgh.

The Pirates, managed by Jim Leyland, of the early 90s were solid.

"What emerges from the AP story is that a team considered to be poorly run was, from a business standpoint, very effectively run. Their profit margin of 8 percent matches the average profit margin for S&P 500 corporations over the last 30 years. Roger Noll, a Stanford economist, is quoted saying, “Probably the Pirates would be less profitable if they tried to improve the team substantially.”



So the Pirates’ owners attend to the bottom line while the players use the ball club as a glorified farm team. Once they develop their talent they’re happy to go where the money is, and ownership is content to trade them away or let them walk. Of course, by not intending to field a competitive team, they run the risk of alienating their fans—which is why the Pirates are furious about the AP report, which is based on leaked documents of “a private company that has no obligation to publicly report its financial results.” But loyalty to the Pirates—one of baseball’s oldest teams, the team of Honus Wagner, Hank Greenberg, Ralph Kiner, Bill Mazeroski, Roberto Clemente, Willie Stargell—runs irrationally deep. “The day I abandon my Pirate fanhood is the day [Pirates owner] Nutting refuses to pony up the extra cash needed to put together a contender,” said 20-year-old Jack Seiner in a 2010 ESPN interview—17 years into his team’s record-breaking streak of losing seasons."

Growing up an Expos fan I despised the Pittsburgh Pirates. They were that good.

Now they suck - with apparently a talented group of up and coming pitchers.

Alright, Alright

I left a comment on Skeptical Eye (no link to piss Nikk off), basically calling any comparison of modern America to Germany between the Weimar Republic and later on Nazism as bullshit.

And I left it at that. My life, my bullshit. Fuck you.

I was called out. Sorta. Mostly for not expanding and something else I didn't quite get.  Personally, I think the chap read too much into it though.

Nonetheless, it was a fair argument brough up in a critical thinking context. Too many people do say things without much thought.

***

For the record, I know I've only said I have a Major in History but I never really delved into what I studied. While I tried to spread the wealth a little by studying Latin America, Russia and China, my real focus was on North America and Western Europe.

In addition, I complemented history with political science course. I'm one class short of a minor in political science.

Yeah, I was a solid student but since I didn't live in any of the places I studied, my "expertise" is restricted to the books.

All this pent up information is not all useless; at least I hope. The main positive is I'm able to go from Nietzsche to Dante and Aristotle without missing much of a beat, meaning I can follow a conversation on major issues, philosophies and histories without getting lost.

The other advantage is I can spot pseudo-analogies from a mile away - or as I put it on SE: Bull shit. Not because the history as written was necessarily correct but it furnished me with a proper starting point. The rest is just a fucking journey. Don't stop believin' hold on to that feelin'!

Comparing Weimar to America is bull shit. I say that because the differences between the two are obvious. It may not be to others. I realize that. Moreover, I haven't read anything that sufficiently convinces me otherwise. My door is always open. I may have a stock pile of hundreds of history books and hundreds more of periodicals, but all that proves is I can stack books in order and that I know jack squat despite taking some hard stances from time to time.

The thing is, I don't always expand because I'm guilty of assuming my readers already know this crap. I shouldn't but that's the truth. Maybe it's a cop out to be lazy too.

Meh.

All I know is I learned to be suspicious and skeptical of analogies. It takes special care and many things to fall into place for different eras to be compared (evidence, facts etc). It's a little like trying to compare sports teams or athletes from different eras*. Even if the facts fall in line, next come the psychological paradigm of getting into the mindset of the subjects you're studying and therein lies the artist in the historian.

The context, circumstances and conditions are usually completely crooked. There's a difference, I think (I seriously could be wrong here) between similarities and flat out analogies.

Not saying I haven't come across good stuff, for example, I enjoy Victor Davis Hanson's comparisons of Antiquity with modern America. By and large, however, the analogies game is tough gig I submit.

Ok.

Enough of this bull shit.

* From The American Scholar titled Baseball's Loss of Innocence. by Douglas Goetsch. I think this part summarizes nicely what I probably failed to do above:

"When I hear fans discuss, often very knowledgeably, what steroids have done to baseball, the conversation inevitably turns to the Hall of Fame and the hallowed statistics, the great names accompanied by their immortal numbers: Aaron/755, DiMaggio/56, Williams/.406, Ruth/60, or Maris/61* (the infamous asterisk never actually appeared in the record books, but still made his life miserable). In such exchanges, someone eventually declares that we can’t compare players from different eras on account of different technology, stadiums, lengths of season, rule changes, and so forth.



Here’s another reason you can’t compare eras: each one had its own scandal that affected the record books. The number I keep coming back to is 54—Babe Ruth’s home run total in 1920, the year following the Black Sox. That’s when baseball introduced the latest version of the “rabbit ball”—Lardner called it the “T.N.T. ball”—which had a soft cork center making it much livelier off the bat. The previous record for home runs in a season had been 29, set by Ruth the year before. Two seasons earlier Ruth and Frank Schulte shared the league lead in homers with 11. In 1998, when attendance was still flagging due to a strike-shortened season and a canceled World Series four years prior, Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa put on a record-breaking and (as we found out) steroid-fueled home run race that captivated the nation. But long before that, in the wake of baseball’s biggest scandal to date, fans were treated to an unprecedented display of offensive power, the league willing to dilute its record books by putting the ball on steroids.



After 1919, you could argue—as Ring Lardner certainly would have—that it wasn’t even baseball anymore. But should that diminish the achievements of Ted Williams or Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Don Larsen or Sandy Koufax? Maybe the question of which numbers are sacred is something each fan needs to answer for himself. For me personally it’s .545, my lifetime Little League batting average, along with the numbers 21 and 42—worn by Roberto Clemente and Jackie Robinson."

Shutting Down Blog

April Fool's!

You wish.

Come to think of it...

Montreal Police Exert Force On Innocent Bystander

I know. Context is king and we should wait for the police internal investigation on the incidence, but on the surface (as reported), this pissed the living shit out of me.

First off, the woman is clearly NOT a danger to police. That was, ostensibly, a harmless encounter in which a citizen found herself stunned. Second, she's in her 40s and was attempting to enter a health food store. While being in her 40s doesn't mean she couldn't par take in the student riot, but judging by what I saw, the cops should have been able to deduce this. We don't know, in defense of the officer, how hard he pushed her but I felt it was excessive and pointless. If she did freeze, and he knew it, then he's in the wrong.

Watch video here. Scroll to about the 1:20 minute mark.