The idea for this post came from a discussion topic in a Facebook group I was once a member of. The game goes like this: pick a topic (in the Facebook group, it was albums of the 1990s) and pick one that was overrated, and one that was underrated. Here's an expanded version of the Facebook game.
Albums of the 90s:
Over: The Colour and the Shape, Foo Fighters - This album is being re-released this year, but in spite of an impressive list of singles (Monkey Wrench, My Hero, Everlong, Walking After You), the album as a whole never really did it for me.
Under: Sparkle and Fade, Everclear - When I bought this album, I really only liked one song on it (Santa Monica, of course), but I put it in the CD player awhile back to give it a second chance, and I really started to dig it. I think it's probably because I've matured to a point where I can sort of relate more to what Art Alexakis was singing about. Songs like Heroin Girl, Summerland, Strawberry (along with Santa Monica) now rate very high on my list of all-time favourites. Art's desire for freedom seems to strike a chord with me now.
TV Shows:
Over: Everybody Loves Raymond - An old college roommate got me into this show for a few months, but otherwise, I've never really even liked it. I just don't get it.
Under: Scrubs - This show is absolutely histerical. But just as important is how it seems a little more real than most sit-coms or hospital dramas. It also seems able to make me want to cry one second and laugh my way to the floor the next.
Movies:
Over: Fahrenheit 9/11 - This "documentary" was massively popular and pushed a lot of people to the political left, but it was not even close to being a balanced, fair appraisal of the topic. From using shots of smiling Iraqis (instead of the millions who were slaughtered by Saddam) to imply that Iraqis were happy under Saddam Hussein to slightly twisting the facts about bin Laden's relatives being allowed to flee the US after 9/11, this film has more built-in bias than a Fox News show.
Under: Into the Blue - Maybe it's just that I was too distracted by Jessica Alba's bikinied body to realize there was a lack of plot and acting prowess, but I really enjoyed the movie. I think more likely I like the idea of searching for sunken pirate treasure in paradise (the Bahamas) and I've always been a fan of Scott Caan (Varsity Blues, Ocean's 11, Ocean's 12, and Ocean's 13). Either way, IMDb users give it a 5.5, and I'd say that's way too low.
Rock Bands:
Over: the Doors - I like Jim et al, but they aren't worthy of the massive amounts of hype. Their music was good, but not great. They didn't last very long because Jim was an arrogant burn-out and because none of his bandmates were all that good. I love some of their stuff and hate others. I'll give them props because they're definately a must-listen for any music fan, but most of their stuff just hasn't hit me right.
Under: Cream - These guys are getting their dues (they've been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and they released a great reunion concert album/DVD), but they're still not very well known. Between Eric Clapton and Ginger Baker, they may be one of the most prolific bands, in terms of musical talent, ever. Their style influenced everyone from the Beatles to Led Zeppelin to Aerosmith to Pink Floyd to Metallica. Maybe the biggest reason they are so underrated is their brief existance (3 years, 4 albums). Whatever the reason, it's tragic.
That's all for now, thanks for reading my crap!
19 June 2007
08 June 2007
A Message to Stephen Harper
Mr Prime Minister,
When one of the greatest musical geniuses of this or any lifetime requests a meeting with you, you say yes. I know, I know, it's probably not politically expediant to talk to someone who is going to make you look like a fool: (a) by telling you how you are not keeping your promise to help relieve the burden of poverty and debt in Africa, and (b) because you'll giggle a little when you hear his name (mispronounced) with a long "o". But seriously, it's Bono...of U2...of Live 8...Time's Person of the Year (2005)...Nobel Peace Prize Nominee (2003, 2005, 2006)... DATA...the ONE Campaign...The Joshua Tree...he is larger than life.
But even if you aren't a fan of U2's music, Bono's dedication to a noble cause must surely have earned him your ear. Unfortunately, you, Mr Harper, don't care. Like the environment, you really don't give a shit about the millions of people who die every year simply because they don't have clean water to drink. Your mansion in Calgary and your new (temporary) home at 24 Sussex Dr have left you isolated from the realities of life that so many people endure simply because of where they were born.
And as if the chance to meet Bono wasn't enough, you also passed on the opportunity to meet another great musician turned humanitarian, Mr Bob Geldof (of the Boomtown Rats, remember I Don't Like Mondays?). If you had met him, you'd know that you've turned Canada into "an obstructionist in G8 efforts toward a substantive commitment for Africa." (Where have I heard the term "obstructionist" before...?) You're using numbers to claim we're doing our part when in reality we're barely doing one-third of what we promised we would do. What makes that even worse is that we promised to do too little in the first place!
According to anti-poverty groups, "Canada [is] blocking efforts to hold the G8 countries to their promises of helping Africa with aid." I am very nearly ashamed of being Canadian right now. I am absolutely ashamed of our Prime Minister. Why? Apparently, Canada (via Harper's government) is "blocking the G8 from using clearer language to make a firm commitment and accept accountability for fulfilling aid pledges." Harper denies this, but it fits perfectly into the Tory M.O. of twisting numbers and words while obstructing processes that don't fit Harper's narrow world view (oh right, remember the obstruction manuals?).
Stephen Harper, you are not fit for the job you currently hold. You are tarnishing Canada's reputation abroad. You are actively working to ensure the wealthiest states in the world cannot help the poorest. Stephen Harper, you are a disgrace.
Yours Truly,
Me.
UPDATE: I corrected the gramatical error in the title. It only took about a week for me to catch it. I am not always that smart.
When one of the greatest musical geniuses of this or any lifetime requests a meeting with you, you say yes. I know, I know, it's probably not politically expediant to talk to someone who is going to make you look like a fool: (a) by telling you how you are not keeping your promise to help relieve the burden of poverty and debt in Africa, and (b) because you'll giggle a little when you hear his name (mispronounced) with a long "o". But seriously, it's Bono...of U2...of Live 8...Time's Person of the Year (2005)...Nobel Peace Prize Nominee (2003, 2005, 2006)... DATA...the ONE Campaign...The Joshua Tree...he is larger than life.
But even if you aren't a fan of U2's music, Bono's dedication to a noble cause must surely have earned him your ear. Unfortunately, you, Mr Harper, don't care. Like the environment, you really don't give a shit about the millions of people who die every year simply because they don't have clean water to drink. Your mansion in Calgary and your new (temporary) home at 24 Sussex Dr have left you isolated from the realities of life that so many people endure simply because of where they were born.
And as if the chance to meet Bono wasn't enough, you also passed on the opportunity to meet another great musician turned humanitarian, Mr Bob Geldof (of the Boomtown Rats, remember I Don't Like Mondays?). If you had met him, you'd know that you've turned Canada into "an obstructionist in G8 efforts toward a substantive commitment for Africa." (Where have I heard the term "obstructionist" before...?) You're using numbers to claim we're doing our part when in reality we're barely doing one-third of what we promised we would do. What makes that even worse is that we promised to do too little in the first place!
According to anti-poverty groups, "Canada [is] blocking efforts to hold the G8 countries to their promises of helping Africa with aid." I am very nearly ashamed of being Canadian right now. I am absolutely ashamed of our Prime Minister. Why? Apparently, Canada (via Harper's government) is "blocking the G8 from using clearer language to make a firm commitment and accept accountability for fulfilling aid pledges." Harper denies this, but it fits perfectly into the Tory M.O. of twisting numbers and words while obstructing processes that don't fit Harper's narrow world view (oh right, remember the obstruction manuals?).
Stephen Harper, you are not fit for the job you currently hold. You are tarnishing Canada's reputation abroad. You are actively working to ensure the wealthiest states in the world cannot help the poorest. Stephen Harper, you are a disgrace.
Yours Truly,
Me.
UPDATE: I corrected the gramatical error in the title. It only took about a week for me to catch it. I am not always that smart.
31 May 2007
Being on the Other Side
Until January 2006, I had known nothing but Liberal governments. My political awareness started sometime in Jean Chretien's second term in office. Sure, I remember hearing news from the Mulroney years (GST and NAFTA come to mind) and hearing about the Campbell-Chretien battles in 1993, but I really didn't start to understand (or care much) about politics until the late '90s. In contrast, my great Conservative friend has usually (until January 2006) seen his party's leader reside at Stornoway.
So what's the point? Well, I've heard people talk about the Government of Canada's website (www.canada.gc.ca) as just another platform for the governing party. I always considered it the Government's website, and argued that it is non-partisan (as it should be). But now, Stephane Dion at Stornoway, I see things differently. I've visited the website now and then, and everytime I do, I can't help but see all of the Conservative campaigning. That's not meant to be a slight against the Tories, indeed the more I think about it, the more I realize it would be virtually impossible to have it any other way. The Government's website is designed to report what the government is doing, so of course, it is going to be filled with Tory faces and Tory issues. It just makes sense. It also makes sense (in hindsight) that Mr McIver saw the site as a Liberal campaign tool.
Moral of the story: it's amazing how one's position can change one's perceptions.
So what's the point? Well, I've heard people talk about the Government of Canada's website (www.canada.gc.ca) as just another platform for the governing party. I always considered it the Government's website, and argued that it is non-partisan (as it should be). But now, Stephane Dion at Stornoway, I see things differently. I've visited the website now and then, and everytime I do, I can't help but see all of the Conservative campaigning. That's not meant to be a slight against the Tories, indeed the more I think about it, the more I realize it would be virtually impossible to have it any other way. The Government's website is designed to report what the government is doing, so of course, it is going to be filled with Tory faces and Tory issues. It just makes sense. It also makes sense (in hindsight) that Mr McIver saw the site as a Liberal campaign tool.
Moral of the story: it's amazing how one's position can change one's perceptions.
29 May 2007
Time to Grow Up
The Conservative Party must feel they are in a lot of trouble. First, in spite of their plans, they decided to avoid a spring election, and second, they're launching their fourth round of attack ads. While previous rounds were almost comical in their lack of inspiration, this round at least mentions some real issues. You can see the latest round of ads at the Party's new website (www.notaleader.ca).
This ridiculous little site even includes a blog allegedly written by Dion's dog Kyoto. The blog seems a little too poorly written and unintelligent to be authored by a dog, and that's what tipped me off that it is actually written by a Conservative staffer.
The site makes extensive use of Harper's favourite pictures of Dion. The first with Dion shrugging, the second with Dion mid-speech. It seems of the millions of photos taken of Dion, the Tories found two that are less than flattering and have decided to run with them. On the other hand, there is one shot of Harper. In the picture he looks some combination of evil and maniacal - which I suppose is a fair representation of the man. This shot is presumably the best they could find of the millions of photos taken of Harper.
I applaud Stephane Dion for doing an admirable job leading the Liberal Party. In contrast to Harper's micro-management of the Tory attacks, Dion has adeptly navigated the high road. By insisting on talking about the Liberal Party and our ideas, Dion has proven himself a much more likeable, electable leader.
I want to thank Harper and the Tory brain-trust for trudging through the slime while trying to drag Canadian politics to the dispicable depths only before seen in George W Bush campaigns. They're pushing Canadians towards the Liberal left. "Us versus them" scare politics won't work in Canada. We watched our American friends get duped by such dirty tactics, and we won't get fooled like them.
Harper's attack ads have done more to turn me off the Tories than anything else. I admire Stephane Dion. I will vote for him.
This ridiculous little site even includes a blog allegedly written by Dion's dog Kyoto. The blog seems a little too poorly written and unintelligent to be authored by a dog, and that's what tipped me off that it is actually written by a Conservative staffer.
The site makes extensive use of Harper's favourite pictures of Dion. The first with Dion shrugging, the second with Dion mid-speech. It seems of the millions of photos taken of Dion, the Tories found two that are less than flattering and have decided to run with them. On the other hand, there is one shot of Harper. In the picture he looks some combination of evil and maniacal - which I suppose is a fair representation of the man. This shot is presumably the best they could find of the millions of photos taken of Harper.
I applaud Stephane Dion for doing an admirable job leading the Liberal Party. In contrast to Harper's micro-management of the Tory attacks, Dion has adeptly navigated the high road. By insisting on talking about the Liberal Party and our ideas, Dion has proven himself a much more likeable, electable leader.
I want to thank Harper and the Tory brain-trust for trudging through the slime while trying to drag Canadian politics to the dispicable depths only before seen in George W Bush campaigns. They're pushing Canadians towards the Liberal left. "Us versus them" scare politics won't work in Canada. We watched our American friends get duped by such dirty tactics, and we won't get fooled like them.
Harper's attack ads have done more to turn me off the Tories than anything else. I admire Stephane Dion. I will vote for him.
20 May 2007
A Politician's Master?
A recent article by my great friend and political-economics sage Mr. McIver got me thinking about a politician's master:
With government of any kind: no ruler, so far as he is acting as ruler,
will study or enjoin what is for his own interest. All that he says and does
will be said and done with a view to what is good and proper for the subjects
for whom he practices his art. - Plato
19 May 2007
Obstruction Manual
I've heard time and time again how our Conservative government is interested in policy and democracy. This government is beyond the destructive political games that ran wild under the previous Liberal governments. Harper wants meaningful, substantive debate in the House of Commons and its committees. I always suspected this was hollow politiking, and it turns out I was correct. The Globe and Mail (among countless other news sources) has published an article about the Conservative manual that tells committee chairs how best to disrupt committee proceedings when the debate turns against the government.
According to opposition members, "A manual telling Conservative chairs of Commons committees how to stick to the party agenda — and to obstruct or end meetings when the debate turns hostile to the government — is proof that parliamentary dysfunction is being orchestrated by the Conservatives." And it gets worse. "The manual tells the chairs how to select and coach party-friendly witnesses, obstruct unwanted debates, pick witnesses from Conservative ridings and call a halt to meetings that have gone off track."
If you're wondering if the Harper government has actually been adhering to the manual, the answer is unequivocally YES. This week alone, the Tory government has filibustered the ethics committee, the agricultural committee, and cancelled hearings supposed to be held by the official languages committee (why didn't they cancel the Shane Doan bullshit? Because it basically did the job of filibustering for them).
The Conservatives' defence? According to Government House Leader Peter Van Loan, "we...made promises to Canadians at the time of the last election, and we have the duty to deliver on them." Even at the expense of the democratic process it seems.
Liberal MP Ralph Goodale opined, "Right from the very beginning, Canadians observed and members of the media observed, that [Prime Minister Stephen] Harper had a kind of control fetish, that he just had to run everything all the time and there couldn't be one comma or one sentence or one word uttered without his personal approval and I think in part, it is a manifestation of that kind of absolute obsession with control."
This manual basically tells Conservative committee chairs how to get in the way of democracy. As far as I can see, it represents the worst sort of abuse of our system.
In other news, recent polls are showing the Tories and the Grits in a dead heat* in terms of popularity. This before the Liberals have even managed to get their act together. Is this the death knell tolling for the Conservative government?
*****
*If you've clicked this link, you'll notice the poll has the Tories ahead of the Grits by 3%. If you read the entire article, you'll notice that the poll is considered accurate within 3.1%. Therefore, this poll tells us the Tories and Grits are basically tied.
According to opposition members, "A manual telling Conservative chairs of Commons committees how to stick to the party agenda — and to obstruct or end meetings when the debate turns hostile to the government — is proof that parliamentary dysfunction is being orchestrated by the Conservatives." And it gets worse. "The manual tells the chairs how to select and coach party-friendly witnesses, obstruct unwanted debates, pick witnesses from Conservative ridings and call a halt to meetings that have gone off track."
If you're wondering if the Harper government has actually been adhering to the manual, the answer is unequivocally YES. This week alone, the Tory government has filibustered the ethics committee, the agricultural committee, and cancelled hearings supposed to be held by the official languages committee (why didn't they cancel the Shane Doan bullshit? Because it basically did the job of filibustering for them).
The Conservatives' defence? According to Government House Leader Peter Van Loan, "we...made promises to Canadians at the time of the last election, and we have the duty to deliver on them." Even at the expense of the democratic process it seems.
Liberal MP Ralph Goodale opined, "Right from the very beginning, Canadians observed and members of the media observed, that [Prime Minister Stephen] Harper had a kind of control fetish, that he just had to run everything all the time and there couldn't be one comma or one sentence or one word uttered without his personal approval and I think in part, it is a manifestation of that kind of absolute obsession with control."
This manual basically tells Conservative committee chairs how to get in the way of democracy. As far as I can see, it represents the worst sort of abuse of our system.
In other news, recent polls are showing the Tories and the Grits in a dead heat* in terms of popularity. This before the Liberals have even managed to get their act together. Is this the death knell tolling for the Conservative government?
*****
*If you've clicked this link, you'll notice the poll has the Tories ahead of the Grits by 3%. If you read the entire article, you'll notice that the poll is considered accurate within 3.1%. Therefore, this poll tells us the Tories and Grits are basically tied.
16 May 2007
Gas Boycott
A few days ago I was invited into a Facebook group called "Don't Buy Gas on May 15th" (or something like that). I immediately declined the request because the whole campaign is absurd. Now, Global National and Canada.com find the internet campaign worthy of headline news.
The campaign, clearly enough, asked us not to pump gas on May 15th (yesterday) as a way of telling Big Oil (and the government) that gas is too expensive. Well, I have two main beefs with this campaign:
My argument: Gas prices should go up! If the government taxed gas and (preferably) Big Oil more, the price of gas would go up. So would government revenue. That would mean more money for mass transit and other environmentally friendly (or at least less harmful) innovations. Increasing the price of gas would also encourage people to find other ways to get around: buy a bike, strap on some walking shoes, take a bus... (Heaven forbid someone might take a bus. How undignified! Well, not really, only if you're richer than you are smart or terribly pretentious.)
Stephen Harper: increase taxes on oil companies.
(I'm laughing hysterically while writing this because there's no way in hell Harper would tax his buddies in Alberta.)
The campaign, clearly enough, asked us not to pump gas on May 15th (yesterday) as a way of telling Big Oil (and the government) that gas is too expensive. Well, I have two main beefs with this campaign:
- What is the point of boycotting gas for one day? I would guess 99% of the population doesn't pump gas everyday, so I would assume a number of people (like me) didn't pump gas on May 15th simply because they didn't need gas. I would also assume that those people who did righteously avoid pumping gas yesterday still drove their vehicles and will probably just fill up today instead. I think the message gets lost when it's effect is simply to increase the number of people who pump gas on another day. The campaign may have hurt sales yesterday, but I bet today has been a boom for gas stations.
- Gas prices in Canada (and even more so in the US) aren't high! The price of gas in North America is (in relative terms) dirt cheap. We pay more for a bottle of water than for gas! Go to your nearest vending machine and tell me the cost of a 591mL bottle of water. At my college it was $1.75. That works out to over $3 a litre. Have you ever in your life paid that much for gas? I'm guessing no. Also on this point: we, as North Americans are addicted to gas and we use it without thinking. Higher gas prices in Europe and elsewhere lead to the increased popularity of smaller more fuel-efficient vehicles (even diesels are much more popular over seas). Contrast this to the idiot in downtown Toronto who thinks his gas-guzzling super-sized SUV is practical transportation. Give me a break.
My argument: Gas prices should go up! If the government taxed gas and (preferably) Big Oil more, the price of gas would go up. So would government revenue. That would mean more money for mass transit and other environmentally friendly (or at least less harmful) innovations. Increasing the price of gas would also encourage people to find other ways to get around: buy a bike, strap on some walking shoes, take a bus... (Heaven forbid someone might take a bus. How undignified! Well, not really, only if you're richer than you are smart or terribly pretentious.)
Stephen Harper: increase taxes on oil companies.
(I'm laughing hysterically while writing this because there's no way in hell Harper would tax his buddies in Alberta.)
06 May 2007
Smashed
I remember getting a great album on cassette when it came out back in 1994, but with the advent of CD players and the breakdown of my old cassette player, the album was essentially lost. I always spoke fondly of it, always extolling its musical genius, but all real memories of it had virtually faded. That recently changed.
This past winter I finally acquired a CD copy of Offspring's Smash. Without really recalling the songs and sounds of the album, I pressed play:
What beauty! The openning track, Time to Relax, calmly invites the listener to sit back and enjoy the music. It is with this track, that my intimate connection with Smash begins. As I listen to the album today, I find more and more similarities between the themes of the songs, and my own views on life.
First, the obvious - Time to Relax. More than anyone else I've met, I love sitting back and enjoying music. When driving anywhere, my most pressing concern is what music to bring. It seems the soothing voice I first heard back in 1994, at age 12, ingrained itself in my psyche.
The next track, Nitro (Youth Energy), talks overtly about living life like there's no tomorrow, but the underlying message is about a generational divide. "Our generation sees the world, not the same as before," and "the official view of the world has changed," are a couple lines that expose this message. I see generational differences in virtually every aspect of life. I think cross-generational communication is important and difficult.
The third track is Bad Habit. This is almost eerie in how much it reflects my life. While I've never so much as held a gun in my life (I'm Canadian, eh), I do suffer from a bit of road rage. "When I go driving I stay in my lane, but getting cut off it makes me insane," is one line that could define my little problem. I am an excellent driver (don't bother complimenting me, I'll take care of that). I take great pride in driving well. Not simply obeying the rules of the road, but knowing how to avoid dangerous situations, knowing how to avoid accidents, knowing how to predict traffic and so on.* I can now trace this quirk back to Smash.
Track four, Gotta Get Away, is a bit of an anomaly. I don't generally find myself to be my own worst enemy, but I do have an internal locus of control, which this song sort of hints at. The subject of the song talks about how his problems in life are his own doing, which suggests an internal locus of control.
Track five, Genocide, is loosely based on what was happening in Rwanda while the Offspring were recording the album. Though the majority of the 800,000 or so murders happened after the album was released, the build-up had started as early as 1990, and the UN was in Rwanda by October 1993. Who knew that 6 years after first hearing this song I'd begin my studies in political science, concentrating on international relations?
Next up is Something to Believe In. "Do you accept what you are told, without even thinking, throw it all and make your own," and "And if you look away, you'll be doing what they say, and if you look alive, you'll be singled out and tried, if you take home anything, let it be your will to think, the more cynical you become, the better off you'll be," encourage listeners to think for
themselves and to look behind the stories being told. I wouldn't call myself a cynic, but I'm certainly not one to automatically accept what I'm told.
Come Out and Play, the first big single for Offspring, talks about gang violence on school campuses. "The kids are strappin' on their way to the classroom, getting weapons with the greatest of ease," was probably the first argument I ever heard about gun control, and the song in general, which does not glamorize violence, is probably why I'm the anti-gun pacifist I am.
Track eight is Self-Esteem. This one's pretty self-explanatory - when it comes to women and crushes, "I'm just a sucker with no self esteem."
It'll Be a Long Time is about war between states, specifically superpowers. Again, no surprise I did the whole polisci/international relations thing at WLU.
Killboy Powerhead is another anomaly. I don't really see any connection with who I am, but I do enjoy the song!
The next track is priceless. What Happened to You is a better explanation than any as to why I am so very anti-drugs:
Track 12, So Alone, talks about how even in a crowd, we're often all alone. It urges people to get along. I guess that's the extent of its influence on me - get along.
Next up is Not the One. I guess this is perhaps why I tend not to concern myself with seniority. I'm not one to look at someone who's been around and give them credit for just that. I always look at what people actually do, rather than how long they've been doing it. I also tend to distrust those in authority. Then there's the distaste I have for people who chastise youth for the clothes they wear, or the music they listen to, or anything really:
Blame Offspring and Not the One. I guess this song speaks to my international consciousness as well.
Finally, Smash: "Don't give a shit 'cause I'm not gonna budge, I just want to be who I want to be, Guess that's hard for others to see." Also, I'm not very trendy.
So there you have it, the story of how the Offspring and their album Smash informed who I am today. I can't imagine anyone, anything, or any single influence having so much effect on who I would become, but the evidence is unmistakable. Here I always thought I was my own person, but it turns out I'm just the sociological offspring of Noodles, Dexter, Ron, and Greg.
I guess that's okay, I have no problem with who I am.
*****
* My only accident came when some old lady decided to turn left while I was coming the other way going straight through a green light. If you're from the Sarnia-Lambton area, and you've ever wondered why the intersection at Waterworks and Lakeshore has two hydro poles on the south-east side, just ask me. I can tell you all about that - thanks to that lady.
This past winter I finally acquired a CD copy of Offspring's Smash. Without really recalling the songs and sounds of the album, I pressed play:
Ahhhhh, it's time to relax, and you know what that means, a glass of wine,
your favourite easy chair, and of course this compact disc playing on your home
stereo. So go on and indulge yourself, that's right, kick off your shoes, put
your feet up, lean back and just enjoy the melodies. After all, music soothes
even the savage beast.
What beauty! The openning track, Time to Relax, calmly invites the listener to sit back and enjoy the music. It is with this track, that my intimate connection with Smash begins. As I listen to the album today, I find more and more similarities between the themes of the songs, and my own views on life.
First, the obvious - Time to Relax. More than anyone else I've met, I love sitting back and enjoying music. When driving anywhere, my most pressing concern is what music to bring. It seems the soothing voice I first heard back in 1994, at age 12, ingrained itself in my psyche.
The next track, Nitro (Youth Energy), talks overtly about living life like there's no tomorrow, but the underlying message is about a generational divide. "Our generation sees the world, not the same as before," and "the official view of the world has changed," are a couple lines that expose this message. I see generational differences in virtually every aspect of life. I think cross-generational communication is important and difficult.
The third track is Bad Habit. This is almost eerie in how much it reflects my life. While I've never so much as held a gun in my life (I'm Canadian, eh), I do suffer from a bit of road rage. "When I go driving I stay in my lane, but getting cut off it makes me insane," is one line that could define my little problem. I am an excellent driver (don't bother complimenting me, I'll take care of that). I take great pride in driving well. Not simply obeying the rules of the road, but knowing how to avoid dangerous situations, knowing how to avoid accidents, knowing how to predict traffic and so on.* I can now trace this quirk back to Smash.
Track four, Gotta Get Away, is a bit of an anomaly. I don't generally find myself to be my own worst enemy, but I do have an internal locus of control, which this song sort of hints at. The subject of the song talks about how his problems in life are his own doing, which suggests an internal locus of control.
Track five, Genocide, is loosely based on what was happening in Rwanda while the Offspring were recording the album. Though the majority of the 800,000 or so murders happened after the album was released, the build-up had started as early as 1990, and the UN was in Rwanda by October 1993. Who knew that 6 years after first hearing this song I'd begin my studies in political science, concentrating on international relations?
Next up is Something to Believe In. "Do you accept what you are told, without even thinking, throw it all and make your own," and "And if you look away, you'll be doing what they say, and if you look alive, you'll be singled out and tried, if you take home anything, let it be your will to think, the more cynical you become, the better off you'll be," encourage listeners to think for
themselves and to look behind the stories being told. I wouldn't call myself a cynic, but I'm certainly not one to automatically accept what I'm told.
Come Out and Play, the first big single for Offspring, talks about gang violence on school campuses. "The kids are strappin' on their way to the classroom, getting weapons with the greatest of ease," was probably the first argument I ever heard about gun control, and the song in general, which does not glamorize violence, is probably why I'm the anti-gun pacifist I am.
Track eight is Self-Esteem. This one's pretty self-explanatory - when it comes to women and crushes, "I'm just a sucker with no self esteem."
It'll Be a Long Time is about war between states, specifically superpowers. Again, no surprise I did the whole polisci/international relations thing at WLU.
Killboy Powerhead is another anomaly. I don't really see any connection with who I am, but I do enjoy the song!
The next track is priceless. What Happened to You is a better explanation than any as to why I am so very anti-drugs:
Before you started tokin' you used to have a brain, But now you don't get even
the simplest of things, I can draw a little picture, Or even use my hands, I try
to explain but you just don't understand, Man you're really losin' it, And
you've really done a lot of junk now, But you keep on abusin' it, What in the
world happened to you?
Track 12, So Alone, talks about how even in a crowd, we're often all alone. It urges people to get along. I guess that's the extent of its influence on me - get along.
Next up is Not the One. I guess this is perhaps why I tend not to concern myself with seniority. I'm not one to look at someone who's been around and give them credit for just that. I always look at what people actually do, rather than how long they've been doing it. I also tend to distrust those in authority. Then there's the distaste I have for people who chastise youth for the clothes they wear, or the music they listen to, or anything really:
I'm not the one who made the world what it is today...we're not the ones who
leave the homeless in the streets at night, we're not the ones who've kept
minorities and women down...We're not the ones whose pollution blackened our
skies, And ruined our streams, We're not the ones who made the nuclear bombs,
That threaten our lives, We're not the ones who let the children starve in
faraway lands.
Blame Offspring and Not the One. I guess this song speaks to my international consciousness as well.
Finally, Smash: "Don't give a shit 'cause I'm not gonna budge, I just want to be who I want to be, Guess that's hard for others to see." Also, I'm not very trendy.
So there you have it, the story of how the Offspring and their album Smash informed who I am today. I can't imagine anyone, anything, or any single influence having so much effect on who I would become, but the evidence is unmistakable. Here I always thought I was my own person, but it turns out I'm just the sociological offspring of Noodles, Dexter, Ron, and Greg.
I guess that's okay, I have no problem with who I am.
*****
* My only accident came when some old lady decided to turn left while I was coming the other way going straight through a green light. If you're from the Sarnia-Lambton area, and you've ever wondered why the intersection at Waterworks and Lakeshore has two hydro poles on the south-east side, just ask me. I can tell you all about that - thanks to that lady.
05 May 2007
Miscellaneous Musings
It has been far too long since I last posted an entry here, so I thought I would kill some time with a post indulging some random thoughts. Enjoy!
I finished my program at Lambton College with an A average, which is good for me. Congratulations to everyone else in the program who also finished. I think I may find myself back at school in a few years, but who knows. For now I'm back to the job search. This is my least favourite activity...ever. Here's hoping it doesn't last long.
The Toronto Raptors finished their season last night with a loss to the New Jersey Nets. It was a close game and one of the best I've seen so far in this year's playoffs. I was pretty distraught about the loss. I really thought this Raptors' team was good enough to get past the first round, and certainly good enough to beat the Nets. I won't blame Jose Calderon's picked-off pass into the post for the loss. Had that pass made it through to Chris Bosh, I'd be looking forward to game seven right now, but really, the Raps had long since blown the game. Bosh was dreadful from the field (at least until the last 5 minutes of the game when he finally started to play like Chris Bosh) while Andrea Bargnani seemed to be on fire. The problem was that the Raptors' seemed to stay away from Il Mago (as Bargnani is known). At one point, Bargnani got the ball and forced up a shot probably because he was worried he wouldn't get the ball back. And I can't blame him. He seemed to be the fourth option on the floor in spite of the success he was having when he did get the ball. Unfortunately, the Raps stayed away from the rookie and will be away from the court until the start of next season. Which, I will add, should be a great year!
I read a story in the Sarnia Observer that our fair city is the 57th best place to live in Canada. I guess. Not for me, but for a lot of people - primarily those who are retired or nearing retirement. Message to Mayor Mike Bradley: bringing call centres to the city doesn't exactly qualify as adding good jobs. Maybe I'm just bitter because of my experience looking for work here, but it almost seems like in this city a university education (in anything other than engineering) makes you over-qualified rather than employable. So now I have a college education, maybe that'll help!
This whole Shane Doan controversy (which seems thankfully to be over) is a disgrace. I don't know who initiated this debate among our Parliamentarians, but boy was it a waste of time. Supposedly Doan made a derogatory comment about French Canadian hockey players back in 2005 and as such should forever be banished from captaining a Team Canada. The problem is that the NHL did an investigation into the whole deal and decided Doan was innocent. Whatever genius politician brought up this whole mess needs to be slapped...or perhaps be given a pie in the face as per Canadian tradition. Do your part here.
In the best news all year, Paris Hilton is going to jail. I guess after driving under the influence of alcohol (or whatever designer intoxicant Hollywood's bimbos are using) for the nth time (this time while on probation), a judge has finally sentenced her to prison time. Hopefully this will also keep her out of the news...if only for 45 days...probably not.
For the first time in my life I actually picked up a business magazine today. This edition of Canadian Business seems to be almost entirely filled with human resources news (which works for me since that's the program I just finished). I've read most of it and, as expected, it seems a far cry from my usual political magazines. Instead of the leftist propoganda, it naturally looks right (as in right-wing, not necessarily as in correct). To be honesty, reading this magazine gave me a little more insight into some of the things my BBA and BComm friends say. Maybe I'll read it more often.
Well, that's what's running through my head today. Hope you enjoyed this meaningless self-indulgence.
I finished my program at Lambton College with an A average, which is good for me. Congratulations to everyone else in the program who also finished. I think I may find myself back at school in a few years, but who knows. For now I'm back to the job search. This is my least favourite activity...ever. Here's hoping it doesn't last long.
The Toronto Raptors finished their season last night with a loss to the New Jersey Nets. It was a close game and one of the best I've seen so far in this year's playoffs. I was pretty distraught about the loss. I really thought this Raptors' team was good enough to get past the first round, and certainly good enough to beat the Nets. I won't blame Jose Calderon's picked-off pass into the post for the loss. Had that pass made it through to Chris Bosh, I'd be looking forward to game seven right now, but really, the Raps had long since blown the game. Bosh was dreadful from the field (at least until the last 5 minutes of the game when he finally started to play like Chris Bosh) while Andrea Bargnani seemed to be on fire. The problem was that the Raptors' seemed to stay away from Il Mago (as Bargnani is known). At one point, Bargnani got the ball and forced up a shot probably because he was worried he wouldn't get the ball back. And I can't blame him. He seemed to be the fourth option on the floor in spite of the success he was having when he did get the ball. Unfortunately, the Raps stayed away from the rookie and will be away from the court until the start of next season. Which, I will add, should be a great year!
I read a story in the Sarnia Observer that our fair city is the 57th best place to live in Canada. I guess. Not for me, but for a lot of people - primarily those who are retired or nearing retirement. Message to Mayor Mike Bradley: bringing call centres to the city doesn't exactly qualify as adding good jobs. Maybe I'm just bitter because of my experience looking for work here, but it almost seems like in this city a university education (in anything other than engineering) makes you over-qualified rather than employable. So now I have a college education, maybe that'll help!
This whole Shane Doan controversy (which seems thankfully to be over) is a disgrace. I don't know who initiated this debate among our Parliamentarians, but boy was it a waste of time. Supposedly Doan made a derogatory comment about French Canadian hockey players back in 2005 and as such should forever be banished from captaining a Team Canada. The problem is that the NHL did an investigation into the whole deal and decided Doan was innocent. Whatever genius politician brought up this whole mess needs to be slapped...or perhaps be given a pie in the face as per Canadian tradition. Do your part here.
In the best news all year, Paris Hilton is going to jail. I guess after driving under the influence of alcohol (or whatever designer intoxicant Hollywood's bimbos are using) for the nth time (this time while on probation), a judge has finally sentenced her to prison time. Hopefully this will also keep her out of the news...if only for 45 days...probably not.
For the first time in my life I actually picked up a business magazine today. This edition of Canadian Business seems to be almost entirely filled with human resources news (which works for me since that's the program I just finished). I've read most of it and, as expected, it seems a far cry from my usual political magazines. Instead of the leftist propoganda, it naturally looks right (as in right-wing, not necessarily as in correct). To be honesty, reading this magazine gave me a little more insight into some of the things my BBA and BComm friends say. Maybe I'll read it more often.
Well, that's what's running through my head today. Hope you enjoyed this meaningless self-indulgence.
23 April 2007
Your Prime Minister
There lived a certain man in Russia long ago
He was big and strong, in his eyes a flaming glow
Most people looked at him with terror and with fear
But to Moscow chicks he was such a lovely dear
He could preach the bible like a preacher
Full of ecstacy and fire
But he also was the kind of teacher
Women would desire
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
There was a cat that really was gone
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
It was a shame how he carried on
He ruled the Russian land and never mind the Czar
But the kasachok he danced really wunderbar
In all affairs of state he was the man to please
But he was real great when he had a girl to squeeze
For the queen he was no wheeler dealer
Though she'd heard the things he'd done
She believed he was a holy healer
Who would heal her son
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
There was a cat that really was gone
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
It was a shame how he carried on
(Spoken:)
But when his drinking and lusting and his hunger
for power became known to more and more people,
the demands to do something about this outrageous
man became louder and louder.
"This man's just got to go!" declared his enemies
But the ladies begged "Don't you try to do it, please"
No doubt this Rasputin had lots of hidden charms
Though he was a brute they just fell into his arms
Then one night some men of higher standing
Set a trap, they're not to blame
"Come to visit us" they kept demanding
And he really came
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
They put some poison into his wine
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
He drank it all and he said "I feel fine"
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
They didn't quit, they wanted his head
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
And so they shot him till he was dead
*****
Who was the real Rasputin? According to Wikipedia: "Contemporary opinions variously saw Rasputin as a saintly mystic, visionary, healer, and prophet, or as a debauched religious charlatan. Historians can find both to be true, but there is much uncertainty: accounts of his life have often been based on dubious memoirs, hearsay, and legend." Though there's not really much agreement on who he was, it is commonly believed that Rasputin influenced the latter days of Czarist Russia through his prophecies and religious declarations.
Now Prime Minister Stephen Harper has his own Rasputin behind the scenes (and you're footing the bill for this sage). The video above also talks about Harper's personal stylist (who's also on your payroll). I think the most telling thing is that the Conservative House Leader is laughing and cracking jokes either because he finds it funny that Harper wears more make-up than an emo band or because he'd rather not try to justify his leader's excentric decadence.
He was big and strong, in his eyes a flaming glow
Most people looked at him with terror and with fear
But to Moscow chicks he was such a lovely dear
He could preach the bible like a preacher
Full of ecstacy and fire
But he also was the kind of teacher
Women would desire
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
There was a cat that really was gone
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
It was a shame how he carried on
He ruled the Russian land and never mind the Czar
But the kasachok he danced really wunderbar
In all affairs of state he was the man to please
But he was real great when he had a girl to squeeze
For the queen he was no wheeler dealer
Though she'd heard the things he'd done
She believed he was a holy healer
Who would heal her son
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
There was a cat that really was gone
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
It was a shame how he carried on
(Spoken:)
But when his drinking and lusting and his hunger
for power became known to more and more people,
the demands to do something about this outrageous
man became louder and louder.
"This man's just got to go!" declared his enemies
But the ladies begged "Don't you try to do it, please"
No doubt this Rasputin had lots of hidden charms
Though he was a brute they just fell into his arms
Then one night some men of higher standing
Set a trap, they're not to blame
"Come to visit us" they kept demanding
And he really came
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
They put some poison into his wine
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
He drank it all and he said "I feel fine"
RA RA RASPUTIN
Lover of the Russian queen
They didn't quit, they wanted his head
RA RA RASPUTIN
Russia's greatest love machine
And so they shot him till he was dead
-Boney M
*****
Who was the real Rasputin? According to Wikipedia: "Contemporary opinions variously saw Rasputin as a saintly mystic, visionary, healer, and prophet, or as a debauched religious charlatan. Historians can find both to be true, but there is much uncertainty: accounts of his life have often been based on dubious memoirs, hearsay, and legend." Though there's not really much agreement on who he was, it is commonly believed that Rasputin influenced the latter days of Czarist Russia through his prophecies and religious declarations.
Now Prime Minister Stephen Harper has his own Rasputin behind the scenes (and you're footing the bill for this sage). The video above also talks about Harper's personal stylist (who's also on your payroll). I think the most telling thing is that the Conservative House Leader is laughing and cracking jokes either because he finds it funny that Harper wears more make-up than an emo band or because he'd rather not try to justify his leader's excentric decadence.
20 April 2007
Magic Carpet Ride
I was thinking more about RS's Songs with a Secret. I think they missed Steppenwolf's Magic Carpet Ride. Everyone knows it's about a drug trip, but I've read that it describes a certain fraternity's initiation ritual quite well. While the fraternity officially denies it, they don't address the fact that the song closely describes their ritual. The song is also listed among other frat songs. Even the frat's official website has a picture of Aladdin's lamp on the home page (the song references Aladdin's lamp). I've read that the Steppenwolf members who were in the fraternity were kicked out and their names erased from membership databases for exposing the secret ritual. Alternatively, I've read that the song was ghost-written by a member of the frat. Whether the song is about the ritual, or just a drug trip, it certainly has a secret and should therefore have been on the list.
If any of my reader (singular, I think I only have one) is a member of Lambda Chi Alpha (aka LXA), you can anonymously tell me if the song really does describe the ritual.
Here are some quotes from members:
"I remember in about 1970-1971, Steppenwolf came to Chattanooga, Tn. and two other brothers besides myself went backstage to talk to them before the concert. When introduced to them, they gave us the “handshake test” and asked us to stay for the final song (of course-Magic Carpet Ride!) It is hard for me to believe there is not a link here."
"I have an old vinyl album (Steppenwolf, Gold: Their Great Hits) as part of a collection of vinyls that my mother gave me. On the reverse side of the album cover are three pictures. Amazingly they are purple, green and gold!" (the frat's official colours are purple, green and gold)
"I remember discussing the similarities with the song and LXA during chapter meetings. There has to be a connection somewhere. The similarities are too great!"
*****
In other news:
This list is just another reason why Rolling Stone magazine is a must-read for all rock-music junkies. According to Rolling Stone, these are the 40 songs that changed the world. Very cool.
If any of my reader (singular, I think I only have one) is a member of Lambda Chi Alpha (aka LXA), you can anonymously tell me if the song really does describe the ritual.
Here are some quotes from members:
"I remember in about 1970-1971, Steppenwolf came to Chattanooga, Tn. and two other brothers besides myself went backstage to talk to them before the concert. When introduced to them, they gave us the “handshake test” and asked us to stay for the final song (of course-Magic Carpet Ride!) It is hard for me to believe there is not a link here."
"I have an old vinyl album (Steppenwolf, Gold: Their Great Hits) as part of a collection of vinyls that my mother gave me. On the reverse side of the album cover are three pictures. Amazingly they are purple, green and gold!" (the frat's official colours are purple, green and gold)
"I remember discussing the similarities with the song and LXA during chapter meetings. There has to be a connection somewhere. The similarities are too great!"
*****
In other news:
This list is just another reason why Rolling Stone magazine is a must-read for all rock-music junkies. According to Rolling Stone, these are the 40 songs that changed the world. Very cool.
17 April 2007
In Memory, In Honour, In Support
By now we've all heard of the tragedy at Virginia Tech on Monday when 33 people were killed by a 23 year old student. Among the dead are a Canadian professor and a holocaust survivor who died heroically trying to save his students. In sad news, one blogger decided things would have been different if other students had been armed. The moron apparently doesn't get that lax gun control helped facilitate this massacre. The Washington Post summarizes this and other blogs. Finally, the Toronto Star (via the Canadian Press) has this interesting (and interactive) history of violence in schools.
That's the news, now time for my take.
For some reason, the Dawson College tragedy on September 13, 2006 didn't really hit me. One person was killed and 20 were wounded that day. I think it really should have struck me since it happened in Canada (Montreal) at a college not unlike the one I currently attend. But it didn't seem to connect like the Virginia Tech rampage has.
I recall that while attending Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo I always felt perfectly safe. I remember feeling a sense of community there. I was always surrounded by other young people who were there because they wanted to be. There was stress and there was even violence, but I felt safe. There was this sense that everyone around me had the same goals and ambitions. I imagine students at Virginia Tech felt very much the same way. I can't imagine their grief. I was in class when I read the news online. A friend from WLU IM'ed me about the news. He said it was mental. I was still, I think, in disbelief. I said I don't think I could have gone back had it happened at Laurier while we were there.
I was watching a special report on CBC when I was inspired to have my input. They were interviewing students from VT about the incident. One group talked about hearing gun shots in the adjacent classroom and leaping through windows to escape. One student reported that he was the last to make it out of the room alive - the two people behind him were shot and killed. One professor (as mentioned above) died trying to save his students. I cannot imagine having that kind of bravery and composure in such a chaotic situation.
I don't want to turn this into an argument about gun control laws in the United States (though I may already have done that). This is about those who were tragically killed. This about the families and friends who suffered unimaginable loss. This is about those who have to go back to class. This is about a tragedy that will be overcome.
We're with you.
That's the news, now time for my take.
For some reason, the Dawson College tragedy on September 13, 2006 didn't really hit me. One person was killed and 20 were wounded that day. I think it really should have struck me since it happened in Canada (Montreal) at a college not unlike the one I currently attend. But it didn't seem to connect like the Virginia Tech rampage has.
I recall that while attending Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo I always felt perfectly safe. I remember feeling a sense of community there. I was always surrounded by other young people who were there because they wanted to be. There was stress and there was even violence, but I felt safe. There was this sense that everyone around me had the same goals and ambitions. I imagine students at Virginia Tech felt very much the same way. I can't imagine their grief. I was in class when I read the news online. A friend from WLU IM'ed me about the news. He said it was mental. I was still, I think, in disbelief. I said I don't think I could have gone back had it happened at Laurier while we were there.
I was watching a special report on CBC when I was inspired to have my input. They were interviewing students from VT about the incident. One group talked about hearing gun shots in the adjacent classroom and leaping through windows to escape. One student reported that he was the last to make it out of the room alive - the two people behind him were shot and killed. One professor (as mentioned above) died trying to save his students. I cannot imagine having that kind of bravery and composure in such a chaotic situation.
I don't want to turn this into an argument about gun control laws in the United States (though I may already have done that). This is about those who were tragically killed. This about the families and friends who suffered unimaginable loss. This is about those who have to go back to class. This is about a tragedy that will be overcome.
We're with you.
The Meaning of Rock
"Sometimes...playing rock music...it can all become a big wash and sometimes the words get lost..." says Pearl Jam guitarist Stone Gossard at a concert in Seatle. While the band went on to play Lukin (the lyrics of which cannot be understood), the idea that rock lyrics are often misunderstood is very valid. There are countless rock songs that, for whatever reason, are consistently misinterpretted. My favourite is Neil Young's Keep on Rockin' in the Free World, which many mistakenly think is an anthem for the free world (or specifically, the fall of the Berlin Wall), but in reality is about the decay of American politics and society. Rolling Stone magazine has their own take on the Top 25 Songs With a Secret. I'm not going to transcribe them all, but here are some of my favorites:
2. “Lola” – The Kinks: Thought to be about a beautiful woman, actually inspired by an incident in which Kinks’ manager Robert Wace spent a drunken night dancing with a transvestite he mistook for a woman.
3. “Born in the USA” – Bruce Springsteen: Misperceived as a nationalistic anthem, is really a dark portrait of post-Vietnam life.
5. “Rainy Day Women #12 & #35” – Bob Dylan: With its lyrical proclamation, “everybody must get stoned” the song was embraced as a stoner’s anthem, but the song is actually about the literal throwing of stones.
6. “Please Please Me” – The Beatles: Thought to be a cute little teenage love song, is actually about oral sex.
11. “Polly” – Nirvana: Misunderstood by frat boys to glorify rape, was actually inspired by a true story in which a rape victim escaped from her captor.
12. “She Bop” – Cyndi Lauper: Thought to be a charming and innocent song about a girl dancing around, is actually about masturbation.
18. “Pennyroyal Tea” – Nirvana: Thought to be inspired by many things, including a tea Kurt drank to ease his stomach pain, was actually inspired by an herbal remedy meant to cause an abortion.
20. “Good Riddance (Time of Your Life)”– Green Day: Misperceived as a love song, is really about a bitterness-filled breakup.
24. “Drain You” – Nirvana: Thought to be just another song about heroin, is actually about a case in which one twin baby stole the nutrients from its twin while in the womb, resulting in one stillbirth.
25. “Dier Eir von Satan” – Tool: Thought to be about something to do with Satan, the lyrics, which are all in German, actually consist entirely of a repeating recipe for hashish cookies.
I think my absolute favourite in the RS list is Good Riddance (Time of Your Life). I still recall so many people singing this "great love song" with their highschool sweethearts. One RS reader wrote that it seemed that at every wedding he went to this song was played for the couple's first dance. The title of the song is Good Riddance! How people didn't know this was about a bitter break-up confounds me.
I also love Please Please Me because it launched the shaggy-haired idols from Liverpool into stardom. These "good boys" represent the "good ol' rock and roll" that your parents wish you would listen to. I think this may actually be the perfect embodiment of what rock is: a big FU to mainstream society (preferably without them knowing it!).
Kudos RS.
2. “Lola” – The Kinks: Thought to be about a beautiful woman, actually inspired by an incident in which Kinks’ manager Robert Wace spent a drunken night dancing with a transvestite he mistook for a woman.
3. “Born in the USA” – Bruce Springsteen: Misperceived as a nationalistic anthem, is really a dark portrait of post-Vietnam life.
5. “Rainy Day Women #12 & #35” – Bob Dylan: With its lyrical proclamation, “everybody must get stoned” the song was embraced as a stoner’s anthem, but the song is actually about the literal throwing of stones.
6. “Please Please Me” – The Beatles: Thought to be a cute little teenage love song, is actually about oral sex.
11. “Polly” – Nirvana: Misunderstood by frat boys to glorify rape, was actually inspired by a true story in which a rape victim escaped from her captor.
12. “She Bop” – Cyndi Lauper: Thought to be a charming and innocent song about a girl dancing around, is actually about masturbation.
18. “Pennyroyal Tea” – Nirvana: Thought to be inspired by many things, including a tea Kurt drank to ease his stomach pain, was actually inspired by an herbal remedy meant to cause an abortion.
20. “Good Riddance (Time of Your Life)”– Green Day: Misperceived as a love song, is really about a bitterness-filled breakup.
24. “Drain You” – Nirvana: Thought to be just another song about heroin, is actually about a case in which one twin baby stole the nutrients from its twin while in the womb, resulting in one stillbirth.
25. “Dier Eir von Satan” – Tool: Thought to be about something to do with Satan, the lyrics, which are all in German, actually consist entirely of a repeating recipe for hashish cookies.
I think my absolute favourite in the RS list is Good Riddance (Time of Your Life). I still recall so many people singing this "great love song" with their highschool sweethearts. One RS reader wrote that it seemed that at every wedding he went to this song was played for the couple's first dance. The title of the song is Good Riddance! How people didn't know this was about a bitter break-up confounds me.
I also love Please Please Me because it launched the shaggy-haired idols from Liverpool into stardom. These "good boys" represent the "good ol' rock and roll" that your parents wish you would listen to. I think this may actually be the perfect embodiment of what rock is: a big FU to mainstream society (preferably without them knowing it!).
Kudos RS.
"B.S." or "Harper's Environmental Catholicon"
It seems the Harper government has "leaked" a draft plan that would begin to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as early as 2010. According to the Canadian Press,
Harper has decided to leak this in the lead up to the next federal election, which of course means it is bullshit. I hope I'm wrong, I hope the Tories will actually do something helpful on the environment, but this, I'm certain, is bullshit. I can't believe a government so flippant about climate change, would suddenly come up with a proposal that would do Canada's part to stem the tide of global warming. This is nothing more than pre-writ campaigning. My money says the Tories will try to work on it after the next election (if they win) then tell us they can't get support from enough provincial governments to make it work and will end up scrapping it. Of course all these federal-provincial negotiations will be meaningless shams, but they will give Harper someone else to blame for not delivering on this promise.
I want to be wrong here. Harper, prove me wrong. Make this happen. Deliver on this promise.
The 13-page plan, marked secret, says regulations and programs introduced by
Ottawa and the provinces will mean that emissions can be expected to start to
decline as early as 2010 and no later than 2012. After that emissions will
decline steadily, according to the document.
Harper has decided to leak this in the lead up to the next federal election, which of course means it is bullshit. I hope I'm wrong, I hope the Tories will actually do something helpful on the environment, but this, I'm certain, is bullshit. I can't believe a government so flippant about climate change, would suddenly come up with a proposal that would do Canada's part to stem the tide of global warming. This is nothing more than pre-writ campaigning. My money says the Tories will try to work on it after the next election (if they win) then tell us they can't get support from enough provincial governments to make it work and will end up scrapping it. Of course all these federal-provincial negotiations will be meaningless shams, but they will give Harper someone else to blame for not delivering on this promise.
I want to be wrong here. Harper, prove me wrong. Make this happen. Deliver on this promise.
13 April 2007
Blogging for the Sake of Blogging
Well, it was a busy couple of weeks for me. Lots of school work has meant I've been too busy to post anything all week (with the exception of one blog, which I promptly took down in the interests of my own sanity). I guess the truth isn't that I've been too busy, but rather, that I haven't been inspired. I blame all the group meetings and assignments for taking away my desire to read the news. I also blame Mr. McIver for not having posted any Tory rhetoric in about as long. Usually I can count on at least one of those sources to inspire me.
Anyway, I'm bored now, so I just took a quick look at the Globe and Mail where I found an interesting article about a new Grit-Green alliance. Liberal leader Stephane Dion has agreed not to run a candidate in the riding of Central Nova (currently held by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay), where Green Party leader Elizabeth May will be running. In return, Ms May has agreed not to run a candidate in Dion's riding of Saint-Laurent-Cartierville.
My question is: What's the point? May isn't going to beat a sitting cabinet minister and Dion's seat probably isn't up for grabs (he won by nearly 20,000 votes last time around). Dion said he likes May's policy on the environment. Woo-hooo. Doesn't he like his own policy on the environment?
I'm thinking Mr. McIver might be right, maybe this Dion guy is a complete moron. One MP called him "a big albatros around the party's neck," while another was inspired to opine that the Liberal Party is now "the silly party."
Something has got to be up. I cannot conceive of any good reason for Dion to make this deal. Is May going to jump ship right after the election (if she wins, which she won't)? In that scenario, the Liberals are a conniving party intent on tricking Central Novans to vote Liberal without knowing it. I hope that's not the case. Is Dion worried about his own seat? I don't think he should be. How could one possibly lose enough popularity to erase a 20,000 vote advantage in fewer than 2 years? Did May and Dion engage in some extra-political affairs (aka Clintonian politics or shagging) and now May is extorting him? Or Dion is extorting May?
I can't agree with NDP eidolon and former leader Ed Broadbent's assertion that this is the “ultimate kind of scheming to reduce electoral choice,” but he's not exactly wrong, he's merely embellishing the significance of the deal.
I'm a Liberal, but let's just say Dion's next move better be across the Rubicon (that is, it better lead to an inevitable Liberal return to power).*
*****
* Pat, I said "an inevitable return to power," not "the inevitable return to power." I'm not suggesting the Liberals are destined to win the next election because it is some sort of Liberal right, I'm saying Dion's next move better put us in a position where we will be able to win the next election. I know how you love to talk about the Liberal Party's sence of entitlement to govern, so I thought I'd clarify that I'm not demonstrating that alledged belief.
Anyway, I'm bored now, so I just took a quick look at the Globe and Mail where I found an interesting article about a new Grit-Green alliance. Liberal leader Stephane Dion has agreed not to run a candidate in the riding of Central Nova (currently held by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay), where Green Party leader Elizabeth May will be running. In return, Ms May has agreed not to run a candidate in Dion's riding of Saint-Laurent-Cartierville.
My question is: What's the point? May isn't going to beat a sitting cabinet minister and Dion's seat probably isn't up for grabs (he won by nearly 20,000 votes last time around). Dion said he likes May's policy on the environment. Woo-hooo. Doesn't he like his own policy on the environment?
I'm thinking Mr. McIver might be right, maybe this Dion guy is a complete moron. One MP called him "a big albatros around the party's neck," while another was inspired to opine that the Liberal Party is now "the silly party."
Something has got to be up. I cannot conceive of any good reason for Dion to make this deal. Is May going to jump ship right after the election (if she wins, which she won't)? In that scenario, the Liberals are a conniving party intent on tricking Central Novans to vote Liberal without knowing it. I hope that's not the case. Is Dion worried about his own seat? I don't think he should be. How could one possibly lose enough popularity to erase a 20,000 vote advantage in fewer than 2 years? Did May and Dion engage in some extra-political affairs (aka Clintonian politics or shagging) and now May is extorting him? Or Dion is extorting May?
I can't agree with NDP eidolon and former leader Ed Broadbent's assertion that this is the “ultimate kind of scheming to reduce electoral choice,” but he's not exactly wrong, he's merely embellishing the significance of the deal.
I'm a Liberal, but let's just say Dion's next move better be across the Rubicon (that is, it better lead to an inevitable Liberal return to power).*
*****
* Pat, I said "an inevitable return to power," not "the inevitable return to power." I'm not suggesting the Liberals are destined to win the next election because it is some sort of Liberal right, I'm saying Dion's next move better put us in a position where we will be able to win the next election. I know how you love to talk about the Liberal Party's sence of entitlement to govern, so I thought I'd clarify that I'm not demonstrating that alledged belief.
06 April 2007
Thursday Night Debauchery (Minus the Promiscuity)
I've decided, before the fish get too big, that I should publish my recollection of the events of last night so as to ensure I'm not accused of ever having actually donned bicycle shorts and a muscle shirt while singing Shake Your Bon Bon with friends at La Cantina. So here is the night, as I recall it:
I started by going with some friends to watch the Sarnia Blast get embarrassed by the Strathroy Rockets in game six of the league championships. The final score was 9-7, which isn't a massive defeat, especially considering the Rockets' ninth goal was an empty-netter, but allowing nine goals, regardless of how many you've scored, is embarrassing (or should be). Basically, the defense played more like pylons while the coach refused to pull the starting goalie until he allowed the eighth Strathroy goal. What a debacle.
From the game, we went to La Cantina where I would proceed to embarrass the hell out of myself (and probably those forced to be seen with me). I think it all started out modest enough: a few drinks, a few games of pool, and a bevy of friends together for some therapeutic release. Then things started to get interesting. My "friends" (whom I shall later thank for a wonderful evening) decided to submit my name to the friendly karaoke DJ who soon after called me up to sing Ricky Martin's Shake Your Bon Bon. Apparently, it was my birthday last night, so, as is tradition at La Cantina, I was asked to bend over while my friends slapped my skinny ass 25 times in celebration.
I want to take a moment here to thank my new not-best-friend Kyle for finding a binder with which to strike me. Ass. Anyway, due to this flogging, I was physically unable to shake my bon bon, so I remained largly still while belting out the most excruciatingly awful rendition of the aforementioned Ricky Martin hit (notice the absence of bicycle shorts and muscle shirt). I want to thank Steph and Jodi, who helped out with the choruses, and Cindy for laughing hysterically off stage.
I started by going with some friends to watch the Sarnia Blast get embarrassed by the Strathroy Rockets in game six of the league championships. The final score was 9-7, which isn't a massive defeat, especially considering the Rockets' ninth goal was an empty-netter, but allowing nine goals, regardless of how many you've scored, is embarrassing (or should be). Basically, the defense played more like pylons while the coach refused to pull the starting goalie until he allowed the eighth Strathroy goal. What a debacle.
From the game, we went to La Cantina where I would proceed to embarrass the hell out of myself (and probably those forced to be seen with me). I think it all started out modest enough: a few drinks, a few games of pool, and a bevy of friends together for some therapeutic release. Then things started to get interesting. My "friends" (whom I shall later thank for a wonderful evening) decided to submit my name to the friendly karaoke DJ who soon after called me up to sing Ricky Martin's Shake Your Bon Bon. Apparently, it was my birthday last night, so, as is tradition at La Cantina, I was asked to bend over while my friends slapped my skinny ass 25 times in celebration.
I want to take a moment here to thank my new not-best-friend Kyle for finding a binder with which to strike me. Ass. Anyway, due to this flogging, I was physically unable to shake my bon bon, so I remained largly still while belting out the most excruciatingly awful rendition of the aforementioned Ricky Martin hit (notice the absence of bicycle shorts and muscle shirt). I want to thank Steph and Jodi, who helped out with the choruses, and Cindy for laughing hysterically off stage.
Once this calamity was mercifully over, we soon headed over the The Lazy Duck. The Duck is a popular dance club in Sarnia and it seems, at least last night, I was right at home. According to Erin (not Beener, she bailed early), I was "dancing...a lot." Though, as you can see, not well.
So that was the night. Nothing really all that bad I guess, just a lot of good, clean, alcohol-inspired fun.
If I should apologize to anyone, I do (I'm specifically thinking about how I got caught, on camera, making sure Cindy's shirt was...lint-free). I'm not going to include that picture, sorry.
Thanks to all my friends who made this a fun night: Kyle, Sarah, JR, Erin, Amanda, Amanda, Chris, Cindy, Jodi, Brook, Steph, Craig, Beener, Corey, Dusty, Jordan, and anyone else I drank from my memory. As an aside, I think this was the first time I ever saw Dusty at a bar and was more intoxicated than him.
Last night was a very interesting night. I trust I entertained a number of friends, and if I managed to do that I suppose it was all worth it.
Enjoy your Easter weekend. Or, if you don't believe in the Resurrection of Jesus, enjoy your weekend!
05 April 2007
The Yawn of Canadian Politics
I don't know what's worse, the Conservative Party's attactics (that's "attacks" and "tactics" smooshed together because when I was re-reading it, I found those two words awkward to say one after the other) or their insistance that the Liberals don't care about real issues. I know, I know, the Liberals are a bunch of panzies because they keep seeking apologies for Conservative slander, but I really don't see the problem. One partisan blogger (who seems as capable of independent thought as the rest of them) tells me it shows that the Liberals "[regard] the images and self-esteem of its officials as the most pressing public issue there is." MacLean's Paul Wells seems to be receiving the same talking points from Conservative headquarters. Finally, lest I forget the most dignified of all Conservatives, even Mr McIver has had his say.
How dare we Liberals cry foul?
To Ms Tintor, Mr Wells, and Mr McIver, it seems even your own allies are getting a little tired of your ugly tactics. Andrew Coyne, a blogger so Conservative (the capital 'C' is intentional) he has earned a link on Mr McIver's site (just above the Western Standard), posted an article decrying Tory attack ads. Thank you, Mr Coyne, for reaffirming the fading notion that at least some Tories have the capacity for independent thought.
According to the Tories, the Liberals "don't care about real issues" because all we do is demand apologies. Well, I just pulled up the Liberal Party's website and I see nothing that attacks the Tories or demands apologies from them. In contrast, I also pulled up the Conservative Party's website and one of the top four stories is titled "Stephane Dion has a lot of explaining to do," while the top link on the right side of the page reads "Not a Leader" (that's Toryspeak for "Stephane Dion"). Incredibly, there are exactly two pictures of Stephen Harper on the Tory homepage. How many of Stephane Dion? Two! I'm confused, which party doesn't care about real policy? And those are the official media mouths! I don't even need to talk about the blogs. Tintor, Wells, McIver, and surely others I haven't the stomach to bother reading (I get my fill of partisan propoganda while sifting through American newspapers for international news), all seem to be wearing blinders that render them incapable of looking beyond Liberal reaction to Conservative attacks.
I know I'm not going to convince any androids (read: Conservatives) that the Liberal Party actually cares about policy, so I'm not going to go any further on that. What I'll do instead is expose the Conservative game plan. Mr McIver did the same to the (alleged) Liberal game plan, so I shall respond in kind. Without further preface, here is the Conservative game plan:
How dare we Liberals cry foul?
To Ms Tintor, Mr Wells, and Mr McIver, it seems even your own allies are getting a little tired of your ugly tactics. Andrew Coyne, a blogger so Conservative (the capital 'C' is intentional) he has earned a link on Mr McIver's site (just above the Western Standard), posted an article decrying Tory attack ads. Thank you, Mr Coyne, for reaffirming the fading notion that at least some Tories have the capacity for independent thought.
According to the Tories, the Liberals "don't care about real issues" because all we do is demand apologies. Well, I just pulled up the Liberal Party's website and I see nothing that attacks the Tories or demands apologies from them. In contrast, I also pulled up the Conservative Party's website and one of the top four stories is titled "Stephane Dion has a lot of explaining to do," while the top link on the right side of the page reads "Not a Leader" (that's Toryspeak for "Stephane Dion"). Incredibly, there are exactly two pictures of Stephen Harper on the Tory homepage. How many of Stephane Dion? Two! I'm confused, which party doesn't care about real policy? And those are the official media mouths! I don't even need to talk about the blogs. Tintor, Wells, McIver, and surely others I haven't the stomach to bother reading (I get my fill of partisan propoganda while sifting through American newspapers for international news), all seem to be wearing blinders that render them incapable of looking beyond Liberal reaction to Conservative attacks.
I know I'm not going to convince any androids (read: Conservatives) that the Liberal Party actually cares about policy, so I'm not going to go any further on that. What I'll do instead is expose the Conservative game plan. Mr McIver did the same to the (alleged) Liberal game plan, so I shall respond in kind. Without further preface, here is the Conservative game plan:
- say mean things about the Liberals until they react
- make fun of the Liberals for reacting
- tell mommy
(The last step hasn't been called into action yet, but it will once the Tories realize the first two steps are transparent and annoying.)
If you're wondering why I chose to use such juvenile language as "say mean things" and "make fun of", it's because I borrowed this plan from an assignment I did in grade 3 about how bullies act. Sorry.
Here's a simple message to the hypocrites (read: Conservatives):
Stop telling us that personal attacks are the norm in politics. Even if
you're correct, and they are the norm, does that make it right? Of course
not. Stop telling us that the Liberals don't care about real policy,
because doing so is hypocritical (that is to say, doing so
is to focus on Liberals and values while ignoring real policy!).
If you want the Liberals to focus on real policy, try doing it yourself.
Instead of calling us panzies and cry babies, tell us our policy (for example)
on Afghanistan is faulty (and it might be, as Mr McIver notes, it can sometimes
be difficult to nail down Dion's policies). Or better yet, tell us your
policy!Thank you.
03 April 2007
The Weekend that Was
I don't generally make a habit of posting about my experiences (at least not anymore). But I had an exciting (and tiring) weekend, so here goes...actually, my buddy Loafie asked me to talk about him in a blog so here it is, he only has himself to blame.
The weekend started Thursday night. I went to La Cantina (as usual, reluctantly) for a going away party for some friends. While there, I had a few beverages and caught up with some old friends.
Then Friday night I worked on an essay, yippie.
Saturday I went to Burlington to visit my sister, my new little cousin, and some friends and other family. (Here's were Loafie comes in.) Me and two of my best friends, Loafie and Floody (we have no real names...) went out to BP for some food and drinks. As normally happens when we get together, many of the lengendary stories came up: how Loafie earned his nickname at the Delta Hotel in Ottawa, the moaner story (also from the Delta), how we got kicked out of Paddy's in Waterloo after our final university exam ever, and so on. You say you want to know how Loafie got his name? Well, sure, let's publish it for everyone to read. Apparently (I wasn't in the room, but I've heard the story a thousand times...and I still find it hysterical), the kiddies were sitting around in a Delta hotel room when Wheeler asked what animal everyone would be if they could be any animal (Wheeler is a funny guy, a great guy who I admire, but a funny guy). I guess most people chose the standard regal beasts - eagles, lions, whatever, but Loafie, he picked a squirel...or was it a bird? Either way, he picked an animal capable of perching atop hydro wires, tree branches, whatever, so as to "drop a loaf" on people he didn't like. This was the first weekend we really got to know each other, so this unfortunate story and nickname has stuck with him ever since. Since I outed Loafie, I should out the Moaner. The moaner story involves someone jumping around (drunk I think) at the end of someone else's bed, commanding them to go to sleep so the leaper could hear the moan that allegedly eminates from the moaner during sleep. Again, I wasn't actually in the room, but the story is a classic. I refuse to write about how we got kicked out of Paddy's because it borders on the criminal, and Sandra's still a little ways from being a lawyer, so right now, I have no representation. Anyway, that was Saturday. Great times! I can't wait to see them again at the end of April!
On to Sunday. My aunt decreed Sunday Easter Sunday, so we had an easter dinner (at 1.30pm). But more special was finally meeting Kathryn, my cousin's daughter. Kate is (I guess) two or three weeks old now. She's super cute, and super small. I got to hold her, which was mildly less frightening than the last time I held a child that young. Experience helps I guess.
Anyway, it wasn't really an exceptionally eventful weekend, but it was an all-around great weekend. I absolutely needed some time with the old boys. And a big dinner with the extended family was grand as well.
Thanks everyone!
The weekend started Thursday night. I went to La Cantina (as usual, reluctantly) for a going away party for some friends. While there, I had a few beverages and caught up with some old friends.
Then Friday night I worked on an essay, yippie.
Saturday I went to Burlington to visit my sister, my new little cousin, and some friends and other family. (Here's were Loafie comes in.) Me and two of my best friends, Loafie and Floody (we have no real names...) went out to BP for some food and drinks. As normally happens when we get together, many of the lengendary stories came up: how Loafie earned his nickname at the Delta Hotel in Ottawa, the moaner story (also from the Delta), how we got kicked out of Paddy's in Waterloo after our final university exam ever, and so on. You say you want to know how Loafie got his name? Well, sure, let's publish it for everyone to read. Apparently (I wasn't in the room, but I've heard the story a thousand times...and I still find it hysterical), the kiddies were sitting around in a Delta hotel room when Wheeler asked what animal everyone would be if they could be any animal (Wheeler is a funny guy, a great guy who I admire, but a funny guy). I guess most people chose the standard regal beasts - eagles, lions, whatever, but Loafie, he picked a squirel...or was it a bird? Either way, he picked an animal capable of perching atop hydro wires, tree branches, whatever, so as to "drop a loaf" on people he didn't like. This was the first weekend we really got to know each other, so this unfortunate story and nickname has stuck with him ever since. Since I outed Loafie, I should out the Moaner. The moaner story involves someone jumping around (drunk I think) at the end of someone else's bed, commanding them to go to sleep so the leaper could hear the moan that allegedly eminates from the moaner during sleep. Again, I wasn't actually in the room, but the story is a classic. I refuse to write about how we got kicked out of Paddy's because it borders on the criminal, and Sandra's still a little ways from being a lawyer, so right now, I have no representation. Anyway, that was Saturday. Great times! I can't wait to see them again at the end of April!
On to Sunday. My aunt decreed Sunday Easter Sunday, so we had an easter dinner (at 1.30pm). But more special was finally meeting Kathryn, my cousin's daughter. Kate is (I guess) two or three weeks old now. She's super cute, and super small. I got to hold her, which was mildly less frightening than the last time I held a child that young. Experience helps I guess.
Anyway, it wasn't really an exceptionally eventful weekend, but it was an all-around great weekend. I absolutely needed some time with the old boys. And a big dinner with the extended family was grand as well.
Thanks everyone!
02 April 2007
Interesting Song Titles, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Procrastination
I was thinking about an update to my "Random List" section where I traditionally post stupid little top five lists. I thought of doing top five weird song titles, but when going through some music looking for weird song titles, I found too many. What does this mean? It means you, my faithful readers, get yet another new blog tonight (this is number three).
First, some head scratchers with cool stories behind them:
First, some head scratchers with cool stories behind them:
- Any early (pre-1960s) song titles with the phrase "Rock and Roll" in it is refering to sex. I learned that recently, maybe you didn't know. Now you do.
- Hadacol Boogie (Jerry Lee Lewis and Buddy Guy perform the version I know, but it is a cover): Apparently "Hadacol" was a medicine marketed as a vitamin suppliment. I don't generally feel I need a vitamin suppliment, but I would have taken this particular one - it was 12% alcohol! This song is about being drunk. The spoken words at the end of the track I know asks why they called it Hadacol. The answer: "hada call it something."
- Death of a Martian (Red Hot Chili Peppers): This one is sad. It was written for Martian, Flea's dog, who passed away during the recording sessions.
- Strawberry (Everclear): This song was inspired by a dream Art Alexakis had. In his dream, he relapsed after having kicked his drug habit. It has, as far as I can tell, absolutely nothing to do with strawberries.
- You Don't Have to Mean It (the Rolling Stones): "You don't have to mean it, you just got to say it anyway..." I don't want to say what I think it's about, but it's probably got something to do with...relationships.
- The Ballad of El Goodo (Evan Dando): Who's El Goodo and why does he deserve a ballad?
- My Ding-A-Ling (Chuck Berry): This one could probably go in the second category, but you don't have to know the song to know what it's about!
- Pressed Rat and Warthog (Cream): I don't know who Pressed Rat and Warthog are, but according to Ginger Baker, they've reopened their shop and are selling Cream t-shirts. I'd buy one.
- The Lemon Song (Led Zeppelin): Similar to the above Everclear song, it has, as far as I can tell, nothing to do with the food in its title. In fact, this is a (sort of) cover of Howlin' Wolf's Killing Floor making the Zepp title even more curious.
- Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey (the Beatles): John Lennon said this song was about him and Yoko Ono, which suggests that Yoko Ono certainly had something to hide...
- Little Ole Wine Drinker, Me (Dean Martin): I just like it. But then, I just like alcohol, so this shouldn't be a surprise.
- Pigs in Zen (Jane's Addiction): What? Is Perry Farrell suggesting pigs are buddhists?
- Ted, Just Admit It... (Jane's Addiction): Admit what? Apparently the song is about the fine line between good and bad...
- Naked & Famous (PUSA): Yeah, that would be cool.
- Possum Kingdom (Toadies): Animal anthropology or acid trip? Actually, it's either about making it behind the boathouse with a hot brunette, or about the devil's temptations... I'm not sure I can give the Toadies enough credit to believe the latter.
- How's My Ex Treating You? (Jerry Lee Lewis): I just love it. Tim?
- Drinkin' Wine Spo-Dee-O-Dee (Jerry Lee Lewis): Clearly Jerry Lee had been drinking way too much wine.
Something About Iraq that Didn't Seem Old to Me
You may have noticed that I haven't posted anything about Iraq in a long time. In fact, I believe I've only ever posted on the topic once since Kerr's Comments started a couple months ago. Iraq is all over the news, it's reported everyday, ad nauseam, so I steer clear and try to give a voice to other issues. Well, I've decided to make an exception. I was reading an article in Time magazine entitled The War Turns 4. Here's the quote that caught my eye:
I don't think this needs analysis. Fucking evil.
An Iraqi mother hopes her children will be safe - but then she learns that bombers are placing children visibly in the backseat, as unwitting little decoys, so the car can clear the checkpoints before the driver blows it up, with the children still inside.
I don't think this needs analysis. Fucking evil.
Quantifying My Love for Rock Bands
I have previously blogged about what my favourite rock bands are and the list, no matter how many times I do it, seems never to be the same twice. The only constants seem to be Eric Clapton, the Tragically Hip, and the Beatles. So, I decided to try to determine, in a completely objective manner, what my favourite rock bands are. I decided to do this by counting how many songs by individual bands I have ripped to my computer (yes, Metallica, they're all legal...ahem). So here is the list, my favourite musical acts:
*****
* 30 of Sloan's 46 tracks are from their last CD, so this really shouldn't count. Though I do love them.
** Since Cream basically was Eric Clapton, I considered combining the two. Had I done so, EC would have finished second with 69 (hehe) songs. Or more, were I to count my Yardbirds collection. (Plus another with John Mayall and the Bluesbreakers and one with BB King. I have no Blind Faith or Delanie & Bonnie and Friends. My collection of Derek and the Dominos only includes Layla, and it is counted under Eric Clapton, since he was Derek and the Dominos.)
*** Audioslave deserves to finish higher because every song they ever officially released on CD is accounted for. Stupid Chris Cornell breaking up the band!
**** Any sexual innuendos are strictly unintentional, you sicko. Yes, I know I caught it too. You're saying that makes me a sicko? Huh...
*****
I decided to add a bonus here: Some lyrics from the much underrated Kings of Leon:
More bonus: Some lyrics from the Rolling Stones:
Beautiful. No matter what's going on in your life, music is always there to take you away.
- the Beatles (116)
- the Tragically Hip (62)
- the Rolling Stones (52)
- Chuck Berry (51)
- Sloan (46)*
- Pearl Jam (44)
- Live (43)
- Our Lady Peace (41)
- Eric Clapton (40)**
- Audioslave (38)***
- Red Hot Chili Peppers (34)
- Cream (29)**
- Led Zeppelin (28)
- BB King (23)
- Bob Dylan (22)
- Aerosmith (22)
*****
* 30 of Sloan's 46 tracks are from their last CD, so this really shouldn't count. Though I do love them.
** Since Cream basically was Eric Clapton, I considered combining the two. Had I done so, EC would have finished second with 69 (hehe) songs. Or more, were I to count my Yardbirds collection. (Plus another with John Mayall and the Bluesbreakers and one with BB King. I have no Blind Faith or Delanie & Bonnie and Friends. My collection of Derek and the Dominos only includes Layla, and it is counted under Eric Clapton, since he was Derek and the Dominos.)
*** Audioslave deserves to finish higher because every song they ever officially released on CD is accounted for. Stupid Chris Cornell breaking up the band!
**** Any sexual innuendos are strictly unintentional, you sicko. Yes, I know I caught it too. You're saying that makes me a sicko? Huh...
*****
I decided to add a bonus here: Some lyrics from the much underrated Kings of Leon:
feels like a fast or homeless sleep,
at least there's a record that i love to play
More bonus: Some lyrics from the Rolling Stones:
And his coat is torn and frayed,
It's seen much better days.
Just as long as the guitar plays
Let it steal your heart away,
Let it steal your heart away.
Beautiful. No matter what's going on in your life, music is always there to take you away.
27 March 2007
Canada Shall Remain One...At Least for Now
Last night we found out that the Parti Liberal du Quebec (PLQ) will form a minority government in that province. The Action Democratique du Quebec (ADQ) will form the official opposition and the Parti Quebecois (PQ) will be rendered meaningless... Okay, the PQ finished third, a mere 12 seats behind the PLQ, so "meaningless" is an exaggeration, but you get the point. This is sort of how everyone expected the election to go down - the PLQ would stay in power, the ADQ would leap frog the PQ to become the official opposition, and the PQ would lose some seats and finish third - no surprises really. And that's a good thing. The plunge taken by the PQ (they won 9 fewer seats than they did last time) means support for Quebec seperatism is waning (if only temporarily). Either way, we can (hopefully) count on at least a couple years without having to worry about another sovereignty referendum in Quebec.
To make things more interesting for those less politically nerdy, here are some interesting tidbits about the election results:
P.S. If you're looking for more analysis, but don't like "the man's" news sources, check out what the incomparable Mr. McIver had to say. If you do check out his article, remember that he speaks with a blue tougue which is almost certainly controlled by Stephen Harper.
To make things more interesting for those less politically nerdy, here are some interesting tidbits about the election results:
- Quebecors (like your Prime Minister) don't much care about the environment - the Parti Vert du Quebec was unable to win a single seat;
- Quebecors are not commies - the Parti Marxiste-Leniniste du Quebec also failed to win any seats;
- Quebecors don't like weed - the Bloc Pot won fewer than 2000 votes (or 0.04% of the popular vote);
- Quebecors prefer weed over Christianity - the Parti Democratie Chretienne du Quebec garnered more than 100 fewer votes than the Bloc Pot;
- The Parti Democratie Chretienne du Quebec has nothing to do with Jean Chretien;
- finally, the Quebec Solidaire didn't matter.
P.S. If you're looking for more analysis, but don't like "the man's" news sources, check out what the incomparable Mr. McIver had to say. If you do check out his article, remember that he speaks with a blue tougue which is almost certainly controlled by Stephen Harper.
26 March 2007
Rock Mash-ups
I was listening to Seven Mary Three's American Standard today when I got to thinking about some potential rock mash-ups. Here you go:
Who would you mash-up? (If you say Linkin Park/Jay-Z I will not publish your comment - it was tried and it was useless. Jay-Z dominated so much, it just as easily could have been a mediocre house band behind him.)
*****
* I like some of the vague, cryptic lyrics out there, but too often there's no discernable meaning behind them. Lyrics can be vague and cryptic, but they have to mean something. Take the Shins for instance. James Mercer's lyrics are not easy to understand. They meander around meanings, but they say exactly what he wants them to say, you just have to think about them a bit. James Mercer = genius.
- Everclear/Seven Mary Three - Everclear lead singer (and creative driving force) Art Alexakis ought never to have been given a microphone. Notwithstanding great tracks like Santa Monica, Summerland, and Strawberry, Art has, in my opinion, one of the worst voices in music. On the other hand, in my opinion, he is also one of the best songwriters in rock music. His songs seem to connect to everyone. He manages to express his thoughts and experiences without the vague, cryptic lyrics that so many rockers use.* I think if Art set down his microphone, and started writing songs for other bands, he would be much more appreciated. Here's where 7M3 comes in. Lead singer Jason Ross has a killer voice - it rivals the best grunge has ever offered. Unfortunately, from what I heard on American Standard, he should not be allowed to write anymore song lyrics. I will grant him genius on Cumbersome, but it pretty much ends there. A message to the 7M3 crew: hire Art to write you some songs (like Everclear or not, the man writes hit songs), and return to your platinum glory days of 1995-1996.
- The Doors/Nickelback - This one is a stretch, but just think about it. Nickelback singer-songwriter Chad Kroeger is seemingly incapable of writing complete songs. Almost everything I've heard from Nickelback is (musically) murderously catchy, but (lyrically) incomplete. I'm not kidding, go read the lyrics to some Nickelback songs - they repeat the same verse over and over (sometimes Chad changes a word or two). On the other hand, you have the Doors. Replace the kitschy Doors music with the near-metal Nickelback sound, then replace the incomplete Nickelback lyrics with Jim Morrison poetry and you have a great, cross-generational rock band. Also, give the Doors' Robby Krieger the lead guitar duties because I'm not convinced Kroeger and Ryan Peake actually know how to play their guitars.
- Nirvana/Pearl Jam - I'm not suggesting either of these monster rock bands need(ed) any help being great, but imagine them combined. I would never replace Kurt Cobain, but since he...took himself out of the picture, think what could have been if Pearl Jam's Eddie Vedder had taken over singer-songwriter duties and Mike McCready had taken over on lead guitar: Vedder's lyrical genius, Novoselic's monster bass, Grohl killing his drum set (back where he belongs), and McCready on lead guitar. The only problem: McCready and Vedder would have to pull double-duty because Pearl Jam is too great to let die.
Who would you mash-up? (If you say Linkin Park/Jay-Z I will not publish your comment - it was tried and it was useless. Jay-Z dominated so much, it just as easily could have been a mediocre house band behind him.)
*****
* I like some of the vague, cryptic lyrics out there, but too often there's no discernable meaning behind them. Lyrics can be vague and cryptic, but they have to mean something. Take the Shins for instance. James Mercer's lyrics are not easy to understand. They meander around meanings, but they say exactly what he wants them to say, you just have to think about them a bit. James Mercer = genius.
Thoughts While Procrastinating
NME magazine is reporting that Eminem is suing ex-wife Kim in an attempt to stop her from insulting him in public. What a hypocrite! Before I say anymore, you should know that I hate Eminem. Talk about wasted talent. The man is a lyrical genius with perhaps the best flow in the game, but he's a complete idiot. The man sells his records by releasing pop-ready, (moderately) kid-friendly, bouncy singles, then fills the rest of the album with hatred. It's roughly equivalent to pedophiles attracting children with lollipops. Anyway, back to the story. Eminem is suing wife Kim in an attempt to make her stop insulting him in public. The hypocrisy is this: every single Eminem album has been characterized by him insulting Kim at on at least 75% of the tracks. According to Eminem, when he insults her, it's freedom of expression. But what happens when she insults him? Suddenly it's defamation of character and harmful to their daughter? What the hell is the difference? Eminem, go away. You tool.
*****
In more important news: Today Quebecors go to the polls. The Quebec provincial election has begun and analysts are predicting a tight three-way race between the ADQ, the PQ, and the (incumbent) Liberals. I'm pulling for the Liberals. The PQ are, of course, the seperatists, so to pull for them would be to pull for the dissolution of Canada. I'm not too familiar with the ADQ, but I hear they are the right-wingers in Quebec provincial politics (filling the void left by the missing Conservative Party), so I cannot pull for them. Anyway, it sounds like we're going to have to wait until late tonight before we get the results. Should be interesting!
*****
That's all for today. Enjoy your Monday!
*****
In more important news: Today Quebecors go to the polls. The Quebec provincial election has begun and analysts are predicting a tight three-way race between the ADQ, the PQ, and the (incumbent) Liberals. I'm pulling for the Liberals. The PQ are, of course, the seperatists, so to pull for them would be to pull for the dissolution of Canada. I'm not too familiar with the ADQ, but I hear they are the right-wingers in Quebec provincial politics (filling the void left by the missing Conservative Party), so I cannot pull for them. Anyway, it sounds like we're going to have to wait until late tonight before we get the results. Should be interesting!
*****
That's all for today. Enjoy your Monday!
23 March 2007
Rolling Stone is a Fan of Mine
It has become crystal clear that Rolling Stone magazine reads my blog. A few months ago (on my lost myspace blog) I wrote an article in which I created two fantasy supergroups. I created them from past and present rock stars - Clapton, Page, Ramone, McCartney, Hendrix, Flea, Cobain, Grohl, Peart, and others. Then, a few weeks later, Rolling Stone magazine asked its readers to name their own supergroups. Clearly, they were inspired by my creative genius.
Now they've done it again. A week or so ago, on the "Random List" part of this blog (just above the links on the right hand side) I named my top five Neil Young songs. Well guess what? Rolling Stone borrowed my idea again. Our lists weren't the same, but clearly they were once again inspired by my blog. I'm not mad at them. I think it's pretty cool. I'm flattered. They could at least give me a shout-out though.
P.S. - The only thing I can think of that would be cooler than having Rolling Stone reading my blog would be having the Rolling Stones read my blog. A boy can dream.
Now they've done it again. A week or so ago, on the "Random List" part of this blog (just above the links on the right hand side) I named my top five Neil Young songs. Well guess what? Rolling Stone borrowed my idea again. Our lists weren't the same, but clearly they were once again inspired by my blog. I'm not mad at them. I think it's pretty cool. I'm flattered. They could at least give me a shout-out though.
P.S. - The only thing I can think of that would be cooler than having Rolling Stone reading my blog would be having the Rolling Stones read my blog. A boy can dream.
Do Drugs Enhance Creativity?
This is a common question I hear. Ever since Bob Dylan introduced the Beatles to marijuana in the mid-1960s, this has been a common question among rock fans. The standard answer seems to be yes, drugs do enhance creativity. The proof seems overwhelming: the Beatles, Pink Floyd, the entire psychedelia movement, but maybe it's not true afterall. Nine Inch Nails driving force Trent Reznor says no (courtesy Rolling Stone):
- Trent Reznor has spoken very candidly about the extent to which drugs impaired his ability to create music, saying: “I had made writing out to be a terrifying prospect filled with pain and failure and some things that I dreaded doing because I’ve always lacked self-confidence and every other thing. By the end of my run with drugs I’d also realised that my brain wasn’t functioning right and I’d lost the power to really concentrate – it really made my art suffer, which made me feel worse, which made me want to get high and you know, that cycle starts up.” Now that he’s sober, Reznor says, he’s finally learned how to write on the road, which makes him even more productive than he’s ever been before.
(Read the original article here.)
Maybe we shouldn't be surprised. Doesn't it seem like the more drug-infused a rocker is, the quicker his/her career plummets? Pink FLoyd, the Beatles, and countless other bands seemed to peak then self-destruct, largely due to substance abuse. On the other hand you have bands like the Rolling Stones. They nearly broke up leading up to the release of Exile on Main St because some members of the band were abusing drugs. But others were (relatively) clean, and that probably saved the band. The Stones are the only British Invasion band that still matters - that still makes good music. You can also consider people like Eric Clapton. He nearly killed himself with substance abuse. His addiction caused him to stop making music for years. Then he kicked the habit, cleaned himself up, and released his most successful songs like Change the World and Tears in Heaven.
Listen to Trent Reznor.
22 March 2007
The Rock Icon Party
I was in the car today on the way to my special edition Organizational Behaviour class listening to Modern Times by Bob Dylan when I began to wonder if I would like him if I ever met him. I came to the conclusion that I probably wouldn't much like him on a personal level. He seems, judging by his music and articles I've read about him, like a bit of a kook. The interesting thing is that I LOVE his music. From Like a Rolling Stone (which I previously named the greatest rock song ever) to All Along the Watchtower to Gotta Serve Somebody to...hell, there are way too many to name, I can't get enough Dylan. But the man, well, he seems like he's probably a little bit out there. A little bit too conspiratorial for my taste. I'm not the type of guy who sits back and believes everything exactly as it appears in the news, but I'm also not going to, for example, believe the US government staged the 9/11 attacks (which is a pretty popular theory - it even made Time Magazine). I'm not saying Dylan would, but I get the impression he would be more interested in that type of conspiracy. I love Dylan the folk-rocker, but the man, I'm not sure. I'll hold off judgment until I meet him in person.
This got me thinking about what other rock stars I would or wouldn't particularily like in person. I recall a friend noting that, notwithstanding a love for the Doors, Jim Morrison was probably a real dick. I concurred. Judging by the stories and the songs, I think it's clear that Jim was not only a drug-addicted womanizer, but he was probably also painfully pretentious. I bet he was the type of guy you'd want to knockout, if not because he was a total jerk to your best friend Jane then because he talked to you like he was walking somewhere over your head. Seeing as Jim's dead, I guess I can't really hold off judgment like I'm doing fo Bob, so I'm going to go ahead and judge Jim a complete ass.
What about Kurt Cobain? Again, I love his music, but I'm not sure about the man. I don't know much about him. I know his widow (Courtney Love) is a real tool. I think your left thumb harbours more intelligence than Courtney Love's entire body. But worse, she just annoys me, period. But does that reflect the type of man Kurt Cobain was? Probably. I've read some stuff about him, but I don't really know what to think. Certainly his own music is great, but he seemed to have a knack for choosing only great songs to cover (especially The Man Who Sold the World). I don't think he was a very happy person though. He'd probably totally bum me out. I think I'd talk to Kurt for a bit then loose interest and move on to someone I would actually enjoy being around.
In this rock-star-studded party who would I actually enjoy being around? A few names come to mind. I think, of all the Beatles, I'd get on best with Ringo Starr. He doesn't abuse his wife (McCartney), he never supported a communist party in Great Britain (Lennon), and he didn't seem excessively dedicated to the psychedelic lifestyle and sitar music (Harrison). He was a late addition, he was always in the background, but, being the drummer, was the heart of the band's live performances, and he seemed to be the most low-key. I bet he had great stories to tell, and I bet he'd talk to you like you mattered.
I also think Eddie Vedder would be a good guy to chill with. I've read some artcles about him and interviews with him. He seems like a chill kind of guy. From his music, he seems socially conscious, but not conspiratorial like Dylan. He has always seemed to me to be down to earth. Having said that, he's a rock icon, so I think he's got some stories to tell. He seems charismatic, but not too charismatic. I think the years spent fighting Ticketmaster and the music video phenomenon probably helped ground him.
Then there's Bono. The man seems to ooze charisma, but more importantly, he seems 100% real. When he was one-third of Time's People of the Year the article exposed him as a hard working, down-to-earth, sincere man. He's had more musical success than almost anyone else in the past 25 or so years, but he still fights for people who have nothing. I once stood about 30 feet from him and what a thrill! Not many people can inspire that kind of emotion in me. The funny thing is, at that time, I wasn't really a big U2 fan. It was when he appeared at the Liberal Leadership Convention in Toronto. He spoke flawlessly about debt and AIDS relief. I bet I could sit across a table from him for days without ever losing the wide-eyed-little-hockey-player-who-just-met-Wayne-Gretzky look.
Some other rockers I think I could be friends with:
This got me thinking about what other rock stars I would or wouldn't particularily like in person. I recall a friend noting that, notwithstanding a love for the Doors, Jim Morrison was probably a real dick. I concurred. Judging by the stories and the songs, I think it's clear that Jim was not only a drug-addicted womanizer, but he was probably also painfully pretentious. I bet he was the type of guy you'd want to knockout, if not because he was a total jerk to your best friend Jane then because he talked to you like he was walking somewhere over your head. Seeing as Jim's dead, I guess I can't really hold off judgment like I'm doing fo Bob, so I'm going to go ahead and judge Jim a complete ass.
What about Kurt Cobain? Again, I love his music, but I'm not sure about the man. I don't know much about him. I know his widow (Courtney Love) is a real tool. I think your left thumb harbours more intelligence than Courtney Love's entire body. But worse, she just annoys me, period. But does that reflect the type of man Kurt Cobain was? Probably. I've read some stuff about him, but I don't really know what to think. Certainly his own music is great, but he seemed to have a knack for choosing only great songs to cover (especially The Man Who Sold the World). I don't think he was a very happy person though. He'd probably totally bum me out. I think I'd talk to Kurt for a bit then loose interest and move on to someone I would actually enjoy being around.
In this rock-star-studded party who would I actually enjoy being around? A few names come to mind. I think, of all the Beatles, I'd get on best with Ringo Starr. He doesn't abuse his wife (McCartney), he never supported a communist party in Great Britain (Lennon), and he didn't seem excessively dedicated to the psychedelic lifestyle and sitar music (Harrison). He was a late addition, he was always in the background, but, being the drummer, was the heart of the band's live performances, and he seemed to be the most low-key. I bet he had great stories to tell, and I bet he'd talk to you like you mattered.
I also think Eddie Vedder would be a good guy to chill with. I've read some artcles about him and interviews with him. He seems like a chill kind of guy. From his music, he seems socially conscious, but not conspiratorial like Dylan. He has always seemed to me to be down to earth. Having said that, he's a rock icon, so I think he's got some stories to tell. He seems charismatic, but not too charismatic. I think the years spent fighting Ticketmaster and the music video phenomenon probably helped ground him.
Then there's Bono. The man seems to ooze charisma, but more importantly, he seems 100% real. When he was one-third of Time's People of the Year the article exposed him as a hard working, down-to-earth, sincere man. He's had more musical success than almost anyone else in the past 25 or so years, but he still fights for people who have nothing. I once stood about 30 feet from him and what a thrill! Not many people can inspire that kind of emotion in me. The funny thing is, at that time, I wasn't really a big U2 fan. It was when he appeared at the Liberal Leadership Convention in Toronto. He spoke flawlessly about debt and AIDS relief. I bet I could sit across a table from him for days without ever losing the wide-eyed-little-hockey-player-who-just-met-Wayne-Gretzky look.
Some other rockers I think I could be friends with:
- the entire roster of BNL
- Eric Clapton
- Chantel Kreviazuk (mostly because she's smokin' hot)
- Andre 3000 (OutKast)
- Amy Lee (Evanescence)
- Pete Doherty (Babyshambles/The Libertines)
- the Gallagher brothers (Oasis)
- Gene Simmons (Kiss)
21 March 2007
The Conservative Budget
I promised the impressive Mr. McIver (a future student, congrats) that I would look into the Tory budget and determine what all the thumbs down were about in an email I recieved. I will begin by summarizing the inverted pollices:
This all coming courtesy the Honourable John McCallum (Markham-Unionville).
So what is my take on the Conservative budget? I don't know. I'm no economist. Ask Pat what he thinks and you'll have the precise opposite of what I think. Okay, not really, but from what Mr McCallum (former Minister of National Revenue and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance) tells me, it sounds bad. What else would you expect from a righty like Stephen Harper?
Here's my half-assed assessment:
Bonne nuit.
- The budget did not deliver meaningful tax relief. "Tax relief for hard-working Canadians is a paltry $80 per tax-payer" (no word on what relief less industrious Canadians were given). In fact, the Conservatives have been raising taxes since they took power. In 2005 the lowest income tax rate was 15%. Today, it is 15.5%.
- The budget did not deliver on promoting environmental sustainability. The Conservatives cut our commitment to renewable energy by 1500 megawatts. They maintained tax breaks for the expansion of the (very dirty) oil sands projects (Harper helping out his Albertan allies). They reduced funding for environmental issues to the provinces by half. Finally, they replaced rewards for those who make energy saving changes with costly gimmicks.
- The budget did not deliver help to working families, students and Aboriginal Canadians. In 2006 the Conservatives promised 125,000 new childcare spaces over 5 years. They have delivered precisely zero in the past year. The so-called Universal Child Care benefit is fully taxable and the government will pull in an average of $400 per family thanks to this. The only money delivered to students will be given to the top 4000 graduate students (you included Pat?) while the rest of us get nothing. The Conservatives dropped the Kelowna Accord and replaced it with funding that is, comparatively, a "drop in the bucket."
This all coming courtesy the Honourable John McCallum (Markham-Unionville).
So what is my take on the Conservative budget? I don't know. I'm no economist. Ask Pat what he thinks and you'll have the precise opposite of what I think. Okay, not really, but from what Mr McCallum (former Minister of National Revenue and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance) tells me, it sounds bad. What else would you expect from a righty like Stephen Harper?
Here's my half-assed assessment:
- No help to those who need it, only to those who don't. Case and point: the Tories are giving money to the top 4000 grad students, all of whom are almost certainly getting other bursaries and being given various jobs by their schools to help them earn money to pay for tuition/living expenses/beer (I know WLU does that).
- The Tories raised taxes for those in the lowest tax bracket. That means the second poorest class of Canadians are bearing a larger percentage of the tax burden.
- As for his 1% decrease in GST, well, same thing. That reduction becomes more meaningful as you spend more money. If you spend $5000 (before taxes) a year on goods and services that are subject to the GST, you will have saved (roughly) $50 (wooohooo) thanks to this decrease. If you spend $15,000 (before taxes) a year on goods and services that are subject to the GST, you will have saved (roughly) $150. So the more you spend the more you save. Who do you think spends more: someone making $20,ooo per annum or someone making $200,000 per annum? I would assume the latter. If I'm correct, that means Harper's GST cut benefits the rich much more than the average Canadian.
- The budget maintained tax breaks for oil sands expansion. Why? Let's (for now) forget that the oil sands are killing our environment. If the oil sands are really worth expanding (i.e. they are financial viable; profitable), why do they need/deserve tax breaks? Take a look at all the most profitable companies in the world and I bet you find a whole lot of big oil companies that are conducting business in the oil sands region. But, hey, who cares if they're killing Earth and raking in dough like Daniel Negreanu at a Texas Hold'em tournament? Give them tax breaks anyway. It's not like those breaks are coming out of the average Canadian's pocket right? It is? Shitty.
- The Tories are giving money to families for child care. That's nice of them. But you say the money they hand over is taxable? That means whatever they give Canadians, they get a certain percentage of it back. Meaning what they promise is a lot more than what they're actually giving. Dirty.
- Ever wonder why the Canadian government isn't trusted by its negotiating partners? First we sign the Kyoto Accord, then Harper comes in and scraps it. "I know we promised we'd do this, but I'm not really keen on that anymore, so we're not going to do this instead." Then we sign the Kelowna Accord only to have Harper come in and scrap it. "I know we promised we'd do this..." you know the rest. It is a fundamental principle of international politics, of politics plain and simple, that agreements are binding on the state, not the government, meaning a change in government does NOT void those agreements. You simply cannot have agreements being signed then scrapped everytime a government changes. For you business types (here's looking at you Pat) consider what happens when a business changes ownership. Is that business still bound by contracts entered into by the previous owners? I don't know about all contracts, but any collective agreement (i.e. unionized businesses) remains in force, as do all employment contracts (i.e. non-unionized businesses). The same for government agreements like the Kyoto and Kelowna Accords. Unless you're the Harper government, then you don't care. Because you're stupid. That's right, the Tory government is stupid. Morons.
Bonne nuit.
Politicians are Liars
Here is an article from Psychology Today that I found very interesting:
For many Americans, the words "government official" and "lying bastard" are practically synonymous. Now Colgate University psychologists report that leadership skills and the ability to deceive do, in fact, go hand in hand. And the connection begins earlier than you might think.
The researchers gave preschoolers a drink that was either sweet or tart. Then they asked the kids to say that the drink was sweet--even if it wasn't. The best deceivers, it turned out, were the same kids who had emerged as leaders during an earlier play period. Their superior social skills and ability to manipulate others helped them both lie convincingly and attain top ranking in the playground pecking order, report Caroline Keaating, Ph.D., and Karen Heltman, Ph.D., in Personality and Psychology Bulletin (Vol. 20, No. 3). A second experiment, this time with college students, produced similara (sic) results, particularly with men.
So with presidential primary season upon us, a little skepticism might be a good idea. The fact that leaders are masters of deception doesn't mean that politicians actually lie more often than the rest of us, Keating cautions. "But if they did, we wouldn't be able to tell because they are better at it."
Here's the article as published by psychologytoday.com.
For many Americans, the words "government official" and "lying bastard" are practically synonymous. Now Colgate University psychologists report that leadership skills and the ability to deceive do, in fact, go hand in hand. And the connection begins earlier than you might think.
The researchers gave preschoolers a drink that was either sweet or tart. Then they asked the kids to say that the drink was sweet--even if it wasn't. The best deceivers, it turned out, were the same kids who had emerged as leaders during an earlier play period. Their superior social skills and ability to manipulate others helped them both lie convincingly and attain top ranking in the playground pecking order, report Caroline Keaating, Ph.D., and Karen Heltman, Ph.D., in Personality and Psychology Bulletin (Vol. 20, No. 3). A second experiment, this time with college students, produced similara (sic) results, particularly with men.
So with presidential primary season upon us, a little skepticism might be a good idea. The fact that leaders are masters of deception doesn't mean that politicians actually lie more often than the rest of us, Keating cautions. "But if they did, we wouldn't be able to tell because they are better at it."
Here's the article as published by psychologytoday.com.
20 March 2007
Only Read this if You're a Hard-Core Politico...or Sadistic
I've had a conversation (over and over) about the original intent of the writers of our Constitution as regards the nature of power in Canada, specifically whether the authors of the Constitution Act, 1867 meant government power to be centralized in Ottawa or decentralized among the provinces. At the centre of this debate are, of course, sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act. Here they are (if you're interested in reading what I have to say, but aren't interested in reading Sections 91 and 92, just scroll down to where it says "Here's where the article really starts" in bold, capital letters):
POWERS OF THE PARLIAMENT
91. It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces; and for greater Certainty, but not so as to restrict the Generality of the foregoing Terms of this Section, it is hereby declared that (notwithstanding anything in this Act) the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to all Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
1. Repealed. (44)
1A. The Public Debt and Property. (45)
2. The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.
2A. Unemployment insurance. (46)
3. The raising of Money by any Mode or System of Taxation.
4. The borrowing of Money on the Public Credit.
5. Postal Service.
6. The Census and Statistics.
7. Militia, Military and Naval Service, and Defence.
8. The fixing of and providing for the Salaries and Allowances of Civil and other Officers of the Government of Canada.
9. Beacons, Buoys, Lighthouses, and Sable Island.
10. Navigation and Shipping.
11. Quarantine and the Establishment and Maintenance of Marine Hospitals.
12. Sea Coast and Inland Fisheries.
13. Ferries between a Province and any British or Foreign Country or between Two Provinces. 14. Currency and Coinage.
15. Banking, Incorporation of Banks, and the Issue of Paper Money.
16. Savings Banks.
17. Weights and Measures.
18. Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes.
19. Interest.
20. Legal Tender.
21. Bankruptcy and Insolvency.
22. Patents of Invention and Discovery.
23. Copyrights.
24. Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians.
25. Naturalization and Aliens.
26. Marriage and Divorce.
27. The Criminal Law, except the Constitution of Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction, but including the Procedure in Criminal Matters.
28. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Penitentiaries.
29. Such Classes of Subjects as are expressly excepted in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces.
And any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section shall not be deemed to come within the Class of Matters of a local or private Nature comprised in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces. (47)
EXCLUSIVE POWERS OF PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES
92. In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
1. Repealed. (48)
2. Direct Taxation within the Province in order to the raising of a Revenue for Provincial Purposes.
3. The borrowing of Money on the sole Credit of the Province
4. The Establishment and Tenure of Provincial Offices and the Appointment and Payment of Provincial Officers.
5. The Management and Sale of the Public Lands belonging to the Province and of the Timber and Wood thereon.
6. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Public and Reformatory Prisons in and for the Province.
7. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Hospitals, Asylums, Charities, and Eleemosynary Institutions in and for the Province, other than Marine Hospitals.
8. Municipal Institutions in the Province.
9. Shop, Saloon, Tavern, Auctioneer, and other Licences in order to the raising of a Revenue for Provincial, Local, or Municipal Purposes.
10. Local Works and Undertakings other than such as are of the following Classes:
(a) Lines of Steam or other Ships, Railways, Canals, Telegraphs, and other Works and Undertakings connecting the Province with any other or others of the Provinces, or extending beyond the Limits of the Province:
(b) Lines of Steam Ships between the Province and any British or Foreign Country:
(c) Such Works as, although wholly situate within the Province, are before or after their Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces.
11. The Incorporation of Companies with Provincial Objects.
12. The Solemnization of Marriage in the Province.
13. Property and Civil Rights in the Province.
14. The Administration of Justice in the Province, including the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction, and including Procedure in Civil Matters in those Courts.
15. The Imposition of Punishment by Fine, Penalty, or Imprisonment for enforcing any Law of the Province made in relation to any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section.
16. Generally all Matters of a merely local or private Nature in the Province.
(Section 92A be damned...for now...for our purposes here.)
If you don't trust my faithful reproduction of these sections, go here. I don't know why I didn't just use a link in the first place, but it's all here now, so it's staying. If you're wondering what the numbers in brackets after some of the lines are, they're links, and you can follow them if you follow the link I gave you above.
For future reference, "Parliament" = federal government, while "Legislature" (generally) = provincial government (that's just basic Canadian political knowledge if you're a nerd like me, so I'm clarifying for the vast majority of people who aren't so nerdy).
*****
HERE'S WHERE THE ARITCLE REALLY STARTS
*****
So, do these sections indicate that the authors intended Canada to be centralized or decentralized? I will argue they wanted Canada to be centralized. I'll start at the top.
POWERS OF THE PARLIAMENT
91. It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces; and for greater Certainty, but not so as to restrict the Generality of the foregoing Terms of this Section, it is hereby declared that (notwithstanding anything in this Act) the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to all Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
1. Repealed. (44)
1A. The Public Debt and Property. (45)
2. The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.
2A. Unemployment insurance. (46)
3. The raising of Money by any Mode or System of Taxation.
4. The borrowing of Money on the Public Credit.
5. Postal Service.
6. The Census and Statistics.
7. Militia, Military and Naval Service, and Defence.
8. The fixing of and providing for the Salaries and Allowances of Civil and other Officers of the Government of Canada.
9. Beacons, Buoys, Lighthouses, and Sable Island.
10. Navigation and Shipping.
11. Quarantine and the Establishment and Maintenance of Marine Hospitals.
12. Sea Coast and Inland Fisheries.
13. Ferries between a Province and any British or Foreign Country or between Two Provinces. 14. Currency and Coinage.
15. Banking, Incorporation of Banks, and the Issue of Paper Money.
16. Savings Banks.
17. Weights and Measures.
18. Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes.
19. Interest.
20. Legal Tender.
21. Bankruptcy and Insolvency.
22. Patents of Invention and Discovery.
23. Copyrights.
24. Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians.
25. Naturalization and Aliens.
26. Marriage and Divorce.
27. The Criminal Law, except the Constitution of Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction, but including the Procedure in Criminal Matters.
28. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Penitentiaries.
29. Such Classes of Subjects as are expressly excepted in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces.
And any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section shall not be deemed to come within the Class of Matters of a local or private Nature comprised in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces. (47)
EXCLUSIVE POWERS OF PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES
92. In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,
1. Repealed. (48)
2. Direct Taxation within the Province in order to the raising of a Revenue for Provincial Purposes.
3. The borrowing of Money on the sole Credit of the Province
4. The Establishment and Tenure of Provincial Offices and the Appointment and Payment of Provincial Officers.
5. The Management and Sale of the Public Lands belonging to the Province and of the Timber and Wood thereon.
6. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Public and Reformatory Prisons in and for the Province.
7. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Hospitals, Asylums, Charities, and Eleemosynary Institutions in and for the Province, other than Marine Hospitals.
8. Municipal Institutions in the Province.
9. Shop, Saloon, Tavern, Auctioneer, and other Licences in order to the raising of a Revenue for Provincial, Local, or Municipal Purposes.
10. Local Works and Undertakings other than such as are of the following Classes:
(a) Lines of Steam or other Ships, Railways, Canals, Telegraphs, and other Works and Undertakings connecting the Province with any other or others of the Provinces, or extending beyond the Limits of the Province:
(b) Lines of Steam Ships between the Province and any British or Foreign Country:
(c) Such Works as, although wholly situate within the Province, are before or after their Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces.
11. The Incorporation of Companies with Provincial Objects.
12. The Solemnization of Marriage in the Province.
13. Property and Civil Rights in the Province.
14. The Administration of Justice in the Province, including the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction, and including Procedure in Civil Matters in those Courts.
15. The Imposition of Punishment by Fine, Penalty, or Imprisonment for enforcing any Law of the Province made in relation to any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section.
16. Generally all Matters of a merely local or private Nature in the Province.
(Section 92A be damned...for now...for our purposes here.)
If you don't trust my faithful reproduction of these sections, go here. I don't know why I didn't just use a link in the first place, but it's all here now, so it's staying. If you're wondering what the numbers in brackets after some of the lines are, they're links, and you can follow them if you follow the link I gave you above.
For future reference, "Parliament" = federal government, while "Legislature" (generally) = provincial government (that's just basic Canadian political knowledge if you're a nerd like me, so I'm clarifying for the vast majority of people who aren't so nerdy).
*****
HERE'S WHERE THE ARITCLE REALLY STARTS
*****
So, do these sections indicate that the authors intended Canada to be centralized or decentralized? I will argue they wanted Canada to be centralized. I'll start at the top.
- The "POGG" Clause. "It shall be lawful for [the federal government] to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada". This is the Canadian equivalent of the 'national interest' clause in the American Constitution. Washington has made extensive use of the national interest clause so much so that the US is now centralized even though it was initially conceived as a loose union of independent states not unlike the European Union. The Canadian government has not similarly taken advantage of the POGG clause largely due to pressure placed upon the legislative and judiciary branches of the state to recognize duality (English/French) and regionalism.
- The expansive preamble of section 91. "...and for greater Certainty, but not so as to restrict the Generality of the foregoing Terms of this Section, it is hereby declared that (notwithstanding anything in this Act) the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to all Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated". This clearly indicates that the ferderal government has exclusive power to legislate regarding all matters not delineated specifically in section 92. It also specifically notes that the list which follows is general and not exhaustive (i.e. "not so as to restrict the Generality...").
- The preamble to section 92. "In each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated". This preamble is highly restrictive. There is nothing to indicate that this list is not exhaustive. Even in the preamble to section 91 you see that the list in section 92 was designed to be exhaustive.
- Section 92A(3): "Nothing in subsection (2) derogates from the authority of Parliament to enact laws in relation to the matters referred to in that subsection and, where such a law of Parliament and a law of a province conflict, the law of Parliament prevails to the extent of the conflict." Specifically the latter part, which reads "where such a law of Parliament and a law of a province conflict, the law of Parliament prevails to the extent of the conflict." This subsection only refers specifically to renewable resources, but the idea that federal laws supercede provincial laws is a clear indication that the authors intended the federal government to be superior, and therefore, Canada to be more centralized.*
You don't have to take my word for it. I tracked down my copy of the nauseatingly boring Comparing Federal Systems, Second Edition, by Ronald L. Watts.** The book was produced for the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario. It was "required" reading for one of my courses at WLU (though it looks to be in near mint condition...). According to Watts, "The original 1867 constitution was marked by strong central powers including some powers enabling the federal government to override the provinces in certain circumstances...with the major residual powers assigned to the federal government." He very clearly states that the Constitution's original form was unequivocally centralized.***
There is no denying that the Constitution Act, 1867 was designed to centralize power under the federal government. Mr. McIver, I rest my case.
Well, not quite. Mr. McIver is going to ask how the Liberal Party could possibly consider something like child care to be within federal jurisdiction. To help answer, here is Section 93(4):
"In case any such Provincial Law as from Time to Time seems to the Governor General in Council requisite for the due Execution of the Provisions of this Section is not made, or in case any Decision of the Governor General in Council on any Appeal under this Section is not duly executed by the proper Provincial Authority in that Behalf, then and in every such Case, and as far only as the Circumstances of each Case require, the Parliament of Canada may make remedial Laws for the due Execution of the Provisions of this Section and of any Decision of the Governor General in Council under this Section."
Basically, if a province does not make a law about education, "the Parliament of Canada may make remedial Laws for the due Execution of the Provisions of this Section." If you're like me and you can't find anything about child care in the Constitution Act, 1867 then you cannot logically come to any other conclusion then that the federal government has the authority to enact legislation regarding child care. Thanks to section 93(4) this remains true even if you're like Mr. McIver and you don't buy in to the whole "including, but not limited to" interpretation of the preamble to section 91 (that is assuming you think child care could reasonably be considered to fall under the category of education).
Case closed.****
*****
* If you are interested in reading the rest of the Constitution Act, 1867, I've been told (by various professors) that you'll find other similar evidence.
** Watts is no kook, he apparently wins awards.
*** All this is on page 24 if you're interested.
**** Booooyaaaa
btw - I hope I have the right to reproduce sections of our Constitution. It's not covered under any copyright or intellectual property laws, is it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)