Contracts, Cash, and Gold

Good evening!

You know, at first I thought I'd do something nice and light-hearted.  Some music, some laughs, and so on, but then I said nah.    Instead tonight we here at Raccoon Inc. will embark on some more pontification.  There are a few things that I'd like to comment on tonight.  So I will.  So there.


MADE TO BE BROKEN

Man!  Everywhere you look lately this asshole's back in the news.

There's a good, flattering picture of the silver fox.

Yeah...  I gotta say.  I'm not a real fan of the guy.  I mean, I respect my fellow Commonwealth brethren and all, and shedding light on government shenanigans is boffo stuff, but yeah...  Not a fan.  Oh, and before I go any further, please take a listen to this here track while you read.  It should add a little tone to the following.

So, he's stewing in the Ecuadorian embassy (of all places!) and he's been granted asylum by the nation, but he has to leave London first some how.  If only there was a way...

If you have a problem, if no one else can help, and if you can find them....maybe you can hire The A-Team.

No, nothing comes to mind.  He's screwed.  Well, but, here's what really irritates me.  I remember seeing this poster on the news.  Something about "don't shoot the messenger" or something like that.

That picture is actually in full colour.

Yes, that's the one!  Well, that sounds nice, but give me a break.  We're talking about Julian Assange here.  Mr. Wikileaks.  He knew what he was getting into when he got into the business of procuring state secrets and broadcasting them here, there, and everywhere.  True, he's airing everyone else's dirty laundry, but there is a price to be paid - and that's not what I'm upset with.  What I'm upset with is that they make him look like some sort of hero...

My favourite Disney movie of all time.

...when the fact of the matter is that he took a trip to Sweden and couldn't keep it in his pants.  So he's not really so much this...

Better call the Mad Hatter.

...as he is this...

Really, though, living in France is its own punishment.

There is this... thing where people with lots of fame that do bad things seem to have the gravity of their misgivings obfuscated by their fame.  You know, never mind that he allegedly sexually assaulted someone in Sweden.  Oh no, this is just an American plot to bring the treasonous coward to the gallows.

American lawmakers as seen through the eyes of Assange.

What a load of crap!  And then there's this other asshole over here!

Arrrrgh!

This Paul Watson (CanCon!) asshole thinks he's some sort of cross between Pamela Anderson (and more CanCon!) and Hayreddin Barbarossa.  So, like, what?  A renegade environmentalist... pirate?  That skips bail in Germany?  To... somewhere?  Like, Tortuga, or something?  Because..?  Sharkfinning is so bad that I can do whatever I want to stop it?  This is such crap!  Let me spell it all out for you in one word: Crito.

If Paul Watson grew a full beard and removed his hairpiece...

So, for all of his famous (or infamous) discourses around Athens, Socrates was charged with "corrupting the youth and impiety", sent to trial, found guilty, and sentenced to death.  The night before his death, his wealthy friend Crito visits him in his cell and says "Don't you worry none, Socrates old friend, I've got everything figured out.  I have every guard bribed from here to Memphis and we can high tail it outta here and head straight to Thessaly where they'll be happy to have you there, so quit moping around in there and let's go, ok?"  And what does Socrates say?  He says no.  He's not going anywhere.  He's going to face his judgement with dignity.  "What?  Are you crazy?" Crito asks.  "Enough clowning around!  They're gonna pour hemlock in your ear come sunrise, so we really gotta get moving here.  Let's go!"  But Socrates stayed put and explained to Crito that that's not the point.  The point is that because Socrates lived in Athens, he had to live by Athens' rules.  He couldn't just pick and choose which rules he lived with and which ones he didn't.  No one is above the law.  When you choose to live in a city, you are a party to the social contract which binds society together in a civilized fashion and to flee the sentence that was brought about fairly by the people of the city would be to breach that contract.  Eventually Crito gave up and Socrates was put to death in the morning.

Now, the purpose of this story is the illustrate this social contract.  If we want to be a member of a society we must live by that society's rules; otherwise there is chaos.  By not facing his accusers in Sweden, Assange is breaking his social contract, and by evading justice once again Watson is breaking his social contract, as well.  Though both men have laudable causes (at least laudable by some), when this contract is broken, so therefore is the trust that one may have with their cause.  Let me use another current example to illustrate.

In the Jailhouse Now, indeed.

So when Pussy Riot violated their nation's laws standing up for what they believed in, did they flee justice and, I dunno, sneak across the border into Latvia?  No, they stayed put, stood trial, were convicted and sentenced to two years.  This is what makes their message so much more powerful.  The social contract that was violated for Assange and Watson remains intact for Samutsevitch, Alyokhina, and Tolokonnikova (yes!  more CanCon!  sorta...).  While Pussy Riot violated the laws of the state, they faced the full weight of justice (and then some) which makes them and their cause all the more palpable, sincere, and relatable.

Breaking the law is fine.  Breaking the social contract is the real crime.


MO MONEY, MO PROBLEMS

I have to say this story took me completely by surprise this week.  Surprise and dismay, honestly.

GENTLEMEN, BEHOLD!  THE NEW CANADIAN $100 BILL!

Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!

Neat, huh?  There's some insulin there and a heart thing and a DNA thing.  And a woman (that looks A LOT like Helen Hunt) looking into a microscope.  Well, the woman has been a source of... acrimony?  Is that a good word for this?  Nonsense?  Hand wringing?  I'm at a bit of a loss as to how to frame this.  Because it's so weird, you see.  It's very odd!

Here's what happened.  The above pictured new $100.00 isn't the original version of the banknote.  An earlier version of the note had the woman at the microscope appearing more... Asian and less Helen Hunt-ish.  The reason for the change was because of the results of a focus group...

...in Montréal...

 ...which found that the suggested image of the Asian woman didn't appear to represent Canada, while another focus group...

...in Fredericton...

...stated that  “the inclusion of an Asian without representing any other ethnicities was seen to be contentious".

Before I get into the meat and potatoes of my argument here, I would like to highlight a valid point that has come about as a result of this: if you are putting a bottle of insulin on the note, why not just slap on a picture of Banting and Best?  On one hand, duh!  On the other hand, I think that what they're trying to get across is more than just the invention of insulin, but the legacy of medical research as a whole that Canada has produced as a nation, and so in that case I see their point.

Now, this is where it gets silly.  I'd like to refute the idea that an Asian woman does not represent Canada, because...

The 26th Governor General of Canada since Confederation.

...not only is it wrong, it's farcical.  What the hell do you mean "an Asian woman does not represent Canada"!?  That is absurd!  This is 2012 we're in right now.  Is there still an idea in this country that just because the first, I dunno, two... three... seventeen prime ministers were (often drunken) Scotsmen that to be "Canadian" is to be a WASP?  For goodness sake, we're not too afraid to have Adrienne Clarkson and Michaëlle Jean as Governor General, but put an Asian looking woman on the banknote and all of a sudden the sky is falling?  I see comments people are making saying "Well, multiculturalism is a failed project in Europe, so it's about time we faced facts here in Canada."

So, once they decided to axe the "Asian" woman on the $100 bill, in their place they placed a woman with a more "neutral" ethnicity.

REVENGE OF THE $100 WOMAN!

Hey!  Wait a minute!  She's not ethnically neutral...  She's not ethnically neutral at all!  She's pretty transparently Caucasian!  What the hell?  Is the argument that "Caucasian" is to "Neutral" as "Vanilla" is to "Neutral"?  Because it's not.  Vanilla is vanilla.  It's a flavour!  It's a type of something.  It's not a blank pallatte.  Good grief!

This isn't just racist pandering, this is disheartening.  We as a nation are better than this.  I'll put this simply.  Canada is the result of a British and French colonization and forcible annexation of lands that belonged to the native people.  Since the colonial days it has become a safe haven for refugees from around there world where people can go to enjoy a better life.  My family, like many others, ended up in Canada as guests because Canada was nice enough to take us in when Europe was busy trying to annihilate itself.  The idea of a multicultural Canada was just fine for them then when Germany was trying to take over the world, but now that things are comfortable here we are saying that there are refugees and then there are refugees, if you know what I mean.  Or put another way, there are Canadians, and then there are foreigners that live in Canada.  This type of thinking isn't just incorrect, it's (as much as I like Helen Hunt) shameful and should prove to be a very serious lesson that even in this day and age with the melting pot that our society has become, some groups are still way out of focus.


WE ARE THE .5%

Now that the Olympics in London are over and done with, I've been hearing a lot of analysis of Canada's placing at the Olympics.  To be sure, Canada ended up with one gold medal, five silver, and twelve bronze for a total of eighteen.  Personally, I don't have a problem with it whether they rack up 100 medals or none.  Our athletes did their best, win or lose.  Hey, I didn't spend unimaginable hours on a trampoline to become the best in the world, so who am I to be critical in any way of our athletes' performances?  However, there are some that are quite critical.

Dave Feschuk of the Toronto Star writes:

"Congratulations, Canada’s Olympic team! You just followed up your country’s greatest sporting moment, the 2010 Vancouver Olympics, by finishing tied with Uganda, Uzbekistan and Grenada in the gold-medal count at the 2012 London Games!"

...and goes on to say...

"...any way you spin it, the mission has not been accomplished."

Nicholas Cotsonika of Yahoo Sports has a little bit of a patronizing article stating:

"By one measure, these Games were a disappointment for Canada. One gold? That's the lowest total since 1976, when Canada was shut out on home soil in Montreal, and that's a poor return on millions of dollars of real money that was spent to develop these athletes -- some of it government money. The Own the Podium program is missing something -- the "w." Canadians were on the podium, but they didn't own it. With five silvers and 12 bronzes, you might call this the Bronze Age."

Ah yes!  The Bronze Age!  Back when the javelin was serious business!

More patronizing still is Matthew Fisher's article in the Windsor Star:

"Worse than Canada's disappointing result is that fact that these results do not appear to have perturbed the federal government, the COC or a congenitally forgiving media and public. Meanwhile, in Australia - with 40-per-cent fewer people than Canada - it is a national scandal that its team only won seven gold and 35 medals."

There's more negative stuff out there and it's easy enough to find, so I'll leave it at this.

Now, let's see here.  The population of the earth is currently estimated to be 7,034,000,000.  The population of Canada is estimated to be 34,892,000.  Rounding up that's .5% of the world's population.  The total number of all medals handed out at the 2012 Summer Games in London was 300.  If you take Canada's proportionate share of the earth's population and round up to the nearest medal, we're due to win two.  Two (2).  1.488 to be precise.

Pretend that these lemons are Olympic medals!  Why lemons?  We were all out of sour grapes.

You know, you can spin all this "wealthy industrialized nation" lines you want, all the money and science and training in the world would not make me medal in triple jump.  I was born with a bad ankle.  I just can't do it.  It takes a certain type of human, a certain biomechanical set of conditions to be able to do something "the best".

For example, Rosannagh MacLennan...

...has proven herself to be the greatest trampolinist in the world because she has the right conditioning, agility and physical structure to be a great in her sport.  However, I highly doubt that she could ever lift 255 kg. over her head.  No amount of science or funding in the world could help with that because she just wasn't built that way and she just simply can't do it.

Now, Holley Mangold...

...can lift 255 kg. over her head (aka. five Rosannagh MacLennans), but I doubt that any amount of money or training would make her competitive in the 100 m. dash because that's just not the way that she is designed, either.  She was just plain not built to be a sprinter.  Get what I'm saying here?

So money and facilities, while they help, still need elite athletes to utilize them and we have approximately .5% of the earth's supply.  Winning zero to one medal I could see being a disappointment in the grand scheme of things, but winning two or more (or 18!) is a great success for our great nation.  So stop complaining that we don't have all the marbles and say thank you to all of our athletes that have given up their lives for their sport and, win or lose, have made us all proud.

And that about does it for tonight.  Thank you very much for reading and have a good night!

The Passionate Imbiscile

Good evening!

Sorry for the delay on creating a new blog.  Things have been busy lately and I've been working on writing short fiction and - holy crap!  Over a thousand hits!  Zowie!  Well over a thousand hits!  Thanks everyone watching!  I'll keep up the good work.  But for now, the editorial board is back onto serious, serious, dread serious topics.

You know what?  I love democracy.  I really do.  In the words of Winston Churchill, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."  I believe this to be true.  Democracy can be dirty, smelly, ugly, and downright repugnant, but at least it's not guaranteed to be.  I also believe that if you're eligible to vote, you're eligible to be head of state because it takes all kinds to make this whole big machine work.  The downside to this, however is the following question: Who elected this moron?  Mmm...  Good question.

Originally, tonight's blog was going to go about extolling the virtues of Rob Ford (no easy feat there), but a larger theme began to materialize:  what's so wrong about having a passionate idiot in charge?  So, with that in mind, let's put up the one and only Rob Ford up against some other notable idiots and see how they stack up in terms of passion, leadership, and other fine traits befitting a leader.

DEFINING TERMS

By dictionary.com an idiot is defined (definition #2) thusly:

Psychology . (no longer in technical use; considered offensive) a person of the lowest order in a former and discarded classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25.

Whoahoho!  Slow down there Jason Statham.  Where's the fire at, huh?

Kidding aside, I have put a lot of thought into this and, really, calling someone an idiot or dumb or what-have-you is pretty much one of the worst things that you can say about someone.  For example, a tiger gets by on speed and stealth and teeth and fangs.

Well, some tigers get by on speed and stealth.  Some don't, relying instead on pure, raw power.

But without teeth and claws they're not nearly as dangerous (hence the phrase 'toothless tiger') because those are the tools at the animal's disposal that it uses to get ahead.  Scorpions are poisonous, falcons fly real good, jellyfish sting and are gooey, and elephants are bloody huge.  But what are humans?  Not that big, not that strong, not that fast, not that poisonous, and pretty bland to look at, otherwise.  However, they're smart.  Real smart.  How smart?

A toad can't really operate a motor vehicle on their own accord.

That smart.  So smart in fact that we take pity on the other creatures and lend them our traits so that they too can roar around in a Bentley, if only in our imaginations.  Now, if you deprive a human of their intelligence, what, I ask you, do they have left to fend for themselves with as an animal?  Not much.  Because intelligence is as integral to the human existence as poison is to the scorpion, and when you take it away you seemingly dehumanize them.  On the other side of the equation a very smart human being seems more completely human than someone of average intelligence.  So when you call someone dumb, you're really calling them the worst possible thing that you can call them, which is weird because we do it all the time!  Making someone else look like an idiot is a massive feather of pride for a lot of people.  Go figure.

As for "passion" the definition (#1) is as follows:

any powerful or compelling emotion or feeling, as love or hate.

Simple enough.  Fire!  Guts!  Moxy!  All that nice, good stuff.  But now for one last definition: leadership (definition #2).

ability to lead: As early as sixth grade she displayed remarkable leadership potential. Synonyms: authoritativeness, influence, command, effectiveness; sway, clout.

Clout!  I've always liked that word.  Clout!  It's one of those nice German words that has some oomph behind it.  So now that we've taken a look at the three principles here, it's time no move on to our first challenger.


BUILT FORD TOUGH vs. LASTMAN STANDING

Oof.  Geez.  Yeesh.  There is a tough task laid out ahead of us, but if you're up to it, so am I.  Our first exercise will attempt to compare apples to apples.  Ready?  Alright.  Let's start with a pop quiz.  What happens when you take a...

I don't wanna slag other contractors, but you know...  Just saying...

...and you mix it with a...

Actually, my apartment is precisely one step up from living in a van down by the river.

..?

Anybody?

...

Anybody?

...

The correct answer is...

Bah ha ha ha ha!  Respect for taxpayers?  Bah ha ha ha ha!

And you know what?  Add in a dash of this as well...

No, Ms. Stintz, I expect you to approve the subway plan!

But when you add Goldfinger into the equation then this jolly, good-natured fool...

Gah ha ha ha ha!  Can someone hand me a Kleenex?  Gah ha ha ha ha!

...turns into this:

The angriest man in Toronto. 

Now, I want to make something clear before I progress any further: I am not writing this post just to slag Rob Ford.

Fwa ha ha ha ha!  A taxpayer funded Kleenex!  Fwa ha ha ha ha!

No, seriously.  On the contrary I'd like to take an objective view at his mayoralty and his smarts, his leadership and his passion for the great city of Toronto.  Starting with the smarts, I think we can all agree that he's smarter than the average bear, right?











...




















..........
















Right..?












...

*tick tock tick tock tick tock...*

..........













Hmm.














.....














...........












Anyone..?
















...













Guess not.  It's kind of a generally accepted fact that he's not the sharpest tool in the shed.  More brawn than brain, sure.  Prime suspect.

So why am I even concerned about this clown at all?  Well, firstly, I used to live near Toronto once upon a time and I've visited it several times, so I have a certain level of affection for it.  It's a nice, modern city with a lot of character.  Secondly, it's the largest city in Canada and not by a little bit.  So like New York in America, London in the United Kingdom, and Tokyo in Japan, to a great degree it acts as the broadcast tower for culture to be shone across the world.  Like it or not, what happens in Toronto matters in the big picture.  Therefore the mayor of Toronto better goddamn know that they  say or do transcends above and beyond their fair city and onto the international stage.  Fact: one in six Canadians live in Toronto's metropolitan area.  This is as opposed to the one in ten thousand that live in...

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

To demonstrate my case I present you the challenger: SARS.

This is not a communism infiltration map.

Remember 2003?  SARS?  The city of Toronto was being besieged as the North American ground zero for the SARS epidemic.  Countries were advising people not to come here lest you die a gruesome, near instant death.  In this bleakest of hours for the city, who emerged as the unlikeliest of heroes?

Nooooooooooooooobody!

That's not true at all, Mel!  You know, people called you an embarrassing buffoon, and probably still do, but if there's one thing I saw from you, especially during the SARS outbreak, was passion.  Real honest to goodness passion.  True, true, he did say he never heard of the World Health Organization before on CNN and seemed to embarrass people all over town (and country), but at the same time, there was sincerity in his anger.  Admirable sincerity.  If there's one trait that I can think of that exemplifies a great politician, it's sincerity.  When he was at that press conference, he was steamed.  Pissed. 

"Am I sick? You're darn right I'm sick… I have never been more sick because I've never been so angry in my life."

What was he sick with?  He had been scaling back his mayoral duties due to having been infected with Hepatitis C, an ailment which ended his political career that year.  He came back, fit to be tied over the hammering his city was taking over the SARS epidemic.

So while many pundits and geniuses saw a raving dimwit embarrass everyone on CNN unleashing a diatribe against the World Health Organization, it turns out that not only was in not in vain, but he was stupid like a fox.  After the WHO got taken to the woodshed for its declaring travel advisories to Toronto which ultimately did more harm than good, later on when the Swine Flu epidemic broke out, well, the WHO got cold feet when it came to issuing travel advisories to affected regions, lest some other nincompoop furniture salesman lash out at them.  In the end, not so dumb after all.  Passion and leadership when it mattered.

Now back to Mr. Ford.

It's... uh... up there somewhere.  On the roof of some adjacent building, I guess.

One of the most contentious issues of his young mayoralty is his stance on GLBT issues.  First question: can you be conservative and support gay, lesbian, bi, and transgender awareness in your community?  Answer: yes.  Proof:

I find it very difficult to say anything at all bad about Joe Clark.  I really do.  Oh, and that's the Calgary Pride Parade by the way, and not just a very stylish trip to Zellers.

But you know what that takes?  Leadership.  Some courage, too.  I acknowledge that it's not easy to reconcile "football coach" and "GLBT supporter", but it can be done and has been done.  Brian Burke, anyone?  Sure.  You're not even a trailblazer anymore.  The bar's already been set.  And if you're uncomfortable with the more flamboyant parts of the culture (and hell, I'm uncomfortable with a lot of the bizarre stuff that makes the highlight reels of pride parades), that's fine.  I don't care about that.  Here's what I care about: when you're alone, and you feel alone, and you feel different, and you're scared, and you're sad, and you're broken up, and you're lost, having a mayor that looks and acts like every bully you've had to deal with along the road who takes mean jabs at you at the best of times and stays silent when you need help at the worst of times is absolutely, positively no way to run a railroad.  Subway be damned, gravy train be damned.  If you can't show leadership where leadership is in sorry need and short supply, and you're making wise-ass jokes about needle exchanges and George Smitherman, and it has never been easier to make even the smallest of gestures to reassure a population that you give a damn, then you are totally and completely bankrupt of leadership skill.

Eureka!

What makes Rob Ford angriest?  Someone comes near his house.
What makes Mel Lastman angriest?  Someone slags his city.

Point: Lastman.


GEORGE W. BUSH vs. ROB F. FORD

Now, I was going to start out and put two people head-to-head on this one, but I think that we can all agree that this time we are dealing with the one, the only, the incomparable...

Bah ha ha ha ha!  Respect for taxpayers!  That's rich!  Bah ha ha ha ha!

Boy, is it ever universally agreed that George W. Bush is not that bright.  His butchery of the English language is legendary.

"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream."

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

"They misunderestimated me."

And so on and so forth. 

Now, one thing these two have in common is their folksy, everyday guy, average slob-on-the-street charm, and I dig that.  Like I say, I believe that if you can vote, you should be able to be Prime Minister.  There are lots of pictures of them looking anything from goofy to magisterial, so let's go the other direction and have a sneer-off.  Up first, the challenger, George Bush the Younger.

Ooo!  Pretty tough!  Not a bad opening salvo.  "THE DECIDER".  Nice.  What else ya got?

This one's pretty good, too.  Got some edge to it, though.  Not too shabby.  Gimme some more, though.  Play it up a bit.

Now you're talking.  Say, that's a pretty good Prince Charles impression.  Nice.  Now let's have one last one and give it all you got.

Oooo!  I do like that one!  Arrogant yet cocky.  Smug yet cocksure.  The editorial board here at Raccoon Inc. gives it a two thumbs up.  However, we all know that Bush was much more of a goofy-grinner than a serious-scowler and there was a good reason for that.  He had someone to do that for him.

All hail the king.

Alright, Rob.  Now.  Let's have a good sneer for the camera.

Ah, that's pretty weak.  Come on!  Put some backbone into it!

Better.  Better.  I can see some contempt there.  Good good, but I think you can do better.

Oooo...  Getting better.  I do detect shades of the great sneermaster Charles Grodin in that one, but let's see if we can take this to another level.

Sweet ass!  A drive by sneering!  A modern take on a classic.  But aw come on!  Drop the other shoe!  Gimme everything you got!

That's the money shot!  Now that's a snarl that'd make Charles Vane shiver in his timbers.

Now to get down to brass tacks.  If Ford and Bush have one thing in common it's that both of their last names are words.  But another thing is that they are both hard right conservatives seemingly cut from very similar cloth.  Mel Lastman could be conservative, too, but not near with the same swagger as these two.  So let's see some of them conservative credentials.  You two put on a mighty fine sneer clinic there, so let's see some tough-on-crime action here.  Bush, you're up.  Age before beauty.  Er...  Actually, scratch that last bit.

Smile for the birdie, Mr. Bush!

Now, in all honesty, it actually was rather difficult to find a good picture of Bush scowling because he normally has two looks on his face: earnest thought and goofy grin.  I'll be honest again, I have no problem whatsoever with a goofy grin face.  That's the normal, default look on my face, too, so I'm not gonna bash him or anyone for that.  In fact, I wish more people could lighten up a bit.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have a late entry into the sneer-off.  Don't count your chickens just yet.

Make no mistake, however, The Decider is not all smiles und sunshine.  Sometimes the law has to be laid down.  On the other hand, other times the law has to be suspended.

So what exactly does "Habeus Corpus" mean?  Well, it's Latin for "you must present the person in court".  Essentially it's a part of the American constitution that anyone brought under arrest must have their day in court, and by extension cannot be held indefinitely in jail without being brought before a judge...

For example.

...so that if there is insufficient evidence to proceed that the prisoner's release is safeguarded.  This prevents the state from arbitrarily holding someone indefinitely.  Only a small handful of times has rule been suspended, such as during the Civil War and World War II.  Oh, and by Bush in 2001.  In fact, Habeus Corpus was not restored until 2007.  Now, during the Civil War it was only suspended for four years.  During World War II it was only for measly three years and only in force in the state of Hawaii.  But after 9/11 it was suspended for a record six year.  Six years!

Let me rephrase this a little bit.  Habeus Corpus was not suspended during...

Notch one for the Empire!  Hurrah!

...nor was it suspended during...

Geez, I'd hate to have his job.  The Great War wasn't really very great at all.

...nor was it suspended during...

I really and truly do not love the smell of napalm in the morning.

During each of those bloody conflicts, the United States held back with restraint, but after 9/11 (not a war, mind you, but a terrorist attack) it was suspended for longer than any other instance in United States history.  That right there, that is some serious conservative, rods and axes credentials, my friends.  More on this later, however, for now it is Rob Ford's turn.

Eeeeek!  One of them is wearing a mask, too!  Isn't that illegal or something?

Quote:

"You bitches!  Don't you fucking know?  I'm Rob fucking Ford, the mayor of this city!"

Direct quote.  Well, according to the CBC, anyway.  Rob himself denies it, but I think if you got a few beers into him...  You know.  Just saying.

So what is his stance on crime?

Subjective, apparently.

I'll try to be more specific.  Remember that terrible shooting recently at a block party that most... people have heard about?  A couple people opened fire on a crowd one evening killing two and injuring 23 others.  And then there was a shooting the next night.  And the next night.  And again later that same week.  Times like these require a steady hand that won't get swept up in the moment.  They require level-headed thought and rational decision making, not knee-jerk reactionary pandering.  So, Mayor Ford hit the airwaves and addressed the people.

Mr. Ford: OK, whoever it may be, that’s what I’m saying. Maybe I’m not an expert on, you know, the ministries, but I’m saying that if it’s foreign affairs or immigration and citizenship, I want to talk to the PMO to find out if we can – and maybe we can’t. But I’m just trying to clarify that if you’re caught with a gun and convicted of a gun crime, I do not want you living in this city any more. To find out that information you have to go through the PMO, and that’s what I’m doing. So, I’m not an expert in this but I’m trying to resolve the issue that’s at hand.

That's right.  Calm, level-headed, thoughtful, informed decision-making.  That's leadership.  Now, I have a problem with both of these two and it goes something to the tune of this:

It may sound funny, but you have to have pay a price to live in a free country.  See?  Sounds funny, paying for something to be free, but it's true, though.  It just challenges the idea of what a "free country" really means.  A free country doesn't mean some sort of neat-and-tidy, perfectly manicured suburban utopia, it means that when murderers and terrorists commit those acts which make them so, you must accept that pain, stare them right square in the eye, and unflinchingly meet them with the laws that a free nation must have in order to call itself so.  To limit freedom isn't just overly simplistic populism, or even just plain lazy, it is flinching in the face of those who would do us harm and it tells them that it is those who would do us harm rather than those who seek harmony that are really in control of this nation.  It's easy to say "tighter gun control", but tighter gun control only drives up the prices of illegal guns thereby providing illegal gun runners with that much more capital to expand their operations.  Someone is always going to want someone else dead - it's just human nature.  They'll get the guns one way or another, and the irony is that when you tighten gun control you empower those who would use illegal means.

So, do good fences make good neighbours?  Maybe, but tougher laws do not make for a stronger society, it makes for a weaker society.

Point: None awarded, sadly.

Now for the last competition of the evening.


THE GOVERNATOR vs. THE GRAVYNATOR

Every once in a while throughout time and into antiquity someone gets swept up into the throne that really shouldn't be there.

Huh.  That's a pretty good all-star cast.

Whether they're born into it or placed there, every once in a while you get that one where shortly after they begin their tenure you're stuck saying "Geez!  What were we thinking?"  Worst of all is when it happens in a democratic nation and the people willingly place them on the throne.  Often times there's an accompanying populist uprising where someone loudmouth is chosen as champion or someone that has this charisma or elan where they are an instantly known face and are swept up into power before any real, sober thought is afforded to...

Is your super-human power the ability to perhaps parallel park a Hummer?

Oh God.  What have we done?  By "we" I mean "the honourable citizens of the Great State of California".  I think you can safely file this in the old "it seemed like a good idea at the time" folder. 

In 2003 California's debt to GDP was 16.90%, good for 34th place in the United States.  In 2011, however that ratio rocketed to 20.57% dropping the state down to 41st.  Now, you could say, "Aw, that's not so bad.  Look at New York.  They went from 50th place to 50th place during that time.  So what?"  Well, you could say that, but my reply would be one name: Stockton.

On June 28th, 2012 Stockton, California, population 291,707 at last census, became the largest city in U.S. history to file for bankruptcy.  With an unemployment rate of 20.1% in March the city's accounts were already doomed when the real estate crash occurred.  Afterwards one out of every thirty houses was foreclosed upon and the median housing price dropped by 44%.  Stockton's own unemployment rate was at 13.3% ranking it as one of the highest rates in the entire United States.  Bleak.  Very bleak.  It is worth mentioning that Stockton is California's 13th largest city, and if it can happen there to a city that size, it can happen anywhere.

While Stockton's case is severe, it's not the only city hurting in California right now, and the fall has been a long one and people knew where to point the blame.

It is good to be king.

In 2010 Gov. Schwarzenegger's approval rating slid on down to 23%, below his predecessor whom he had defeated in a recall election.  So good, old fashioned populism and star-powered machismo only get you so far, it seems.  If you can't balance the books, it's not going to look pretty.  In his defense, from what I've seen, read, and heard about his tenure, the Governator did about as good as anyone could do under the circumstances.  I don't believe that for a second, but that's what they say.  Now, I was going to end the discussion on Arnold here, but I thought I'd just throw up a few more of these "Governator" pics just cause they're so damn cool.

Of course he gets his own beer!  You know you've made it as a successful politician when you get a beer named after you.  Right, Jean?

Right.  Now to Mr. Ford.

Yeeeeeep.  Typical lefty going around door-to-door looking for a handout.  You get em', Rob!

Aw, not again!  Geez, I thought we've been through this already.  Please, disregard the trick-or-treaters for a moment.  You can go back to bouncing kids off your property shortly, but right now we just would like to see if your brand of populism has led to any form of good government.

Well, I will say this: regardless of who won the civic election, David Miller left the City of Toronto's finances in a total mess.  How bad a mess?  Well, in the end the city faced a deficit of $774 Million, aka over 3/4 of a Billion dollars.  Three quarters of a billion!  Worse yet, it was a known fact that the city had been having a case of the shorts for years to the tune of between $500-$700 Million.  What that says is that not only is the problem a challenge to tackle for its magnitude, it's also a challenge to tackle for its longevity.  Complacency was the word the people cried.  Enough was enough of this wasteful practice.  It was time for someone to come in and bring the gravy train to its final destination.  The winds of change were blowing.

Really blowing if this picture is to be believed.

Enter: Rob Ford.  Sure, he talked a good game.  The city doesn't have a revenue problem, it has an expense problem.  Stop the gravy train.  Better customer service.  And up and down the streets of Toronto he marched with his crass, populist message and wouldn't you know it: he won.  People wanted change and he promised it.  Now, did he deliver?

Well, yes.  I mean, granted, you can make numbers tap dance, sing, and cross-stitch until they look like what you want them to look like, but to start 2011: $774 million deficit.  To end 2011: $139 million surplus.  That's pretty impressive, even if they are fake because previous mayors wouldn't even pretend they were anywhere near surplus territory.  Also, granted, that Ford said he would find $2 Billion (with a "B") in "efficiencies" to bring the deficit back in line.  It's pretty safe to say that that promise was crap, but at the end of the first year of his tenure, viola, his books are balanced.

So, as far as doing what he said he would do and shaking up the established order and status quo down at City Hall while riding in on a white steed during the campaign...

Or perhaps some other... shall we say... alternative form of transportation.

Well... uh...  Point: Ford.


CONCLUSION

I may be wrong in this assessment, and I probably am wrong in this assessment, but I'll give it anyway.  I think that Rob Ford is a jerk and an asshole.  I think he's a bigot.  I would be shocked it he signaled during a lane change unless there was a police car nearby.  In fact, I'll go a step further and say that I think he's the type of person that will break rules until he is caught.

However!

I think that he does have a very clear moral compass.  While I think that he's the type of person that might, you know, do this...

Rob Ford: fender bender waiting to happen.

I doubt that he's the type of person that would do this...

Sun shines, grass grows, birds sing, and brother, politicians steal money (when they think no one's looking).

He's notoriously cheap!  Miserly.  Stingy.  Niggardly.  Very, very tight wallet.  And not his own wallet, but with the city's coin purse, and in the province that brought you...

Ouch!

...and...

Oof!

...and...

Kapow!

...it is unusual to see a politician at any level that's careful with public funds.  It really is.  And, in my opinion, if you have a politician running a city that is this careful with public funds and that cognizant of the taxpayer, then that politician ought to be given the benefit of the doubt, more leash to work with, a mulligan or two, or whatever you want to call it.  I almost want to say that, yeah, he's a big dumb slob, but he's not a crook, so whatever - and as I said in the outset, this is a democracy.  If a big dumb oaf wants to run for mayor, he can, and if he gets elected, then great!  The system works!  Hooray! 

So, is Rob Ford more a positive or a negative force?  I think it's a little bit of both, but that's like anyone.  However, when you have a city that's deep, deep in the red and you have a candidate that's clearly competent to cut waste and balance the budget, then the odd (read: weekly) gaffe is a reasonable price to pay to get the finances in order.  And!  Not only does Toronto get their finances in order, but the rest of the country gets some hilarious headlines, and on this note I'll end it tonight.  Thank you and have a good night!