My return; Stronach's departure

So after abandoning this little haven for political ranting for almost a year, I have deigned to return. Why? Well, this was just too good to pass up talking about!

Now, I should be doing a dance of joy at this - she has been one of my political
arch-nemeses for awhile in that I pretty much am against everything she stands for. Not always the issues, as she and I share some of the same ideas in that, but more in the fact that she'll basically believe everything her handlers tell her and I'm all for women in politics thinking for themselves and not being puppets controlled by men. I know in my previous entries I've talked about how she really allows herself to be led by the nose - or the penis. One only needs to look at the crap with Peter MacKay to know that.

But for some reason, I'm not dancing. I'm not even singing. I'm just sort of looking at my computer screen and wondering.

Wondering what caused her to make this decision. Wondering if I'm happy - and if so, why am I happy? Shouldn't I be supportive of women no matter what? Even if she's letting herself be controlled by men, isn't she still better than a liberal man in that riding? Or is it worse, as it's more a facade than anything else and it makes the Liberals look progressive when they aren't. I don't know. I'm leaning towards the latter, but part of me wants to be supportive of the former. After all, she's not a machine. She does have a brain.

In fact, my first impulse was to send her a heartfelt letter saying that I was sorry to see her go. Not because I liked her at all, but I find it sad that it seems she's giving up. To me, this doesn't look like her admitting that she doesn't like politics. It looks like her being shunned from the Old Boys Club, given a pat on head and told that she wasn't needed anymore. It's like, she caused a sensation, she was all over the media ...but when push came to shove, she was never taken seriously.

And even though she was a little nutty, that's sad.

Are women in politics ever going to be taken seriously? Can they be, when someone like her is the most prominent example to go by?

Headline: Tories do totally expected yet idiotic thing, once again.

Now, it's really no secret that I loathe the Conservatives and everything they stand for. I don't like Stephen Harper, I don't agree with their policies and I definitely don't think that they reflect Canadian values.

But now, this is just another indication that they are certainly not right for Canada.

Does anyone else see the movie The Day After Tomorrow playing out in their heads? Seems pretty fucking prophetic to me.

Yes, I understand that Canada isn't doing so hot with the whole environmental thing. But for chrissakes, is this going to help? No, I really don't think so. We NEED Kyoto; and what we need even more is to get the US to sign on, not say, 'Okay, guys ...they decided not to play kickball, let's go to their house and play whatever they want instead.'

Which is effectively what we're going to be doing if we back down on Kyoto now. We signed it, we made the commitment - what we need to do now is lead by example, not pander yet again to what the US wants. If they want to be bastards, you know what? Why don't we do something like ...oh ...putting sanctions on them? Or maybe refusing to trade with them? I get that they're our biggest trading partner, but who the hell wanted that anyway?

There are a lot more countries who signed on to Kyoto than those that refused it. So why don't we use that to our advantage instead of saying 'Yes! We'll do it. ...Oh, you guys aren't. Well, uh ..we were just kidding.'

The environment is the most important thing. Without a healthy planet, all of the other issues we think are so important mean fuck all. Because guess what? Once the planet is dead,we'll ALL be dead.

I don't understand why this is so hard for people to grasp. We should be getting down on our knees and kissing the ground, grateful that we have the Earth and that it is able to provide for all of our needs. We're fucking lucky. But no, like everything else, we take it for granted and treat it like it's something we're just entitled to have. That resources are infinite - and even if they aren't, we'll be dead before they run out, so who cares? Who cares about our children and our grandchildren, who may never know what clean air actually is?

God, people really piss me off. You know, I've often said that my priorities aren't what a lot of people in the West's are, and I'm not going to be so arrogant as to say that I'm right and they're all wrong, but Jesus. Isn't it slightly important to people that if we don't have, oh ...clean water and air, perhaps that student loan isn't maybe so important? Because breathing and drinking water are essential to life?

And people call me 'not down to earth' when I worry about this stuff. Hello!? I'm more down to earth than most in that I'm actually concerned about the Earth.

Anyway, enough about me. I see that the Conservatives are saying that they will put something in Kyoto's place. And I can predict exactly what that will be: "Anything the US/our business partners/masters say is goooood."

And for you people playing the home game, let me just point this out, carte blanche: The Conservatives don't care about the environment. They follow a neo-liberal/neo-conservative ideology that holds that only the now is important, and that doesn't care about future generations. So if they can externalise costs NOW by sacrificing the environment, they will. Because it makes them money now.

Stephen Harper can go on and on about how he does care, but I think his record suggests otherwise. I mean, if you look at the Party's website, the only thing in their issues portion is on ethanol and biodiesel. Nothing on the environment really. And even their candidates don't really seem all that concerned about being environmentally friendly.

And the Sierra Club has plenty to say on exactly how much the Conservatives really care about sustaining our environment for future generations as well as turning back the ravages we've already accomplished.

We're fucking ourselves over, and the Conservatives are content to see it happen.

Chew on that, people who are even considering voting Conservative. As for you people strategically voting ....I don't even have time for you.

Although, in the spirit of strategic voting since it seems to be the 'in' thing to do these days, let's not leave the Liberals out of this. I mean, the Conservatives aren't the only ones who aren't concerned. Under the watch of the Liberals, we've seen pollution go up, Kyoto signed but no definitive action occur ...and it really seems like business as usual up on Parliament Hill.

Business as usual meaning 'do jack all about the environment and keep people concerned about other issues by giving them scraps to maintain our power.'

Now, many of you are probably wondering why I don't like the Green Party if I'm so gung-ho about protecting and preserving our environment.

Well, basically it comes down to their platform.

Environmental protection? Yay! Conservative-style fiscal plan? No!

I am not even sure how this Party functions. It's like the bumblebee, that's all I can say: The Green Party should spontaneously combust, but it's by the sheer fact that they don't know that they are able to continue to exist.

On top of it, the Green Party, I'm sorry to say is like a one-trick pony. They're dead on when it comes to many environmental issues - but they are sorely lacking when it comes to everything else.

I know you think I'm biased, but for my money, my vote would still go to the NDP.

They have an extensive environmental platform that takes all the good parts of the Green Party, but they're far more flexible as far as other issues go. Because we need versatility. We need a party who can address many of the problems and inequalities of our society and not try to mesh left wing environmental policies with the worst kind of right wing fiscal policy.

So, please please. When you're thinking about who to vote for on January 23rd don't cop out and strategically vote. Do the brave thing. We can win, honest.

Let's get ready to rumble!

Oh, fuck yeah. Last night, this was the news of the evening.

We're having an election January 23rd, baby! Now, for many, this is a time of trepidation as we wonder who is going to form the next government. Canadians have lost faith in the Liberals, this is clear.

So who is going to form the next government? Everyone knows the Conservatives are no better - they may not have the scandals, but their views on health care, education, child care et cetera do not fall in line with the values of Canadians. Quite simply, we don't love everything they stand for.

I know there are some that love their platform, particularly in Alberta and maybe Saskatchewan. But overall, they're not representative of the sort of country we want in Canada. We don't want to privatise health care and send women back to the kitchens, do we? We don't want immigrants to be left out in the cold when it comes to job opportunities and contributing to the very culture of Canada. We don't want more corporate tax cuts and for our country to be even more of the US's puppet.

We want sovereignty. A strong military. Good health care and social services. Universal child care. Strong cities that are able to deliver the goods: In short, we want the NDP. Now, now, I know what you are going to say next: The NDP is a dreamer's party. They can't balance a budget. Jack Layton doesn't look like a Prime Minister. If I vote NDP, my vote will be wasted. They can't win.

I've heard all of these excuses and more.

But here's the rub: If all the people who said they'd like to vote for the NDP, but were afraid of the Conservatives just did it rather than trying to strategically vote, we'd have something. If you look at the last election's numbers you'll see that in many ridings, the NDP lost by less than 1000 votes - and in some ridings, it was even closer. This says something; this says that people are voting for the NDP across Canada, but unlike the Liberals and Conservatives who have lots of support in specific regions, the NDP is popular across many ridings - which can be a disadvantage, as we don't have concentrations of NDPers in certain ridings with enough numbers to secure the seats.

But with your help, we CAN!

Another point to ponder about elections: Our system is not fair. It favours cadre parties that have these concentrated pockets of supporters in ridings rather than parties that have widespread support across the country. It's not based at all on popular vote, just who gets the most votes in a riding. In the last election, the NDP got 15.7 percent of the popular vote - and 19 seats (18 now, as one left the party and is now sitting as an independent). Sound good? Well, the Liberals got 36.7% of the popular vote - and 134 seats!!

Now imagine a Paliament based on popular vote with 37 percent of the seats being Liberals, 3o percent Conservatives, 13 percent Bloc Quebecois and 16 percent NDP. Think things would be different? I do.

Also, how many people would vote differently under a proportional representation system where they didn't have to worry about strategically voting to win in their riding; instead, they could merely vote for whom they wanted and that would be reflected in the popular vote, thus helping their party win? The end of strategic voting? *Gasp!* Perish the thought!

Okay, kids, what have we learned today?

1) That the Liberals are corrupt bastards who don't deserve to win - not even another minority.
2) The Conservatives are USer wannabes who need to stop taking money from the NRA and start paying attention to Canada - and Canadian values. Seriously. Check out their website. After you get beyond the nightmares of Stephen Harper's face at night, look at their issues, what they want for Canada - it's some scary shit.
3) That maybe, just maybe we should give the NDP a chance. Remember! Tommy Douglas, the Greatest Canadian was an NDPer. Yeah, we've had some bad NDP governments in BC and Ontario, but we've had loads more bad Conservative and Liberal governments (*coughRalphKleinDaltonMcGuintyPaulMartinBrianMulroneycough*) so that isn't really a good excuse. And if you take 5 minutes to just read the NDP platform, you'll see they don't really live in some magic land where money grows on trees. Their ideas are fiscally sound, and this has even been acknowledged by economists and business people.

So let's give them a chance this go around, can't we?

Another example of business hijacking government.

Yeah, I this says it all.

Now, I'm all for effective service and my tax dollars being well spent ...but come on. Money-back guarantee? That's not even viable. They're just all out lying, now.

Thanks again, Liberals, for proving you are no better than the Conservatives. Woo!

Dance, Puppet!! *Jiggles strings*

Yeah, so I'm not surprised, but that doesn't mean I'm any less disgusted.

I was reading cbc.ca this morning (Yay, lock-out over! Fuck you management, you pricks!) and of course the top headline besides "More than a thousand feared dead in South Asian quake" is "PM accused of hurting free trade." *Gasp!* I may just have a heart attack that Paul Martin would dare sully that all powerful thing known as ..free..trade...

First off, Canadians never wanted it. Yeah, we like trade, et cetera ...but it was widely seen as a big mistake. It was an election issue, actually. Chretien was all for it (yeah, no one's perfect) and Mulroney wasn't...guess who won? Yeah. And guess who, right after, instituted free trade anyway? Oh yeah. Talk about lying bastard politicians. And people think Canadian politics is staid.

Anyway, the Americans have been going at this softwood lumber bullshit for some time. They want free trade, but only by their rules. It's funny that they don't even try to pretend to not be bullies anymore (not that they ever really pretended, but they mostly did to other "first world" nations. I'm sure people in South America would tell me otherwise). They want free access into our market, but they don't want us in theirs in return. Case in point: Beef. One cow was found, on a fluke, to have mad cow and how long was Canadian beef banned in the US? ...Even after they found a cow with the same thing in the States? Protectionism. They want to be able to sell their bullshit vegetables and coca cola and whatever else all over the world, while still doing whatever they want to protect their own markets.

They basically have done a big "fuck you!" to the Invisible Hand, while pretending to worship capitalism. But then again, they don't follow the principles of real capitalism at all anyway, so I suppose it doesn't matter. It's one of those "do as I say, not as I do" things. [Editing note: Isn't it funny that in Wikipedia, the purpose of the Invisible Hand is to protect against protectionism? That tickled me a bit.]

And this takes us to softwood lumber. They've been ignoring the rulings literally, I think, forever. EVERYONE has told them to comply; even the UN. And still, they drag this on. It's hurting the Canadian lumber industry; something significant in a country full of woods. I don't even believe in capitalism to begin with, and this is bugging the hell out of even me.

So I think Paul Martin has every right in the world to threaten the US with some sort of reciprocation. What've we got that grabs them by the balls? Energy. So it's time we stopped being so nice and played hardball with the big boys. I was on this back in the day when Jack Layton was saying it. He's had the right idea all along, and bravo to Paul Martin for finally having some balls. (See, I'm not above giving props where it is due.)

But that, in turn takes us to the Panderer's Party. Oh, I mean C.R.A.P. Oh, sorry. The Conservatives and my most favourite target, Peter MacKay. C'mon. Only the Conservatives would tell us to continue to lay down and take it while the US fucks us. I know it's icky imagery, but please. We're supposed to protect this lie?! To continue to pretend that we're happy with the scrap that we're being given? To settle for having our sovereignty stomped on? I don't fucking think so. If we seriously want to pull ourselves from the teat of the Great Satan we need to stand up for ourselves for once. We need to stop trying to make everyone happy and look out for us. We're the definition of wishy-washy and it has. got. to. stop.

If we want to be taken seriously, we have to do something serious. And fuck the Conservatives. They say they want to protect Canadian interests, but what that means is, only if Canadian interests are in line with their master's, the US. They'd have us dance for the Americans when we should be kicking them in the shins.

I don't know, does this seem like common sense to anyone else? I know people can say that trade is a two-way street, and friends don't do this sort of thing ...but friends don't fuck each other out of money, either. Friends don't ban our beef and watch our industries flounder. Friends don't try to bully us for not backing wars we don't believe in. So I think we've moved beyond the point of friends and have to start looking at it as what we really are: neighbours who are becoming increasingly less alike. And I think we're at the point where we have to take a stand and say, we're not going to hold up this fascade anymore if you aren't going to act like a friend.

Because that's what true friends do. We know when to end it, if it's becoming unhealthy. We don't allow ourselves to continue to be bullied by a friend, who I'm sorry to say is looking more and more like a sociopath every day.

CBC Lockout is killing me...

We're up to almost a week of Antiques Roadshow in place of my CBC Newsworld News.

Can I tell you that I'm going a little crazy? I am not one to say anything against unions; quite the opposite. But this lockout is going to drive me a little nutty.

I know not that many Canadians watch CBC Newsworld. Generally, it's one of those channels that exists, and people may flip by it and watch for a few minutes ....but this is seriously messing up my routine!! 2 PM-5PM on weekdays is my CBC Newsworld watching time!! It's when I get my world news and catch up on what is going on in the world!!

And now, when I turn the channel on, I get Antiques Roadshow. What the fuck?!?

Now, I know that my personal enjoyment and routine is not the biggest problem here. But isn't that when people start giving a fuck? When it affects them personally?

Anyone following this story knows that the reason the lockout occured was because there is a "dispute" over the protocol of when contract workers can be hired.

Ah yes. Once again, neoliberalism rears its ugly head, and we see that all around us, lower paid contract work complete with no benefits abounds. I even love the language. When the workers go, it's a strike. When management kicks them out because they refuse to bend to the whims of the man, it's a labour disruption.

Now, maybe I'm being overly cynical and spinning the story just a bit, but when the first story about the lockout on Yahoo! News goes a little something like this than I just don't know how else to translate it.

"Workers aren't opposed to contract work..." Oh no? Isn't this is why this is happening? Because management wants to hire more contract workers, and - damn them - the people want jobs that provide security and benefits? The CBC isn't some cuthroat private corporation out to make a buck and damn the workers. It's a Crown Corporation. It's supposed be working for the People of Canada. We're the shareholders, here, bucko. And for my 26 bucks a year, I want to know that people who work for the CBC have job security.

I love the CBC. I especially love Newsworld; it's a reason for me to pay whatever ung-dly amount of money it costs to have cable on its own. That's how important it is to me. But what is even more important to me is that Crown Corporations don't fall into the same trap as private corporations. Down with more contract work at the CBC.

I can appreciate that they want the flexibility to bring in specialised people for projects. But 20% contract workers isn't enough for that? How many more could we possibly need? I sympathise with people who need this sort of work, but I mean, come on. What are they teaching people in Journalism and Radio and Television Arts school? Surely people could be hired out of university on a permanent basis who can handle these sorts of work. Also, what about professional development?

Honestly, what I'm worried about is not that 20% of contract workers. They're just trying to feed their families like everyone else. What I am worried about is when contract work starts creeping into more and more of the CBC, and suddenly, Journalism is this piecemail free-lance sort of thing where you have to rely on people to pick up your option or whatever in order to able to get paid. All the time. And no one in journalism has job security. And it becomes like social work - restructuring hits ...the whole slippery slope.

I could see this happening at a private media conglomerate or corporation ...but please don't let it happen to the CBC. Crown Corporations are designed to be friendlier and serve the people rather than shareholders.

Please don't tell me that the time of that is over. And, for G-d's sake, bring back my Newsworld!

Struggling to remain hopeful...

In keeping with my last post which was incredibly sappy I know and not at all my usual rant, I've decided to bring another topic up that I don't immediately abhor ...but instead feel very mixed about.

Dove's new campaign for real beauty.

I'm not sure what to think. I desperately want this to be something I can get behind, because by all accounts it is an incredibly important issue and I know firsthand what it is like to have very low self-esteem because I am not a size 0. But as usual, I'm still a little wary of a corporation coming out and trying to preach that we need to expand the definition of "beauty;" corporations are still all about making money, after all...and I'm a firm believer that there is no marriage of corporations and social responsibility that is not dysfunctional and doomed to fail.

That being said, I'm not blind to the merits of the campaign; even though I hate it, people care what corporations say. We buy what they want us to buy, we believe stuff is good when they say it is ...even I, the very picture of anti-consumerism find myself sometimes wondering if I need new eyeshadow when I see it in Chatelaine. So, when a corporation that has been selling beauty products for years and years says that we need to redefine beauty, that holds slightly more water than when some charity says it (Which sounds very sick, I might add. I really loathe that people can't see good ideas until someone comes along and tries to sell them something with it).

And so we have not only a campaign to sell soap and cold cream, but also something trying to revolutionise the way we see beauty through research, scholarships and even designing a new programme at Harvard to get (presumably) the best minds in the United States thinking about how women have allowed themselves to be defined by a proportion of the population so small that it is barely statistically significant.

I just don't know. I guess I need to watch what happens with it to see. If they follow through with everything it says on the website, then I think it is a step in the right direction. It isn't groundbreaking by any stretch of the word; people have been parading around with studies for YEARS about how beauty is being defined very narrowly and that girls are developing more and more eating disorders to try to conform to this idea that less is more, literally. I mean, I'm only 24 and I can see the rise in it. When I was in high school, I knew one girl who was a size zero, and she didn't even do it on purpose. Now, living in Toronto I see so many of them that it makes me sort of sick. It really isn't healthy.

But if they're just paying lip service to this idea in order to look all sweet and politically correct in order to sell more soap ...then I will, once again feel completely betrayed. I remember seeing the very beginning of this campaign in my Chatelaine and thinking it was a cool idea, and then it disappeared until now. So, we'll see if it actually takes off, or if it turns out to be insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

For now, though, I urge people with all my soul to check out Jean Kilbourne's work; specifically the Killing Us Softly series. These documentaries pretty much changed my life. They talk about women in advertising, and how we're seen and how this reinforces certain (disgusting) ideas. While Dove may be packaging a good idea, Jean Kilbourne really delivers the goods. Her work is amazing and shows why women need to band together and stop this. Support Dove in this real beauty stuff, but it's even more important for us to support each other. Remember, men didn't give us things like the vote, shelters for abused women and inheritance rights; we had to fight tooth and nail for them, and it's only through banding together and not allowing men to divide and conquer us that we're going to get through this.

Send me a comment if you agree.