In loving memory of...

Señor Quincy, gone two years ago today, but not forgotten, and still missed.

http://sandeepm.nomadlife.org/2005/02/senor-quincy.aspx

*sniff*

The dilemma of opportunity

You spend your time searching for something that will make you happy, and willingly try different things, taking opportunities as they come up, but without a clear plan of what the end game is going to be. It ends up being a compromise of some kind, where you are happy in certain areas, but less so in others.

And then comes yet another opportunity, one that carries a higher degree of risk, but a higher potential of fulfillment. You never know what it will really be like unless you accept it, but then you wonder if you really gave the current opportunity a fair shot. Have you seen everything, done everything? Or do you end up skipping from opportunity to opportunity, never really being sure if you gave it a sair shake or not.

Maybe it will decide itself....

OH-lympic...

Man, whoda thunk that Canada would get shut out three times in Olympic hockey? Yes, our ladies did us proud, but what was up with the Men's team? Did someone tell them this was a vacation or was it clearly explained that they had to work for their medals?

Still, a good set of Games for Canada, a shame no one is actually watching them.

Celebrity Rant

So my room-mate, bless her soul, is on her Spring Break and watching television. Lots of it. As a result, I learned something today that may change the course of humanity:

Nick may ask for alimony from Jessica!!!

The President of Iran put an immediate hold on his country's nuclear programme until the fallout from this earth-shattering news could be fully assessed.

Refugees in Darfur immediately started a collection fund when news of this shocking situation reached them through relief aid workers.

Chechen rebels agreed to an immediate ceasefire in order to "promote goodwill and understanding between Nick and Jessica, to ensure that their gifts to the world can continue", according to a spokesman.

The Pakistan military immediately ceased aid to earthquake victims in Kashmir in order to marshall all available resources to providing Nick with the essentials of life, including rice.

I don't know whether to be appalled or depressed that more Americans care about this useless garbage than about issues that actually have some effect on their lives. THEY ARE TWO PEOPLE WHOSE ONLY CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIETY IS PLAGIARIZING OTHER PEOPLE'S EFFORTS!!! WHY IS THIS A LEAD STORY WITH BREATHLESS COVERAGE AND ENDLESS EXCLAMATION MARKS?!?!??!

Argh......people, get a clue as to what is important in life already!

Rant complete.

Loneliness

Te extraño...

In defense of singles

So another Valentine's Day has come and gone and for many people, all the better and good riddance. For me it was another year of phone calls and electronic cards, with a despairing sense of optimism that one day, someday, long-distance will refer only to the phone bill, but for many people, it's a cruel taunt by a smug "couples" class that sees itself as better than everyone else.

I have always been perplexed as to the sneering contempt some couples have towards singles. Bridget Jones is perhaps the worst example of purporting the myth that singles are useless and defective, despite its early attempts and sneering right back at couples. I have always had an admiration for Colombia's day of love and friendship, which is a great opportunity to party with friends, but also remind your sweetheart of how much you love him/her/it (and, conversely, how fatal it can be if you forget to get something for your querida, but that's a different rant about consumerism for another day).

It's odd how smug some people towards singles, especially when you consider the glass houses that many couples live in. One (single) friend recounted to me a couple of years ago about how one her friends got all high and mighty after her wedding and continued to look down on her single friends, even as her husband slept with one of the bridesmaids. Another friend who went to one of those retirement planning sessions was amused at the planner's advice that getting married is the best financial decision you can make, while getting divorced is the worst. So perhaps staying single ensures a happy retirement?

That said, despite being a member of coupledom, I think people should just lay off singles and appreciate them for who they are. The singles I know are smart, funny, attractive people whose company I enjoy immensely in a variety of situations (all innocent and respectful of my vows, thank you very much, get yer mind out of the gutter!). They fill their lives with meaningful activities, good friends and, yes, good times, which is a helluva lot better than settling for some poor imitation and spending their time miserable, but attached.

Bookstores are full of "expert" advice as to why so many more people are single (or divorced, which is expensive, see above), but to me it's just a function of people being more certain of what they want (or what they don't want) and enjoying themselves as much as possible while they can. The rest of your life can seem forever, and our generation ultimately takes dating as a more casual thing than before, and are more willing to demand more out of a prospective partner than someone to share the rent with.

Happiness is everywhere around you if you are willing to look for it, but people shouldn't feel pressured to get into a bad relationship simply to not have family members wag their finger at you. Knowing what you like and don't like ensures that you can find your own happiness however you please.

But, please, stay away from the bridesmaids....

The humiliation of the good doctor

My room-mates were watching Dr. Phil so I was more or less subjected to it since the living room and kitchen are both open concept. I say subjected because I find it difficult to watch the show. The guy basically berates people and talks down to them, and it's just, quite frankly, humiliating to watch those people. Maybe it's because I don't like confrontations, but I have a hard time seeing how his method helps people. Sometimes people need to have a good smackdown to get them to see their own folly, but unless the people in his show are all slow and dumb, I can't see why this is such good television.

More importantly, why would people want to subject themselves to that?

Fear Factor nowithstanding....

Emerson vs. Stronach

The furor over Emerson's switch appears to have died down, but to close my thoughts on this, here are a couple of key differences between both cases:

1) Stronach said she was unhappy with the direction of the party, even though she helped create it; Emerson appears to have been unhappy not being in cabinet.

2) Stronach could have sat as an independent if she was unhappy with her new party, so switching parties was unnecessary; getting a cabinet post was a bribe. Emerson, however, wanted only the cabinet position so changing party was pretty much his only option.

3) Stronach's switch allowed Paul Martin to win a crucial confidence motion in the House, so he essentially bought Stronach's vote. Emerson's switch makes no difference to the composition of the House, nor is it linked to any vote, ergo no bribe.

4) Stronach, despite having been a Liberal for less than eight months, is already setting up her run for the leadership of the Liberal Party, less than two years after running for the leader of the Conservative party. Ambition exceeding talent. Emerson, however, has no interest in the leadership of any party, and his talent matches his ambition of being a cabinet minister.

I'm still not happy with Emerson's switch (or the Tories' decision to even try to poach him), but I think Stronach's move was more detrimental to the country and, according to the Criminal Code, an illegal bribe. There is nothing illegal about Emerson's move, though like Stronach's, it reeks.

Brrr....

Winter is back, I didn't miss it. On the plus side, I get out of work and there is still light in the sky.

Closer....closer....closer.....patio season approaches!

All About Emerson

Unsurprisingly, there has been much indignation and consertation over David Emerson's decision to change team so soon after the election. I'm of two minds on this personally, as I am generally against party-switching normally, but particulary unhappy when defectors get put into cabinet immediately. I don't think that a by-election is particularly necessary, since people who are unhappy with their party can sit as an independent, and as has been said often, Emerson will have to face the voters for his decision (as John Bryden did in 2004).

That said, he is a smart guy and given his business background, I was never really sure how he fit in as a Liberal in the first place, especially since Ujjal Dosanjh moved into the Liberals from the NDP. Perhaps Paul Martin told him that his Liberals would be more pro-business, and Emerson started to have doubts when Martin got into bed with Jack Layton to stay in power last spring.

I guess, overall, I'm indifferent, since the pros match the cons of the whole situation. I do agree with John Reynolds and his comment though, that in getting Emerson and losing Belinda Stronach, the Tories got the better trade. I personally, however, would not have tried to recruit him the day after the election. This is why voters are so cynical about politicians.

Compassionate Conservative

Anyone remember that term from the 2000 election? Bush's latest attempt at financial management is essentially a bad joke played on those who voted for him, not once, but twice. Face it, unless you contributed to his campaign, you're a sucker as far his budget is concerned. Increases in defense and pork, decreases in programs that actually make Americans rise above a level consistent with the third world. And no matter how large the deficit is, tax cuts should be bigger and more permanent.

Americans will realize just how bad of a president Bush really is, but by then he will be long gone, in a comfortable retirement of wealth with nary a care in the world. I knew he was bad in 2004, but Americans are going to have to find out how bad he is the hard way, with another two years of this polar opposite of the true definition of compassionate conservative.

More of Free Speech

In discussions and watching things spiral out of control, I've looked over my first post on the cartoon riot and think I can simplify and clarify my position.

Free speech is a right that should be protected, but burning an embassy and advocating death is not a valid form of free speech.

The boycott, on the other hand, may prove to be the most useful tool available to offended Muslims.

Free Speech versus Religion

By now, most people have heard about how a series of cartoons published in a Danish newspaper last fall (and then republished in a Norwegian newspaper a month ago) has inflamed the Muslim world. At last report, embassies in Syria were being torched, a boycott of goods from Denmark has begun in various other countries and diplomats are working overtime to deal with the situation.

At the root is a conflict between two vastly different ideas that would inevitably conflict:

Freedom of expression

versus

Religious respect

As has been noted in an explanatory sentence in most articles, Islamic tradition dictates that images of Prophet are forbidden, ostensibly to avoid idolatry, as even respectful drawings are forbidden. What is less-known is that this ban also extends to people and animals, which is why Islamic art generally tends towards calligraphy and a sort of vine-like artwork.

The other side of the coin is that people should be allowed to express their opinions and thoughts, with most people accepting limits on such things as inciting hate or falsehoods (you can't express your thoughts about "fire!" in a crowded movie theatre, as a well-worn example).

So what happens when people choose to express themselves in a way that is forbidden by a religion? In this case, the religion forbids its adherents from making images of the Prophet, but one could infer that everyone else is forbidden as well. That inference, however, is not justification enough to act in violence against people who are not followers of your religion.

The issue of tolerance may be a function of the maturity of a religion. Over the past 30 years, there has been a growing trend of so-called artists to depict Jesus in ways that could never fall under the heading "respectful", yet either because Christianity is more tolerant or just unable to defend itself, such artworks do not engender to level of hatred and violence seen in the middle east. However, go back two or three hundred years, and the outcome may very well have been similar (think of book-burnings back in the "good old days").

Ultimately, such acts of violence speak more to the attitude of the offended than the offender. Islam was a religion that was born under oppression, prejudice and violence and as a result, its early writings (the hadiths, not the verses of the Qu'ran) are infused with a siege-mentality, that you either defend your religion or it will cease to exist. Such was the case over 14 centuries ago but, today, Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world and with a demographic base that ensures its survival for at least another 14 centuries.

In a perfect world, people would have an innate sense of respect for other people and not seek to deliberately offend others. I have seen the cartoons in question and while they are amateurish and largely unfunny, it should not have surprised anyone that they would offend. Do we have the right to offend? Not technically, but it ends up being an irritating, but necessary, side-effect of free speech.

A vortex

So I was out with some friends for a birthday party earlier this evening. There is really no other way to describe the evening but fun. It was good food, good friends, good wine, basically a wonderful night where I learned a lot, talked a lot, listened some more, cracked jokes and laughed at others.

And through it all, I felt something was missing, that as happy as I was, it wasn't complete.

And I got home, and sought comfort and solace in a sad song that puts into words what I feel. Yes, it's sappy and emotional and drivel, but dammit, it hurts that she is not not here with me.

I'm grateful for what I have and seek out the happiness that is in every day. And yet....

I leave a quote:

And all these days i spend away
I'll make up for this i swear
I need your love to hold me up
When its all too much to bear

When the night falls in around me
I dont think ill make it through
I'll use your light to guide the way
Cause all I think about is you

TQM....

Appearances

For those who read it a while ago, my Christmas party rant seems out of touch. So much goes on that I am unaware of and when I found out certain things, as I did today, my perspective can sometimes be radically altered.

As much as I like to make sweeping generalizations to provoke a response, I am painfully aware of just how complex life is and how many shades of grey there is. I would like to find comfort in a simple black and white world, but in the end, life just isn't that easy.

It's probably better I did take it down, because nothing makes sense anymore and yet, somehow, it still does.

Dazed and confused....