Unacceptably Groomed

I have written before on the subject of male equality, but in planning this wedding that I am to take part in I have been faced with the reality of the last bastion of exclusively female territory; The nuptials. Within these stony cathedral walls women make sexist jokes about men and their lack of ability to help with even the most simple planning, their lack of interest or insight into the inner workings of the 'proceedings' and the fact that they mostly appear to function as ambulatory wallets. In fact, as an ice breaker with most new vendors I would typically tell them how lucky I was to be marrying a man who had not only opinions on colors and details, but also was actively involved in selecting them; this never failed to garner some appreciative sighs.

The truth is, of course, that this wedding has been a melodious blend of both our interests, and
it is a singular joy that this fact gives lie to the age old notion that men have to be tricked
into marriage, and so therefore shuffle their feet down the lilac strewn aisle that the bride has chosen.
This rampant braggery is not just to make myself feel big, I have noticed, in this comparison, that the
Wedding World is not actually prepared to cede control to the greater egalitarian society.

A prime example of this mistrust was the invitations. Victor was struck by inspiration from a sample
I had found and created the entire invitation himself on the computer. I was going through some other
obligations at the time, and we figured it made more sense to leave the whole matter in his hands.
Throughout the entire process of ordering the invitations Victor had to constantly field questions about
'what the bride wanted' and 'what was the bride's name?' in order to put it on the order form, despite the fact that I never set foot in the store nor even picked up receiver to discuss anything with the shop. For all they knew, he was possibly just an eccentric who decided to design cards one day, and they were working themselves into a tizzy about a fictional individual whose name came from a small hallucination brought on by too much tennis.

They let him see his account at one point where my name was prominently placed at the top, while
his enjoyed a lower placement, almost as an afterthought. The special comment section of the account
included the gem, "Just as a note, the GROOM is the primary point of contact for this project, not the bride."
Oh, the power my sex wields.

Not to compare the trials that my female ancestors suffered, being treated as chattel rather than a human being, to the annoyance that Victor experienced at being the constant second party to this inkjet waltz, but in this 'enlightened' day it seems ridiculous that we are so backward thinking as to treat someone in this fashion.

The invitations completed, we were motivated to get them out just a few days later and so, to save time, I went in to collect them. There, proudly displayed on the box, was my name, alone. I made mention of this fact, adding that it was surprising given that the groom had been the only one they had spoken or contacted with during the entire process, and had referred to the project as 'his baby', but the only response they could give me was that they put the bride's name on the box. Always. Because they just did. So there.  

Needless to say, the world of matrimony is still pretty unwelcome to men who wish to be a part of their big day, but I like to imagine that will fade with time as being 'metrosexual' becomes more mainstream and acceptable.

Fly Off the Handle (At a White Guy)

I got a compliment today. As far as compliments go it was pretty backhanded, but I actually enjoyed it. While lounging in the hot tub a man mentioned to me that I was, "Pretty jacked, for a girl." Now, let the race to disseminate that begin.

The first thing I noticed is that I was not offended. I've worked pretty darn hard at this body of mine and I like it when I get feedback that I haven't been wasting my time. I chose to focus only on the beginning of the sentence, and that's all compliment. I thought about that and concluded that the statement is not offensive if only I am aware of it because I am not offended. Why is that? Well, offending someone is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition of making an offensive statement.

Furthermore, there is nothing in the statement that is untrue. (Well, allow me to be a little arrogant for a bit) I am pretty muscular, when considered against the average of most females. Can a true statement be offensive? I suspect so, and actually, it is more likely the truth that is the offensive aspect, since it cause us to come face to face with an uncomfortable reality, and the resultant cognitive dissonance is so unpleasant that we seek to shove it in someone else's face.

But what, if someone wanted to be offended by the statement (and it sure has the smell of something offensive) could be considered offensive? First, the idea that there needs to be a special category for women is a bit offensive. As though since women are conventionally less muscular than men there needs to be a different scale or competition just to help them win something. Secondly, it is a bit offensive that he felt the need to include the honorific, "for a girl" as if I could possibly forget and consider myself on the same level as a man. Finally, one could consider the fact that he wanted to let me know that he thought I was 'pretty jacked', but needed to curtail his praise with the diminuative phrase 'for a girl', is rather condescending and a bit patronizing. 

Anyway, this whole post is what is going through a woman's brain the next time you compliment her and she stares into the distance with a vague smile for a while. Compliments: Serious business.

The title is meant to remind the reader of the song "Pretty fly (for a while guy)", and is not meant to imply anything about the race of the gentleman in question."

You Might be a Canadian Triathlete

If you've ever had to thaw your swimsuit before putting it on,

you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If your shampoo gives your scalp that great tingly feeling because of the ice crystals,

you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If your standard issue race gear is number, timing chip, and bear bells,

you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If you smuggle gravel onto the indoor track just to get that 'trail-run' feeling through the eight winter training months,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If you credit your latest PB to a startled, grumpy beaver,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If you freak out while doing laps because something is following you, but you just aren't used to feeling your toes,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If replacing the chain on your bike means the snow chains,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If you have ever felt the need to Google the effects of jogging in Yak Traks,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

If the extra weight from blood you assumed you would lose to mosquitoes throws off your first States race,
you might be a Canadian Triathlete

Seriously, Though, Who AM I Going to Call?

Yesterday a friend phoned me in moderate need and since I was right in front of my computer (I an concerned it is becoming part of me) I figured I could oblige. I Googled to see what the nearest police station was to my friend's location. Simple, right?
In my quest to simply find the closest station, keep in mind I could do this calmly from the safety of my desk, not desperately on my smart phone, I Googled

Police Bonnie Doon
Police Bonnie Doon Edmonton
Police Station Bonnie Doon Edmonton
Police Stations Bonnie Doon Edmonton
Police Station near Bonnie Doon Edmonton
Police Stations near Bonnie Doon Edmonton
Police Edmonton
Police Station Edmonton
Police Stations Edmonton
EPS
EPS Edmonton

To my dismay none of these resulted in pointing out any police stations. The results varied from the unstaffed and purely training oriented Police Recruiting Center downtown, which I'm pretty sure was a restaurant last time I passed it, to the Milarm Retail store because they were listed as providing police equipment.

I am disappointed that something this important, finding a police station, can not be found with the most simple Google searches. Is there a magic phrase I am missing? (Police Bonnie Doon Edmonton Please) I don't want to tell the police how to do their jobs but I'm going to: it might be useful for them to clean up their online presence.

Perhaps if I had the Siri system I could simply scream at her and she'd find me a police station. Or singing lessons. Either way.

UPDATE:
It appears the magic words were "Edmonton Police Locations"! Try to remember that, everyone!

Honorary Baby Steps

I was not going to post today - this week is finals week and I find myself drowning- but then I read this post by The Reformed Patriarchy Whore, and decided to post my own baby steps into feminism as well.

This past Friday I was giving up my turret, that I work in every night every day of the week, to the weekend worker, who had been in the turret occasionally before and had been trained in it. As I let him in the door he said something that I have forgotten since and I responded that "I knew everything." he chuckled and said that "Of course you're supposed to; You're a woman."
Feeling incredibly annoyed, I controlled myself enough to give him a blank look and say that we should "ride right past that", and launched into a business-like description of anything he needed to know about the turret for the weekend. I made sure he was all set and took off for the night.

It might sound like an overreaction, but consider this; this person had been employed for about three months - I have been working at this job for four years. Further to that I am explaining to him how to do this job. I don't appreciate being patronized in this fashion, especially when I will need to assume a management capacity in coming months. Ordinarily I am the type of person who just chuckles, regardless of whether I consider it funny, and ignores it, but I have noticed that this tends to spiral out of control into working dynamics that I don't like. So here's to setting a line and nipping it in the bud.

Wildcard Weekend: Well Done, Sister Suffragette!

Did we forget this? Did we ignore the gift that was given to us? I wish I had wanted to be Missus Banks more as a young girl; seems she did some pretty serious butt-kicking.

A Nuclear War can Ruin your Whole Day

As someone who has a vested interest in knowing if there is someone out there targeting women, one thing I cannot stand from the media is crying wolf. Maybe it was just a slow news day, or maybe the good people at the news agency just really want to make sure we all stay safe and secure with a man guarding us, but either way it just dampens my alarm about the real psychopaths targeting women, assuming it's just more crying wolf.

Further to this point, what exactly is the criteria for designating a 'targeted attack'? Two women have been attacked, and so it was concluded that the attacker was targeting women, and the media responded by interviewing women in the area to make sure they were properly frightened. If it had been two men, they would have called it 'a series of attacks', but since they happen to be women, they are 'targeted'.

This is because being a women is considered a novelty. The most obvious place to see this, and possibly the place where it started, is in Hollywood. Think of an action movie that stars a group. If it isn't all men, there usually one black guy and one woman. Because being a woman is an interesting novelty - something that defines an individual. A man, well, that's just a normal person, but a woman, that's a woman.

Anyway, what I am laboriously getting to is that I haven't felt entirely safe (except at work - guns do that) since the discovery of the Russell Williams case, and so if the media is going to alarm my concern that some misogynistic asshole is trying to stage a sequel here in the City of Champions, they better have solid gold proof.

A Dear Loss

I am sad to report that my Grandpa, Kenneth Haywood, passed away peacefully on Monday. He was a fantastic businessman who never let success go to his head. He stayed grounded and empathic even into his retirement, remaining active in the Rotary Club, building a school in Malawi, and championing the Auto Theft prevention movement. He and my Grandma, Sheila Haywood, were often found jetsetting around the world, enjoying life. The staff at Grey Nuns Hospital and St. Jospeh's Auxillary were caring and patient with us, even when we had to steal chairs from pretty much everywhere to seat his well-wishers.

Grandpa was often quiet, content simply to connect people and watch the magic. Family gatherings were often characterized by him snoozing gently in a chair while we surrounded him, chattering like pigeons. Although he would often get up and wander off suddenly, deciding by some internal clock that it was time for bed, he made sure we all had the chance to say Goodbye at the end. That consideration and patient interest in everyone he met are the traits that I will remember him for, and hope that I can emulate in my own life.

Thank you for everything Grandpa. You changed more than we will ever know.

For Whom the Road Tolls

One thing that I have always hated is reading polls that tell me what Canadians want. Especially when I disagree; it makes my opinion look less important. As if I am some radical, wild card with my novel notion that I shouldn't have to pay for things I have already paid for. Like roads.

Apparently, thanks to an online survey of Canadians (my first thought, 'how do they know it was all Canadians?') at least 50% of us would support road tolls. The article paints this solution like a miracle cure saying it will, "ease gridlock and shorten their commute", "get rid of gridlock in our cities", "reduce strain on roads and increase overall efficiency", and "encourage drivers to take public transit". Read that last one again, "encourage drivers to take public transit". What they mean by that is the want to put the squeeze on drivers, to make driving less pleasant and so make transit seem more pleasant by comparison.

The problem is for those of us unwilling or unable to take transit, we feel the squeeze anyway. One commuter surveyed said he had added $1,200 to his annual driving costs. This, at a time when filling up at the pump can be harrowing. Just like that guy who advises lonely men to 'tactfully insult woman to bring them down to your level', it is ridiculous that we should be threatened into taking transit. We should find a way to enhance the transit system until people genuinely want to use it.

The other tactic that is suggested by tolls is that people will find alternate routes, and thus "Ease gridlock". Ignoring the fact that the major roads, the ones eyed for tolls, are the ones that are fully equipped to handle that much traffic, this plan is not going to be effective because with gas how much it is, it is not worth it to divert because the extra gas money will sink you anyway.

I really want to tag this one under "stupid ideas", but I will settle for just learning how to counterfeit coins in case I ever run into a road toll in the great country of Canada.

Tweeting Asterisks

It's long been obvious that we hold our members of parliament to a higher standard than our regular chums, especially in the House of Commons. It is with this higher standard in mind that we approach the situation of MP Pat Martin, whose name is so close to Paul Martin's that every time I read this story I get a little thrill that Paul has beefed up.

The event in question, of course, is the use of profanity in a tweet issued while Mr. Martin (the Pat one, not the Paul one) was sitting in his place in the HoC. He was frustrated with the budget proceedings and so tweeted that; "This is a f--king disgrace ... closure again. And on the Budget! There’s not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot sh--." in another tweet he invoked the phrase "god damn". When he was called out for his foul mouth on twitter, he replied "F--- you." which has earned him some Internet cred, but not so much admiration from the populous.

The detail that I feel makes a difference that is often glossed over in the press is that the tweeter who 'called him out' did so by saying he expected a foul-mouthed socialist to capitalize the word 'budget' but not the word 'god'. It may not make a difference to some people, but to myself, the fact that he was being criticized for not being religious does make a difference. The main criticism was not about his language, but about his lack of respect for another tweeter's God.

As for the debate about his language, it seems ridiculous to claim he should not be allowed to write profanity on twitter while in the House. Either he can write profanity on twitter or he can not. The tweet is not magically going to change because his physical location is one place or another.

Personally, I don't care what kind of language politicians use, just so long as their message is not obscured. In this case he was simply expressing distaste with the budget proceedings, and that came through even more effectively because we all gasped and thought, "Bad words!" But let us not obscure our message. He did not cuss out a citizen who was criticizing his language or politics, but one who was commenting on his religion.

Leaking the Leaks

Imagine this; you've been scanning the files available on Wikileaks all afternoon, whether for interest or just boredom, when you get up to take a quick bathroom break, taking your cellphone to play some angry birds. Halfway through your constitutional, however, you receive a phone call, which you answer, despite being on the toilet, you gross person.

It's an automated voice, tonelessly telling you that your Internet provider has been notified that you have been found on Wikileaks. The voice continues on to tell you that you may be fined $2500 if you are convicted of looking at government files, then gives you a chance to record a defense.

What would you do?

Answer? Hang up. It's complete garbage, propagated by these idiots, Prankdial, in the hopes that they could make a quick buck, although where exactly they acquire the money from is pretty vague. (Maybe in your haste to lodge a defense you blurt out your credit card detail and SSN?) The site includes such gems as "Why you callin' my boyfriend?" and the phone call from the ring saying "seven days" which I'm not going to say would make me pee myself, but I still check the TV for well water stains and that bitch is about 8 years, 4 months, and 12 days too late. The uncomfortable thing is that they can also impersonate the RAAA, claiming you've been found guilty of piracy, and could be fined some exorbitant amount.

Let alone how offensive some of these recordings are, playing on stereotypes and other offensive depictions, I can't understand how impersonation is illegal, but this is legal. I can't wait for the day when someone is actually contacted by the authorities and ignores them because they believe it's just a prank. Or more likely, someone just tries to ignore them and claim that they thought it was a prank. Fun is one thing, but is this really something we should tolerate?

Yet Another Sacrifice

Although I have often enjoyed them, I always feel slightly sad about pictures of gravesites. It has been considered rude to photograph graves, but that tradition has gone by the wayside in history, as have many niceties that unfortunately became inconvenient for our own selfish purposes.

One further thought on this is the publicity of soldiers' gravesites. It almost seems that their final sacrifice was their privacy in death, is to remind us of the heavy cost of war. It is doubtless that most would have no qualm about our publicizing their gravesites, but it is just another thing we give them no choice about.  We will remember them.

If We Like it, Then We Better put a Ring on it

I hate being led by the nose. I hate being offered shiny baubles to distract me from something that has started to smell. Most of all I hate when the shiny baubles are only a tiny fraction of a giant pile of gold that is currently sleeping under a smiling dragon.
Just recently Edmonton held a giant forum to discuss the proposed, now confirmed, arena that would cost an additional 100 million that we do not exactly have. Although it was not unanimous, the feelings of the city were apparent; No arena. Not with the current financial plan that was laid out. When the provincial government, the people we had planned to ask for 100 million dollars, reneged on a 92 million that was allegedly promised to us for a new museum (whether actually or by simply implying they would pay and then changing) I, for one, reevaluated my assessment of the probability that the province would 'chip in' to zero. But the arena progresses.

So now, in the Edmonton Journal, we are offered a choice; Would we like to finish the Anthony Henday, the celebrated ring road encircling the city that even Yours Truly has used in the past 24 hours? Or would we like to finish the LRT that has long been a source of embarrassment for a city our size? We have to pick one. Maybe we should just paint two balls, white and black, then let Mayor Mandel pick one from a bag?

How about both? Is that an option? Can we have both internal and external convenience when it comes to transportation in the city? Especially when you consider the Arena would be considerably hampered by a lack of effective transportation to and from the site. Apparently not. Truth be told, I retain a fondness (bafflingly and in flagrant defiance of the evidence) for our Mayor, but I really believe he needs to step back from this arena deal and revisit it in 5 to 10 years when we have the ability to travel around our city without busting a blood vessel. This is not a case of having my cake and eating it too, this is a case of having a plate and some utensils to eat my cake before making the icing. Otherwise it's just going to be a huge mess.

The Mother of Hubris

The story on the CBC is pretty convincing; the majestic Golden Eagle, which has long graced our skies (the only territory it is not endangered in), has come under threat. The birds, which are listed as in a 'sensitive' condition by Alberta Fish and Wildlife (a word which here means "please stop using them for tennis"), have been dealing with a severe lead poisoning issue. The Wildlife Rehabilitation society of Edmonton has been forced to euthanize five in the last year from severe levels of lead in the birds' blood.

The society believes the lead comes from spent cartridges left by hunters during the hunting season. A quick search on google shows this is a common belief throughout the pacific northwest with numerous studies documenting the issue. A phone call to my source confirmed the use of soft lead for hunting species such as grouse or other small game, but not big game such as deer or bear. And although it is rare for a wounded animal to get away and provide a movable lead feast for other carnivorous animals, it is common that lead pellets miss their target and are left to move swiftly into the food chain.


Although I had begun this story with the plan to discredit the society's theory and supplant in the theory that it was the birds' habitats atop lead-lined telephone wires that were causing the poisoning, the overwhelming evidence, such as the California ban on lead shot that heralded in a dramatic drop in wildlife lead poisoning, points to the fact that it is a big problem.


So why don't more hunters choose non-lead shot? The fact is that it is just not available for purchase in small enough sizes for use. Whether this is due to non-demand or some sinister plot to make Golden Eagles endangered, the fact is this is a perfect point for the government to step in and get its 'regulating on'. So although it is pretty embarrassing to gear myself up for a story, only to be completely stymied, it is better to get the issue out. Maybe the money we save from disbanding the long-gun registry could be used for providing non-lead alternatives.


The title refers to the fact that Athenian Aeschylus, "the father of Greek tragedy" was killed when an eagle dropped a turtle on his bald head, thinking it was a rock. 

Jacking the Sound to Noise Ratio

With Remembrance day coming up the usual slew of once-a-year politicos come out of the woodwork to voice their opinion on wars and the military in general, sometimes in the mast passive-aggressive, tasteless way possible.

An 86 year old veteran who volunteers his time to sell poppies arrived at one of the iconic poppy boxes that are endemic this time of year to discover someone had stuffed a political cartoon underneath it. The cartoon mimicked the old Herman cartoons (thinking of them reminds me of my wonderful great grandmother's basement) and contained the text,

"May I suggest that we declare war, invade and rob another rich country with an army of hired killers, soldiers that is, like we did in the past to Germany and a dozen other countries."

A sentiment so awkwardly written that I am left wondering if we are all being trolled. I mean, it takes a lot of bravery to stuff a bit of paper underneath a box instead of confronting the octogenarians that service it, (not to be ageist) and obviously a lot of commitment to have done it twice; what kind of person could possess these qualities? Only the most die-hard, staunch anti-war protester.

In case there is any doubt left at this point in my writing career, let me remove all doubt: I absolutely support people's right to freedom of speech. In making this statement, however, the protester removes the objection from war and places it on objecting to soldiers. Pretty much everybody agrees war is bad (Mm-kay?) Few positive effects came from it, and by and large, it's a last-ditch effort for achieving goals. But soldiers are a different story. Having soldiers does not imply violence. Being a soldiers does not imply being violent, or even pro-war.

When making your statement obfuscates the more well developed and relevant messages, you can't be surprised when people want to collar you. Not 'the man' but your fellow protesters. You ruin our credibility, and make it difficult for people to find the best message to support their goals. It's like what happened to feminists. Their message became more and more confused until now only the bravest call themselves feminists, since to do so invites ridicule. If the anti-war/anti-violence movement wants to keep it's tread, it must guard against mixing the message with anti-soldier sentiments; to do so would spell it's downfall.

In activism, the medium is the message, and the message from this 'activist' is perfectly clear: "I'm a joke"

 

Dig Within

While looking around into the Chinese coin discovery that was logged in the Yukon I discovered the full report on archelogical digs in the Fort St. James area. It's an impressive read with some killer maps if you have the time, but if not, here are some concerns I found.

Along with an interesting look into the methods and processes that they use at the site, there were some concerns about the effectivness and the reliability of the method. It seems there was inconsistancy in labelling a location a 'high' likelihood for artifacts (both of archeolgical sites and something called culturally modified tree locations). This led to communication break down as it was unclear why some had been marked high probability, while equivalent ones elsewhere had been marked moderate or lower. I can support the need to allow for the personal discretion of the investigator, however, it should not be so severe as to call into doubt the efectiveness of the report. These reports are used to predict the impact of industry development; if companies think the information is useless, they will be more inclined to dismiss findings that may make development difficult, and valuable archelogical sites could be senselessly lost.

The company also contacted both relevant industries and First Nations bands to gain their feedback on the method. However, out of nine First Nations the company contacted a full four of them simply did not respond to the minimum email and letter (some were even phoned). Of the remaining five, three groups reported they did not know the method existed, one commented on its use, and one group said they would not use it because "went through Apollo", meaning Apollo forest products, a large company who works in the area. To compare, of the eleven companies the organization spoke to, all were familiar with the model, but a few said they did not prefer to use it. This is incredibly disheartening since the bands had helped to develop the method when it was first created in 2003. The report speculates that a high management turnover rate contributed to the process being lost, but again, in cases where archeological relevance is concerned we are missing a valuable ally in the bands. The report mentions later including "sensitive First Nations data", but if the company had not been so diligent about contacting the bands (indeed, we are still missing the information from four of the relevant bands) this information could have been lost.

If this company's experiences with First Nations bands is typical there needs to be a closer look into interactions between companies and bands. Without a proper channel for discussion there will be more animosity and difficulty, building resentment until no progress can be made for anyone.

The title is a quote from the venerable Marcus Aurelius: "Dig within. Within is the wellspring of Good; and it is always ready to bubble up, if you just dig."

This Post has 22 Theories

Marg Delahunty! It's me, Pun'd it.

Although there are few things I would point to as decidedly Canadian, one of the few is the oddball political humor of This Hour has 22 Minutes. Years ago my family could be found watching the series together, laughing ourselves silly over even such simple things as the introductory warning that heralded in the show. (My favorite was in reference to a massive snow dump that left Toronto phoning the army for help, "Warning: Center of Universes should have better snow removal.") It was lighthearted but informative, and I have no doubt it is partially responsible for both the country and my own interest in politics.

One of the best skits the show would engage in was Marg Delahunty, warrior princess, who could be seen in her red uniform and plastic sword, charging up to politicians to lampoon them for anything they felt the public deserved to discuss. It helped show us that politicians are human and available, not some great head in a tower, passing down commandments from on high. Sometimes it even made us feel a little better about legislation that maybe didn't proceed as we had hoped, a great salve in the sometimes insensitive world of politics.

Recently, however, Ms. Delahunty approached Toronto mayor Rob Ford for a bit of light ribbing that backfired when he hid himself in his house and phoned 911. To be honest, it was perhaps imprudent to approach Mr Ford at home, although whether he was alone (the crew had resolved only to approach him if he was alone) or his daughter was present, who he claims fled "freaking out" into the house (One wonders what she will do when Halloween rolls around), is under debate. Has he never been approached by reporters at his home?

Although I hope the crew decides to avoid approaching people at their private residency, I sincerely hope that they do not discontinue their activities. Without this bit of fun I cannot imagine what would happen to the state of political interest in this country. Mr. Ford should learn to lighten up and take what comes his way. No one is free from political scrutiny, no matter what outfit it wears.

He Blinded me with Status

Is it not odd that a man who was once a strong contender for 'most powerful man in the world' is now under investigation for criminal activities? But this dialogue never happened, could not have begun to happen, while he was in power.

George W. Bush, once the president of the United States, is currently the suspect in an investigation into allegations of torture by his order from when he was in power. It is apparent he is even aware of these allegations, when he cancelled a private speaking conference after learning of the Center for Constitutional Rights' plan to prosecute, and takes steps to avoid being arrested, which also indicates if not an admission of guilt, at least a lack of confidence in his innocence.

What is frustrating in this case is that nothing was done while Mr. Bush was in office. Nothing could be done. There is a case to be made for public security, but why are there no systems in place to account for this? Are we to just accept that the president enjoys immunity from prosecution while in office, excepting cases that may provide interesting fodder for trashy tabloid mags?

Alternately, what will we discover once our own officials leave power?

The least of which is likely to be a case involving deportation of a Canadian citizen. If nothing else can offend people, ignoring Government issued documents by simply waving their hands and insisting they 'made a mistake', should certainly do it. I can understand the desire to get rid of criminals, but ignoring their birth certificate and passport to facilitate dumping them in a foreign country is not a viable option.

It is possible this is a threat to scare the individual into behaving properly, but the important aspect of a threat is that it must be achievable. If steps have been taken that convince this man that the government could actually seize his passport and birth certificate, then 'deport' him, then we have a problem.

As the State, So the People

Earlier I have spoke of the institutional policy of Canadian exploitation indicative by Homeland Security's pedophile website, and the repercussions such a policy holds for Canada. But lately, we have discovered the worm goes deeper. As we should have suspected when an institutional policy of exploitation of Canada exists, it can be guaranteed that the belief will 'trickle down' to more casual exploitation.

The Scouts issue in the states is the most apparent issue of this. A quick reading reveals the cavalier attitude with which the scouting program treats sovereign Canadian soil. In 1976 Turley is released from a state hospital after kidnapping a child and being deemed a "mentally disordered sex offender". He is released after being ordered to return to Canada, and only report if he returned to the States. That is correct, they felt they could dump their trash up here with no repercussions.

Three years later he molested three boys while at a camp. When one of the victims reports the abuse, the problem is solved when Turley packs up and goes home to Canada. The magical land where children don't exist and can therefore not be abused. True to form, after this incident Turley packs up and moves to Victoria where he molests more children.

Perhaps you are unconvinced; This could all be circumspect, blown out of proportion, or incomplete information. When confronted about the 'perversion file' that Scouts maintained on people like Turley, Scouts executive Buford Hill said, "'I don’t remember what we decided, other than we didn’t want this person on our staff. Hopefully, he went back to Canada and that was their problem.'" I would like to press the point that this was not a guarded communication where their shady backroom policy is brought to the light of day, this is a boldfaced statement to the press. He is so confident that this view is mainstream that he offers this up to preserve the Scouts good name - to show they did something about this predator. Apparently the Scouts' 'youth protection efforts' only applies to American youths.

Just as a psychological aside the report mentions that this man lives in Alberta but is 'reformed' by a sex offender program and quotes him saying, 'Rick Turley today is a caring loving person who just wants to stay below the radar.' That's right - he refers to himself in the third person when speaking about how he is reformed. This typically indicates a disconnect from the statement. He doesn't believe he's reformed, and neither do I. A persistent, reckless offender like Turley is unlikely to be 'treated' without chemical castration, and even then, not completely.

Personally, after this incident, the finding that Scouts America occasionally traded information with Scouts Canada about violators is cold comfort. If such Anti-Canadian sentiments can be gleaned from one report, you can guarantee the issue goes further in private. 

The title is not meant to imply that all Americans believe these things, but that a state institutional system can influence the common person's beliefs. 

That's Free Enterprise, Friends

I think Albertans knew that Premier Redford would have a bit of an upward climb to defend herself in the beginning, not only because every politician does but also because her sudden second-place win means we didn't have the time to work around to the idea of her being in power, and society does not move quickly.
What we had not realized was that this climb might be fabricated by a false 'call to action' by an opposition leader.

Suncor's Firebag work site in Fort McMurray allegedly let go of approximately 200 workers and replaced them with cheaper temporary foreign workers, which had been approved by the government when Suncor claimed they could not find appropriate local workers.

The NDP's leader Brian Mason is now calling on Premier Redford to step in and resolve this situation but it seems like he is setting her up for a fool's errand. If she steps in to have the worker's passes revoked she will be seen as anti-immigration and anti-business, if she fails to, leaving the situation alone, she loses the base of public support that put her in the office.

Now, while I am not particularly fond of unions, in this case it is clear they have egg on their face. They tried to demand wages that were obviously too high, and they were outmaneuvered by the company. This is not any different from the usual squabbles of hiring union or non. What would the union have done if the company had hired non-union Albertans? There is no point to belonging to a union if they cannot negotiate these situations without resorting to crying for the government.

On the other hand, the company has screwed themselves over in this situation. Should they ever attempt to return to the unionized employee this has seriously damaged relations to the point that any sensible union would rake them over the coals on the next contract negotiation. The company can't count on the government rubber-stamping these workers again, after this outcry, and the temporary workers are just that, temporary. This was clearly just a power-maneuver to give the business extra clout in further negotiations, but by escalating to sway public opinion the union has already gotten the upper hand.

In essence all that Premier Redford needs to do is wait. Further applications for workers won't  be approved and the union and business will be forced back into their playpen to learn how to play nice. She should not have to micro-manage business interactions, but they should re-examine the application process to hire temporary workers. But that should be it. She's got a province worth of bigger things to deal with.

The title is from a quote by Barbara Ehrenreich: "That's free enterprise, friends: freedom to gamble, freedom to lose. And the great thing -- the truly democratic thing about it -- is that you don't even have to be a player to lose."