Big Brother time! (This one's for you Megan...)
Plenty has happened since my last BB8 post; it's not AS boring as it was in the beginning, but I still hold firm to my assessment that this season isn't nearly as good as seasons past. That being said...
Joe "gracefully" left, Nick got the shaft, Kail finally got put out of her misery, Mike played stupid and was booted, Dustin had to pay by acting as the fall guy, and Jen was backdoored. What a wonderful world.
And then there were seven.
Dick - When did Dick get boring? Not a single abusive outburst or tirade since Jen left. It's amazing that he's still in the house, but I think he can thank the producers of BB for that, at least in part. They've been known to try to influence the guests in the Diary Room, and knowing that Dick is their biggest ratings draw in the house, they'd be reluctant to let him go. Anyway, as much as he's managed to turn this season's snorefest into a somewhat watchable spectacle, he's also turned into the biggest creep EVER. Could he be more eager to make out with his own daughter!?! His "congratulatory" hugs and kisses are really starting to weird me out, and the whole "I am your faaaathaa" routine isn't terribly believeable. "Daniele, take your vitamins." "Daniele, do you want to talk about our relationship?" "Daniele, do you need a hug?" No Dick, she doesn't need a hug, she needs you to leave her the eff alone, you gross her out on multiple levels. He used to make things interesting, he used to be very influential, but now he's the desperate old guy. He'll be here for at least another two weeks by my calculations, perhaps even until the final two.
Zach - I still haven't figured out what this guy is useful for, but I don't think he's as stupid as I did before. He comes off as a pretty intelligent guy in the diary room, and I guess he can't be THAT stupid if he outlasted so many others, but he's still just a floater to me. He's never won a single veto competition or HOH, even though he's played in almost every one, and he hasn't managed to nail down a solid alliance. Float float float Zach. He must be so bored! No friends, no conflict, no nothing. He's on the block this week, but he might just survive. Who knows, who cares. Zach is boring.
Jameka - Man, I laughed when the BB people started playing organ music every time Jameka speaks. Her "God is a gangster" speech was great, lotsa laughs in my house that night. I feel sorry for her in a way, a God-fearing woman being surrounded by a bunch of evil, blasphemous deviants...but not THAT sorry. She's still boring. And giving up 5 HOH competitions for the chance at 1 POV? Silly girl. She's got 2 weeks max left in that house, and I have a feeling she won't really be missed.
Jessica - I don't know what she sees in America's player, but whatever, she's managed to get herself farther than anyone expected, so kudos to her. Stupid move this week not putting up Dick or Daniele, and she'll likely pay for that when she's the first person voted out of the final four, but even stupider was starting a reality showmance. She wouldn't have given Eric a second glance in the real world, but he's the house Adonis compared to Zach and Dick. Still, as America's player he's not able to be completely honest with her about strategy, and that fact is sure to hurt her in the long run. Again, boring.
Eric - Am I the only person who wants to crazy-glue his eyebrow in place, so that he can't raise it like the Joker from Batman every time he speaks? Nerd, nerd, nerd. Annoying? Oh yes. He drives me nuts. "America loves me!" Uhhh...are ya sure? Cause I beg to differ. The powers that be are doing what they can to keep him in the house, and it's a good thing, because I don't think he would have stayed by his own devices. And another thing: LAUGH WITH YOUR MOUTH OPEN! Every time he laughs, I get this premonition that snot is going to fly out of his nose. Watch him next time, it's irritating. He'll make it to the final four I think, but not because I want him to.
Amber - Too much. This girl is TOO MUCH!! "God bless you God." "I think when I leave the show I'm going to be America's Next Top Model." "I had a vision and God told me I was going to win the power of Veto." "Nobody wants to be in the final 2 with me because everyone loves me and I'm a threat in that way." I swear to you, I wish you could still get $50 bucks for admitting someone to the Butterscotch Palace, because I'd be a red bill richer. She's entertaining if nothing else, with all the sobbing and bible-thumping and modelling aspirations, ahhhh....*wiping tears of laughter*. She's probably going home this week, and good riddance, but her psychological volatility will be missed.
Daniele - Ladies and gentlemen, the winner of Big Brother 8. She deserves to win. She's kicked butt in the competitions (3 POVs and 2 HOHs), managed to evade the shadow of her father to an acceptable extent, and doesn't have as many enemies as one would think she should. Her and her father in the final 2 would ensure her the cash, but even against the others she's superior. Only my prediction, but an accurate one, I believe.
And that's it for now. The best part of this show is watching clips on YouTube with all the footage the producers don't want you to see. How contestants are coached in the diary room; how they influence houseguests as to who to nominate and evict; and how they play up the psychosis of the weak and weary to better the show's ratings. Ahh, reality tv at it's best. I don't think they've done a very good job of accentuating the Alice in Wonderland theme, so I hope there are more twists to come.
In any case, I'll be in front of the tv faithfully on Thursday night, as will all of you.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
If I Had A Million Dollars....
One of today's big headlines: "Single Winner in $314 Million Powerball Lottery"
Imagine. $314 million bucks now belongs to one person. Could be an old lady with a bunch of really lucky dogs. Could be a college senior who will now be drunk until February. One ticket, probably costing about two dollars, and that one person's life is changed forever.
My husband and I often talk about what we would do if we ever won the lottery, as I'm sure everybody has. Now don't get me wrong, I'll never ACTUALLY win the lottery, largely because I don't play (I don't have any luck - like I say, I wouldn't win at Bingo if I was the only person playing). Like the convenience-store-gamblers say, "You'll never win if you don't buy a ticket," so I've resigned myself to that fact, but it still doesn't stop us from daydreaming about it.
Just think about it for a minute. Let's say you're a family with a couple of kids and you win a much-needed million dollars. What would you really do with it?
The first sensible thing to do would be hire a financial planner, right? That's always been my train of thought, but maybe not with ONE million dollars. Give me a half hour and a big truck, and I could spend that much at Wal-Mart. So no financial planner for this amount. First, let's pay all our bills. The average Canadian family is over $70,000 in debt. So let's say you pay off your bills, your car, your credit cards, and your student loans, and let's say all that costs you $100,000 (which it probably doesn't...paying off every single debt would probably cost a lot more, but let's just go with a nice round number). And let's say you sold your house, getting rid of your mortgage. So you're at square one, with no debts whatsoever.
What do you do first? Plenty of people would say "build a house". As anyone who has built a house knows, this venture is very expensive, often more expensive than buying. And this new house wouldn't just be ANY house, it's your DREAM house, right? Come on, you're a millionaire!!! Can't be a millionaire and build a 1200 sqaure foot bungalow! So by the time you buy a nice piece of waterfront property, get all your permits, pay for your labor, materials, furniture, etc, etc, etc,...you're out about...hmmm...I'd say about $400,000. Possibly a bit less if your dream house is not that fancy, possibly more if it's a real palace. So half of your money is gone already.
Now of course you're going to need a new car. At least one. A millionaire can't be seen driving around town in a Kia! So let's say $50,000 on some fancy new wheels (not including the GTO you promised to buy your husband if you ever won the lottery...and not including the two old muscle cars he wants to buy and restore for your two boys for when they're older...and not including a minivan, which you kind of need anyway). On second thought, maybe I need to revise that number to $100,000. Five vehicles will be very expensive, and I can afford it now, being a millionaire and all.
Now we have our dream house and our dream cars. What about a nice vacation? St. Tropez, anyone? Let's go! Flights, hotel, meals, entertainment, insurance, souveniers, ground transportation.....hmmm...for four people, plus a friend for my son, plus someone to watch the baby so we can go out for a night or two while on vacation....I'll say this trip would cost an easy $25,000.
So now we're back from vacation, and we need to get down to business with this money. Our kids will, if they know what's good for them, be going to college someday. Considering how much it cost when I went, I'd be surprised if a million dollars would pay for it all in 2016. But let's put aside $100,000 for each of the kids, as I'm sure that will pay for tuition at least. And let's also assume our two kids are going to each have two kids of their own, so we have to put aside a few bucks for the grandkids too...let's say $25,000 each? There's another $100,000.
Hold on now, I better tally up these numbers. Hmm....I only have $175,000 left. Didn't I have a million dollars just a second ago? I didn't even go shopping yet!
Ok, now we have to make a few investments for the long term. $50,000 on the right stocks should do it, I think.
So that leaves me with $125,000. Still seems like a lot of money, but I have to give some away. And, being as their "favorite" sister/brother/aunt/neice/cousin/etc is now a millionaire, nobody is expecting $50 in a card, if you know what I mean. So let's figure in at least ten people, and give them $10,000 each. There's another $100,000.
Now I have $25,000 left, plus whatever I got for selling my house. I haven't given any money to charity yet, I haven't paid for the upkeep, maintenence, and operating costs of my fleet of vehicles and my huge, electricity-consuming house. I haven't paid my taxes. I haven't even bought groceries yet.
Suddenly one million dollars doesn't seem like very much, does it?
Winning $1,000,000 in the 6/49 isn't the same today as it would have been twenty years ago. Many of us have spent a million dollars and more in our lifetime, and certainly aren't rich. It makes you wonder if winning that much would really be enough. Surely, if I won a million dollars, I wouldn't be building a house worth five-hundred grand, but when you hear that someone won the lottery, they're automatically "The Rich People", and they're expected to live a certain lifestyle. I have a feeling that a millionaire's only brother would be a little bitter getting $10,000. And $50,000 doesn't seem like very much to invest on your future. So these numbers I have used as examples might be skewed somewhat, but we can all agree on one thing - it doesn't take long for money to disappear. If not on houses and cars and vacations, it would go somewhere else, and fast. To live the life of a celebrity, to have every material possession we want, would one million dollars be enough? Probably not.
Still, if anyone has a spare million they're willing to part with, I would be happy to take it off their hands.
Imagine. $314 million bucks now belongs to one person. Could be an old lady with a bunch of really lucky dogs. Could be a college senior who will now be drunk until February. One ticket, probably costing about two dollars, and that one person's life is changed forever.
My husband and I often talk about what we would do if we ever won the lottery, as I'm sure everybody has. Now don't get me wrong, I'll never ACTUALLY win the lottery, largely because I don't play (I don't have any luck - like I say, I wouldn't win at Bingo if I was the only person playing). Like the convenience-store-gamblers say, "You'll never win if you don't buy a ticket," so I've resigned myself to that fact, but it still doesn't stop us from daydreaming about it.
Just think about it for a minute. Let's say you're a family with a couple of kids and you win a much-needed million dollars. What would you really do with it?
The first sensible thing to do would be hire a financial planner, right? That's always been my train of thought, but maybe not with ONE million dollars. Give me a half hour and a big truck, and I could spend that much at Wal-Mart. So no financial planner for this amount. First, let's pay all our bills. The average Canadian family is over $70,000 in debt. So let's say you pay off your bills, your car, your credit cards, and your student loans, and let's say all that costs you $100,000 (which it probably doesn't...paying off every single debt would probably cost a lot more, but let's just go with a nice round number). And let's say you sold your house, getting rid of your mortgage. So you're at square one, with no debts whatsoever.
What do you do first? Plenty of people would say "build a house". As anyone who has built a house knows, this venture is very expensive, often more expensive than buying. And this new house wouldn't just be ANY house, it's your DREAM house, right? Come on, you're a millionaire!!! Can't be a millionaire and build a 1200 sqaure foot bungalow! So by the time you buy a nice piece of waterfront property, get all your permits, pay for your labor, materials, furniture, etc, etc, etc,...you're out about...hmmm...I'd say about $400,000. Possibly a bit less if your dream house is not that fancy, possibly more if it's a real palace. So half of your money is gone already.
Now of course you're going to need a new car. At least one. A millionaire can't be seen driving around town in a Kia! So let's say $50,000 on some fancy new wheels (not including the GTO you promised to buy your husband if you ever won the lottery...and not including the two old muscle cars he wants to buy and restore for your two boys for when they're older...and not including a minivan, which you kind of need anyway). On second thought, maybe I need to revise that number to $100,000. Five vehicles will be very expensive, and I can afford it now, being a millionaire and all.
Now we have our dream house and our dream cars. What about a nice vacation? St. Tropez, anyone? Let's go! Flights, hotel, meals, entertainment, insurance, souveniers, ground transportation.....hmmm...for four people, plus a friend for my son, plus someone to watch the baby so we can go out for a night or two while on vacation....I'll say this trip would cost an easy $25,000.
So now we're back from vacation, and we need to get down to business with this money. Our kids will, if they know what's good for them, be going to college someday. Considering how much it cost when I went, I'd be surprised if a million dollars would pay for it all in 2016. But let's put aside $100,000 for each of the kids, as I'm sure that will pay for tuition at least. And let's also assume our two kids are going to each have two kids of their own, so we have to put aside a few bucks for the grandkids too...let's say $25,000 each? There's another $100,000.
Hold on now, I better tally up these numbers. Hmm....I only have $175,000 left. Didn't I have a million dollars just a second ago? I didn't even go shopping yet!
Ok, now we have to make a few investments for the long term. $50,000 on the right stocks should do it, I think.
So that leaves me with $125,000. Still seems like a lot of money, but I have to give some away. And, being as their "favorite" sister/brother/aunt/neice/cousin/etc is now a millionaire, nobody is expecting $50 in a card, if you know what I mean. So let's figure in at least ten people, and give them $10,000 each. There's another $100,000.
Now I have $25,000 left, plus whatever I got for selling my house. I haven't given any money to charity yet, I haven't paid for the upkeep, maintenence, and operating costs of my fleet of vehicles and my huge, electricity-consuming house. I haven't paid my taxes. I haven't even bought groceries yet.
Suddenly one million dollars doesn't seem like very much, does it?
Winning $1,000,000 in the 6/49 isn't the same today as it would have been twenty years ago. Many of us have spent a million dollars and more in our lifetime, and certainly aren't rich. It makes you wonder if winning that much would really be enough. Surely, if I won a million dollars, I wouldn't be building a house worth five-hundred grand, but when you hear that someone won the lottery, they're automatically "The Rich People", and they're expected to live a certain lifestyle. I have a feeling that a millionaire's only brother would be a little bitter getting $10,000. And $50,000 doesn't seem like very much to invest on your future. So these numbers I have used as examples might be skewed somewhat, but we can all agree on one thing - it doesn't take long for money to disappear. If not on houses and cars and vacations, it would go somewhere else, and fast. To live the life of a celebrity, to have every material possession we want, would one million dollars be enough? Probably not.
Still, if anyone has a spare million they're willing to part with, I would be happy to take it off their hands.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Response to "Not So Merry"
In the past few days, my blog post about the murder of Paula Gallant has received quite a bit of attention. In acknowledgement of these viewers, I want to thank everyone for taking the time to read this blog, as well as for the kind comments that have been posted. My intention was to vent about the anger and frustration I feel about the status of the investigation, as well as keep Ms. Gallant's name circulating in conversation, and I think I have accomplished that in some small measure. I encourage everyone to pass the word around, keep asking questions, and keep demanding answers. Though I can't speak for them, I would imagine that her family finds comfort in knowing that so many people, neighbors and complete strangers alike, support the fight for justice. I did not know Ms. Gallant, but based on the response to my blog, I have to assume that was my loss. Thanks again, for reading and for joining me in prayers and well wishes for her daughter and family.
-Gina MacDonald
-Gina MacDonald
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
In about January, I started getting email invitations to join "Facebook". I had no idea what Facebook was, but when I had been invited by about three-quarters of my email contacts, I decided to find out. A "social networking" site, designed to help people stay in touch with co-workers, classmates, and friends, had become instantly popular with people of all ages. At first I declined the invitations, but soon all conversations started or ended with "on Facebook". "Oh did you see the picture of so-and-so on Facebook?" "Did you add so-and-so on Facebook?" "I read on Facebook that so-and-so got married last year." So I did it - I joined Facebook.
I doubt that there are any readers here who AREN'T on Facebook, but just in case, let me sum in up for the two or three people in Canada who don't know how it works.
You accept an invitation to join via email (or just create a Facebook account). Facebook asks which of your email contacts you'd like to add as "Facebook friends", and you check their names accordingly. Those contacts who aren't yet registered on Facebook are sent an invitation. Those who are registered are automatically sent a "friend request", and once that request has been accepted, you have access to their personal profile. From this profile, you can look at THEIR friends, and request any of those people to be YOUR friends, and on and on it goes. Pretty soon you have a million people on your friends list, some you've requested, and some who have requested you.
But I'll assume most of you are registered on Facebook. Maybe you even have a Facebook window open as we speak. Probably.
I loved Facebook at first. I reconnected with so many people who I haven't seen in years and years, and brushed up on the lives of those who I'm well acquainted with. I got to see who got married, who got fat, who had kids, who moved to Korea, and who peaked in high school. I got to see pictures of their kids, their wedding, their summer vacations, their cats, their cars, and their memorable moments. I got to see who they were friends with, and (sometimes more interestingly) who they weren't friends with. I could send them a message, post a "hello" on their wall, or even poke them to get their attention. Most people's profiles were a comprehensive overview of their lives, with no detail spared. It would take a person days and weeks to read every wall post, see every picture, scroll through every friends list. Which is precisely why I quit.
I found myself spending far too much time on Facebook. I would have to check it every five minutes, just to see if anyone had sent me a message, or posted on my wall, or sent me a friend request. And I can admit this because I know I'm not alone. There are groups called "Facebook Anonymous" and "Crackbook", simply because people can't seem to stay away from this thing. Add to that the fact that, suddenly, I had almost three hundred people on my friends list....I wasn't aware that I even KNEW three hundred people, let alone LIKED those three hundred people. And I can almost guarantee that "friends lists" are often populated just to get an edge in the apparent "who has the most friends" competition taking place. Suddenly I was very aware that people I had added simply through vague recognition (aka, she was two years ahead of me in high school), were able to see pictures of my kids. And my life. I found that to be unsettling, so I quit.
And now I'm faced with a far worse dilemma - I feel completely cut off from the outside world. Since getting rid of my Facebook account, the majority of people who know me have asked "where I went." Huh? Where did I go? I haven't gone anywhere. "No, I mean on Facebook. I don't see you on my list anymore." Imagine! Almost as if I didn't exist before Facebook came along! And it doesn't stop there. Since becoming absent from Facebook, I have missed out on plenty. Several friends have had babies over the last month or so, and I haven't seen a single picture. They're on Facebook. Several more friends have gotten married, and, again, I haven't seen a single picture. Only on Facebook. One friend sent his wedding invitations via Facebook, and I missed out on that too. It seems as though, if you're not on Facebook, you snooze you lose.
So I've come up with my own social networking plan. I'll gather the relevant information from my close circle of friends, and through the miracles of modern technology, I'll be able to talk to them and leave them messages whenever I want. It's a plan to enable friends to keep in touch, without relying on Facebook to keep our lives relevant to each other.
It's called a phone.
I doubt that there are any readers here who AREN'T on Facebook, but just in case, let me sum in up for the two or three people in Canada who don't know how it works.
You accept an invitation to join via email (or just create a Facebook account). Facebook asks which of your email contacts you'd like to add as "Facebook friends", and you check their names accordingly. Those contacts who aren't yet registered on Facebook are sent an invitation. Those who are registered are automatically sent a "friend request", and once that request has been accepted, you have access to their personal profile. From this profile, you can look at THEIR friends, and request any of those people to be YOUR friends, and on and on it goes. Pretty soon you have a million people on your friends list, some you've requested, and some who have requested you.
But I'll assume most of you are registered on Facebook. Maybe you even have a Facebook window open as we speak. Probably.
I loved Facebook at first. I reconnected with so many people who I haven't seen in years and years, and brushed up on the lives of those who I'm well acquainted with. I got to see who got married, who got fat, who had kids, who moved to Korea, and who peaked in high school. I got to see pictures of their kids, their wedding, their summer vacations, their cats, their cars, and their memorable moments. I got to see who they were friends with, and (sometimes more interestingly) who they weren't friends with. I could send them a message, post a "hello" on their wall, or even poke them to get their attention. Most people's profiles were a comprehensive overview of their lives, with no detail spared. It would take a person days and weeks to read every wall post, see every picture, scroll through every friends list. Which is precisely why I quit.
I found myself spending far too much time on Facebook. I would have to check it every five minutes, just to see if anyone had sent me a message, or posted on my wall, or sent me a friend request. And I can admit this because I know I'm not alone. There are groups called "Facebook Anonymous" and "Crackbook", simply because people can't seem to stay away from this thing. Add to that the fact that, suddenly, I had almost three hundred people on my friends list....I wasn't aware that I even KNEW three hundred people, let alone LIKED those three hundred people. And I can almost guarantee that "friends lists" are often populated just to get an edge in the apparent "who has the most friends" competition taking place. Suddenly I was very aware that people I had added simply through vague recognition (aka, she was two years ahead of me in high school), were able to see pictures of my kids. And my life. I found that to be unsettling, so I quit.
And now I'm faced with a far worse dilemma - I feel completely cut off from the outside world. Since getting rid of my Facebook account, the majority of people who know me have asked "where I went." Huh? Where did I go? I haven't gone anywhere. "No, I mean on Facebook. I don't see you on my list anymore." Imagine! Almost as if I didn't exist before Facebook came along! And it doesn't stop there. Since becoming absent from Facebook, I have missed out on plenty. Several friends have had babies over the last month or so, and I haven't seen a single picture. They're on Facebook. Several more friends have gotten married, and, again, I haven't seen a single picture. Only on Facebook. One friend sent his wedding invitations via Facebook, and I missed out on that too. It seems as though, if you're not on Facebook, you snooze you lose.
So I've come up with my own social networking plan. I'll gather the relevant information from my close circle of friends, and through the miracles of modern technology, I'll be able to talk to them and leave them messages whenever I want. It's a plan to enable friends to keep in touch, without relying on Facebook to keep our lives relevant to each other.
It's called a phone.
Friday, August 17, 2007
"Mr. Miguel, please report to the office....immediately"
How would you feel if you knew one of your child's teachers was a convicted murderer?
That's what some Quebec parents are facing these days.
After a heated argument with his wife, a man from Montreal suffered a psychotic break and killed her in their home. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and served seven years in prison, regaining his freedom in 1998. He was hired to teach at a trade school in Montreal, stating on his application that he had never been convicted of a criminal offence. His criminal record was discovered in 2004 and he was terminated by his employer, but he has since been rehired....his union challenged the dismissal, saying that under the Quebec charter of rights, he cannot be fired for a crime not related to his job.
A spokesperson for the Quebec Human Rights Commission has stated, "If you're a convicted pedophile, you can't get a job in a daycare. If you're an arsonist, you can't get a job as a fireman. But if the crime is not related to the job, you can't be discriminated against."
So I guess if he had the qualifications, he could work at my son's elementary school. Or at your daughter's daycare. After all, he kills grown ups, not children, so it's not at all related in any way. And he doesn't pose a threat anymore because he served his time in prison. It's a well known fact that criminals aren't repeat offenders, so we can rest assured we're all safe. He has paid his debt to society, since intentionally taking a human life is deemed forgivable after seven years of free meals and limited television priviledges. And he has a right to earn a living, don't forget, in any work environment not related to his crime. So ruling out slaughterhouses and the snuff film industry, he can work just about anywhere. Geez, give the guy a break! He has rights you know. Many more than his wife...who's dead...because he killed her....anyway, I digress.
What would the world be without human rights? They serve us well at times, but at other times, they defeat the purpose for which they were intended. This is another case of the rights of victims and potential victims are coming second to the rights of criminals.
I don't believe in the death penalty (I see it as too humane, a quick exit from a long and miserable existance), but I do believe that a person who intentionally takes a human life should be forced to live out the rest of THEIR life being punished for their crime. Prison systems these days are a joke (I can tell you with experience having worked in one), and sentencing has become so hollow, political, and lenient, that there is no deterrent. To make matters worse, cases like these prove that, no matter what the crime, your rights as a criminal will be protected moreso than the rights of the innocent people around you....all in the name of Human Rights - which translates into "good politics". How sad.
For anyone who may be opposed to my point of view, and who may think that this man indeed does deserve to earn a living, I have two things to say: one, you wouldn't be so morally high-falutin' if this guy was your son's Grade One teacher. And two, he gave up all the rights of common people when he killed his wife.
Makes you want to think twice about the people around us. Unless we know them well, do we really know them at all?
That's what some Quebec parents are facing these days.
After a heated argument with his wife, a man from Montreal suffered a psychotic break and killed her in their home. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and served seven years in prison, regaining his freedom in 1998. He was hired to teach at a trade school in Montreal, stating on his application that he had never been convicted of a criminal offence. His criminal record was discovered in 2004 and he was terminated by his employer, but he has since been rehired....his union challenged the dismissal, saying that under the Quebec charter of rights, he cannot be fired for a crime not related to his job.
A spokesperson for the Quebec Human Rights Commission has stated, "If you're a convicted pedophile, you can't get a job in a daycare. If you're an arsonist, you can't get a job as a fireman. But if the crime is not related to the job, you can't be discriminated against."
So I guess if he had the qualifications, he could work at my son's elementary school. Or at your daughter's daycare. After all, he kills grown ups, not children, so it's not at all related in any way. And he doesn't pose a threat anymore because he served his time in prison. It's a well known fact that criminals aren't repeat offenders, so we can rest assured we're all safe. He has paid his debt to society, since intentionally taking a human life is deemed forgivable after seven years of free meals and limited television priviledges. And he has a right to earn a living, don't forget, in any work environment not related to his crime. So ruling out slaughterhouses and the snuff film industry, he can work just about anywhere. Geez, give the guy a break! He has rights you know. Many more than his wife...who's dead...because he killed her....anyway, I digress.
What would the world be without human rights? They serve us well at times, but at other times, they defeat the purpose for which they were intended. This is another case of the rights of victims and potential victims are coming second to the rights of criminals.
I don't believe in the death penalty (I see it as too humane, a quick exit from a long and miserable existance), but I do believe that a person who intentionally takes a human life should be forced to live out the rest of THEIR life being punished for their crime. Prison systems these days are a joke (I can tell you with experience having worked in one), and sentencing has become so hollow, political, and lenient, that there is no deterrent. To make matters worse, cases like these prove that, no matter what the crime, your rights as a criminal will be protected moreso than the rights of the innocent people around you....all in the name of Human Rights - which translates into "good politics". How sad.
For anyone who may be opposed to my point of view, and who may think that this man indeed does deserve to earn a living, I have two things to say: one, you wouldn't be so morally high-falutin' if this guy was your son's Grade One teacher. And two, he gave up all the rights of common people when he killed his wife.
Makes you want to think twice about the people around us. Unless we know them well, do we really know them at all?
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
"IF I did it, which I didn't, this is how I WOULD have done it"
I was watching "The Today Show" this morning, and they had an interview with the new publisher of the O.J. Simpson book "If I Did It". Apparently the book, who's publication had been cancelled, has found a new promoter and is set for release in the coming months.
I had briefly heard about this book before, but only today did I look it up online. After it's original printing, copies were leaked online and those interested could read it, download it, or print it. I skimmed through it, paying most of my attention to the "damning" Chapter 6, called "The Night in Question". The book, an account of Simpson's relationship with his wife Nicole, as well as a description of how he would have committed the murders (which his disclaimer states he did not), reads like a confession.
My question is: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Is this guy for real? He swears up and down that he did not kill anyone. He has been running around to media outlets for years proclaiming his innocence. So then he writes a book describing how he WOULD have committed the murders? Are you serious?
So let's say my neighbor's house burned to the ground and I had been accused. After screaming for years that I didn't do it, is it wise of me to further damage my reputation and tell everyone, in the first person, how I would have done it? Let's see, "I sneaked across their yard with a can of kerosene, lit a match, and ran. I knew I would never be caught, so I laughed as I fled the scene." Would that be smart for me to put on paper?
Words escape me as I try to describe the logic behind the writing of this book. In my opinion, most people think that O.J Simpson got away with murder; that he killed those two people, got great lawyers who played on the prosecution's mistakes, got lucky with a bunch of technicalities, and strutted out of the courtroom a free man. So the majority of readers will be shaking their heads, wondering how he could so obviously rub his guilt in the faces of the victim's families, the courts, and the general public....that's what I was doing as I read it, shaking my head.
What would have possessed him to write this? Is it mental illness? Cockiness? Stupidity? Attention-seeking? You would think a guy like O.J. would want to live out the rest of his life fading into the background, but apparently not. If you get a chance to skim through it, ask yourself if it's a book of fiction, as it claims to be, or the boasting of a murderer, eager to embrace his undeserved freedom but still craving the glory and acknnowledgement of having gotten away with two brutal, highly-publicized killings.
I really don't know what to think, except that O.J. Simpson has clearly lost it. Ridiculous book.
I had briefly heard about this book before, but only today did I look it up online. After it's original printing, copies were leaked online and those interested could read it, download it, or print it. I skimmed through it, paying most of my attention to the "damning" Chapter 6, called "The Night in Question". The book, an account of Simpson's relationship with his wife Nicole, as well as a description of how he would have committed the murders (which his disclaimer states he did not), reads like a confession.
My question is: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Is this guy for real? He swears up and down that he did not kill anyone. He has been running around to media outlets for years proclaiming his innocence. So then he writes a book describing how he WOULD have committed the murders? Are you serious?
So let's say my neighbor's house burned to the ground and I had been accused. After screaming for years that I didn't do it, is it wise of me to further damage my reputation and tell everyone, in the first person, how I would have done it? Let's see, "I sneaked across their yard with a can of kerosene, lit a match, and ran. I knew I would never be caught, so I laughed as I fled the scene." Would that be smart for me to put on paper?
Words escape me as I try to describe the logic behind the writing of this book. In my opinion, most people think that O.J Simpson got away with murder; that he killed those two people, got great lawyers who played on the prosecution's mistakes, got lucky with a bunch of technicalities, and strutted out of the courtroom a free man. So the majority of readers will be shaking their heads, wondering how he could so obviously rub his guilt in the faces of the victim's families, the courts, and the general public....that's what I was doing as I read it, shaking my head.
What would have possessed him to write this? Is it mental illness? Cockiness? Stupidity? Attention-seeking? You would think a guy like O.J. would want to live out the rest of his life fading into the background, but apparently not. If you get a chance to skim through it, ask yourself if it's a book of fiction, as it claims to be, or the boasting of a murderer, eager to embrace his undeserved freedom but still craving the glory and acknnowledgement of having gotten away with two brutal, highly-publicized killings.
I really don't know what to think, except that O.J. Simpson has clearly lost it. Ridiculous book.
The Home of Our Hearts (if not our careers)
It probably seems like I'm harping, but I love Cape Breton. In my opinion, there is no greater place to be from, and no better place to live.
This ideology is great in theory, but sometimes it isn't very practical.
It's no secret that Cape Breton isn't where you go when you're looking for a good job. Just the opposite - so many locals unwillingly relocate in order to find one. My brother loves Cape Breton, and yet he toils in Alberta, like so many others, making money, living, and missing home. Look at all the working parents who have to leave their families in Cape Breton to make a living out West for months at a time, sometimes longer, just because there isn't enough opportunity at home to sustain themselves.
During my workforce days years ago in Cape Breton, I never really had a problem getting a job because, for awhile at least, I was in the food service industry. Lowly waitress to some, but I defy you to find me a more profitable minimum wage job. I counted on tips as part of my take-home pay, and without them I would have been on welfare, like so many other people I knew. As I got older and moved to the city, I began to look for a job which utilized my (very expensive) education. In the Metro Halifax area, those jobs are a bit easier to come by, but in Cape Breton, they're almost non-existant. This is what leads me to my latest rant, as I completely understand where all the displaced Cape Bretoners are coming from, now more than ever.
My husband has a good job, and I've been on indefinite maternity leave for a few years. I decided recently that I would like to go out into the workforce again, and we prepared ourselves for the ramifications of that decision. This is what we discovered: for me to put my baby in day care (which we would have to be put on a waiting list to acquire), and to have my older son receive after school care, would cost a minimum of $45 per day. Per day. That equals $225 per week, and that's money I have to make just to justify leaving the house. It would cost even more on days where my oldest son has no school.
Then figure into that the money I would need to spend on clothes for work, the extra expense of packing four different lunches, transportation to and from the sitter, and then to and from work. The stress of getting two kids up and fed and packed and dressed and ready at the crack of dawn, and finding the time to make myself look presentable as well. I also have to take into account the loss of stability we now get to enjoy, since my youngest spends all day at home with his mom, and his brother gets to come home every day after school.
I ask you, is all of that worth $7.50 per hour?
Imagine that daily ritual, figure in the expense, and ask yourself if making $56.00 per day, before deductions, is worth it. That's $281.25 per week, again, before deductions. After deductions, it would likely cost me more to go to work than it does to stay home.
Sadly, there are plenty of you who don't have to imagine it at all, you live it every day. When I look on the JobBank today, there are 33 available jobs listed, which I can tell you is the most I've seen in a long time. Of these jobs, the majority are in the Port Hawkesbury area, making it even costlier for those in rural surrounding communities to get work. A full 23 jobs are either part time, seasonal, or term positions, and 28 of the 33 posted jobs are either minimum wage or just above. Only 2 jobs are significantly more, both term positions, and both in the $10 per hour range. The wild card is a job with the local Regional Development Agency, which requires 3-5 years of experience as a General Manager of a Transit System. I'm assuming, since it says the wage is to be negotiated, that the person they hire will be paid quite a bit more than $10 per hour. That's great for the person from Sydney or Halifax who will apply and transfer here to take the job. The online offerings this week are comparable to the normal selection, though there are usually fewer jobs available in the off-season. Welcome to the Strait Area.
And so how are we expected to live, to raise our kids, to get ahead in life, as the cashier at Dollarama? I mean no disrespect to those people toiling away at their jobs, just making ends meet, or maybe not making ends meet at all. On the contrary, I have the utmost respect for people who are ambitous enough to get out of bed every morning and go to work every day at a job that they despise, underpaid, overworked, disrespected, and discouraged. To have paid the Nova Scotia Community College lots of money for a diploma in Office Administration, and to be cleaning rooms at a hotel in town for $8.00 per hour. To be on your feet as a retail sales clerk for eight and nine hours a day, and to not be able to afford to send your kid camping with his friends because you're broke after you pay your babysitter. I feel for all these people, because I've been there before. I'm fortunate now that I'm in a position where I have a choice, but so many other working parents don't have a choice at all, they have a responsibility to take care of their families, and they do it, like it or not.
So after searching and debating and pondering, I've decided to stay home with my kids instead of getting a job. A second income would have been nice, required maybe, but not at the necessary cost.
To all of you who are working hard, I admire your resolve and determination.
To the government of Nova Scotia, take notice. People who are residents of a region with high unemployment are often thought of as lazy, but really that is probably not the case. We need jobs that pay us for the work we do, that allow us to support ourselves and our families. There isn't much point in discouraging people from moving to Alberta and staying in Cape Breton - you're not leaving us much choice. A power bill, a litre of gas, and a carton of milk costs just as much for someone making $15,000 per year as it does for the guys at the mill who make $80,000. Giving us a break on the cost of day care would be nice, but even that doesn't help the people with no children. We need the government to raise the minimum wage, give tax break incentives to companies for paying higher salaries, and create jobs for qualified individuals. The time is now, so that all people living in the Strait Area, and in Cape Breton, can prosper and stay where they belong - HOME.
This ideology is great in theory, but sometimes it isn't very practical.
It's no secret that Cape Breton isn't where you go when you're looking for a good job. Just the opposite - so many locals unwillingly relocate in order to find one. My brother loves Cape Breton, and yet he toils in Alberta, like so many others, making money, living, and missing home. Look at all the working parents who have to leave their families in Cape Breton to make a living out West for months at a time, sometimes longer, just because there isn't enough opportunity at home to sustain themselves.
During my workforce days years ago in Cape Breton, I never really had a problem getting a job because, for awhile at least, I was in the food service industry. Lowly waitress to some, but I defy you to find me a more profitable minimum wage job. I counted on tips as part of my take-home pay, and without them I would have been on welfare, like so many other people I knew. As I got older and moved to the city, I began to look for a job which utilized my (very expensive) education. In the Metro Halifax area, those jobs are a bit easier to come by, but in Cape Breton, they're almost non-existant. This is what leads me to my latest rant, as I completely understand where all the displaced Cape Bretoners are coming from, now more than ever.
My husband has a good job, and I've been on indefinite maternity leave for a few years. I decided recently that I would like to go out into the workforce again, and we prepared ourselves for the ramifications of that decision. This is what we discovered: for me to put my baby in day care (which we would have to be put on a waiting list to acquire), and to have my older son receive after school care, would cost a minimum of $45 per day. Per day. That equals $225 per week, and that's money I have to make just to justify leaving the house. It would cost even more on days where my oldest son has no school.
Then figure into that the money I would need to spend on clothes for work, the extra expense of packing four different lunches, transportation to and from the sitter, and then to and from work. The stress of getting two kids up and fed and packed and dressed and ready at the crack of dawn, and finding the time to make myself look presentable as well. I also have to take into account the loss of stability we now get to enjoy, since my youngest spends all day at home with his mom, and his brother gets to come home every day after school.
I ask you, is all of that worth $7.50 per hour?
Imagine that daily ritual, figure in the expense, and ask yourself if making $56.00 per day, before deductions, is worth it. That's $281.25 per week, again, before deductions. After deductions, it would likely cost me more to go to work than it does to stay home.
Sadly, there are plenty of you who don't have to imagine it at all, you live it every day. When I look on the JobBank today, there are 33 available jobs listed, which I can tell you is the most I've seen in a long time. Of these jobs, the majority are in the Port Hawkesbury area, making it even costlier for those in rural surrounding communities to get work. A full 23 jobs are either part time, seasonal, or term positions, and 28 of the 33 posted jobs are either minimum wage or just above. Only 2 jobs are significantly more, both term positions, and both in the $10 per hour range. The wild card is a job with the local Regional Development Agency, which requires 3-5 years of experience as a General Manager of a Transit System. I'm assuming, since it says the wage is to be negotiated, that the person they hire will be paid quite a bit more than $10 per hour. That's great for the person from Sydney or Halifax who will apply and transfer here to take the job. The online offerings this week are comparable to the normal selection, though there are usually fewer jobs available in the off-season. Welcome to the Strait Area.
And so how are we expected to live, to raise our kids, to get ahead in life, as the cashier at Dollarama? I mean no disrespect to those people toiling away at their jobs, just making ends meet, or maybe not making ends meet at all. On the contrary, I have the utmost respect for people who are ambitous enough to get out of bed every morning and go to work every day at a job that they despise, underpaid, overworked, disrespected, and discouraged. To have paid the Nova Scotia Community College lots of money for a diploma in Office Administration, and to be cleaning rooms at a hotel in town for $8.00 per hour. To be on your feet as a retail sales clerk for eight and nine hours a day, and to not be able to afford to send your kid camping with his friends because you're broke after you pay your babysitter. I feel for all these people, because I've been there before. I'm fortunate now that I'm in a position where I have a choice, but so many other working parents don't have a choice at all, they have a responsibility to take care of their families, and they do it, like it or not.
So after searching and debating and pondering, I've decided to stay home with my kids instead of getting a job. A second income would have been nice, required maybe, but not at the necessary cost.
To all of you who are working hard, I admire your resolve and determination.
To the government of Nova Scotia, take notice. People who are residents of a region with high unemployment are often thought of as lazy, but really that is probably not the case. We need jobs that pay us for the work we do, that allow us to support ourselves and our families. There isn't much point in discouraging people from moving to Alberta and staying in Cape Breton - you're not leaving us much choice. A power bill, a litre of gas, and a carton of milk costs just as much for someone making $15,000 per year as it does for the guys at the mill who make $80,000. Giving us a break on the cost of day care would be nice, but even that doesn't help the people with no children. We need the government to raise the minimum wage, give tax break incentives to companies for paying higher salaries, and create jobs for qualified individuals. The time is now, so that all people living in the Strait Area, and in Cape Breton, can prosper and stay where they belong - HOME.
WTC7
Not exactly light reading, as it gets very complicated, but I thought I'd post this link since it tells the story much better than I could myself.
Again, no accusations exactly, rather asking everyone to open your mind.
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Again, no accusations exactly, rather asking everyone to open your mind.
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/FEMA/WTC_ch5.htm
Dear Britney
Dear Britney,
It is not often a girl your age finds themselves in such an outstanding position in life. Your early rise to fame seemed to be self-induced, without the enabling, pressure filled, money hungry ramblings of a stage mother, a la Dina Lohan. You worked hard, trained, studied, honed your craft. Your popularity soared, your bank account grew, awards and accolades of all types came in droves, and your success had reached a definite summit. What a tremendous list of accomplishments, and what a fantastic legacy.
It's a terrible shame that you didn't retire at that point in your career.
What are you thinking? What the hell are you doing? Earth to Britney, do you copy? I sometimes wonder if this is the first public display of an alien taking over a human body. Oh, please let it be so, that would explain so much.
When you and Christina were going head to head, I always cheered for you. You were the naturally sexy girl, trying to be a bit skanky at times, but not really succeeding. (Christina was the naturally skanky chick, trying to be sexy, but not really succeeding.) You were half of America's golden couple, and what a beautiful pair. (Umm...I was going to get on your case about that, but seeing as you've freed up Justin for me, I'll let it slide...) You were perhaps the most recognized name and face in popular music, nobody could touch you. There really is truth in the old adage "nowhere to go but down".
You appear before me, on trashy magazine covers, on perezhilton.com, on Access Hollywood, a mere shell of your former glory, barely recognizable as someone who used to be adored by so many. Married for five minutes to some weird hick thanks to a Las Vegas bender? Married AGAIN to the only person in Hollywood who already had more kids than Brangelina? Two babies being drug around to movie sets, video shoots, and shopping sprees? Two babies being left home every night while Mommy goes out on the town making a fool of herself? Once successful, twice pregnant, twice divorced, what a hard fall. All the money in the world and not a brain cell to spare. A beautiful girl, reduced to a head-shaving, gum-chewing, interview-botching, alcoholic disaster with a nasty weave and a bad accent. Shameful.
I realize that the constant paparazzi presence doesn't help, and here's my advice to you in that regard: tell them everything. The gossip vultures want what they can't have. If you're trying to hide your rehab stint, new relationship, weight gain - the cameras are there in full force, lapping it up like starving dogs. But if you try desperately hard to get media attention, you end up with an overrated, over-reported wedding ceremony in France that nobody cares about, right Mrs. Longoria-Parker? Mrs. Electra-Navaro? Fame-hizzores, we'll call them. Crickets chirping because all the attention made it boring, unexclusive. Had they banned cameras, tried to get away secretly, Jan Carl would have been scaling walls for a clean shot of the wedding gown. So dupe them! Hold a press conference to let people know you're going for burgers and fries. Hold another one the day after to tell them you've switched conditioners. Eventually they'll get bored of you and move on to whichever celebrity is trying to keep a secret. Only then will you be able to plan a comeback - right now there's too much smut for them to report. They'd much rather see you falter than succeed, so as long as you're going to continue this very public psychotic break, don't expect people to be waiting with baited breath for your triumphant return. They're too busy waiting for your return to Promises Rehab Center to worry about your music.
So Britney, I don't know what else to say to you, but I hope this candid letter finds you in good health and with an open mind. An emotional meltdown is hard to watch, especially when it's happening to someone who was at the top of their game. Stay home at night, take care of your kids, don't accept Paris' invitations for "girls night out", and stay off my tv for awhile. If you want to find success again, you can - but you'll find the most happiness in dignity and respect. And those things you won't find at 3am at Koi bar in Hollywood. Don't give people so much ammunition, and you'll find yourself taking fewer shots.
Sincerely, Watching, waiting & wishing (ok, and laughing)
It is not often a girl your age finds themselves in such an outstanding position in life. Your early rise to fame seemed to be self-induced, without the enabling, pressure filled, money hungry ramblings of a stage mother, a la Dina Lohan. You worked hard, trained, studied, honed your craft. Your popularity soared, your bank account grew, awards and accolades of all types came in droves, and your success had reached a definite summit. What a tremendous list of accomplishments, and what a fantastic legacy.
It's a terrible shame that you didn't retire at that point in your career.
What are you thinking? What the hell are you doing? Earth to Britney, do you copy? I sometimes wonder if this is the first public display of an alien taking over a human body. Oh, please let it be so, that would explain so much.
When you and Christina were going head to head, I always cheered for you. You were the naturally sexy girl, trying to be a bit skanky at times, but not really succeeding. (Christina was the naturally skanky chick, trying to be sexy, but not really succeeding.) You were half of America's golden couple, and what a beautiful pair. (Umm...I was going to get on your case about that, but seeing as you've freed up Justin for me, I'll let it slide...) You were perhaps the most recognized name and face in popular music, nobody could touch you. There really is truth in the old adage "nowhere to go but down".
You appear before me, on trashy magazine covers, on perezhilton.com, on Access Hollywood, a mere shell of your former glory, barely recognizable as someone who used to be adored by so many. Married for five minutes to some weird hick thanks to a Las Vegas bender? Married AGAIN to the only person in Hollywood who already had more kids than Brangelina? Two babies being drug around to movie sets, video shoots, and shopping sprees? Two babies being left home every night while Mommy goes out on the town making a fool of herself? Once successful, twice pregnant, twice divorced, what a hard fall. All the money in the world and not a brain cell to spare. A beautiful girl, reduced to a head-shaving, gum-chewing, interview-botching, alcoholic disaster with a nasty weave and a bad accent. Shameful.
I realize that the constant paparazzi presence doesn't help, and here's my advice to you in that regard: tell them everything. The gossip vultures want what they can't have. If you're trying to hide your rehab stint, new relationship, weight gain - the cameras are there in full force, lapping it up like starving dogs. But if you try desperately hard to get media attention, you end up with an overrated, over-reported wedding ceremony in France that nobody cares about, right Mrs. Longoria-Parker? Mrs. Electra-Navaro? Fame-hizzores, we'll call them. Crickets chirping because all the attention made it boring, unexclusive. Had they banned cameras, tried to get away secretly, Jan Carl would have been scaling walls for a clean shot of the wedding gown. So dupe them! Hold a press conference to let people know you're going for burgers and fries. Hold another one the day after to tell them you've switched conditioners. Eventually they'll get bored of you and move on to whichever celebrity is trying to keep a secret. Only then will you be able to plan a comeback - right now there's too much smut for them to report. They'd much rather see you falter than succeed, so as long as you're going to continue this very public psychotic break, don't expect people to be waiting with baited breath for your triumphant return. They're too busy waiting for your return to Promises Rehab Center to worry about your music.
So Britney, I don't know what else to say to you, but I hope this candid letter finds you in good health and with an open mind. An emotional meltdown is hard to watch, especially when it's happening to someone who was at the top of their game. Stay home at night, take care of your kids, don't accept Paris' invitations for "girls night out", and stay off my tv for awhile. If you want to find success again, you can - but you'll find the most happiness in dignity and respect. And those things you won't find at 3am at Koi bar in Hollywood. Don't give people so much ammunition, and you'll find yourself taking fewer shots.
Sincerely, Watching, waiting & wishing (ok, and laughing)
Back To School
Well, ladies and gentlemen, it's official - summer is almost over. This weekend at Wal-Mart, I was greeted by a huge wall of school supplies. The end is near.
In a way, I'm looking forward to the beginning of the school year. At the very least, it promises to lessen the frequency of the "I'm bored" speech I have to hear every day. Thousands of dollars worth of tvs, vcrs, dvd players, mp3 players, gaming consoles, toys, bikes, skateboards, rollerblades, sports equipment, on and on and on - and they're bored. All of them, sitting in their houses, driving their parents nuts with "I'm bored". Twenty-eight degrees, sun splitting the rocks, pool, trampoline, a dozen friends nearby, and "I'm bored". When I was nine, my parents sent us outside after breakfast and didn't see us again until supper, when they usually had to come looking for us. Kids these days, I don't know if they want us to dress up in clown costumes and entertain them all day, but they certainly don't seem to realize how lucky they are. My son didn't believe me when I told him that going for a walk was something us "old folk" used to do for fun. Perish the thought.
Anyway, as much as the prospect of school is relieving to me, there is one aspect that makes me cringe: packing my son's lunch.
At my house, we have a hot lunch. It's probably not fancy, it's probably not elaborate, but it's hot. Every now and then I make sandwiches, but usually it's Kraft Dinner, chicken noodle soup, hot dogs, or something of the like. When packing my son's lunch for school, I like to ensure that he eats something hot there too. Again, nothing fancy, but a can of ravioli, a pizza pocket, even leftover steak subs from supper. I would think that a school would try to accommodate students and parents in this pursuit.
But no. Now the rule is "no use of microwaves", no heating food at all. Last year, the first time I sent my son to school with a container of leftovers to be heated, it was returned with a note that said not to send something like that again, and that I owed the cafeteria $3.20 for the meal they gave him as a substitution. I was not pleased.
So that leaves me with two choices: no hot food, or buy from the cafeteria. The latter might be an option if it were a little cheaper, but show me someone who can afford to spend $20 per week on grease food, plus pay for snacks and drinks on top of that, PER CHILD, and I'll show you someone who doesn't realize how rich they actually are. I won't pay it, and I'm sure the majority of parents can't afford to pay it either.
The other option leaves me with a very limited menu of cold food. One day I sent him with a bag full of chunks of pepperoni and cheese, and he told me the cafeteria workers had suggested his mother send a more balanced, nutritious lunch. Nice. Again, I was not pleased.
And what's left? Ok, sandwiches.
Let's see...he's allergic to tuna, and doesn't like egg or chicken salad. Sliced ham, flakes of ham...maybe turkey if things are really desperate. And this is what he's supposed to eat every single day for hundreds of days? A sandwich made with meat that's been soaked in brine for weeks? He is not pleased, nor do I blame him.
When I was a kid, we took a peanut butter and jam sandwich to school every single day, and we didn't complain. I can say this loud and proud because every other kid had one as well. The flavor of jam might have varied a bit, from strawberry to raspberry perhaps, but that was about as exotic as it got.
But that was twenty years ago.
Now, lunch time at an elementary school is much different. My kids don't have PB&J every single day for lunch when they're at home, so I don't expect my son to eat it every single day at school either. But even if I did, I wouldn't be allowed. No peanut butter. No peanuts. No nuts of any kind. Nothing that has ever come into contact with anything resembling a nut. No peanut butter on toast in the morning for breakfast, as the smell of peanut butter on a child's breath is apparently harmful as well. No homemade peanut butter cookies, or any other cookie with walnuts, pecans, almonds.
I'm sure parents of children with peanut allergies think the peanut ban is a nessessary step for a school to take. And I know that peanut allergies can be very serious, if not deadly. I feel for these parents and children. But 1 child (maybe) in a school of 450 students, and a common household food is banished from our lives? It's not anthrax, it's peanut butter. It's not airborne, it's injested. If you're allergic, don't eat it. If your child is too young to take the necessary precautions, the teachers and staff should be responsible for ensuring the student does not come into contact with any nutty substance. My son is allergic to seafood and shellfish, and his throat closes over when he is exposed to either of them in any form. I don't expect the schools to go on a witch hunt for tuna lovers, nor do I expect the school, it's staff, it's students, and the parents to change their eating habits and grocery orders; I expect him and his teacher to be aware and careful.
I may seem insensitive, but that's just the way I see it. I've spoken to many, many parents who feel the same way. People hesitate to admit it, but banning peanuts, or any other food, is a bad precendent to set. What's next, banning chips for the kids battling childhood obesity? Banning windows for the kids allergic to pollen? In my thirteen years of school, there was not a single peanut fatality. Was it just a fluke that everyone survived? Or was it that, back then, nobody seemed to overreact the way they do now, people didn't go to such drastic measures, and we all turned out just fine? It may be a bit taboo to even complain about the peanut patrol, but too bad. Someone has to do it.
However, all the complaining in the world doesn't rid me of my lunch-packing woes. I want to give my son a proper dinner without putting myself in the poor house, is that too much to ask?
What does the "student fee" pay for? Do a few microwaves use up so much electricity that the school doesn't have it in it's budget to nuke a few bowls every lunch hour? I wonder if the teachers are allowed to use the microwave? (Oh that's right, there's a private one in the staff room.) Should the staff be allowed to criticize parents on their choice of lunches, when the alternatives we're given are so limited? Next time my son comes home with a story like that, I'll be marching down to the school and telling the cafeteria lady to either fire up the microwave or keep her opinions to herself. And probably not in words that sunny and cheerful.
If you have any suggestions for a good lunch, please let me know, I'd love to have a few new ideas. Pretty soon, I'll be sending him to school with bread and butter. Cold bread and butter.
In a way, I'm looking forward to the beginning of the school year. At the very least, it promises to lessen the frequency of the "I'm bored" speech I have to hear every day. Thousands of dollars worth of tvs, vcrs, dvd players, mp3 players, gaming consoles, toys, bikes, skateboards, rollerblades, sports equipment, on and on and on - and they're bored. All of them, sitting in their houses, driving their parents nuts with "I'm bored". Twenty-eight degrees, sun splitting the rocks, pool, trampoline, a dozen friends nearby, and "I'm bored". When I was nine, my parents sent us outside after breakfast and didn't see us again until supper, when they usually had to come looking for us. Kids these days, I don't know if they want us to dress up in clown costumes and entertain them all day, but they certainly don't seem to realize how lucky they are. My son didn't believe me when I told him that going for a walk was something us "old folk" used to do for fun. Perish the thought.
Anyway, as much as the prospect of school is relieving to me, there is one aspect that makes me cringe: packing my son's lunch.
At my house, we have a hot lunch. It's probably not fancy, it's probably not elaborate, but it's hot. Every now and then I make sandwiches, but usually it's Kraft Dinner, chicken noodle soup, hot dogs, or something of the like. When packing my son's lunch for school, I like to ensure that he eats something hot there too. Again, nothing fancy, but a can of ravioli, a pizza pocket, even leftover steak subs from supper. I would think that a school would try to accommodate students and parents in this pursuit.
But no. Now the rule is "no use of microwaves", no heating food at all. Last year, the first time I sent my son to school with a container of leftovers to be heated, it was returned with a note that said not to send something like that again, and that I owed the cafeteria $3.20 for the meal they gave him as a substitution. I was not pleased.
So that leaves me with two choices: no hot food, or buy from the cafeteria. The latter might be an option if it were a little cheaper, but show me someone who can afford to spend $20 per week on grease food, plus pay for snacks and drinks on top of that, PER CHILD, and I'll show you someone who doesn't realize how rich they actually are. I won't pay it, and I'm sure the majority of parents can't afford to pay it either.
The other option leaves me with a very limited menu of cold food. One day I sent him with a bag full of chunks of pepperoni and cheese, and he told me the cafeteria workers had suggested his mother send a more balanced, nutritious lunch. Nice. Again, I was not pleased.
And what's left? Ok, sandwiches.
Let's see...he's allergic to tuna, and doesn't like egg or chicken salad. Sliced ham, flakes of ham...maybe turkey if things are really desperate. And this is what he's supposed to eat every single day for hundreds of days? A sandwich made with meat that's been soaked in brine for weeks? He is not pleased, nor do I blame him.
When I was a kid, we took a peanut butter and jam sandwich to school every single day, and we didn't complain. I can say this loud and proud because every other kid had one as well. The flavor of jam might have varied a bit, from strawberry to raspberry perhaps, but that was about as exotic as it got.
But that was twenty years ago.
Now, lunch time at an elementary school is much different. My kids don't have PB&J every single day for lunch when they're at home, so I don't expect my son to eat it every single day at school either. But even if I did, I wouldn't be allowed. No peanut butter. No peanuts. No nuts of any kind. Nothing that has ever come into contact with anything resembling a nut. No peanut butter on toast in the morning for breakfast, as the smell of peanut butter on a child's breath is apparently harmful as well. No homemade peanut butter cookies, or any other cookie with walnuts, pecans, almonds.
I'm sure parents of children with peanut allergies think the peanut ban is a nessessary step for a school to take. And I know that peanut allergies can be very serious, if not deadly. I feel for these parents and children. But 1 child (maybe) in a school of 450 students, and a common household food is banished from our lives? It's not anthrax, it's peanut butter. It's not airborne, it's injested. If you're allergic, don't eat it. If your child is too young to take the necessary precautions, the teachers and staff should be responsible for ensuring the student does not come into contact with any nutty substance. My son is allergic to seafood and shellfish, and his throat closes over when he is exposed to either of them in any form. I don't expect the schools to go on a witch hunt for tuna lovers, nor do I expect the school, it's staff, it's students, and the parents to change their eating habits and grocery orders; I expect him and his teacher to be aware and careful.
I may seem insensitive, but that's just the way I see it. I've spoken to many, many parents who feel the same way. People hesitate to admit it, but banning peanuts, or any other food, is a bad precendent to set. What's next, banning chips for the kids battling childhood obesity? Banning windows for the kids allergic to pollen? In my thirteen years of school, there was not a single peanut fatality. Was it just a fluke that everyone survived? Or was it that, back then, nobody seemed to overreact the way they do now, people didn't go to such drastic measures, and we all turned out just fine? It may be a bit taboo to even complain about the peanut patrol, but too bad. Someone has to do it.
However, all the complaining in the world doesn't rid me of my lunch-packing woes. I want to give my son a proper dinner without putting myself in the poor house, is that too much to ask?
What does the "student fee" pay for? Do a few microwaves use up so much electricity that the school doesn't have it in it's budget to nuke a few bowls every lunch hour? I wonder if the teachers are allowed to use the microwave? (Oh that's right, there's a private one in the staff room.) Should the staff be allowed to criticize parents on their choice of lunches, when the alternatives we're given are so limited? Next time my son comes home with a story like that, I'll be marching down to the school and telling the cafeteria lady to either fire up the microwave or keep her opinions to herself. And probably not in words that sunny and cheerful.
If you have any suggestions for a good lunch, please let me know, I'd love to have a few new ideas. Pretty soon, I'll be sending him to school with bread and butter. Cold bread and butter.
Not So Merry, After All
Over the past few days, I have been very apprehensive about writing this next blog entry, as I do not want anyone to misinterpret my intentions. Since I have been unable to get this topic out of my head, I'm going to take my chances and write it anyway. I do want to add, however, that I do not know any facts of this case beyond what I have heard in the media, nor do I, in any way, accuse any particular person of being responsible or having any involvement in this crime.
December 2005 was a great time for my family. It was my baby boy's first Christmas, the kids had loads of gifts under the tree, and I made my first big Christmas dinner. At the time, we lived in a nice little subdivision in Timberlea, and we liked to drive around to look at all the brightly decorated houses. On the 27th, my husband went Boxing Day shopping in Bayers Lake, and I baked his birthday cake (he was celebrating his....ahem....seventh consecutive "28th birthday" the following day). I remember looking at the clock several times that afternoon, wondering if I would finish his cake before he returned home.
On the morning of the 28th, the first thing I noticed outside was a police cruiser. Since seeing the police was a rarity on our street, I found it even more strange to see several of them drive by within an hour or two, as well as an RCMP helicopter overhead. When my husband called home from work, I told him about the noticeable police presence, and he dropped the bomb on me: a body had been found in a car parked at the school. A what? A body? In Timberlea?!? I didn't believe him. I humoured him and hung up.
His claim was confirmed on the news that evening. Paula Gallant, originally from Cape Breton, a teacher at Beechville-Lakeside-Timberlea school, mother of a baby girl, had been murdered. I was shocked, confused and horrified. Over the next few days, weeks, and months, I began to follow the story as details were released, as I'm sure most residents of Timberlea did. My son attended BLT, where Ms. Gallant taught grade three. The school, and her house, were so close to mine, that anyone with a good arm could throw a rock and hit either building. This crime was a little too close to home for my liking, a feeling I shared with, I'm sure, plenty of others.
What made it even more terrible for me was the fact that she had a baby the same age as mine. The thought of a mother being taken away from a child that age was heartbreaking. It still is. If anything threatened my ability to come home to my kids, I would scream and fight with such fury that my attackers would probably flee, fearing for their lives. I can't help but think that, while I was baking a cake and looking at the clock in the early evening of December 27th, 2005, Ms. Gallant was doing just that, fighting for her life. It bothers me to think about that.
And here we are, almost two years later, and her killer is still roaming free. Maybe driving past us on the highway, maybe behind us in line at the grocery store, nobody knows. Her little girl is without a mother, her sisters and family are still grieving, and I'm still at home thinking about it, often. As much as I hate wondering what happened to that poor woman, two other points make me even crazier. My preamble and question is this: we lived in a community where everyone knew your business. They knew what kind of underwear you wore by looking at your clothes hanging out on the line. They knew if the neighbors' teenaged kids got home at 3am. They knew if the guy in the blue house had a drug problem, if the lady who drove the white Malibu was cheating on her husband, and if the people with the loud Yorkshire terrier screamed at their kids all the time. After the fact, the neighborhood hairdressers, storekeepers, and busy-bodies whispered rampant speculation and knew all the comings and goings at Ms. Gallant's house. My question is, how is it possible that so many people are so nosy, observant and intrusive, but NOT A SINGLE PERSON SAW ANYTHING THAT DAY WHICH WOULD HELP THE POLICE?? From what I heard and read, whoever was responsible for Ms. Gallant's death returned her car to BLT, a very visible school parking lot, empty during Christmas vacation, and drove away in another vehicle. I'd be willing to bet that, had someone been parked there for an illicit rendezvous of some sort, people up one street and down another would know all the details by the next morning. But how did no one see anything in THIS case, when it matters? Very frustrating.
And another thing. There are cases in the past few years which have not left the forefront of the media for more than a few weeks. The only place I have read about possible breaks in the Gallant case is, sadly, in "Frank" magazine. I'm sure this fact must infuriate her family. Had I been the victim of a horrible crime like this, I like to think that my husband would not rest or shut up until the killer was apprehended. He would be crawling up the leg of Steve Murphy's pants to get on the 6pm news every night, just to remind people of what happened and how they might be able to help. Ms. Gallant's sisters have seemed very diligent, but there is only so much that one or two women can do. It is up to everyone else, Paula Gallant's neighbors, friends, colleagues, and mourners, to keep her case in the forefront of our minds and, hopefully, the media. Someone knows something, and with enough scrutiny, pressure, protest, and persistance, that someone or something will eventually surface.
Until it does, I will keep Ms. Gallant, her daughter, and her family in my thoughts. I implore you to do the same.
December 2005 was a great time for my family. It was my baby boy's first Christmas, the kids had loads of gifts under the tree, and I made my first big Christmas dinner. At the time, we lived in a nice little subdivision in Timberlea, and we liked to drive around to look at all the brightly decorated houses. On the 27th, my husband went Boxing Day shopping in Bayers Lake, and I baked his birthday cake (he was celebrating his....ahem....seventh consecutive "28th birthday" the following day). I remember looking at the clock several times that afternoon, wondering if I would finish his cake before he returned home.
On the morning of the 28th, the first thing I noticed outside was a police cruiser. Since seeing the police was a rarity on our street, I found it even more strange to see several of them drive by within an hour or two, as well as an RCMP helicopter overhead. When my husband called home from work, I told him about the noticeable police presence, and he dropped the bomb on me: a body had been found in a car parked at the school. A what? A body? In Timberlea?!? I didn't believe him. I humoured him and hung up.
His claim was confirmed on the news that evening. Paula Gallant, originally from Cape Breton, a teacher at Beechville-Lakeside-Timberlea school, mother of a baby girl, had been murdered. I was shocked, confused and horrified. Over the next few days, weeks, and months, I began to follow the story as details were released, as I'm sure most residents of Timberlea did. My son attended BLT, where Ms. Gallant taught grade three. The school, and her house, were so close to mine, that anyone with a good arm could throw a rock and hit either building. This crime was a little too close to home for my liking, a feeling I shared with, I'm sure, plenty of others.
What made it even more terrible for me was the fact that she had a baby the same age as mine. The thought of a mother being taken away from a child that age was heartbreaking. It still is. If anything threatened my ability to come home to my kids, I would scream and fight with such fury that my attackers would probably flee, fearing for their lives. I can't help but think that, while I was baking a cake and looking at the clock in the early evening of December 27th, 2005, Ms. Gallant was doing just that, fighting for her life. It bothers me to think about that.
And here we are, almost two years later, and her killer is still roaming free. Maybe driving past us on the highway, maybe behind us in line at the grocery store, nobody knows. Her little girl is without a mother, her sisters and family are still grieving, and I'm still at home thinking about it, often. As much as I hate wondering what happened to that poor woman, two other points make me even crazier. My preamble and question is this: we lived in a community where everyone knew your business. They knew what kind of underwear you wore by looking at your clothes hanging out on the line. They knew if the neighbors' teenaged kids got home at 3am. They knew if the guy in the blue house had a drug problem, if the lady who drove the white Malibu was cheating on her husband, and if the people with the loud Yorkshire terrier screamed at their kids all the time. After the fact, the neighborhood hairdressers, storekeepers, and busy-bodies whispered rampant speculation and knew all the comings and goings at Ms. Gallant's house. My question is, how is it possible that so many people are so nosy, observant and intrusive, but NOT A SINGLE PERSON SAW ANYTHING THAT DAY WHICH WOULD HELP THE POLICE?? From what I heard and read, whoever was responsible for Ms. Gallant's death returned her car to BLT, a very visible school parking lot, empty during Christmas vacation, and drove away in another vehicle. I'd be willing to bet that, had someone been parked there for an illicit rendezvous of some sort, people up one street and down another would know all the details by the next morning. But how did no one see anything in THIS case, when it matters? Very frustrating.
And another thing. There are cases in the past few years which have not left the forefront of the media for more than a few weeks. The only place I have read about possible breaks in the Gallant case is, sadly, in "Frank" magazine. I'm sure this fact must infuriate her family. Had I been the victim of a horrible crime like this, I like to think that my husband would not rest or shut up until the killer was apprehended. He would be crawling up the leg of Steve Murphy's pants to get on the 6pm news every night, just to remind people of what happened and how they might be able to help. Ms. Gallant's sisters have seemed very diligent, but there is only so much that one or two women can do. It is up to everyone else, Paula Gallant's neighbors, friends, colleagues, and mourners, to keep her case in the forefront of our minds and, hopefully, the media. Someone knows something, and with enough scrutiny, pressure, protest, and persistance, that someone or something will eventually surface.
Until it does, I will keep Ms. Gallant, her daughter, and her family in my thoughts. I implore you to do the same.
I Miss You, Janelle
Yawn
So I guess I'm going to talk about Big Brother 8 now.
For those of you who don't watch it, or who don't know anything about Big Brother, this blog entry will read like a Mandarin textbook to you, and I'm sorry. Tomorrow will not be about the specifics of one particular season of a TV show, I promise. For those of you who DO watch, or have watched in the past, I look forward to hearing your comments and thoughts.
I had so been looking forward to this season, to fiesty and controversial characters, smart and not-so-smart players, and the different dynamics in the house. What a huge disappointment.
To date, here are my thoughts:
Carol: aka, the first person to be voted out. She was a pretty girl, if nothing else. Too bad her rival didn't get evicted first.
Joe: aka, the annoying gay guy, second evictee. After the first episode I thought I was really going to like him, especially after he told the whole house that his rival ex-boyfriend Dustin had given him gonorrhea. LMAO for about an hour. But Joe doesn't know when to shut up. He was obnoxious ad nauseum. Attention-monger with a very loud voice, and total hypocrite besides. Bye Bye Joe.
Danielle: I like this girl for some reason. She hasn't really done anything notable, and she does seem a bit on the spacey side, but she hasn't done anything to rub me the wrong way. She seems to think her father is the biggest dork ever, which is nice in a refreshing, all-kids-think-their-parents-are-dorks kind of way. As long as she gets a grip on the whole relationship with Nick, distances herself from her father's big mouth, and if she stops spending so much friggin time in bed, I think she'll be there for the long haul.
Dick: Oh Dick, what can I say. In one respect he's very smart. No matter how uncomfortable the situation, Dick is always there with his mouth to make it more uncomfortable. Calling people out on their lies, exposing all the dirty deals, it's great; and he's making a name for himself as the guy who always tells the truth, no matter what the cost. That could serve him well later in the game - he could lie about anything, and people would believe him over someone else. But that's assuming he's still in the house. The way he's shooting his mouth off to everyone is getting abrasive, and it might hurt him. He's used the power of HOH like a police academy drop-out working the door at a nightclub. Good thing his reign is over, hopefully he didn't have enough time to shoot himself in the foot. I like him, as long as he's not in charge.
Dustin: My favorite, gonorrhea or no gonorrhea. I liked him immediately, and he hasn't done anything yet to change my mind. A bit sad that we "play for the same team", as I think he's better looking than any other guy in the house. He may be playing under the radar, but for now, I say let him. Smart move at least until Joe was out of the picture. He's in the good graces of just about everyone in the house, and we'll see where his loyalty is when the herd is thinned a little.
Amber: Get it together lady! Do you think she does it on cue? "What can I say, I'm a crier," she said. Well thanks for the news update, no one had noticed the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Maybe a nice girl and all, but she doesn't have enough in the cahones department to be a contestant on this show. We shouldn't have to watch her sook and cry constantly, and the other contestants shouldn't have to spend all day fighting her battles, standing up for her, and consoling her. She's an emotional trainwreck and the sooner she goes back to her daughter in Las Vegas, the better. You are the weakest link, goodbye.
Jameka: Floating around, with the exception of her Africa meltdown, is all this girl has done to date. She seems to be very intelligent and street smart, so why isn't she making a bigger impact on the show? I have no idea. I'd like to see more of her, or none of her at all.
Jessica: Who? I honestly had to go to CBS.com to find out this girl's name. Used to being "the hot blonde" I imagine, with the bigger personalities on the show, she doesn't quite know where to put herself. The world record holder for using the word "like" the most times in one sentence, Jessica's floating M.O. will be discovered soon, and I'm sure the players will tire of it. Go back to your cheerleading squad dear, they're about to shoot an episode of Girls Gone Wild.
Eric: Everyone knows someone like Eric. The nice, nerdy guy in high school who did whatever it took to make the cool people like him. The type of guy who just doesn't sound natural when he swears. The guy who's more interested in watching the guys than the girls, not because he's gay, but because he has to learn how to be cool, and the girls are out of his league anyway. "America's Choice" should have been a contender, but this guy, as much as he tries hard and seems to be sweet enough, is going to get eaten alive when the game REALLY starts.
Mike/Nick/Zach: I group them together because they might as well be one person. Equally useless and uninteresting. The eye candy the producers so desperately need to keep the interest of their female viewers (and, often times, female contestants). It's a shame the BB people didn't look harder....I'm sure they could have found a few beefcakes who actually have a personality. Nick's "relationship" with Danielle sets him a bit apart from the rest, but not enough to make a big difference. The most interesting contribution from any one of these guys was Nick's "the 5 guys I would sleep with if I was gay which I'm not" speech. Again, LMAO.
Jen: "Jensa Member" - the irony of all ironies. Jen is a poor man's Janelle. Not nearly as attractive, but thinks she's the prettiest girl in history. Amazing body, but nothing above the shoulders, so to speak. Janelle was annoying, conceited, with a "couldn't care less" attitide. Jen tries to be the same way, but she's not as convincing. I can picture her putting away her brave face when the lights go out and crying herself to sleep every night. She doesn't have the same level of confidence or smarts as her predecessor, and her schtick is getting old. Good riddance.
Kail: "Everyone in my town works for me! I'm so wealthy and powerful and saavy." It's great that she enjoys her life in the real world, because I think she'll be heading back to it soon. For someone who's such a successful businesswoman, she's a pretty crappy Big Brother contestant. Selling everyone down the river, and then telling people about it. Lying, scheming, making alliances left and right, and then telling everyone about it. Trying to be too sneaky and too competitive right from the get go, instead of learning who to trust first and making decisions from there. Silly, silly Kail. Fun times watching her eat crow, but the drama involved in her desperate, unsuccessful campaign to stay is more interesting than watching her over the next few weeks. Nice knowing you, Kail, but I think you booked your ticket home.
Whew, that turned out to be a lot longer than I intended. But anyway, the moral of the story is, I miss Janelle and Dr. Will. Unless they show up with their sleeping bags to join BB8, this season just isn't won't be as fun to watch.
Update: I wrote this when Dick was HOH...lots and lots has happened since then. I will write another post about the remaining contestants and the status of the game in the coming days.
So I guess I'm going to talk about Big Brother 8 now.
For those of you who don't watch it, or who don't know anything about Big Brother, this blog entry will read like a Mandarin textbook to you, and I'm sorry. Tomorrow will not be about the specifics of one particular season of a TV show, I promise. For those of you who DO watch, or have watched in the past, I look forward to hearing your comments and thoughts.
I had so been looking forward to this season, to fiesty and controversial characters, smart and not-so-smart players, and the different dynamics in the house. What a huge disappointment.
To date, here are my thoughts:
Carol: aka, the first person to be voted out. She was a pretty girl, if nothing else. Too bad her rival didn't get evicted first.
Joe: aka, the annoying gay guy, second evictee. After the first episode I thought I was really going to like him, especially after he told the whole house that his rival ex-boyfriend Dustin had given him gonorrhea. LMAO for about an hour. But Joe doesn't know when to shut up. He was obnoxious ad nauseum. Attention-monger with a very loud voice, and total hypocrite besides. Bye Bye Joe.
Danielle: I like this girl for some reason. She hasn't really done anything notable, and she does seem a bit on the spacey side, but she hasn't done anything to rub me the wrong way. She seems to think her father is the biggest dork ever, which is nice in a refreshing, all-kids-think-their-parents-are-dorks kind of way. As long as she gets a grip on the whole relationship with Nick, distances herself from her father's big mouth, and if she stops spending so much friggin time in bed, I think she'll be there for the long haul.
Dick: Oh Dick, what can I say. In one respect he's very smart. No matter how uncomfortable the situation, Dick is always there with his mouth to make it more uncomfortable. Calling people out on their lies, exposing all the dirty deals, it's great; and he's making a name for himself as the guy who always tells the truth, no matter what the cost. That could serve him well later in the game - he could lie about anything, and people would believe him over someone else. But that's assuming he's still in the house. The way he's shooting his mouth off to everyone is getting abrasive, and it might hurt him. He's used the power of HOH like a police academy drop-out working the door at a nightclub. Good thing his reign is over, hopefully he didn't have enough time to shoot himself in the foot. I like him, as long as he's not in charge.
Dustin: My favorite, gonorrhea or no gonorrhea. I liked him immediately, and he hasn't done anything yet to change my mind. A bit sad that we "play for the same team", as I think he's better looking than any other guy in the house. He may be playing under the radar, but for now, I say let him. Smart move at least until Joe was out of the picture. He's in the good graces of just about everyone in the house, and we'll see where his loyalty is when the herd is thinned a little.
Amber: Get it together lady! Do you think she does it on cue? "What can I say, I'm a crier," she said. Well thanks for the news update, no one had noticed the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Maybe a nice girl and all, but she doesn't have enough in the cahones department to be a contestant on this show. We shouldn't have to watch her sook and cry constantly, and the other contestants shouldn't have to spend all day fighting her battles, standing up for her, and consoling her. She's an emotional trainwreck and the sooner she goes back to her daughter in Las Vegas, the better. You are the weakest link, goodbye.
Jameka: Floating around, with the exception of her Africa meltdown, is all this girl has done to date. She seems to be very intelligent and street smart, so why isn't she making a bigger impact on the show? I have no idea. I'd like to see more of her, or none of her at all.
Jessica: Who? I honestly had to go to CBS.com to find out this girl's name. Used to being "the hot blonde" I imagine, with the bigger personalities on the show, she doesn't quite know where to put herself. The world record holder for using the word "like" the most times in one sentence, Jessica's floating M.O. will be discovered soon, and I'm sure the players will tire of it. Go back to your cheerleading squad dear, they're about to shoot an episode of Girls Gone Wild.
Eric: Everyone knows someone like Eric. The nice, nerdy guy in high school who did whatever it took to make the cool people like him. The type of guy who just doesn't sound natural when he swears. The guy who's more interested in watching the guys than the girls, not because he's gay, but because he has to learn how to be cool, and the girls are out of his league anyway. "America's Choice" should have been a contender, but this guy, as much as he tries hard and seems to be sweet enough, is going to get eaten alive when the game REALLY starts.
Mike/Nick/Zach: I group them together because they might as well be one person. Equally useless and uninteresting. The eye candy the producers so desperately need to keep the interest of their female viewers (and, often times, female contestants). It's a shame the BB people didn't look harder....I'm sure they could have found a few beefcakes who actually have a personality. Nick's "relationship" with Danielle sets him a bit apart from the rest, but not enough to make a big difference. The most interesting contribution from any one of these guys was Nick's "the 5 guys I would sleep with if I was gay which I'm not" speech. Again, LMAO.
Jen: "Jensa Member" - the irony of all ironies. Jen is a poor man's Janelle. Not nearly as attractive, but thinks she's the prettiest girl in history. Amazing body, but nothing above the shoulders, so to speak. Janelle was annoying, conceited, with a "couldn't care less" attitide. Jen tries to be the same way, but she's not as convincing. I can picture her putting away her brave face when the lights go out and crying herself to sleep every night. She doesn't have the same level of confidence or smarts as her predecessor, and her schtick is getting old. Good riddance.
Kail: "Everyone in my town works for me! I'm so wealthy and powerful and saavy." It's great that she enjoys her life in the real world, because I think she'll be heading back to it soon. For someone who's such a successful businesswoman, she's a pretty crappy Big Brother contestant. Selling everyone down the river, and then telling people about it. Lying, scheming, making alliances left and right, and then telling everyone about it. Trying to be too sneaky and too competitive right from the get go, instead of learning who to trust first and making decisions from there. Silly, silly Kail. Fun times watching her eat crow, but the drama involved in her desperate, unsuccessful campaign to stay is more interesting than watching her over the next few weeks. Nice knowing you, Kail, but I think you booked your ticket home.
Whew, that turned out to be a lot longer than I intended. But anyway, the moral of the story is, I miss Janelle and Dr. Will. Unless they show up with their sleeping bags to join BB8, this season just isn't won't be as fun to watch.
Update: I wrote this when Dick was HOH...lots and lots has happened since then. I will write another post about the remaining contestants and the status of the game in the coming days.
The New Hitler
I truly wish Mr. Bush wouldn't make himself such an easy target for rampant bashing and discord.
He's apparently been busy of late, trying to find a way to quickly, effectively, and quietly stop all this anti-war sentiment that is present in every corner of America. (Note: A recently conducted Associated Press poll found that a full two-thirds of all Americans want all troops pulled out of Iraq by spring 2008.) So George, being George, opted to not let the country decide. His judgement is, as far as he is concerned, more important than those of the elected representatives. So what shall we do? he wondered. These pesky voters won't shut up! They keep pressuring me! They're yelling at me! They're calling me mean names! Daddy, what can I do?? (Those aren't quotes, by the way, that's just how I imagine him reacting) And the result? "President" Bush issued a sweeping order outlawing all forms of protest against the Iraq war. It's called "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq." This information does not come from CNN, or some random internet news source, it comes from Dubya himself. You can find it here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html
The following summary of the order I stole from a newspaper reporter named Sergio, and I find it to best encapsulate the main idea:
"The order states that the government may, without warning, deprive you of all property if it deems that you MAY at any point in the future, commit acts of violence, or support or donate to, ANY organization, that MIGHT support or commit actions that HINDER the PROGRESS towards the GOAL of STABILITY in Iraq. So, here's the problem. All the capitalized words above are open to interpretation. Many of them specifically allow one man, the Secretary of the Treasury, to make predictions about possible future actions and act on them (he doesn't have to get a court order, or ask anyone else, he can just order his Secret Service agents to act and that's that). Others words in the order that are used to refer to those who might "hinder" progress could be stretched to include protesters, the Red Cross, Amnesty International or anyone who donates to a Senator or Representative who votes against funding the war."
I have several problems with this, as I'm sure many Americans do as well.
First of all, it's an order. Not a bill that required several levels of debate, revision and approval, but an order from the President himself, unquestionable, inarguable, based on what HE thought he would subject people to.
Secondly, while the overall notion is a good idea in theory (if you read the order in it's entirety, it's main objective is to stop terrorist funding), the underlying intent of the order, with it's broad language and open interpretation, flushes the fifth amendment down the crapper and basically allows the government to do what it wants to it's citizens.
Third, and perhaps saddest of all, we are being inundated with images of Lindsay Lohan's mugshot, while this Bush business goes unreported.
This seems to me to be a convenient way to shut up the anti-war, anti-Bush folks, under the guise of a "stop terrorist funding" platform. While I don't think every hippie with a "bring our troops home" sign will be locked in solitary confinement, and while many reports of this order and it's implications will surely be dramaticized and exaggerated, there is a valid fear of government interference and control that should be recognized with the issuance of this order.
How can it be that GWB is sailing along for another 18-or-so-months without a glimmer of recourse in sight? America had no trouble impeaching Clinton (as well they should have), but not Bush? I think lying to the people about a midnight rendezvous with a chubby brunette is one thing, but lying to a country about a war and daily becoming more reckless with your power in an attempt to stifle your opponents? That's something else.
He's apparently been busy of late, trying to find a way to quickly, effectively, and quietly stop all this anti-war sentiment that is present in every corner of America. (Note: A recently conducted Associated Press poll found that a full two-thirds of all Americans want all troops pulled out of Iraq by spring 2008.) So George, being George, opted to not let the country decide. His judgement is, as far as he is concerned, more important than those of the elected representatives. So what shall we do? he wondered. These pesky voters won't shut up! They keep pressuring me! They're yelling at me! They're calling me mean names! Daddy, what can I do?? (Those aren't quotes, by the way, that's just how I imagine him reacting) And the result? "President" Bush issued a sweeping order outlawing all forms of protest against the Iraq war. It's called "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq." This information does not come from CNN, or some random internet news source, it comes from Dubya himself. You can find it here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html
The following summary of the order I stole from a newspaper reporter named Sergio, and I find it to best encapsulate the main idea:
"The order states that the government may, without warning, deprive you of all property if it deems that you MAY at any point in the future, commit acts of violence, or support or donate to, ANY organization, that MIGHT support or commit actions that HINDER the PROGRESS towards the GOAL of STABILITY in Iraq. So, here's the problem. All the capitalized words above are open to interpretation. Many of them specifically allow one man, the Secretary of the Treasury, to make predictions about possible future actions and act on them (he doesn't have to get a court order, or ask anyone else, he can just order his Secret Service agents to act and that's that). Others words in the order that are used to refer to those who might "hinder" progress could be stretched to include protesters, the Red Cross, Amnesty International or anyone who donates to a Senator or Representative who votes against funding the war."
I have several problems with this, as I'm sure many Americans do as well.
First of all, it's an order. Not a bill that required several levels of debate, revision and approval, but an order from the President himself, unquestionable, inarguable, based on what HE thought he would subject people to.
Secondly, while the overall notion is a good idea in theory (if you read the order in it's entirety, it's main objective is to stop terrorist funding), the underlying intent of the order, with it's broad language and open interpretation, flushes the fifth amendment down the crapper and basically allows the government to do what it wants to it's citizens.
Third, and perhaps saddest of all, we are being inundated with images of Lindsay Lohan's mugshot, while this Bush business goes unreported.
This seems to me to be a convenient way to shut up the anti-war, anti-Bush folks, under the guise of a "stop terrorist funding" platform. While I don't think every hippie with a "bring our troops home" sign will be locked in solitary confinement, and while many reports of this order and it's implications will surely be dramaticized and exaggerated, there is a valid fear of government interference and control that should be recognized with the issuance of this order.
How can it be that GWB is sailing along for another 18-or-so-months without a glimmer of recourse in sight? America had no trouble impeaching Clinton (as well they should have), but not Bush? I think lying to the people about a midnight rendezvous with a chubby brunette is one thing, but lying to a country about a war and daily becoming more reckless with your power in an attempt to stifle your opponents? That's something else.
P.A.
With Lindsey back in rehab, I feel it necessary to throw in my own towel and make an admission.
Hi. My name is Gina, and I'm a pop-oholic.
Everyone together: "Hi Gina."
They say the first step is admitting your problem, so I'm coming clean.
Though I have always enjoyed pop "recreationally", I didn't start "using" on a regular basis until I was nineteen. My drug of choice has always been cola, diet cola to be specific. I will have a regular Coke or Pepsi in a pinch, but only if the diet variety is unavailable. My taste has become more refined through the years, and now my preference leans toward Big 8 Diet Cola, even above the sweeter, more bubbly Diet Pepsi, which used to be my favorite poison. The whole 7-Up, Ginger Ale, Cream Soda, etc...group of alternatives would save me in an emergency, much the same as we'd all eat grass and worms if regular food were obliterated and we needed to prevent starvation. So for the sake of this rant, we'll say I'm addicted to diet cola, and leave other flavors out of it.
Pop is much more than just a beverage to me. It can be, and often is, the ultimate thirst quencher; the perfect way to wash down a good meal; a meal replacement, if need be; a partner to a ciggarette; a stress reliever; a nightcap; a cool breeze on a hot summer day, if you will. I look forward to my first drink of the day, and I miss it terribly when it's gone. While most people sip a glass of pop and place their empty cup in the sink, I relish every part of a good drink of pop, from beginning to end. Be it frosty, fresh, warm, or flat, it delights my palate each and every time. As most people can't live without their daily "double double", I would be a wreck if I didn't have my daily fix of pop.
Some of you might take offence to the comparison I am making between pop and drug addiction. While I appreciate that drug and alcohol addiction are very serious and difficult beasts to tackle, and while I use this comparison for humour's sake, being addicted to pop has it's physical and psychological side effects as well. Anyone who has ever quit (or tried to quit) can tell you - it's not easy. I have only tried to quit once, unsuccessfully, after hearing that the chemicals in Coke dissolved a penny or fueled a 747 or some such nonsense. The few days I went without pop were painful, anxiety-ridden, and unforgettable. I decided to go cold turkey and switch to water, figuring that my body shouldn't be subjected to the ravages of digesting airplane fuel. In hindsight, I think downing a pint of pure unleaded gasoline would have been easier on my body than the absence of pop. I had splitting headaches. I felt completely drained of energy, fatigued, and lethargic. I was on edge and cranky. I had trouble sleeping. I joked about going through withdrawls, when really that's exactly what was happening. Only after I gave in to my craving and gulped a massive bottle of diet cola did I feel complete and healthy again. Quitting smoking, known to be one of the most difficult pursuits, was easier for me than quitting pop.
And so I sit before you, still a hopeless pop addict. There is no hope in sight for me. If anyone can advise me on a positive course of action, I would be greatful. A good 12-step program maybe? Don't bother telling me to quit cold turkey - I tried that, see above. And the switching to 7-Up or flavored, carbonated water thing, that won't work either, as has been suggested to me in the past. When milk goes down in price I might have a fighting chance, but as long as I can buy a million litres of pop for three bucks at Superstore, I can't see a salvation in my near future. So if you've quit, or know someone who has, please let me know how. As much as I dearly love my pop, I'm ready to fight the beast. At least that's what I keep telling myself. Wish me luck.
And on a related note, contrary to the recent actions of the news media, my recovery/self-destruction will not, thankfully, have to be the first thing Steve Murphy reads tonight at 6pm.
Hi. My name is Gina, and I'm a pop-oholic.
Everyone together: "Hi Gina."
They say the first step is admitting your problem, so I'm coming clean.
Though I have always enjoyed pop "recreationally", I didn't start "using" on a regular basis until I was nineteen. My drug of choice has always been cola, diet cola to be specific. I will have a regular Coke or Pepsi in a pinch, but only if the diet variety is unavailable. My taste has become more refined through the years, and now my preference leans toward Big 8 Diet Cola, even above the sweeter, more bubbly Diet Pepsi, which used to be my favorite poison. The whole 7-Up, Ginger Ale, Cream Soda, etc...group of alternatives would save me in an emergency, much the same as we'd all eat grass and worms if regular food were obliterated and we needed to prevent starvation. So for the sake of this rant, we'll say I'm addicted to diet cola, and leave other flavors out of it.
Pop is much more than just a beverage to me. It can be, and often is, the ultimate thirst quencher; the perfect way to wash down a good meal; a meal replacement, if need be; a partner to a ciggarette; a stress reliever; a nightcap; a cool breeze on a hot summer day, if you will. I look forward to my first drink of the day, and I miss it terribly when it's gone. While most people sip a glass of pop and place their empty cup in the sink, I relish every part of a good drink of pop, from beginning to end. Be it frosty, fresh, warm, or flat, it delights my palate each and every time. As most people can't live without their daily "double double", I would be a wreck if I didn't have my daily fix of pop.
Some of you might take offence to the comparison I am making between pop and drug addiction. While I appreciate that drug and alcohol addiction are very serious and difficult beasts to tackle, and while I use this comparison for humour's sake, being addicted to pop has it's physical and psychological side effects as well. Anyone who has ever quit (or tried to quit) can tell you - it's not easy. I have only tried to quit once, unsuccessfully, after hearing that the chemicals in Coke dissolved a penny or fueled a 747 or some such nonsense. The few days I went without pop were painful, anxiety-ridden, and unforgettable. I decided to go cold turkey and switch to water, figuring that my body shouldn't be subjected to the ravages of digesting airplane fuel. In hindsight, I think downing a pint of pure unleaded gasoline would have been easier on my body than the absence of pop. I had splitting headaches. I felt completely drained of energy, fatigued, and lethargic. I was on edge and cranky. I had trouble sleeping. I joked about going through withdrawls, when really that's exactly what was happening. Only after I gave in to my craving and gulped a massive bottle of diet cola did I feel complete and healthy again. Quitting smoking, known to be one of the most difficult pursuits, was easier for me than quitting pop.
And so I sit before you, still a hopeless pop addict. There is no hope in sight for me. If anyone can advise me on a positive course of action, I would be greatful. A good 12-step program maybe? Don't bother telling me to quit cold turkey - I tried that, see above. And the switching to 7-Up or flavored, carbonated water thing, that won't work either, as has been suggested to me in the past. When milk goes down in price I might have a fighting chance, but as long as I can buy a million litres of pop for three bucks at Superstore, I can't see a salvation in my near future. So if you've quit, or know someone who has, please let me know how. As much as I dearly love my pop, I'm ready to fight the beast. At least that's what I keep telling myself. Wish me luck.
And on a related note, contrary to the recent actions of the news media, my recovery/self-destruction will not, thankfully, have to be the first thing Steve Murphy reads tonight at 6pm.
Lucky Me
Checking online news from cities around the country, I came across these headlines.
From Calgary: "Stabbing rampage wasn't meant to kill anyone, police say"
From Montreal: "Mental illness to be defense in Laval cop slaying"
From Edmonton: "Police ask for help in tragic carjacking case"
I could go on, but you get the point.
And now this, the top story on the news from 101.5 The Hawk, my local radio station. I swear to you, this is the top story:
"Lobster Stolen in Arichat on Weekend, RCMP seeking info about crustacean bandit"
I
almost wish I had written this blog entry last week when the top story was a missing tricycle (I thought it was amusing). That's the story that got me thinking about how truly lucky we are in this part of Cape Breton.
I'm not trivializing these lobster or tricycle thefts, as I'm sure the victims have felt the impact of their losses. However, I think even they would admit that, in the grand scheme of things, their loss could have been much greater.
Growing up, I remember being so desperate to graduate and get out of my community....to go to a big city, somewhere with more action and people and noise. I remember thinking, "this place is so BORING, nothing ever happens here." At the time, I didn't realize what a blessing it is to be able to say that. I think the biggest crime ever committed in the history of my hometown of River Bourgeois, at least in my lifetime, was the attempted robbery of the local Credit Union. Two men got away with a few dollars, and I'll never forget us crowding around the family TV set, watching the ATV reporter broadcast the story from the front of the Credit Union. I'm pretty sure that was the first time our community had been on the news, and it was all very exciting, since I was only about 8 years old. I could be wrong about the year this took place, but I'm sure it must have been 20 years ago. The fact that a 20-year-old attempted robbery (involving no violence) still sticks out in my mind as a huge crime in my community - that is really saying something about where we live.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is Pleasantville. We have our share of abuse cases, vandalism, domestic violence, and fatal car accidents, as does every community in Canada and abroad. Though these cases are largely unreported, their existence is a fact of life in rural Cape Breton. But luckily, we are spared the violent, random crime that is becoming so common in larger cites and towns.
Having lived away from Cape Breton, for several years and in several different places, I have had to adjust my fear and paranoia accordingly, depending on the city. Our family just relocated from Lower Sackville, a beautiful community, and, in my opinion, a perfect place to raise a family if your job is in the Halifax Regional Municipality. In Sackville, we locked our car and our front door. My son was not allowed to leave the small cul-de-sac where we lived, and had to check in with me every hour on the hour when he was playing outside. I never left my kids in the car alone, even just to run into the corner store. My son's bike was locked up every night. The fear of child abduction was always on my mind. The fear of mugging and gun violence was always in the back of my mind, especially walking through the Wal-Mart parking lot at night with a million bags. In general, I was more alert, more aware and more wary of the people around me. Nothing bad ever happened while we lived in Sackville, but it was "the city", and you can never be too careful, I decided.
Our mindset in Cape Breton is much different. I can tell you that, in the six months we lived in River Bourgeois, neither our car nor our house has been locked even once. (Since moving to Port Hawkesbury we've been locking up, so don't get any big ideas) My son can go play outside for hours without me having to worry about where he is. There might be half a dozen cars that drive on our road the whole day, so traffic isn't an issue. I can run into Bucky's garage for milk and even chat with the clerk for a few minutes, without having to worry about someone coming along and swiping my kids out of the car. My sons bikes, and many other toys, are outside in the yard every night, and never once have we woken up fearing they might have been stolen while we slept. What my son might consider "a stranger" is, in all likelihood, the father of a girl I went to high school with, or a woman I used to babysit for. When I see a bunch of shady looking teenagers on the street, chances are they're not going to accost me, they're probably going to say hello because I know their older brother or something. And gun violence? My only fear of guns is that I'd probably suffer a heart attack and die of shock if I heard of gun-toting criminals roaming the streets of Richmond County. Maybe it's naive of me to think that I can live here with this sense of security, but history speaks for itself, and I'll take my chances for now.
The moral of my little story is this: consider yourself blessed if you're lucky enough to reside in our peaceful little corner of the world. Remember that not everyone is as fortunate to raise their kids in such a safe place. If you leave, don't assume every town and city is as safe as ours.
Appreciate living in Cape Breton!
Even if it is boring.
From Calgary: "Stabbing rampage wasn't meant to kill anyone, police say"
From Montreal: "Mental illness to be defense in Laval cop slaying"
From Edmonton: "Police ask for help in tragic carjacking case"
I could go on, but you get the point.
And now this, the top story on the news from 101.5 The Hawk, my local radio station. I swear to you, this is the top story:
"Lobster Stolen in Arichat on Weekend, RCMP seeking info about crustacean bandit"
I
almost wish I had written this blog entry last week when the top story was a missing tricycle (I thought it was amusing). That's the story that got me thinking about how truly lucky we are in this part of Cape Breton.
I'm not trivializing these lobster or tricycle thefts, as I'm sure the victims have felt the impact of their losses. However, I think even they would admit that, in the grand scheme of things, their loss could have been much greater.
Growing up, I remember being so desperate to graduate and get out of my community....to go to a big city, somewhere with more action and people and noise. I remember thinking, "this place is so BORING, nothing ever happens here." At the time, I didn't realize what a blessing it is to be able to say that. I think the biggest crime ever committed in the history of my hometown of River Bourgeois, at least in my lifetime, was the attempted robbery of the local Credit Union. Two men got away with a few dollars, and I'll never forget us crowding around the family TV set, watching the ATV reporter broadcast the story from the front of the Credit Union. I'm pretty sure that was the first time our community had been on the news, and it was all very exciting, since I was only about 8 years old. I could be wrong about the year this took place, but I'm sure it must have been 20 years ago. The fact that a 20-year-old attempted robbery (involving no violence) still sticks out in my mind as a huge crime in my community - that is really saying something about where we live.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this is Pleasantville. We have our share of abuse cases, vandalism, domestic violence, and fatal car accidents, as does every community in Canada and abroad. Though these cases are largely unreported, their existence is a fact of life in rural Cape Breton. But luckily, we are spared the violent, random crime that is becoming so common in larger cites and towns.
Having lived away from Cape Breton, for several years and in several different places, I have had to adjust my fear and paranoia accordingly, depending on the city. Our family just relocated from Lower Sackville, a beautiful community, and, in my opinion, a perfect place to raise a family if your job is in the Halifax Regional Municipality. In Sackville, we locked our car and our front door. My son was not allowed to leave the small cul-de-sac where we lived, and had to check in with me every hour on the hour when he was playing outside. I never left my kids in the car alone, even just to run into the corner store. My son's bike was locked up every night. The fear of child abduction was always on my mind. The fear of mugging and gun violence was always in the back of my mind, especially walking through the Wal-Mart parking lot at night with a million bags. In general, I was more alert, more aware and more wary of the people around me. Nothing bad ever happened while we lived in Sackville, but it was "the city", and you can never be too careful, I decided.
Our mindset in Cape Breton is much different. I can tell you that, in the six months we lived in River Bourgeois, neither our car nor our house has been locked even once. (Since moving to Port Hawkesbury we've been locking up, so don't get any big ideas) My son can go play outside for hours without me having to worry about where he is. There might be half a dozen cars that drive on our road the whole day, so traffic isn't an issue. I can run into Bucky's garage for milk and even chat with the clerk for a few minutes, without having to worry about someone coming along and swiping my kids out of the car. My sons bikes, and many other toys, are outside in the yard every night, and never once have we woken up fearing they might have been stolen while we slept. What my son might consider "a stranger" is, in all likelihood, the father of a girl I went to high school with, or a woman I used to babysit for. When I see a bunch of shady looking teenagers on the street, chances are they're not going to accost me, they're probably going to say hello because I know their older brother or something. And gun violence? My only fear of guns is that I'd probably suffer a heart attack and die of shock if I heard of gun-toting criminals roaming the streets of Richmond County. Maybe it's naive of me to think that I can live here with this sense of security, but history speaks for itself, and I'll take my chances for now.
The moral of my little story is this: consider yourself blessed if you're lucky enough to reside in our peaceful little corner of the world. Remember that not everyone is as fortunate to raise their kids in such a safe place. If you leave, don't assume every town and city is as safe as ours.
Appreciate living in Cape Breton!
Even if it is boring.
Has the U.S. been "Punk'd"?
That’s what I was asking myself after hearing on the news last week that Lewis “Scooter” Libby had his sentence commuted by George W. Bush. I was sitting in my living room, watching the late news, and half expected Ashton Kutcher to jump out onto the screen and say “Just kidding Americans!! That never happened! You’ve all been Punk’d!”
But it was no joke.
For those of you not familiar with the case, here’s a brief overview of the surrounding circumstances, as reported in the media and translated into layman’s terms from my perspective.
The Bush administration based their Iraq attack plan on intelligence that claimed Saddam Hussein had acquired large amounts of uranium from Africa, and planned to use this uranium to make weapons of mass destruction designed to attack the United States. A man named Joseph Wilson was sent in to investigate the alleged sales of uranium, and exposed this “intelligence” as a sham. Dick Cheney, the Vice President, organized a campaign to discredit him, and put in motion a plot to “out” Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, an underground CIA operative. When the Plame case was being investigated and tried, Scooter Libby, Cheyney’s right hand man, lied to the jury to protect Cheney. Libby was tried and convicted by a judge and jury, and was sentenced to 30 months in prison for perjury and obstruction of justice.
GWB is quoted as saying, “I respect the jury’s verdict, but I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive...” With one sweep of his pen, GWB has ensured that Libby will spend no time in jail. He gets 2 years probation and a large fine instead. Commuting a sentence is not the same as a full pardon, in that it does not erase the criminal record. However, the President’s decision is final and can not be challenged or overturned by any court or attorney. Scooter Libby will not spend a day in jail for his crimes, and the President has hinted that a full pardon may be in Libby’s future.
So now I ask you….doubleyou-tee-eff is going on here?? Just because this executive privilege exists, should the President use it to disregard the decision of a judge and jury to save one of his own? Would the same leniency be shown to anyone else? I can safely say no, as GWB has only commuted three other sentences in his six-and-a-half year Presidency. He has issued fewer pardons than any President since the Second World War. Despite a phone call from the Pope, Bush allowed the first execution of a woman since the American Civil War. Undermining the judiciary must be reserved for only very special folks, like Libby. After all, Bush ignored the usual process of running requests through the Justice Department lawyers, and instead made his “own evaluation” of Libby’s circumstances and sentence.
Here's what I think.....
Sentences are handed down by courts every day. It’s the system of justice that decides the guilt or innocence of an individual, and then the fate of this person. A SYSTEM…not a President.
Land of the Free? No - not even a little bit. US citizens are at the mercy of an irresponsible, irrational dictator….someone overpraised, oversupported, and underqualified. A President who has taken advantage of the blind loyalty shown to him after 9/11 and lied his country into war. Someone with such a blatant disregard for the people that he serves, that he’s exploited their fear and caused the death of thousands of them in the search for oil, wealth and power. Someone who will not accept responsibility for any of the mess he’s caused. A leader who ignores the resounding American voice saying “we don’t want to be at war anymore”. Someone without an ounce of respect for the American Justice System. A President as corrupt as any other who has “served” the United States.
Home of the Brave? Maybe - we’ll see in November 2008 if Americans have the stones to elect a President who serves Americans, and who is made to be accountable to Americans. Someone who, even though they might be female, or black, or not from Texas, or oppose the war in Iraq, will bring new ideas, new perspective, and a new plan. Someone who is willing and ready to earn the trust their countrymen, instead of demanding and abusing it. A President who will conduct themselves on behalf of the whole Republic, and not on behalf of their party and their personal interests.
And do you know what the worst part is? GWB, Chaney, and the rest of the White House senior staff are probably sitting in the Oval Office, wearing the Montgomery Burns-esque sneer, drumming their fingers together. They’re probably drinking vodka and Red Bull, smoking cigars, watching Girls Gone Wild, and laughing….”we can do whatever we want and get away with it…”
And they’re right.
Time for change, people. This is a huge slap in the face, and hopefully a huge wake-up call, to the American voting public. Regular citizens don’t understand the many facets of government policy, nor do I, but we DO understand a “fixed lottery” when we see it, like the Libby case. When my grandkids open their history books in 20 years, they will read about the most laffable, ridiculous, selfish Presidential administration in U.S. history. Hopefully the next leader of the free world will be someone who the American people can be proud to call their President.
But it was no joke.
For those of you not familiar with the case, here’s a brief overview of the surrounding circumstances, as reported in the media and translated into layman’s terms from my perspective.
The Bush administration based their Iraq attack plan on intelligence that claimed Saddam Hussein had acquired large amounts of uranium from Africa, and planned to use this uranium to make weapons of mass destruction designed to attack the United States. A man named Joseph Wilson was sent in to investigate the alleged sales of uranium, and exposed this “intelligence” as a sham. Dick Cheney, the Vice President, organized a campaign to discredit him, and put in motion a plot to “out” Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame, an underground CIA operative. When the Plame case was being investigated and tried, Scooter Libby, Cheyney’s right hand man, lied to the jury to protect Cheney. Libby was tried and convicted by a judge and jury, and was sentenced to 30 months in prison for perjury and obstruction of justice.
GWB is quoted as saying, “I respect the jury’s verdict, but I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive...” With one sweep of his pen, GWB has ensured that Libby will spend no time in jail. He gets 2 years probation and a large fine instead. Commuting a sentence is not the same as a full pardon, in that it does not erase the criminal record. However, the President’s decision is final and can not be challenged or overturned by any court or attorney. Scooter Libby will not spend a day in jail for his crimes, and the President has hinted that a full pardon may be in Libby’s future.
So now I ask you….doubleyou-tee-eff is going on here?? Just because this executive privilege exists, should the President use it to disregard the decision of a judge and jury to save one of his own? Would the same leniency be shown to anyone else? I can safely say no, as GWB has only commuted three other sentences in his six-and-a-half year Presidency. He has issued fewer pardons than any President since the Second World War. Despite a phone call from the Pope, Bush allowed the first execution of a woman since the American Civil War. Undermining the judiciary must be reserved for only very special folks, like Libby. After all, Bush ignored the usual process of running requests through the Justice Department lawyers, and instead made his “own evaluation” of Libby’s circumstances and sentence.
Here's what I think.....
Sentences are handed down by courts every day. It’s the system of justice that decides the guilt or innocence of an individual, and then the fate of this person. A SYSTEM…not a President.
Land of the Free? No - not even a little bit. US citizens are at the mercy of an irresponsible, irrational dictator….someone overpraised, oversupported, and underqualified. A President who has taken advantage of the blind loyalty shown to him after 9/11 and lied his country into war. Someone with such a blatant disregard for the people that he serves, that he’s exploited their fear and caused the death of thousands of them in the search for oil, wealth and power. Someone who will not accept responsibility for any of the mess he’s caused. A leader who ignores the resounding American voice saying “we don’t want to be at war anymore”. Someone without an ounce of respect for the American Justice System. A President as corrupt as any other who has “served” the United States.
Home of the Brave? Maybe - we’ll see in November 2008 if Americans have the stones to elect a President who serves Americans, and who is made to be accountable to Americans. Someone who, even though they might be female, or black, or not from Texas, or oppose the war in Iraq, will bring new ideas, new perspective, and a new plan. Someone who is willing and ready to earn the trust their countrymen, instead of demanding and abusing it. A President who will conduct themselves on behalf of the whole Republic, and not on behalf of their party and their personal interests.
And do you know what the worst part is? GWB, Chaney, and the rest of the White House senior staff are probably sitting in the Oval Office, wearing the Montgomery Burns-esque sneer, drumming their fingers together. They’re probably drinking vodka and Red Bull, smoking cigars, watching Girls Gone Wild, and laughing….”we can do whatever we want and get away with it…”
And they’re right.
Time for change, people. This is a huge slap in the face, and hopefully a huge wake-up call, to the American voting public. Regular citizens don’t understand the many facets of government policy, nor do I, but we DO understand a “fixed lottery” when we see it, like the Libby case. When my grandkids open their history books in 20 years, they will read about the most laffable, ridiculous, selfish Presidential administration in U.S. history. Hopefully the next leader of the free world will be someone who the American people can be proud to call their President.
Musings
TO START WITH.....(AN INTRODUCTION & DISCLAIMER)
I’ve always made fun of people who started a blog. I thought it was a ridiculous, self-indulgent pastime for bookish types with too many opinions and too much time on their hands.
I was right.
I’m starting one anyway though, simply because I realize I have a lot more to say than I thought I did. I planned on writing a book of essays someday, but that takes the kind of committment and dedication that I just don’t have - hence this blog.
I’ve been reading assorted blogs for a few weeks, and I find it interesting. I have been inspired to write what I feel like saying, without worrying who likes it and who doesn’t. And I’ve also been reminded that there are more pressing matters at hand in the world than Paris Hilton and the Beckhams. And there is importance in so many issues that don’t make it to TV. And, lastly, not everyone wants to talk about the same things as everyone else….sometimes not even your husbands or friends are interested in certain subjects that you could go on about for days. So I figured I’d spill my guts in a blog. That way I can spare my family of my endless ranting, while still amusing and infuriating those who enjoy it.
I should probably tell you, I’m not an expert, I just pretend to be. I am educated, but I don’t have the credentials to make my opinion terribly valuable at the top. Luckily for me, I’m not interested in what scholars think of my opinion -my goal is to spark a few conversations and blow off some steam.
Another thing you might want clarified…..I’m not affiliated with any political party, and I like the thought of voting for leaders and ideas, as opposed to parties. I am very liberal when it comes to some issues, and very conservative when it comes to others.
I won’t apologize for anything I say here. If you don’t like it, you can go back to Facebook or YouTube or whatever you absorb yourself in. I won’t begin a philosophical discussion or political commentary every time I post - sometimes I’ll be complaining about what happened on Big Brother 8 or wondering what rehab facility is now housing Lindsey Lohan. So read if you choose - but don’t complain, since the mouse is in your hand.
I’ve always made fun of people who started a blog. I thought it was a ridiculous, self-indulgent pastime for bookish types with too many opinions and too much time on their hands.
I was right.
I’m starting one anyway though, simply because I realize I have a lot more to say than I thought I did. I planned on writing a book of essays someday, but that takes the kind of committment and dedication that I just don’t have - hence this blog.
I’ve been reading assorted blogs for a few weeks, and I find it interesting. I have been inspired to write what I feel like saying, without worrying who likes it and who doesn’t. And I’ve also been reminded that there are more pressing matters at hand in the world than Paris Hilton and the Beckhams. And there is importance in so many issues that don’t make it to TV. And, lastly, not everyone wants to talk about the same things as everyone else….sometimes not even your husbands or friends are interested in certain subjects that you could go on about for days. So I figured I’d spill my guts in a blog. That way I can spare my family of my endless ranting, while still amusing and infuriating those who enjoy it.
I should probably tell you, I’m not an expert, I just pretend to be. I am educated, but I don’t have the credentials to make my opinion terribly valuable at the top. Luckily for me, I’m not interested in what scholars think of my opinion -my goal is to spark a few conversations and blow off some steam.
Another thing you might want clarified…..I’m not affiliated with any political party, and I like the thought of voting for leaders and ideas, as opposed to parties. I am very liberal when it comes to some issues, and very conservative when it comes to others.
I won’t apologize for anything I say here. If you don’t like it, you can go back to Facebook or YouTube or whatever you absorb yourself in. I won’t begin a philosophical discussion or political commentary every time I post - sometimes I’ll be complaining about what happened on Big Brother 8 or wondering what rehab facility is now housing Lindsey Lohan. So read if you choose - but don’t complain, since the mouse is in your hand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
