Canada's history - abridged yet again

On the weekend, an out-of town friend and I had a good look at the statues of the 'Valiants' , the fourteen bronze statues of military heroes from our past that stand on the overpass near the end of the Rideau canal.

I asked my buddy - "What two prominent figures are missing from this collection?"

It didn't take long for a response...of course, General Wolfe and Marquis de Montcalm are missing. Most of us would give the same answer if we stopped to think about it for a minute.

We both agreed that this is yet another example of Canadian bureacratic pussy-footing around some obvious historical facts. To have a war-related memorial and to profile Canada's military past without mentioning the two central leaders in the most pivotal battle ever on our soil, the Plains of Abraham, is like having a rock n'roll hall of fame without the Beatles or Jimi Hendrix. And it is also an example of hypocrisy because the 'Valiants' contains at least two figures from our past (Count Frontenac and D'Ibreville) who had been, in their era, actively engaged in the British-French conflicts in what was later to become Canada...so, no one should be able to play the politically correct card and say, "oooh, can't have Wolfe and Montcalm there, it's too controversial."

For starters, I have no problem with WHO is among the so-called Valiants. I also have a good feeling about having a monument in Canada's capital that simply acknowledges good, competent soldiers and commemorates acts of individual heroism in miltary struggles. All of the people portrayed there had served either our country or the predecessor countries, England and France, some of them died, some died while saving others, and some of them had lead our armed forces to significant victories. Isaac Brock, to name one, can be credited with having saved the 'country that was yet to be' from American takeover in the War of 1812. These are no small deeds.

So, I ask, why not Wolfe and Montcalm? They were both, according to historians, brilliant and - for their era - gallant soldiers. Both had distinguished themselves in actual hand-to hand combat in their youth, and later became leading strategists of the time. Both died in the eventual battle in Quebec City; a reminder of another, much more dangerous time, when generals actually commanded their troops into the line of fire and faced bullets along with common soldiers. So, physical bravery is not at issue. Neither is compassion at issue, as both men were known to treat non-combatants and captures enemies very humanely, at least by 18th century standards. When taken, the city of Quebec was not sacked and pillaged, its people were not harassed or forced to convert. Finally, Wolfe's and Montcalm's importance, albeit almost accidentaly, is so central to the birth of Canada (and to its evolution as a bilingual and bi-cultural nation) that they should tower over any other of the otherwise brilliant 'heroes'.

Of course, we know two possible answers to why these men are not standing in their bronze liknesses at the memorial: Political cowardice, or plain old lack of perspective.

I think here is a symbolic cause waiting to be taken up by a local politician.

---

Fight Back with Pink

This is absolutely brilliant.

Stories like this remind me that things get better the more exposure kids get to different ideas rather than being isolated at schools (such as faith based schools, Catholic system included).

Good on them for doing what too few high school boys would ever have the balls to pull off. This makes an honest difference in the world.

---

Area Commission Satirized

I haven't read The Onion online in quite some time, so I find it kind of telling that when I did today this is the story I come across. It's like they were visiting Gatineau or possibly attending a Council meeting for the political party I used to work for.

I particularly like the line "Over the course of the six-and-a-half-hour meeting, the only variation on the endless monotony of inconsequential concerns was the occasional tone of entitlement."

Fun times.

---

Veiled Thoughts

I think Elections Canada got it right.

I think women who chose to wear a facial covering should be able to vote without revealing their faces. I also think Elections Canada was slightly too expedient in their process though. People like to be asked before someone else makes a decision on their behalf. And with good reason, Muslim women are now uneasy about having the spotlight shone on them in Quebec because of something they didn’t actually ask for.

The reasons I think Elections Canada got this right are probably a bit facile to the rest of you. Firstly, I think anything that makes the voting process more accommodating to everyone is a good thing. Voter turnout is low and this allows more people to vote without really interrupting their lifestyle choices or religious faith. I really don’t think this will lead to widespread voting corruption scandals. Fear of that is really just a disguised racist fear. Secondly, just because there is the right doesn’t mean it will actually be invoked by anyone. It wasn’t an issue before, anywhere, so it probably won’t be now. So I think we should just all chill out because this is just saying “you don’t have to if you don’t want to” before someone took the nation to court over a violation of their rights as a Canadian. Not that I think it would necessarily happen but if this wasn’t decided upon by Elections Canada then it is much more likely that it could.

Also, you can vote even if you don't actually have any identification but can get a sworn statement that you are who you claim to be. Say you've had a house fire and lost all identification the night before an election or you were robbed or some other circumstance (veil not required). At least that's how I remember the Canada Elections Act, it has been a while though.

I’ve already heard of these people in the by-elections protesting that the people at the counter don’t know if the person voting is really the person voting and this is somehow a bad thing (even though you provide I.D. to vote as the person and nobody has since shown up to vote a second time unveiled). I mean how often does someone steal someone else’s identity in order to elect the candidate of their choice? I mean honestly, this isn’t the 1800’s or Chicago in the twenties. If you provide official identity you get to vote, it’s simple. There are no major identity theft rings created for the purpose of voting – buying gasoline and computers online, sure, but voting? C’mon, get a grip.

That being said, it will be interesting to see just how utterly racist Quebec really is during the Taylor-Bouchard Commission hearings. I find it funny that a culture that is extremely Catholic claims to be secular. It’s like discussing the canon of being Canadian or Quebecois. I heard an outtake this morning about how it was terrible that Sikhs could wear turbans if they were in the RCMP. As if being Canadian is determined by “not turban wearing” which I’m sorry, is racist bullshit. But don’t get me wrong I don’t think these feelings are limited only to Quebec, I’m sure they are present across Canada it’s just that Quebec has Herouxville.

This all sounds like a lot of baseless fears. Hmmm, who else believed in a religious conspiracy to take away from a specifically limited cultural definition then used that as a way to deflect from any serious issue until mobs were formed to rid themselves of a global conspiracy to poison pure cultures?

---

No more a girl, and, well, sort of a woman

I admit I was not home during the MTV awards. I was down in Kingston, kayaking on the St.Lawrence, more worried about my boat taking on water in the waves than worried about whose public stock has risen or plummetted, or about who made a splash across the scandal-hungry media pages (bad puns, all around).

I do admit to having read about the MTV awards, though. Yeah, thirty five and still interested in the 'charts'...I was kind of hoping to see who won what award and if anyone among the performers I actually like made it to the podium. In my rather naive viewpoint, these events are still supposed to be about achievement, talent, and giving something back to the fans...and not primarily about who is wearing (or not wearing) what and who will make a stupid remark.

Now, enter the Ottawa Citizen. Their lead-up to the coverage of the said ceremonies was Britney Spears and her attempt to emulate a stripper. Point for Britney, zero for the Citizen. I had to search through the rest of the Arts section to find out who was actually awarded for what (and, yes, Shakira did win something, so the world is essentially unfolding the way it should).

Why am I so put off by the Citizen's coverage?...hmm, let me count the ways...

First, the article was a living proof that even a slightly above-the average paper in a big Canadian city will go for the obvious, albeit lame, hint of ' sleaze and scandal' instead of focusing on someone else who is actually accomplishing interesting things. Britney's slightly sagging midriff is bigger news than singers like Shakira, Kaney West and Justin Timberlake who actually have some talent, actually are recording and selling albums and happen to be in constant play across dance floors. It reminded me of huge amoung of coverage of Eddie 'the Eagle' in the ski-jumping competition, back in the Calgary winter olympics, the last-place finisher, rather than Matti Nykkanen, the winner (and one of the best ski jumpers to ever fly off the 90 m jump).

Second, there was such a palpable sense of schadenfreude in the coverage of Britney. Let her rest, don't give her any more headlines, for God's sake. The media vultures, sensing someone's reputation will fall by the wayside, are lining up to feast on the fast-cooling but still-twitching body. Speaking of body, I find it offensive that so much attention was directed at the fact Britney's bod no longer the super-buff, preternaturally toned and sleek machine but more of a 'natural' looking 25-year old woman's body. Gents, you know what I mean when I admit to liking normal girls, normal women, with a bit of flesh around the hips and some pleasing curves. Britney may not be bright but she is still sexy. To send the message that anything else than the gym-honed, traithlete-like figure is 'sexy' is to further add to the inferiority complexes that just about every young female out there seems to have...

Last but not least, she lip-synchs. The horror, the horror...Hasn't this lip-synching stuff been around for the last 20 years, ever since bands starting running around and having intricate dnace/floor shows, with acrobatic-type moves? How 'bout Janet Jackson or scores of other pop stars?

So, basically, I regret to see - yet again - a terribly shallow approach to media coverage of anything to do with pop music. And, I'd sleep with Britney, for sure. We might not sit around and talk about existentialism or the history of diplomacy, but I'd still sleep with her.

---

Tory vs. Fossil

I think someone should throw a fossil at John Tory. It would probably fly just over his head. Or he'd ignore it.

Asked if he would allow creationism to be taught, John Tory practically got on his knees and rang out merciful and humble thanks to his Lord for His magnificent intervention (and to have a bit more fuel for the fire - it gets cold when the media doesn't pay attention during a campaign). So yeah, he's thinking we should give money to enforce ignorance. You can't teach creationism, it's like teaching someone to be an idiot. You just are.

I mean how to you teach faith based math? The easy joke is to look at the Conservative campaign budget. But seriously, you don't understand square roots, just denounce your instructor as an agent of Satan. You don't like history, no worries, God created everything that was and is as it always was and will be. Don't worry about specific dates, that's just fickle knowledge and recorded truth. Knowledge and truth are human conceits and have no place in the faithful learning environment.

You can teach evolution and you can teach science but faith simply can't be instructed. No matter how much money you give. You simply have it. You learn devotions but not actual faith - try looking it up sometime. Then again if you're a believer you don't need to because you'll already know everything you need to know through god.

You see, I don't have faith because I've got too many actual thoughts getting in the way. Because I learned things. I didn't take things on faith.

If anything, John Tory is the perfect advocate as to why adding more representation to the provincial legislature is a bad idea. We can get more like him. You know, people who think The Flintstones was a documentary and will get paid to not teach your kids.

---

Kind of Faulty Logic There Guys

So Emperor Harper and a bunch of representatives from the most environmentally unfriendly nations, most of whom did not sign Kyoto, will be meeting to discuss solutions to global warming. It's sort of like Satan and a bunch of imps and demons getting together to discuss which religion they'll choose.

---

Not so-Super series

I don't know whose idea it was to mark the 35th anniversary of the legendary 72' hockey series by pitting our juniors against Russia's juniors. I don't care to know, and I would be willing to forgive this error in PR judgement...if it wasn't for the fact that we currently have one of the best generations of hockey juniors, ever, while the Russians are struggling with all kinds of issues in their program.

I have watched a little bit of the series. The hockey was allright but it's a sad reality (and a huge indictement against staging hocky tournaments in the summer) that I would be almost immediately changing the channel and looking for US Open tennis, picking up that good book, or actually doing something myself. I simply wasn't sold on the Not-so Super Series.

Think of the original 72' classic as the equivalent of the original Pink Panther movie. Now, advance to the 21st century and find a lame remake (even if Roberto Begnini was actually quite funny in the remake...) of that police comedy classic. Imitated but not even close to duplicated. This hockey tournament falls in the same category.

When you sweep your opponents, despite your guys being jet-lagged half the time - the Russian games were played in crazy places like Omsk in Siberia - it is not "super". Canada should have faced Sweden, Czech Republic or Finland. They would have given us a better run for our money than the current crop of up-and coming Russians.

---

More "This Is Not News"

---

Seriously. Someone had to do a study on this? This is really something that shouldn't earn someone a Master's or a Ph.D. I think we learn this somewhere around grade 5 or 6, when our hormones start kicking in.

Weekend Religion

I went to a Catholic wedding this weekend. I've since decided that I will never be stepping foot inside another Catholic church, except perhaps for a funeral of a loved one. It was one of the most intolerant exhibitions I've ever witnessed, especially since I was there to celebrate two people I love in their love for each other. Instead there was an hour long ceremony explaining that I don't love my wife, our kids can't love us and we simply can't love them, and that my marriage it is a lie. There was more but I stopped listening and decided to play with the kids in the pew in front of me instead rather than cause a scene by leaving which I was prepared to do.

So guess what my thoughts are on faith based school funding? I think we need less and not more. If you want faith based education, pay for it your damned selves. Unless you're going to create a pagan viking school or the Blessed Lucifer School of the Second Ring as well.

I'd totally send my kid to viking school.

---