Grazing Rites

For the first time in the last few weeks Wolf Blitzer actually posed a question of substance on his blog: “Would the U.S. be better off if it met with adversaries?”

He’s no Cafferty but I felt the need to weigh in…

“I think more often than not these countries have a large anti-American sentiment so to say that a meeting with the US president could be used to support the leaders seems like false reasoning to me.

As well I don’t think anyone is suggesting another “peace in our time” outcome of such conversations but opening a dialogue is key. Are we supposed to behave like a petulant child when others don’t do what we want or are we going to behave like adults on the world stage?”

An interesting comment came up on the official message board for the next Star Trek movie…

Question: “I still think that A Obama-Hillary Dream Ticket is the best option. They could perfectly combine their opinions on health care. Barack’s plan with hillary’s law proposition. As president Obama should also include Nader and maybe mccain in its governement. But being realist, the latter would never be accepted in an obama presidency nor by the democrates nor by the republicans (especially the conservatives).”

My reply: “I don’t know, I think Hillary’s gone too far for that to work. Republicans would just play her “shame on you” quote repeatedly during the race. Personally I think an Obama/Edwards ticket is far more likely and viable.

I could see Nader and McCain possibly having a role to play in an Obama presidency but the question is what role. Nader as AG and McCain as SecDef maybe but there’s another side of the coin. Would Nader legitimize an Obama presidency in the eyes of his staunch (and admittedly few) supports? Would it be seen as a compromise of his ethics/policies? Or, on the other hand, would it be seen as giving him greater influence? For McCain would it completely dissolve his Republican support? And even if it did, at his age would it matter that much to him? It’d likely be another 8 years before he has a serious shot at the presidency again.

As for being a realist you must remember that conventional realism comes in large part from the current structure and unwritten rules of politics which Obama does not necessarily choose to follow. Remember the Vice President was originally intended to be the runner-up in the general election for president. There is also precedent for having opposing party members playing specific roles in a government, Bill Clinton for example had some Republicans working in his day. So I wouldn’t rule it out completely but I do think that if they are given positions they would be very specific roles and would be contained to those roles. For example McCain as SecDef would not be able to advise Obama on economic policy - there just wouldn’t be any point since they fundamentally disagree in that area. But even though they don’t agree on Iraq I think McCain might be willing to carry out his orders to refocus on Afghanistan and hunt down terrorists.“

In case you weren’t already aware I have given my 2 weeks notice to my second job. I crunched the numbers and it only ever made up 3% - 6% of my income, this figure was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It just didn’t make sense anymore - perhaps it never did.

I first wanted to work there when my contract at a performing arts theatre ended when I graduated high school. My first choice was the Playhouse but they never seemed to hire anyone under 30. That ironically became my problem when I applied for GM, I wasn’t quite old enough. Close, but not quite.

Then years later I was applying for a promotion and when it was awarded to someone else I thought it wise to inquire why and what I could do to improve myself. The answer was diversified event experience. The person who got the job recommended me for a spot at GM and I was hired.

Not long after I switched career tracks, shifting from event management to an administrative support management role, thus nullifying the relevance of GM.

So why did I stay?

It’s what I do.

There were 3 other guys hired at the same time and on the same recommendation as myself. 2 didn’t last out the first year, the other didn’t finish the second year.

I hate quitting, even if it is a job I don’t exactly enjoy. The average time a person spends in an entry-level, front end, or service job is 2 years. I pretty much stick to it until I can go no further for whatever reason. 4 years at the performing arts theatre, 3 years as a cashier (a job I never applied for), 4 years at Sears (a job I was asked to apply for), and 12 years and counting at my day job (a result of literally being dragged to a job fair).

Day job. Hmmm. I guess that phrase won’t be necessary for me anymore. Although the upcoming municipal election might bring the phrase back temporarily. I haven’t gone a complete year working only one job since 1995, the first year I worked anywhere. So conceivably 2009 could be the next year I only have one job. 13 years of working 2 or more jobs. At one point I actually had 4 jobs.

It’s strange and liberating at the same time.

Now I’m not saying Thursday’s debate was definitely rigged but let’s look at this critically. Clinton was asked first the vast majority of the time. Questions about a specific candidate cast in a negative light were all about Obama. They gave Clinton the last word and essentially let her hijack the debate for awhile. No question was asked regarding health care but she spoke about it at length.

So there’s the evidence side, what about motivation? Let’s say Obama owns her in the debate and takes the 4th handily, what do you figure would happen to the mid-term ratings of CNN? Short term, the very short term, would be good but there would be a significant drop until after the conventions. I checked before the debate and CNN.com was the 17th most visited website in the US.

When the race has it’s victor expect that to drop. They could conceivably be trying to ride this thing out as long as possible which would perpetually put them in the position of subtly pushing the underdog, whoever that may be.

Oddly enough this provides an incentive to have a debate on MSNBC or Fox News. Okay, maybe I got a bit carried away, CBS, NBC, and ABC might be interested, it’s the original reality TV, reality!

Oh well, this is probably all academic anyways, the bias is probably mine largely out of shock that her stupid name-dropping in her opening statement actually worked on the crowd.

Stupid Texans.

Latest unsuccessful attempt to get on The Cafferty File…

Question: “When it comes to being president, how much does experience really matter?”

Answer: “This isn’t a matter of seniority. 2 people can have the exact same experiences; while one can learn, grow, and draw from that experience while the other does not take advantage of opportunities.”

Experience can be a double-edged sword, it can make you jaded as well as seasoned. While it may be somewhat troubling that the current candidates don’t have experience running small versions of a country it does somewhat level the playing field on that requirement. People can vote for ideas, plans, character, policy, etc rather than on a resume which at the end of the day could send a stronger message outlining what the will of the people truly is.

I’ve been rocking some great late 90s music on my PDA the last few weeks: Live, Moist, The Hip, Depeche Mode, Hootie…it’s great stuff I haven’t really paid attention to in a long time. Much of it I didn’t even have on mp3 when the craving came. Also throw in some Ben Folds, PSB, Toad, Duran Duran, Deee-Lite, and even a little Neil Diamond and Neil Young and you’ve got a pretty diverse mix.

I suspect I will be asked for my opinion of this before long so I figure I’d get out in front of this one.

First off, KITT. I, like most, was disappointed to see some new car and no Mr. Feenie. That said the effects of the new KITT are pretty good and Val Kilmer does a decent job - I guess if you can’t pull off Batman you try being the Batmobile. I have a faint hope about KITT as I read online that it’s outward appearance can change to look like other cars. Assuming they mean more than colour we may yet see the old KITT. And Feenie’s still alive by the way, he’s 80 but he’s out there somewhere.

The new special features were pretty good and the outward appearance changes for turboboost so the designers get to live.

As for the actors I was impressed by the supporting cast more than the primaries. The main bad guy Michael Amador and the inventor were interesting and engaging - everyone else including the mom Leah Brahms weren’t noteworthy. The Hoff also did well and I liked how they kept his current status ambiguous - he’s famous enough to be known but not explicitly stated why. I suppose he could come to his son’s rescue in old school KITT at some point…

2 things I can’t say enough good stuff about is the use of the original music and replacing the big rig with a cargo plane. F yeah.

Oh, and I SO called the cargo plane.

I guess for the people who believe Hillary’s claim that Obama doesn’t have a specific plan the question becomes “would you rather have hope with no plan or a plan with no hope?”

While I’m proud of the question I actually don’t accept the premise that Obama doesn’t have a plan - from the beginning of January when I started paying real attention he’s been giving specifics but he’s ALSO been giving a message of hope. I don’t find the two mutually exclusive.

The debate last night was mostly a wash. Hillary started off with some name-dropping that I thought would be seen as pandering but the crowd ate it up, then midway through the debate she got nasty saying that 2 lines suggested by his co-chair somehow equates to stealing entire passages and then that Xerox comment was low. Plithy, but a cheap shot devoid of substance. But then at the end her closing remarks got a standing O and I’m not really sure why. Was it because she made positive comments about Obama and thus provided a party-uniting note to end on? Or was it because, as some suggested, it was the first time she seemed to be aware that she might lose? Or was it just because the debate was over since they stood for the commercial breaks too? I have no idea. And the laughter about the hard times she’s faced, we’re talking about Monica, right? When did adultery become funny? I have a PoliSci Honours degree and the last few minutes of the debate confused the hell out of me.

I think it also worth noting that some of her closing remarks were taken from Edwards.

Irony abounds, no?

I find it interesting their initials, for me HRC always stood for the Hard Rock Café and BO meant Body Odour…not really relevant to the subject at hand I suppose but the initials always throw me

My latest failed attempt to get on The Cafferty File…

Question: “How much will newspaper stories raising questions about John McCain’s ethics and his alleged relationship with a woman lobbyist hurt his presidential chances?”

Response: “I think Jon Stewart’s comments last night on Larry King were right on the money about this and I just hope that view is expressed sufficiently in the mainstream media. The fact is even if these “sources” are all accurate all it amounts to is unconfirmed thoughts on the part of his staff. And it’s noteworthy that these are former staff, they may have a bone to pick with the man that may not be based in facts. I once had similar concerns about my boss but unless you can show me a hotel bill where they shared a room this story is completely without substantive focus. Without objective evidence, aides fears don’t count, the only story here should be that he spent time with a lobbyist; the romantic relationship side of the story is more fit for the Enquirer than reputable media.“

I had cookies in a flower box delivered to my partner at work on Valentine’s Day.

Suck it everyone else.

Multiple sources are claiming the next season of 24 has been delayed by a year thanks to the 3 month WGA strike. It hasn’t been officially confirmed but it does make you want to swear like you’re on the show.

“Son of a bitch!” or “Damn it!“, your choice.

Meet The Parents had two good lines: “…if you can break my kung-fu grip” and “I will take you down. I will take you down to Chinatown“.

These phrases are both staples in the stream of consciousness running commentary in my head.

So when I was waiting for the bus at Main @ Hastings and some high school kid was being obnoxious it was not uncommon for me to think “keep that up and I will take you down. I will take you down to Chinatown.”

Then I realized I was IN Chinatown.

“Well, that would be redundant” I thought as I chuckled to myself. Everyone around me thought I was crazy.

Screw them anyways.

Jon will recognize this for the comedy gold that it is.

Ah, bias; easy to call, difficult to prove. It’s like calling someone a witch in Puritan Salem…or playing the race card in contemporary society. I’ve been guilty of calling bias without all the facts myself I’ll admit, and I’ve had the finger pointed at me - both rightly and wrongly.

I know I’ve accused the CNN website of favouring Hillary on more than one occasion in this very venue while others accuse the media at large of loving Obama. But I think I’ve stumbled upon some selective reporting that’s hard to deny.

A superdelegate in New Jersey switched from Clinton to Obama. It’s unprecedented in this campaign and the only website I could find reporting on it was The Huffington Post. CNN didn’t update their delegate count to reflect the change. In fact they had a couple articles asking if Hillary’s support was waning and didn’t bother to mention it. This could very well be the tipping point and neither CNN nor MSNBC are writing about it.

Well I guess that leaves me.

So it seems my first couple Mr Mom days went by largely without incident but I have to say the timing was the opposite of ideal as we were both sick. His first cold requiring medication and it happens on my first solo all-day watch. For 2 days in a row now I’ve weighed the possibility of calling in sick to work but if I can make it through today and tomorrow he’ll have a sleepover at his Nana’s so maybe then I can get this thing licked.

The last couple of days I’ve tried twice more to get my comments on The Cafferty File but thus far no luck. Here are my two latest attempts, both about Hillary Clinton.

Question: Do you believe Hillary’s promise about no scandals in her White House, particularly none involving Bill?

Answer: I think the fact that this is a subject for mainstream discussion illustrates that the issue will be a problem in the general election if she gains the nomination, I think that’s the relevant question at this stage: Will Bill’s penchant for scandal hurt the Democrats’ bid for the White House if Hillary gains the nomination? It certainly won’t help.

If she couldn’t control him in relation to their marriage during his administration or keep him from speaking out negatively during her campaign for the nomination, hurting both her bid and party unity in the process, what substantial reason is there to believe she can control him if she becomes president? There are many reasons not to believe her and nothing substantive that supports her claim beyond perhaps some blind faith on the part of her supporters and their cognitive dissonance.

So in a word, no.

Question: Do you think Hillary’s support is eroding?

Answer: If she’s sinking to the level of attack ads and prop gags then her future is about as bright as Carrot Top’s.

What prop gags? Check this out…

The definition of moonlighting is working a second job at lesser pay to supplement your income. Recently I’ve begun to wonder if the time may have come for me to stop.

My day job isn’t full time year round but I rock gray mode pretty hard, last few months notwithstanding. My needs are generally pretty humble.

Okay, cost benefit analysis. Let’s say my take home per shift is about $50. That’s a little under 5 hours in wages. Karl Marx (always good to bring him up when evaluating an aspect of capitalism) defined wages as renumeration for a loss of freedom. But it’s not just that, it’s an hour and a half travel time and 45 minutes of prep. Let’s say that’s about 7 hours. Take home from the cost benefit analysis is a little over $7 per hour.

There’s another dimension to it. Last weekend I worked both days. So I essentially lose my whole weekend for an extra $100 in my pocket.

Now to be fair the cost benefit above doesn’t show money I’d potentially be spending if I weren’t working but I don’t think it would be that much. Let’s face facts I’m a bit of a homebody. Watching TV or DVDs, doing computer stuff, or playing on the Wii doesn’t carry a huge price tag.

And obviously you can’t put a dollar value on spending time with your son so any cost benefit will ignore that aspect.

Seems like a slam dunk? Not quite.

For one thing, I like money. I like the security it affords my family, I like the flexibility of not worrying about how much money I have in my bank account when I make a purchase. Although there’s inflexibility in scheduling when you work 2 jobs.

I also like to travel. With Mindi getting her license family roadtrips to San Francisco and Edmonton are within reach. After seeing In Bruges Jon wants to go to Europe in October, or perhaps the east coast (Orlando, DC, New York). Can I currently afford to do all that? Yes but it would require liquidating some assets (CoW-speak translation: cash in some GICs, not sell the couch).

Mindi returning to work also increases the family’s cash flow despite daycare.

We also don’t know what tax time will be like.

There’s also the cool games and concerts I get to see and the fact that it will be an Olympic venue. And there’s the medical and dental coverage although I may be able to go on Mindi’s plan at no extra charge. Every time I try to use my dental coverage I always seem to run into roadblocks anyways.

So here’s the plan: continue as before but if they annoy me, scheduling conflicts mount, or I get a massive tax return I’ll walk.

What do you think?

This movie goes through stages: first you laugh, then you want to tour Europe, then you want to go home and hug your son. The dialogue is witty and organic, the pacing good, the performances interesting and engaging. The ending is both contrived and predictable but nevertheless works. Overall the movie’s juxtaposition of humour and dark issues comes off as a reaffirmation of life and an inspiration of nobility.

Then again I caught the late showing so I could just be talking out my ass.

Some time ago I came out in favour of the Translink fare hike arguing that new equipment and increased service had a cost and inflation was an oft-ignored factor.

I may have been mistaken.

First a new board is appointed that does not include any elected officials unlike the previous board which included mayors of local municipalities. Next the qualifications and integrity of the members of this new board were brought into question. Then their meetings were closed to the public unlike the open meetings of the previous board.

All of those were discouraging mistakes but I wasn’t about to scream it from the rooftops. Yes, the structure, makeup, and format of the new board appeared a potential formula for abuse it wasn’t a foregone conclusion so I decided to give them a chance.

Their very first action was to approve a pay hike for themselves which increased their overall renumeration by a factor of 6, including a $200 increase on a per meeting payment bringing that up to $1,200.

They get paid $1,200 to have a private meeting. According to the media there’s no other organization funded by taxpayer money that operates in such a way.

In addition to the meeting increase the chairman of the board saw his salary double over that of his predecessors from $50,000 to $100,000.

I have trouble imagining anyone being able to defend this. Who gets a huge raise their first day on the job?

They’re trying to justify it by saying they need to attract qualified people to the board but there are a couple problems with this. First they did just fine with elected officials, second the increase happened AFTER the board was formed so it had absolutely nothing to do with recruitment.

It makes me so angry I want to make a facebook group.

Something was off this morning, I couldn’t quite place it. Something was different. Had I forgotten something important? I didn’t feel sick or anything. In fact I felt pretty well rested. That was probably it, I barely slept the night before last so it was just a good night’s rest.

Then I found myself smiling on the way to work for no reason. Someone was playing music on the bus too loud and I didn’t mind. Someone else bumped into me and I didn’t mind. A guy had a Tablet PC, a technology I’ve never really supported but rather than ponder the evolutionary backstep that represented I found myself rethinking my stance on the subject - maybe I had been too harsh, too quick to judge the technology without giving it a fair chance.

What the hell was wrong with me?

Was it my recent raise? But I wasn’t thinking about that. No, something else was afoot.

Was it the weather? Couldn’t be, it was overcast.

I figure it’s a removal of major sources of stress (daycare cost and workability, performance appraisal, raise) as well as a decline in Seasonal Affective Disorder.

A recent departure in a hectic job market may have opened a couple doors for me. More hours, new responsibilities, a greater role. I am however hesitant to get my hopes up as the last 2 times new opportunity seemed to be on the horizon nothing came of it. It would be nice to bring in some more money for the family and have an opportunity to grow professionally though.

After an unending supply of references to gloves coming off on the campaign trail, many made available via humourous clip trip on The Daily Show, now that Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race we’re due for a landslide of puns. I however won’t sink to that level.

Oh, who am I kidding?

I guess this race is un-Mitt-igated.

Now the race can really get heated. It’s hard to take the gloves off with a Mitt-in.

Romney can now spend more time with his wife, be a her-Mitt.

If Huckabee has fewer delegates than Romney does that mean he should sub-Mitt?

Where do you meet with Romney to add up all the support for him becoming chairman of the RNC? A sum-Mitt.

He’s o-Mitt-ed from the race.

Romney’s per-Mitt-ing McCain to get the nomination.

He’s really li-Mitt-ed their options.

Are these puns doing anything for you?

Not exactly s-Mitt-en?

Now let’s see how many make it onto the late night talk shows.

Remember, there’s a writer’s strike on. Which clearly I support given the lack of effort I put into the above.

As I write this Super Tuesday is just a day away. A poll on the message board I moderate asked visitors what they were more interested in: Super Tuesday or the Super Bowl? Super Tuesday has a significant lead. In 2004 more people watched the Super Bowl than voted in the election. Now Tuesday, while Super, is just a collection of primaries and caucuses and not the general election but it stands as an event guaranteed to make history.

Largest (ie most states) Super Tuesday in history, voter turnout is up, mud slinging is down, sticking by unpopular opinions and decisions is virtuous, for the first time since the 20s no incumbent president or VP is running (Dick Cheney’s “I won’t run, if nominated I won’t campaign, if elected I won’t serve” is perhaps the nicest thing he’s ever said).

Oh, and the Democratic nominee is going to come from a demographic previously never represented at that level.

Barack Obama ran an ad during the Super Bowl, an incredibly rare occurrence.

History is being made in our lifetime. Right now. It’s exciting even at a distance.

It occurred to me earlier today that having been born in the US I might be able to donate to the campaign. I went to Obama’s website and it didn’t load properly in such a way that is caused by, you guessed it, too much traffic. Eventually I got it to load, whether I could legally donate or not was ambiguous but it was clear that it would not be tax deductible, hardly a surprise. Tempted though I was, I can’t afford to spend money in such a way.

I also can’t help but see donating to a politician in another country as meddling in the democratic process. Maybe not CIA-level meddling but a breach of the Prime Directive.

If Barack gets the nomination I wonder what impact it would have externally. We’ve already seen people on both sides of the aisle appropriate his message and methods. How could such a profound paradigm shift not show up on the radars of Canadian politicians? We’ve been scurrying around on the mousetrap of a federal election for years now. Will there be Canadian copycats?

Would a Canadian Obama impersonator be better than a Harper, Dion, or Layton? Well, they’d certainly be easier to listen to. Heck, with a Canadian electorate the guy could probably be Muslim and still win.

But wait, I’ve heard a message of hope, change, and mutual respect before. In person even. A record of leadership, a message of intelligence and common sense. A person whose already done things no one has done.

Ujjal Dosanjh.

Think about it.

Yesterday was the first day of daycare for my son. Not entirely surprisingly it was hard on my girlfriend. I’ll admit it isn’t the easiest on me either. It’s difficult to leave your kid with strangers, particularly at so young an age. My girlfriend made the point that he’d now be spending more time with strangers than his parents - that kind of stuck with me.

I was fortunate enough to have my mom around alot as I was growing up. I can’t imagine what it’s like for kids to go to daycare so young. I know it’s for the best in terms of socialization for him and financial stability for the family but part of me wonders if it might be worth it to think about my girlfriend only working part time.

I don’t think stay at home mom would be the best even if we could afford it simply because he’d largely be spending most of his time at home doing the same stuff: playing with the same toys in a small-ish space and watching too much TV. The more positive experiences he has the better. Plus the more teachers he has, the better. And my girlfriend would benefit from getting a break from the same thing all the time and get to have adult interactions and a sense of accomplishment and self not directly attached to the family.

So daycare is a good thing, no question but when it gets to be full time is it right for a child so young to spend more time with strangers than family?

I’ll be doing the Mr. Mom thing 2 days a week for the next 3 months and then once a week for the next 2 months. All told he’ll only be at full time daycare for 2 months a year. I suppose that isn’t so bad. Another gift from my job I guess - once again the fair will provide in unexpected ways.

I think we were all a little surprised by Edwards’ decision to drop out but the more I think about it the more sense it makes. Obama raised 5 million dollars after winning South Carolina and only then did he have enough money to run ads nation-wide. Edwards simply couldn’t run an effective national campaign for no other reason than the money not being there.

So why hasn’t he endorsed a particular candidate? Well thanks to the Clintons this race has become so heated I have serious difficulty seeing Hillary having Obama supporters in prominent positions if she wins and to a lesser extent I see the reverse being true as well.

Edwards still has a lot to contribute and his focus is on immediate impact so he can’t afford to get benched because he got caught in the crossfire. It’s smart, pragmatic, and strategic. It’s also somewhat unfortunate as I think he’d prefer to back Obama. One of the many reasons is because he’s here because of his message, not who he married.

This is really simple and should not be confused with a victory. There are 2 simple reasons why Hillary won Florida and neither reason has anything to do with the quality of her candidacy.

Reason 1: She’s the only candidate advocating that Florida’s delegates be re-instated therefore only her supporters would see a substantial reason to bother voting.

Reason 2: Hillary’s advocacy for the re-instatement of Florida’s delegates is likely to sway Florida voters to her side merely to have a voice.

Either way a vote for Hillary in Florida is a vote against DNC rules and therefore against the party. Does she really want to win under those circumstances? I think she’s made it pretty clear she doesn’t care how she wins. Can’t let a pesky thing like morals get in the way of establishing a dynasty.

I hate the new names that have been thrust upon Super Tuesday this year, super duper Tuesday chief among them. I found myself yelling at the TV the other day when it was used so I urge you not to say it in front of me lest a blackout in a fit of homicidal rage ensue.

I’ve been trying to think of a better name, maybe something with a little rhyme or some alliteration. Ticket Tuesday? Parlay Tuesday? Okay, so it’s a little harder than I thought. Maybe we can just stick to Super Tuesday rather than sound like we’re in elementary school.

Although I suppose we could choose a name to describe this one instance since it seems like it’s going to be a unique event.

Well actually it’s already guaranteed to make history as one way or another the democratic nominee will come from a new demographic.

If we choose a name to represent just this one Super Tuesday It would be fair to focus on the DNC as their turnout has outpaced the GOP at every turn. Further to that why not name it after the nominee with the most high-profile endorsements?

So there you have it, Obama Tuesday.