Polygamy - It's All You Ever Wanted

Marriage is simply a social construct. Malleable, evolving, subject to change. A progressive, equitable society must embrace a more enlightened attitude towards marriage, particularly when it comes to gay marriage.

Isn’t that what we have been told?

Anyway, here we are, in Canada, faced with a pending legal challenge on polygamy by the Mormons of Bountiful BC. And isn’t it a grand, marvelous day for all progressive Canadians.

Finally, we can take this next step toward building a more enlightened society. A society where everyone is equal including all marginalized minorities - like polygamists, for example.

And anyway, what’s to lose? Marriage? Ha. It’s been a long time since marriage meant anything at all.

I ask you, what’s so special about marriage? What benefits or privileges come with marriage these days? What special respect or consideration is given married people? Common law couples have the same rights. They get the same property, succession, benefit and pension rights as legally married couples. And as for the validity of the marriage contract – what a joke. What other contract can be legally severed by one party without the consent or cooperation of the other? Marriage, that’s all. Once the foundation of our society – now a meaningless parody. So what’s all the fuss about? Let the polygamists in, I say.

I tell you, I am perplexed how anyone who supports gay marriage could possibly object to polygamy. People who love each other should not be discriminated against when comes to marriage. All people should be treated equally. Isn’t that the basis of the argument for gay marriage? Isn’t it all about honoring the love between two people? Aren’t those who oppose this principle bigots? And if it’s between a man and his wife, or a man and his husband; why not between a man and other wife, or a man and his other husband. Why should anyone have the right to tell loving people who they can and cannot marry?

The sad thing about all of this is that the supporters of gay marriage - the people whose philosophies fundamentally changed the way that we look at marriage – are not front and centre in the fight for polygamous marriage. Oddly, they supported expanding the definition of marriage when it benefited them but, now, when it doesn’t, they seem to be singing a different story. I just can’t understand it. Do they have something against Mormons?

Curse those divisive Mormons. How dare they want us to accept a different definition of marriage. What right do they have to expect us to change an understanding that has been in place for thousands of years. Hmmm, where have I heard that before?

Interestingly it’s not only Mormons who do the multiple lovin’ thing - Muslims do it too. Right here in Toronto, I've read that there’s a mosque that allows polygamous marriages. Wow. Apparently this seems to be a practice that crosses cultural barriers. (I’m getting a warm and fuzzy multicultural feeling here.) Maybe this could be something that brings us together, rather than tears us apart.

Tell me, what greater testament to our multicultural ideals can we possible extol than to allow our valued Muslim neighbours to stand side by side with their Mormon brothers in embracing an important part of their culture here in our tolerant, multicultural Canada. Isn’t that what Canada is all about – allowing everyone to adhere to their valued cultural norms while co-existing side by side with everyone else?

I have read that the lawyer representing the Bountiful (a well named community, I’d wager) male who is being charged with polygamy has stated that he will rely heavily on previous court decisions that changed the definition of marriage to include gay people.

Imagine, Mormons, Muslims and gays, in lockstep, leading us into a brave new progressive world where marriage is no longer the sole dominion of straight Christian people. I’m getting all tingly inside.

So, let’s just take life as it comes, and call a spade a spade, shall we. Marriage has long since lost its meaning. When people can sever a legal marriage contract unilaterally with little or no consequences; when people who are not married are legally given the same family rights as married people and when one woman is allowed to marry another woman, well, clearly marriage is not what anyone could have envisioned years ago when it was for life and only between a one man and one women. Apparently, all bets are off. So, let the chips fall where they may.

And the gambling euphemisms are not entirely out of place here. After all, it was a gamble to expand the definition of marriage. And everyone was fully aware that, once opened up, marriage would be fair game for polygamists. Some of us knew this was true and fought against gay marriage. Others knew it was true but fought for it because they wanted so badly for gay people to be married. Whatever the case, here we are.

But take heart, all you folk who favored gay marriage but oppose polygamous marriage. You have nothing to fear. Canada’s leftist, feminist, activist courts will not let you down. Regardless of your hypocrisy, there will never be a legal polygamous marriage in Canada – not anytime soon anyway. Our judges will see to that.

Even if it means tying themselves in legal semantical knots. Even if it means ignoring any existing legal precedents. Even if it means defying all measures of logic and common sense. They will make up all sorts of fancy sounding reasons why their previous decision to allow gay marriage cannot be held up as grounds for allowing polygamous marriage. All sorts of subterfuge and doubletalk will be used. And as usual, Canadians will fall in line like sheep to a sheering. Gay marriage will be protected and white polygamists will be rejected, persecuted and imprisoned. (Muslim polygamists will rightfully be excluded from any persecution..........It's a political thing.)

Let’s face it, marriage is what it is this very minute. It is not what it was and it is not what it’s going to be. It is a work in progress. This legal understanding was enshrined before the legalization of gay marriage, when marriage was ruled no more important than shacking up.

Next stop – a Constitutional challenge by a brother who wants to marry his sister. I’ve got the remote in my hand and I just can’t wait. Bring it on Oprah. Hang on people, it’s gonna be a hell of a ride.

AIDS and Personal Responsibility

There are those who advocate the use of condoms as a way of preventing AIDS.

Sadly, I concur that the reality we live in necessitates that condoms be a necessary part of AIDS prevention.

This does not, however, prevent me from understanding that abstinence and monogamy are the ultimate preventative measures.

They are much more effective than condoms or anything else. And the very thought that humans are incapable of being abstinent and monogamous reveals to me that some people believe that sexual acts are beyond our control as sentient, rationalizing humans. Are we, after all, thinking humans, or mindless, instinctual, rutting animals?

It would appear to me that those who categorically refute the effectiveness of abstinence and monogamy as a way to prevent AIDS are merely advocates for AIDS itself – incapable of acknowledging that we, as humans, have a higher purpose; that we can actually control our sexual desires.

Don’t have sex except after marriage, be monogamous to your spouse, and live within a culture that advocates these principles, and you will almost always be safe from AIDS and other SIDs. Deviate from this rule and risk other health problems or even death.

This should not be an unreasonable principle for reasonable people to understand.

And, yet, it appears to be that many people want to hang onto their desire to have irresponsible sex and remain untouched by the AIDS scourge by using condoms.

To them I say, good luck.

Just remember, you did have a choice. If you get AIDS, or other nasty communicable diseases, chances are you just made a bad decision knowing full well what the outcome could be - that’s all.

And if you expect sympathy, always remember, your choice to have sex outside a monogamous marriage was a conscious and willful one. One you made of your own volition.

Suffer and/or die gracefully. And don’t blame others for your own bad choices. You are, after all, responsible for your own decisions.

Childless Couples in Little Boxes in the Sky

I live in Toronto. Not a bad city, all things considered. We have our share of good restaurants, lush parks, cool nightclubs and multiple Chinatowns. Of course, there are bad things too, like gridlock, graffiti, litter strewn streets and cemeteries filled with lead-filled dead black men shot by other black men,. But, overall, we are pretty average as far as cities go. For example, like most other Canadian cities: ethnics commit a hugely disproportionate number of crimes; our schools are completely ineffective at educating our young; and our local government is dominated by tax-crazy, loony, left-wing whackos.

But, above all else, Toronto, like most other cities, has become dominated by childless couples living in little boxes in the sky. They are, I would wager, the defining cultural characteristic of our fair city.

They used to call them DINKS – double income no kids. Not sure what they call them these days. They live in condominiums. God forsaken towers of glass and steel stuffed with couples whose limitless drive and ambition have somehow lead them to the grand accomplishment of existing alone together in a 700 square foot holding-tank in the sky.

I hear that it’s rude to call DINKS ‘childless’. The correct term is child-free. And they ARE free. Free to do whatever they please, whenever they please. Free to pursue their careers and personal hobbies unencumbered by the incessant demands of mini thems. Free to leave behind a professional legacy of……..well, a professional legacy of whatever it is that they do professionally: a file cabinet stuffed with legal briefs, a folder of excellently written reports and letters, a staff of clerical workers hand picked by them. It’s all quite impressive, really. And we mustn’t forget the personal legacy: the semi-annual trips to exotic locals, the thousands of wonderful restaurant meals, the theater productions, the concerts, the………hmmmm, wait a minute, these can’t really be considered part of a personal legacy. After all, a legacy is something that lasts after a person dies. Once these people are dead, so too will be their experiences and memories. Never mind.

But there’s still the professional legacy. And it’s pretty serious stuff, if you ask me. All those problems they solved and matters they dealt with. All those memos and emails and meetings and decisions and stuff. And just think, the reason they had so much time for all these profound accomplishments is that they made the ultimate sacrifice and selflessly chose to not have any children.

And they are everywhere, these childless cube-dwelling couples.

Imagine having a natural ability to create life and never using it. What a waste. You go through life, you work at your little job, or maybe you work at a big job, you retire and then you die. How big would a job have to be, to be as important as the life of a child? Your child. A child formed from your seed, carrying your DNA into the future, and entrusted to you to shape and form its beliefs, values and understanding of life? A child who will perpetuate your culture and race.

There is no doubt in my mind that I will, someday, be reviled by everyone - liberals and conservatives alike. Come to think of it, I already am, somewhat. It’s hard to be liked when you have views that are abhorrent to all sides. Purposeful childlessness is an issue that everyone agrees should not be the subject of ridicule or slander. It is, I have come to understand, inviolate and untouchable and must be viewed impartially as a matter of personal choice. It says so in the fine print of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Just dig up Trudeau and ask the socialist bastard.

Well I don’t feel impartial about it. Sure, everyone must have the right to decide for themselves whether they will have children of not. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t. I’m just saying that all these couples who purposely don’t have children are doing irreparable harm to their culture and their race. In fact, some might say that they are traitors to their culture and race. (OK, this is where all the childless white women and couples get really indignant and all the other (non-white) women and couples look at each other and fight the inherent urge to agree.)

Oh, c’mon now, you know that this childless epidemic is an upper and middle class white thing. No other human sub-group is so utterly fixated at making itself extinct. Admit it - most, if not all, of the childless people you know are white. Certainly you don’t know very many black women who have never had a baby. And there are certainly no Muslims. (Oh, stop it, you know very well that Muslims procreate like mosquitoes. At least that’s what Mullah Krekar, a Muslim Cleric in Britain says. And with few exceptions, Muslims are not white. So I can juxtapose them like that.)

Anyway, I’d ask what’s up with these childless white folk, but I already know. It’s really all about having the freedom to circumvent the natural reproductive functions of the female body through unnatural means. Two words: ‘Pill’ and ‘Abortion’. The two main miracles of human ingenuity - next to nuclear weapons and the anthrax virus.

The lesson is thusly: give women the chance to have sex without having children, and they will ALL take it. Some will choose to not have kids at all. Others will wait until it’s too late. Both choices are pretty well the same as far as results go – we get fewer people remaining of that particular human sub-group to represent humanity, and the interests of the sub-group, in the future. And it's happening fast. Some nations in Europe, for example, have the lowest birthrates in the world and their founding people will soon be replaced within their borders by less pigmentally challenged newcomers who don't share their reproductive disdain.

So, here we are, the white race is slowly choking itself to death on unused uteruses and discarded fetuses. And us white folk who have kids are faced with a likely future where our offspring will live in a world and a nation where they are the minority and white people like them no longer have any political or social power at all.

I once had a boss who told me, “Don’t come to me with a problem, unless you also come with a solution”. So, true to form, I not only have a problem to bitch about, but I also have a solution.

What we need to do is work towards freeing the uteruses of all the women of the world who live in cultures were they are forced, or expected, to have babies. These females must be given unlimited access to the pill and abortions and strongly encouraged, through moral suasion and social pressure, to use both like crazy.

And then we wait for that inevitable day when artificially concocted sexual equality (brought about by the pill and abortion) sets their race on the road to oblivion just as it has done to mine.

After all, it may be too late for us white folk to reverse the inevitable demise of our kind, but at least we can work towards sharing our fate with others. In the noble name of gender equity, it’s the very least we can do. And I won’t be satisfied until Somalia has birthrates as low as England’s and a 55 year old childless Pakistani-Muslim-Canadian woman is CEO of CIBC. Then, I’ll know we’re making headway.

Welcome To The Life You Deserve

Welcome to the new millennium. Just a little over nine years into it and things are already going less than swimmingly. Unless, of course, you’re a shark. For them, it’s a feeding frenzy. Come on in, the water’s red.

People are going bankrupt in droves. Businesses are collapsing like a fat man’s resolve at Thanksgiving. Housing sales and prices are dropping faster than a prostitute’s pants. We are in deep doo-doo the experts say. Fasten your seat belts. It’s gonna be a rocky ride.

Our economy is crashing and burning. And what do I have to say about that?

Burn baby burn. (And pass the marshmallows.)

As if the polar ice caps weren’t melting fast enough what with all the hot air bellowing from Obama’s gaping maw. Now we have to contend with a global financial meltdown.

I hear that a lot of people are going bankrupt. Financially, I mean, not morally – although a good number of them probably already are secular morally bankrupt saps. And while I, of course, have absolutely nothing in common with them in this respect – being both morally and financially sound - I do share one silly commonality with them. Just like them I have a weakness toward envy.

Yep, we all feel envious from time to time. The trick is, of course, not to let it control you.

Many of my neighbors were envious. Envious of anyone who had more stuff than they did. And they let it run away with them. They bought houses they couldn’t afford. They maxed-out their credit lines, filling their world with expensive stuff and doing all sorts of cool things that cost oodles of borrowed money - like putting a big flat screen in every room, buying two nice cars, eating in nice restaurants, going to the theatre and flying off to places where they could lie on the beach and pretend that they weren’t actually behaving like vice-ridden, financial morons.

It really was all about envy – with maybe a smidgeon of selfishness, greed and one-ups-man-ship thrown in for good measure. Yep. There was envy in the air. We were prisoners of envy. We were climbing a stairway to envy. Some people climbed aboard the envy train and allowed it to drive their greedy, undisciplined butts all the way into financial ruin.

And me? Well, I was envious too. Of them! The only difference is that I didn’t let it supercede my common sense. While they laughed and lived it up, I lived a relatively humble life and saved my money. And today, while they owe Shylock several kilos of flesh, I owe virtually nothing to anyone. The condo’s paid off. The car’s paid off. And I have no credit debt at all. Who’s laughing now baby.

My family lives on my modest pay. My wife is disabled and does not work. My car is 8 years old. Our TV is still the old tube style. We haven’t moved up to the LCD or plasma. Our home is small. There only one bath and my two daughters share the second bedroom. We eat a home cooked meal at home for supper most nights and the kids come home for lunch every day.

For years I stood in the rain on the platform as the train barreled by, watching the onboard revelers cavort and frolic in reckless abandon. I wanted to climb aboard. Oh, did I want to. But I didn’t. I had the money in my hand for a ticket, but something stopped me. It don’t know what it was, but it was something more noble and righteous than what they were exhibiting.

Yeah. That must be it. I was more noble and righteous than they were. Smarter too. I hate to brag, but it’s hard not to feel superior when I compare myself with people who are stupid, irresponsible, spendaholic dandies with retarded delusions of entitlement.

They had all the stuff they wanted. And I had far less. Nowadays, nothing’s changed for me. I have the same as I had before. But now they are the ones who have less. The tables have turned. Or is it the worm? Whatever the case, I’m getting a big kick out of it.

While I deprived myself, they were stuffing their faces. While I was prudent and careful, they were decadent and self serving. While I sacrificed today to prepare for tomorrow, they sacrificed their tomorrow to wallow in self indulgence today.

OK, let’s put this situation into perspective, shall we? I am not totally without a heart. I don’t want anyone to starve or freeze to death. And certainly that won’t happen here in Canada. But I have absolutely no sympathy for people who will simply have to make a downward lifestyle change to reflect their financial reality. They’ll just move from a house to an apartment. (Lots of people live in apartments.) They’ll sell their car and take public transportation. (Lots of people do that already) Their kids might have to share a bedroom. They might only have one TV. They might not be able to afford any more restaurant meals or vacations abroad for awhile. Big freakin’ deal.

I say to them - Hi there, welcome to the life you deserve. That other life – forget it, you were never worthy of it anyway. If you were, you could’a paid for it yourself. Now shut up, get over it, quityerbellyachin’ and put those potatoes on the stove. No more restaurants for you for awhile.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m taking the family out to dinner and afterwards, I’ve got an appointment to view your house – ooops, I mean your former house. I hear it’s going for a good price.

By the way, didya ever hear the story of the ant and the grasshopper?

Old People Make Me Sick

Old people make me sick. Not all old people. Not Canadian old people. It’s those foreign old people who fill my Canadian city. They’re the ones who make me sick.

OK, maybe they don’t actually MAKE me sick, but they certainly make it harder to get better.

Yep, getting better is a lot harder when you have to wait in a hospital emergency room in line behind seventeen turbaned or hijabed 70 year olds who arrived in Canada yesterday under our ludicrous ‘family reunification’ program. (And believe me, not many old people arrive here from Scotland, France or Ireland to clog up our already over taxed health care system. At least I don’t see too many of them around.)

Yep, old foreigners make me sick because they make me and my elderly Canadian relatives wait. We wait for doctor’s appointments, we wait for nursing home beds, we wait for chronic care, we wait for long term care, we wait for medical testing, we wait for essential surgery, we wait in emergency rooms, we wait and wait and wait behind these queue jumping old foreigners.

Sometimes we wait so long that we die. And then we go to heaven. Where else would such generous, selfless compassionate people go? I hear that God has a special surprise for old Canadians who die waiting for medical treatment. They are reincarnated as the old parents of Federal Cabinet Ministers and they never have to wait for medical treatment again.

God also has a surprise in store for the people who immigrate to Canada and then bring their old parents over to suck the life out of our health care system. I hear that God brings them back after death reincarnated as obese, blind, crippled old Liberals with renal failure and chronic pain who can’t find a family physician or a specialist.

Now that’s poetic justice. Gods humble way of giving the real, unhyphenated Canadians, who lived here all their lives, and who die waiting in line behind old foreigners, a bit of restitution and justice.

Every day, millions of Canadians, especially old Canadians – the ones who lived and paid taxes in Canada all their lives - are faced with long waiting lists for vital, essential medical services. And everyday, dozens, if not hundreds of old foreigners shuffle out of planes and ships onto Canadian soil and take a taxi to their children’s homes or apartments where they don't work or pay taxes or contribute to Canada. They just wait patiently until that inevitable day when something goes wrong with their health. Then they simply call 911 and take that free ride in that free ambulance to the big shiny free hospital full of all the free equipment that will extend their lives so they can use all the marvelous free stuff again and again.

Except its not free. It was bought with money and it was bought with flesh and blood. Money from taxes paid over a lifetime by that sick old Canadian standing over there waiting patiently (like all good Canadians do) while the old foreigner receives treatment first. And flesh & blood from people who came here years ago, before everything was free, and sacrificed to build a nation for their children. And now their children suffer and die while waiting in line behind old foreigners who have sacrificed nothing and to whom we owe nothing.

Maybe the government hasn’t heard, but there is a demographic crises happening in all Western civilized nations. And Canada is no exception. The population is aging. The ratio of young people to old - workers to retirees has never been larger in the history of our nation. It is thought that in 20 – 30 years there won’t be enough young people in Canada to support the huge number of old people.

But, of course, politicians know all about it. They know exactly what’s going on. Sadly, their need to curry votes in Canada’s ethnic communities is more important to them than the health and welfare of citizens. They allow old foreigners to flood into Canada, to the tune of 40,000 a year, because it is in their political interest. Ethnic communities will vote for the politician that acts in their best interest. And they want mommy and daddy here with them, damn the cost to the rest of us. They might sympathise with sick Canadians, but they won't pull mommy out of line so a Canadian can see the doctor first. They take care of their own first. Is it wrong, then, for the rest of us to do the same?

The truth is that we don’t need any more old people. We are growing more than enough of our own. And yet the parasitical travesty that is our “family reunification program” continues unabated. In my view, no one over the age of 40 should be allowed to immigrate to Canada. We have too many old people to support already.

And yes, I have heard the plaintive arguments in favor of allowing immigrants to bring their old parents here to Canada as permanent residents. One argument is that many immigrants would simply go to some other country that allows family reunification. So freaking’ what, I say. If they want to put their own interests above those of their Canadian benefactors, to hell with them. And those who come can visit their parents in their homeland or bring them over for a visit. Our health care system will be less labored because of it.

And then there’s the immigrant or two who is trotted out on TV moaning piteously that they need their old mother and father to mind their six kids because they can’t afford child care. Oh, cry me a river. Hey Akmed, try having one or two children like us normal Canadians and you wouldn’t need to foist your sick old parents on our health care system just to save yourself a few bucks in baby sitting fees.

Old foreigners make me sick. Most of them have contributed nothing to this nation and have never worked a day in Canada in their lives. And now, after they have spent all their lives contributing to their precious foreign homelands, they drag themselves over here to the land of free healthcare and expect elderly Canadians to smile as they are pushed aside so they can line up in front of them for home care, doctors appointments, nursing home beds, surgeries and other vital social services.

As I grow older I become more angry about this abuse of Canadian goodwill. Someday, I’ll be an old Canadian sitting in the ER surrounded by sick old foreigners muttering quietly in their foreign language while they wait in line ahead of me for treatment. Well, they just better hope that I don't have a terminal disease. Because, with nothing to lose, I might decide to take a few of them with me.

Kind reader, it’s time to start giving our own old people priority over foreigners. No one should work and pay taxes their whole lives in a country only to find themselves waiting behind a bunch of old foreigners when they need vital medical treatment. It's just not right.

So, How Do You Like Victimhood So far?

We are afraid. Fear is what defines us as a society. The press emphasize it every day. So do politicians. Victims rights advocates are everywhere pointing their fingers and going tut tut. Emotionally soft soccer moms and dads peer fearfully from their comfy suburban homes and quiver in their fuzzy slippers.

Being a victim is like a badge of honour here in soft, sensitive, socialist Canada. Just purse your lips, lay the back of one hand against your forehead and point the finger of your other hand at your victimizer. Presto, the politicians are there empathizing with you and the press is there with their mics and cameras. You are a celebrity.

Children have been bullying each other since time immorial. Now, all of a sudden, it’s a national tragedy that we all, as a society, must come together to solve. Never mind that bullying is a right of passage for children – a way for them to learn about resilience, courage and self preservation. After all, everyone knows that the best way to defeat a bully is to stand up to him/her. It’s especially preferable to kick the snot out of them. And the victims who do, grow in character and become stronger and more self confident. Of course this is not what our society teaches children. Never are they told to stand up for themselves. Rather they are told to embrace their victimhood and run to others for help. And of course, as is always the case, others – the education, justice and welfare systems - coddle the perpetrator and disregard and disempower the victim. It often seems like they care more for the bully than they do the victim. But that’s to be expected from a system that considers all perpetrators as victims themselves, who have no responsibility for their own actions and can always blame society for whatever mean, spiteful inclinations they may have.

All poor people are victims too. Victims of our heartless capitalist system. Just try and find a media story that asks a homeless person what he has done to rise out of poverty. Never are any of these people expected to do what humans have done since time immemorial and pull themselves out of poverty by trying harder. Always they are cast as helpless victims of a society that has abandoned it’s responsibilities for them. In reality, with the exception of the mentally ill, it is they who have abandoned their responsibilities to society. They are the ones who victimize society by demanding that we take responsibility for their lives so that they may be saved from the effort.

Here in Canada, victims are everywhere and they get way too much attention and regard. Often they are either victims of their own laziness or they are soft, overly sensitive people who fall victim to their own neurotic sense of offense or entitlement.

A woman is launching a class action against a tattoo parlor in Oshawa whose sterilization tools were 2 degrees below the required temperature. When the story broke, public health officials, in an attempt to justify their existence, fell over themselves drawing it into the public eye. The victim doesn't even know if she contracted anything. Many patrons of the tattoo parlor have been tested negative for any inflictions like HIV or Hepatitis results so far. The victim, however, is suing for mental duress. These days you don't have to come to any harm to sue, you just have to be worried that you've come to harm and the lawyers and assorted victim’s lobby groups run to see who can reach the victim’s validation finish line first.

I once read about a thief who broke into a family’s garage while they were away. He got locked in and spent a week eating dog food before the family finally returned and let him loose. He sued and won a settlement for emotional duress. I’m not kidding. These days, even burglars whose schemes are inadvertently thwarted by their own incompetence are considered victims by the courts and entitled to financial compensation.

Another time a drunk party goer dove from the top floor of his party host’s home into the pool. Apparently the host had stopped him several times before he escaped unnoticed to the top floor and dove. He broke his neck and sued. And guess what? He won a huge settlement. After all, we couldn’t expect him to be responsible for his own actions, could we?

And we wonder why the radical islamists are secure in their belief that our society can be toppled. Seems to me that they may be right. We have become vulnerable and soft in our world of plenty. Never do we look to ourselves for answers to our problems or blame ourselves when we do something stupid and fail. Why should we when there is always a politician, reporter or judge at hand to blame someone else.

However, in the victim hunt game, no one is better at exploiting our irrational feelings of victimhood than politicians. They thrive on making us all believe that we are victims of something or other. It’s how they convince us that we need them. It’s how they remain relevant to us. At election time they prance around promising to devictimize us all. Parents who can’t take care of their own children are told that they are victims of a society that does not pay for their children’s daycare. Mothers whose children were conceived through voluntary sex with an irresponsible man with no prospects are told that they have been victimized by him. People who become addicted to booze, drugs, gambling or even sex are told that they have been victimized by a disease and that they, as individuals, are not responsible for their own actions. Laid off auto workers are victims of a government that has not done enough to preserve their jobs. People on waiting lists for subsidized housing are told that they are being victimized by a government that will not build more housing for them. Shooting victims in welfare housing are told that more government funded basketball courts and community programs would have prevented their plight. Kids who drop out of school are told that they are victims of a system that is not giving them the right opportunities.

Whatever problems we have are not our fault, they are always caused by the last government and can be solved if only we elect a new government. Therein lies the fraudulent staple of our democratic political system. And we have bought into it hook line and sinker.

Never are we told that we live in a free and democratic society. Never are we told that our problems can often be solved by making smarter decisions, holding our heads high and pressing on. Always we are told that it is someone else’s fault and if only we had more government help and intervention everything will be alright. After all, what politician in his right mind would ask people to try harder. Don’t we elect governments to do more for us and save us from the pesky responsibility of trying harder? After all, who the hell wants to try harder? We’re way too busy surfing the net, listening to our Ipods, watching our DVDs and tracking the lives of Paris Hilton and Angelina Jolie.

Well, sorry to tell you, but it’s all a crock. People will always fail. And sometimes it’s because they made bad personal decisions and didn’t try hard enough. Sometimes, bad things just happen to them through no fault of others. Of course, we will never hear this simple truth from politicians or the press. After all, they have a vested interest in making us all feel like the victims of others so that we look to them for our salvation. It’s how they make their living and perpetuate their own existence.

It Takes A Village To Raise A Child - Like Hell

“It takes a Village to Raise a Child”. I’m sure you’ve heard that saying. It’s pretty popular among some of our more enlightened, egalitarian citizens. The village, they say, should take responsibility for the children born in it and provide support to parents and families when it comes to raising and protecting their children.

It may not surprise you to learn that this popular saying originated in Africa. After all, when men go around fathering multiple children with multiple women and take responsibility for few if any of them, you better hope that the village is there to raise the kids. Otherwise, bad things might happen.

Hmmm, wait a minute, bad things are constantly happening in Africa despite the awesome wisdom of their popular sayings and the proliferation of villages. Hey, do you suppose it’s really not true? Do you suppose that maybe villages aren’t really that great at raising children and maybe what’s really needed is a family – a solid, dutiful, loving mom and dad? Is it possible that societies that are not centered on the family will fail, regardless of how many villages there are?

Of course, here in Canada we have to slightly realign our expectations when it comes to villages if we want that cute little saying to apply. After all, there are no African villages here. So, when people say that “it takes a village to raise a child”, we know that they are not really talking about villages - they are actually speaking metaphorically. When they say ‘village’, they really mean society – a society controlled by politicians and bureaucrats; i.e., the state. And when they say ‘raise’ they really mean impart values and exercise parental power, control and influence.

Tell me, to what extent do you trust the village/state to exercise parental power and control over your children? To what degree do you trust society and popular culture to influence your children’s mind and shape the type of person they will become? Are you comfortable having them look to society for their values and the state for their welfare? Or would you rather have them look to you? Most parents would, I think. So, why is it that the influence of the state, society and popular culture on our childrens’ minds and bodies is growing while the role parents play is diminishing? Something is terribly rotten in Denmark. In Canada too, apparently.

Anyway, not to worry. It’s all happened before. The Germans did it back in the 30s. And look what happened with them. Ever hear of the Hitler youth Movement? The Germans put their children in the hands of the state, and everything turned out alright. Sort of. Oh well, at least we kicked their ass.

So you'd think they'd have learned their lesson. But no. Just this week I learned of booklets issued by the German government that advised fathers of how important it was for their infant daughters to start developing a sense of sexual awareness. It encourages them to sexually massage their daughters. Here's a link: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073008.html This is very, very sick stuff. And just one small example of what we will have in store for us as whack-job, socialistic governments and bureaucrats grow increasingly arrogant and powerful; and families, growing increasingly fractured and confused, look to them for guidance and support.

So, to repeat the question: How much do you trust society and the state with your children? Many people will say that they don’t trust them at all. And yet, despite this, they continue to grow in size, influence and power. And we are all paying the price, especially our children.

Of course, it wasn’t always like this. Once upon a time, here in glorious nannyriffic Canada, people actually looked to their family and each other first and not to society or the state.

The family unit was inviolate. Parents (mothers, mostly) were the main moral and ethical guides for their children. And they worked at it full time. Village schools imparted knowledge. They didn’t spend half the day focusing on touchy-feely social sciences and liberal/feminist dogma like they do today. Fatherless children were rare in the village and no one had the gall to feel entitled to live off the earnings of their village neighbours. Parents could let their kids run around the village without fear. Sexually explicit imagery did not dominate television, magazine covers and billboards in the village, setting horrible examples for our children. Our overactive sons were not drugged into docility by prescription happy village doctors and career focused village mothers. Childhood suicide and obesity were virtually nonexistent in the village. The family was safe and strong. And so was the village.

Compare that with today. The family has become weak and unstable. And with it, our neighborhoods, our village, our society and our very future.

You see, families define the nature of the village. Not vice versa. The village can only be as strong and cohesive as the families that live within it. Not the other way around.

When families are strong and stable and share a common set of values, as we once did here in Canada, the village is strong and stable and children are safe within it. When families are dysfunctional, weak, confused, divided and unstable, as many are today, the village becomes dysfunctional, divided, unstable and untrustworthy. And we can no longer trust it to impart the correct values to our children or keep our children safe.

And therein lays the paradox that no whacky socialist in the world has ever been able to solve: Strong families form strong villages even though they don’t need them to pick up the child rearing slack like weak families do. Conversely and inevitably, weak families form weak villages, even though they need the help of a strong village much more than strong families do.

Too bad it doesn’t work the other way ‘round eh? Too bad dysfunctional, unstable families couldn’t magically form strong, trustworthy villages. Then they could just turn their children over to the village and turn their minds to things that are more fulfilling to them than raising their own children, like watching Oprah, having an affair or hanging out on the stoop smoking pot.

People, we have been deceived. Sold a damaged bill of goods. That stupid saying about a village raising our children is from Africa for crying out loud, a place where many kids are fatherless and far too many are starving or dying of AIDS. Their families are dysfunctional; so their villages are dysfunctional.

And we are well on our way to the same fate.

Sorry, But I Just Don't Feel Sorry

There must be something wrong with me. I actually feel good about myself. I like who I am and I am proud of my heritage.

Apparently, though, I should be hiding my face in shame. I should be wracked with self recrimination and disgrace. Not that I’ve done anything wrong personally mind you, but I have rather pale skin. Not only that, but I am a British descendant, a heterosexual and a male. You know, the type of person who has no right to feel good about him self for any reason whatsoever.

Have you ever heard of ‘white pride’? Me neither. That’s because white people have no right to be proud. I bet you’ve heard of ‘white guilt’ though. That’s because white folk have no right to not feel guilty. How about ‘straight pride’ - have you ever heard of that? I bet you haven’t. After all, being straight is no reason to be proud. ‘Gay pride’ however, is another story altogether. It’s fabulous.

Just look at me. My white male ancestors have done all sorts of unsavory things. We’ve enslaved, oppressed and even murdered all kinds of people throughout history. I know this because, well, because there’s a lot of people out there who will never let me forget it.

I am white. and by virtue of that, I am required to feel guilty. And if I don’t feel guilty about some crime committed by someone else who lived far in the past, I am told that I am a racist and should at least have the decency to feel guilty about that. It’s all too much guilt for this white boy to bear.

Years ago, Chinese immigrants were forced to pay the government an exorbitant head tax in order to come to Canada. White, male railroad barons used Chinese immigrants like slaves to build a railway. Many were maimed – many more died. Now, over 100 years later, I, apparently, owe all Chinese Canadians an apology. And not just an apology, but also financial reparations. I don’t even know them and my forefathers weren’t railroad barons, they were dirt poor peasants. So why do I owe anyone anything? And anyway, since when is a son responsible for the crimes of his neighbour’s father? What is the logic that drives such an irrational, divisive demand?

Canada also, apparently interred some Japanese people and others during World War II. For this, the Japanese community demanded an apology and guess what – yup, reparations. Leaving aside the fact that, in that time, interment was a perfectly reasonable wartime reaction to Japan’s despicable decision to side with Hitler and Mussolini, we are faced again with the ridiculous notion that the descendants of the people who did something should somehow accept responsibility for it.

The Natives too, are restless in their endless demands for apologies and white man’s moola. They claim that the white man stole their land and attempted to eliminate their culture. As if this was something that only white people did. In reality, everybody did it back then. Sure, Europeans came to North America, conquered the natives and took ownership of the land. But, before that, the natives were doing the same thing to each other. Brutality, rape, murder and genocide were nothing new to them. They were enthusiastic participants in these activities already – amongst themselves. We came and stopped all the inter-tribal warfare and gave them the chance to live peacefully in one united, democratic nation.

And the white part of me isn’t the worst. There’s also that vile male side of me. You know, the side that, throughout the ages, waged endless brutal wars and raped, plundered and pillaged their asses off? All the atrocities that have ever occurred were orchestrated by men. The holocaust, the crusades, an incalculable number of atrocities, massacres and wars - the scourge of (pick one): communism, capitalism, fascism, nazism, socialism, islam, Christianity, nuclear weapons, gas guzzling SUVs - all totally the doings of males.

Of course, males have also invented, designed and produced pretty well everything of practical value to humans in the entire freaking world, including all tools, machines, structures, electronics and transportation devices; as well as being responsible for virtually all advancements in engineering, agriculture, medicine, technology, democracy and justice.

But, alas, I am told that I have no right to be proud and should, by all measures of decency and justice, be groveling on all fours begging the forgiveness of anyone my race and gender has slighted throughout history.

Well, OK. I’m tired. I have had enough. Truce. In the interest of reconciliation and good will, I offer this:

On behalf of everyone who shares my skin color and my gender, allow me to say - to the descendants of anyone our forefathers may have wronged who believe we owe them anything because of it - I’m sorry.

I’m sorry you’ve got a chip on your shoulder. I’m sorry you continually live in the past. I’m sorry you can’t get it through your head that I owe you nothing. And I’m sorry my children have to share the nation their forefathers built with anyone who harbours a grudge against them for what their forefathers did.

More Stuff - Less of What Matters

Every generation of adults deserves to be able to tell their kids and grandkids how much better off they are. It’s like a god given right, or one of Darwin’s main theories, or something.

........Cut to the toothless old man sitting in the rocking chair gumming an old pipe while the kids sit around him on the floor: “You kids got it pretty good these days. You got nothin’ to complain about. Why, when I was a young-un, I used to walk 6 miles to school, in minus 20 degree weather through 8 foot high snow drifts….…..barefoot.”

Yep, the old refrain. No adult should be deprived of the pleasure of saying it and no kid should be deprived of the pleasure of rolling their eyes at it. (Or, at least a variation of it.)

It’s a right of passage – a proud tradition. It’s not about shaming the younger generation. It’s about expressing pride in our advancement and development as a society – the pride of actually being able to provide our offspring with a better life than we had. And indeed, here in Canada, every generation since the great depression has been better off than the one before. Every generation, that is, except the current one.

When I tell my 11 year old daughter about what it was like to be a kid in the sixties and seventies when I was growing up, she sighs and expresses her regret that she didn’t get to experience it. And, I can’t help but feel sorry for her. Her world is different. It’s harsher, faster, more superficial, way more sexual and far more materialistic than mine was when I was her age. It’s also full of strangers.

Earlier this year, my six year old came up to me and said “Daddy, do you know what the white boy in my class said to me.” I said: “White boy? …Hmmmmm……..How many white boys are there in your class?” “One” she answered.

Yep, it’s a brave new world out there for Canada’s founding peoples.

And not only do our children have to struggle to try and understand how to fit in as a fringe minority in their own schools and neighbourhoods, they have to do it with hardly any family to support them. Many of them are the only child born to their parents. Many of their parents were an only child themselves. This means that many kids have no uncles, aunts or cousins. Their families are smaller and there are fewer people in the world connected to them by blood who can offer a sense of belonging, comfort and protection. I can’t even imagine having no family, and yet this is the fate we have bequeathed to our children – a familyless future as they grow old. And it will be even worse for their children as this pattern of white extinction plays out.

When I was 13, I would bound out of the house early Saturday morning, run or bike up the street, find my friends and play with them all day. I knew everyone on our street. Sometimes I wouldn’t even make it home for lunch. And my mother never gave it a second thought. She never told me to be careful as I left. She never did anything to street-proof me. There was no reason to be concerned. The neighbourhood wasn’t a place to be feared, it was a place to live. And live I did. In trees, in fields, in ravines, in bushes - wherever I felt like being at the time. We’d take the trail through the woods and go swimming in the lake, with *gasp* no adults present. When I rode in the car I’d ride in the back, no seatbelt, with my chin on the front seat visually drinking in everything - part of the action. I’d take my bike on 20k trips with my buddies deep into the countryside. I was on the go all the time and that was that. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be when you’re a kid? Why would any parent agonize over something so natural – so right?

Compare that with today. Good-grief, most parents are quivering, neurotic basket cases when it comes to worrying about their precious children. As a result children are given far less freedom than I had growing up. And they have far less fun too. I don’t know why, or when, we became a culture dominated by fear and worry for our children. All I know is that our children are worse off and their world has become smaller and less welcoming because of it.

Sometimes, when I have a day off, I walk my kids to school or go get ‘em for lunch. Their school serves a pretty densely populated neighbourhood. No-one lives more than a half a kilometer away from the school. And yet you would not believe the number of kids who get a drive to school. Instead of walking with friends or class mates, these often pudgy kids travel separate and apart from everyone in their own little self-contained metal and glass bubble. And we wonder why kids are so self absorbed these days. Hell, even if I had the time to drive my kids to school everyday, I’d make ‘em walk anyway. Not only is it good for them physically and socially, it’s good emotionally for them to understand that Dad is not their personal chauffer. And while they trudged off to school, I’d be able to finish my morning coffee in peace and chuckle about how so many parents these days cater to their children like subservient toadies.

A few generations ago, parental love meant providing kids with comfort when they were hurting, advice when they were confused, food when they were hungry, a warm coat when they were cold and a good smack on the ass when they deserved it. Children learned appreciation, humility and respect. These days parental love is measured in how much stuff they buy their kid(s). It’s a compensatory measure, I think, to assuage mom’s guilt for having to (or, in some cases, choosing to) work. Whatever the case, kids these days got it all. Well, not quite all, as is demonstrated anytime a parent takes the little blighter(s) out. “Gimme, gimme, gimme….Can I, can I, can I…..I want, I want, I want……” Ipods, TVs, DVDs, CDs, computers, cell phones, the latest fashions, junk food.…My god, they’re like little versions of government - no matter how much money they suck out of you, they can always find a reason to demand more. Then they waste what you give them on selfish frivolities.

And the endless commercials and ads targeting kids doesn’t help. When I was a kid, there were no ads for toys on TV except for at Christmas time. It’s almost impossible to imagine, isn’t it. Compare that with today. Now, toys are advertised on TV every frikken day. When once kids could expect presents only at Christmas and birthdays, now, they expect them twice a month, or more oftener. And, many of them aren’t often disappointed.

Sadly, though, no matter how you slice it, my children’s lives are far less rich and considerably less fulfilling than mine was when I was their age. I suspect most parents feel the same. Kids have so much more than we did in the way of material possessions and yet so much less in the way of satisfaction, contentment, optimism and freedom.

I figure I’ll never get to give my version of the ‘six mile barefoot walk through snow to school’ spiel to my kids. It is, after all, a parable about how things were so much worse when I was a kid. For it to sound authentic, I’d have to believe that my kids are somehow better off than I was at their age. I’d have to actually feel a certain level of pride and accomplishment at the ‘better’ life I was leaving them. Sadly, all I feel is a mild sense of pessimism. Oh well, maybe my kids don’t have as much in the way of personal freedom, individuality or spontaneity as past generations did. And maybe they don't have as many adventures as I did growing up. But there ARE these DVD’s they’ve been asking for. A quick trip to Wal-Mart and everyone will feel a lot more optimistic, I’m sure. At least ‘till tomorrow.

Pimps, Whores and Multiculturalism

You hear it all the time here in igno(tole)rant Canada: “Our strength is diversity”; or: “Our nation was built on immigration”; or, my personal favourite: “We are all immigrants”.

Not a day goes by without our senses (not to mention our intelligence) being assaulted by these fraudulent declarations. We are constantly told how wonderful mass immigration and rampant multiculturalism is. There is no proof of this, mind you - no quantifiable comparative evidence. And yet we are required to believe it.

There is, in fact, no way to compare the Canada that is, which has been built around massive immigration of different types of people with radically different beliefs and cultures; and the Canada that could have been, had we exercised greater restraint and built our nation more slowly and carefully.

Maybe if we had been more particular with who we let in, we could have avoided some of the more unpleasant developments that are now plaguing our society. Maybe the Air India bombings would not have happened; maybe our welfare housing and jails would not be crammed with fatherless West Indian youths; maybe there would be no Canadian-Islamists plotting to destroy our society from within; maybe Canadian-Tamil gangs wouldn’t be terrorizing schools in Toronto, maybe there’d be none of the dozens of other ethnic gangs operating in our cities; maybe our city schools wouldn’t be jammed with massive numbers of non-English speaking kids whose presence slows down the entire educational process; and maybe Canadians who were born here and paid taxes all their lives wouldn’t be waiting in line for health care behind some recent immigrant’s frail elderly mother who we let come here two weeks ago at age 69.

And yet, despite all the questions that mass multicultural immigration poses for Canada and every nation that embraces it, all we ever hear is the good stuff. Never will you hear anyone in Canada’s dreadfully unbalanced main stream media (MSM) mention anything about the financial, social and cultural costs of mass multicultural immigration (A uniquely Western phenomenon, by the way. Only North America and Europe are accepting immigrants in such numbers so as to eventually, and on purpose, shift the balance of power away from the founding culture.)

The truth is, that many immigrants are a net liability to Canada. A liability that the rest of us have to bear with higher taxes and declining services. They get access almost immediately to a multitude of expensive services and benefits thanks to our tax funded cradle to grave cafeteria of foreignerfreebies, and we pay for it.

They get free healthcare, education for their many kids (and immigrants have way more kids than people who were born here), social services, legal assistance, child tax credit, subsidized housing, government grants, and so much more. They also get immediate use of our vast and expensive infrastructure – cops, firemen, roads, recreation facilities, parks, transit, water, sewage etc. And there are almost 300,000 new immigrants coming to Canada every year. Even if many become net contributors and integrate into the cultural and social fabric of Canada, there's still an awful lot who do not. We who live in the cities, where most immigrants end up, see it every day.

Sure, "Canada was built on immigration" and "We are all immigrants", as our political pimps and their immigrant community whores keep telling us. (Or is it the other way around? Do the politicians whore out grants for their immigrant community pimps in return for votes; or do the immigrant communities whore out votes for their politician pimps in return for grants? Whichever it is, it's a great deal for them both. Not such a great deal, however, for the rest of us.)

Anyway, the thing that is never mentioned is that the ethnic immigrants of yesterday are in no way comparable to the ones who come here today. Unlike today’s immigrants, yesterday’s immigrants were handed nothing for free and they made no demands. They didn’t walk off the plane into a comfy, warm, tax funded city apartment or motel room, meet with their tax funded immigration lawyer and start whining about their religious or cultural rights. They marched off the boat into a raw and inhospitable landscape, were shipped to all corners of this nation and worked in mines, factories, forests and fields. They became merchants, tradesmen, soldiers and businessmen in small communities all across Canada. They did it so their children could have a better life. They adapted to the culture that welcomed them. They didn't expect the culture to adapt to them. And they neither expected nor asked for anything to be given to them. Sadly, that's not the case with some of today’s immigrants. Encouraged by their tax funded community representatives and shameless MSM apologists, they want it all and they want it now. And all their expectations and demands come with a price that the rest of us must pay.

We never stop hearing stories in the MSM about poor disadvantaged immigrants working for minimum wage or on social assistance, living in welfare housing and feeling bad about themselves. Not bad enough, however, to go back where they came from.

Personally, I’d like to find out how many of our city welfare housing units are occupied by immigrants rather than people who were born here. I bet the results would astound you. And yet the left wing MSM and their multi-culti hangers-on continually cry for more tax funded housing while complaining about the environmantal damage caused by urban sprawl and simultaneously demanding that we allow more immigrants into Canada. Hey, if the immigrants are using up all the available housing and pushing people into the suburbs, maybe it would benefit Canada’s poor and the environment to not keep letting so many of them in. Duh.

And don’t get me started on the environment. The ludicrous left keep crying about an environmental holocaust, demanding that we shrink our environmental footprint while cutting back on greenhouse gasses. Then, they turn around and demand that we increase immigration. Don’t these people realize that immigrants use up much more energy and generate far more pollutants here in welfare rich, consumerist Canada than they ever would back in Africa or Pakistan. Here, they drive cars, ride gas guzzling busses, shop at Walmart, and use copious amounts of water and electricity in their multi bedroom apartments. Back there, many do not drive. They shop at the local market and live in much smaller dwellings, often with no running water or electricity. If we really want to save the environment, perhaps it would be better if these people remain in their homelands, where they will use the least resources and do the least environmental harm. Anyone who puts the environment first should surely see that mass immigration to the west and environmental protection are conflicting priorities.

And, there’s not just the financial and environmental costs of immigration to worry about - there’s also the cultural harm caused by Canada’s divisive multicultural policies. Here in Canada, every immigrant has been told that they have an entitlement to government grants and handouts to promote and sustain their foreign cultures within our borders. And they go for it. Who wouldn’t. It’s our fault for offering such a retarded gift in the first place. Think about it – these people leave nations that their cultures turned into filthy, disease-ridden, wartorn, cesspools of oppression, suffering and death, arrive here, and promptly resume the same cultural behaviors that got them in trouble in the first place. And we pay them to do it. All too often we see entire neighborhoods completely overrun by foreigners, essentially ostracizing and isolating other Canadians who may have been there first. Picture this on a national scale and you will see the inevitable result of state funded multiculturalism.

Clearly, it’s time to cut through the rhetoric and look honestly at the pros and cons of mass multicultural immigration. Let’s have some honest and balanced studies showing the financial impact of today's immigration policies on our society and the societal and political effects on Canada's founding culture. So far, honesty and balance are two things the debate has been lacking. And this, we need to change.

Being a Breeder is Fun

It all happened so fast. One moment I’m a carefree single guy, playing in a rock band, drinking copious amounts of beer with nary a thought for the future – the next moment I’m married with two kids, working in an office and planning for my retirement.

What the hell happened?

Lately my hair started thinning out. Crap. I made it to my late forties with all my hair intact, and now, this? Isn’t baldness supposed to happen earlier on in life, like in a man’s twenties or thirties? It’s not fair to let me build up a false sense of smug security about my hair and then pull the plug (no pun intended) like that.

My waistline has also undergone a *ahem* slight fluctuation over the past few years. I used to be as skinny as a 2 x 4, now I’m, well, slight less so. Not fat, mind you, just not skinny. Ah, the changes age brings.

Mentally, though, I’m at my peak. What I lack in memory or attention span, I make up for in experience, wisdom, and emotional maturity. Thank heavens for that. It takes all the intellectual and emotional energy I can muster to stay on top of this ‘breeder’ gig.

Being a breeder might be fun, but it’s not always easy. For one thing, years ago, everyone was a breeder. Breeders had lots of company. These days, it’s a lot different. There are a lot of non-breeders around. And they have a lot more free time, disposable cash and material stuff than us breeders. Sometimes I feel jealous. All those exotic trips and restaurant meals; doing what they want when they want; being able to get-it-on with each other in any room in the house anytime of day or night without worrying about little peering eyes and curious ears - what a life.

But there are benefits to being a breeder. For one thing, if nuclear Armageddon were to happen tomorrow and the food supply were to run out, I could always cook and eat the kids. That’s a huge benefit right there. What price can you put on survival anyway? And they say that childhood obesity is a bad thing. Not if you’re a parent facing starvation it isn’t. In that case, it’s an extra week of life.

Aside from being a good source of nutrition, children can also be an unending source of entertainment. It’s all a matter of approaching this parenting thing in a creative manner.

In my household, the adults never stop laughing. Last evening at supper, for example, I plopped down heaping plates of asparagus, turnip and brussel sprouts in front of the kids and then sat across from them noisily eating a huge chocolate bar and bowl of ice cream. Well, you should have seen their faces. The wails were amusing, but it was the tears that really cracked me up – the way they make wet little trails down their little cheeks. I never laughed so hard in all my life.

Without a doubt, the opportunities for levity never end when you have children. Cutting off their phone calls when they are talking to their friends is always good for a howl of indignation from them and a good belly laugh for me. Listening on the extension and then nonchalantly joining in the conversation uninvited is another way to brighten up an otherwise mundane day. And then there’s the ‘turning off the TV in the middle of their favourite show for no particular reason‘ trick. That’s my personal favourite. The begging and pleading is funny, but when they stomp off to their rooms crying and wailing, well, it doesn’t get much better than that.

And we mustn’t forget the greatest invention for parental entertainment ever invented – the computer. It’s so easy for kids to get hooked on it. All the sites and games for children - my kids love ‘em. And so do I. We love email too. Whenever I’m feeling a little down or maybe bored, I just go into one of their accounts and delete a message or two – or maybe the entire email account. Then I hover in the background when the kid comes home from school and logs on. Whooo hooo, what a scene.

My oldest daughter (11) likes going on a website called “Club Penguin”. There, each kid gets to be a penguin character. They talk to each other, play games, earn penguin money and buy pretend stuff. It costs $6 a month to be a member. Last week I suspended her membership and told her that I wouldn’t reactivate it until she cleaned her room, scrubbed the bathroom, vacuumed the living room, did the dishes & laundry and washed the windows. By the time she finished crying, my cheeks were aching from laughing so much. You should see how clean the house is now.

Anyway, as you can probably tell, I’m lovin’ being a breeder. I cannot imagine my life without having those wonderful little people around to brighten my day. Now, if you’ll excuse me, my daughter just loaded her new MP3 player with a few hundred songs. It took her a whole week. And I’ve got the owners manual right here. Let’s see…….deleting songs. ……page 6.

It's a Nannyriffic World

It’s become such an ingrained part of our culture that we don’t even think about it anymore. It’s natural - like a baby crawling. In fact, it’s exactly like a baby crawling, only in reverse. Instead of crawling so we can learn to walk, we have given up walking so we can crawl. And crawl we do, straight to nanny government whenever something bad happens. It has become so much a part of us that it’s practically an involuntary reflex – beyond our conscious control. We don’t even know we’re doing it any more. The doctor taps our knee with a small hammer and our leg jerks upwards. Something unpleasant happens to someone and we reflexively become a pathetic parody of Oliver Twist. Our arms extend outwards towards government, clutching our empty bowls, as we plaintively beg: ‘Please suh, can I ‘ave sum‘ore?”.

Always more, never less. More help; more protection; more safety; more intervention; more intrusive meddling. It’s what we demand and it’s what our almighty government benefactor loves to provide. Day by day, year by year, decade by decade, government does more and more for us and we do less and less for ourselves, our families and each other. Government grows bigger and stronger. We grow smaller and weaker.

The fairy tale maiden used to clutch her chest and sigh “my hero” when the dashing knight vanquished the evil villain. Not any more. Now she struts to the press conference microphone and publicly pouts about how there would be no evil villains in the first place if only our mighty government hero would fund more social programs.

But it wasn’t always this way. Once upon a time, people actually overcame obstacles in their lives without begging government for help. It’s almost impossible to believe. Were we really that unenlightened and regressive as a species? Imagine, actually accepting that, in life, we sometimes have to take the good with the bad. What WERE we thinking? After all, there should be no such thing as ‘bad’. And if there is, it’s the government’s fault for not regulating it away.

Hey parents, need that extra second income so you can buy that big screen and go to Cuba on vacation? Are the kids getting in your way? Don’t worry. The government will give you state subsidized daycare so Mommy can get out there and do stuff that’s really important and fulfilling, like maybe work in an office or a shopping mall.

Hey University students, are you having to go sober a few nights a week because those nasty tuition fees are eating up all your partying money? Hey, don’t worry, government will cap tuition fees for you and tax the middle class to pay the difference. Pretty cool huh?

Hey girls, is that hot boy ignoring you because he knows you don’t put out? What’s wrong with you? Get horizontal already. There’s nothing to worry about. If you get pregnant, the government will pay for an abortion or, if you decide to keep the baby, it’ll give you a free apartment and monthly welfare cheque, even if your boyfriend lives with you. Now that’s progressive.

Are your elderly parents getting in the way? Are you stressed out at the thought of having to take responsibility for them in their final years? No problem. Just ship them off to a handy-dandy government funded Nursing home and forget about ‘em. They’ll be happy, you’ll be happy and you’ll have a lot more free time to watch reality TV and bitch about how tough life is.

Are you or someone you love dieing of cancer? Never fear. Here in glorious nannyriffic Canada you get health care for free. Yep. You don’t have to do anything for yourself. Just let nanny do it all. Here, take a seat. The doctor will see you in three weeks. The specialist will see you three months from then. Tests will be done next year and treatment should start, oh, sometime between your wake and your funeral. And don’t worry about the cost. It’s all taken care of. Of course you’re not allowed to pay for faster service. That would be unfair to the people who can’t pay. So you’ll just take what nanny gives you and be grateful for it. Here, have some oxycontin. That’ll take the edge off while you wait.

Our enslavement was inevitable; our freedom fleeting and doomed from the start. Maybe humans were not meant to be free. After all, we have always lived under one form of tyranny or another, whether it was by tribal chiefs, dictators, monarchs, feudal landlords or whatever.

And now look what’s happened. This whacky experiment with democracy and capitalism is hardly a few hundred years old and already it’s starting to unravel. When it started we were free. People knew that freedom was directly linked to personal responsibility and autonomy. Our constitutions protected citizens from the state and enshrined individual rights and freedoms for all. And then what happened? Why, we promptly proceeded to barter away our freedom and autonomy to the state, piecemeal fashion, in exchange for safety and help in managing our lives.

You see, deep down inside, modern people don’t really want to be free. Been there, done that. What they want is to be protected and safe. ‘Risk’ is the new N word - a dirty word that must be expunged from our society. In fact, we have reached the point where taking even a minimal risk can be a crime, punishable in a court of law.

Not wearing a seat belt is stupid. It’s not particularly dangerous, mind you, given that 99.99999% of drivers never get in a serious accident, but stupid none the less. Same with adults who don't wear helmets on bicycles & motor cycles or 'personal floatation devices' (what a moronic term - what the hell was wrong with 'lifejacket'?) on water craft. Stupid - yes. But illegal? Should it really be the government’s job to haul us to court and punish us for making a free and conscious personal decision to take a stupid risk? Geez, if acting stupidly is a crime, why is Rosie O'Donnell still walking the streets?

And speaking of stupid risks - it seems to me that it’s far riskier to have unprotected sex these days. If the government was really interested in protecting us it would punish anyone who engages in sex without a condom. Maybe give ‘em some demerit points on their driver’s licenses or something if they are caught doing it in a car. It seems a little inconsistent to fine someone for not wearing a seatbelt but let them get off scott free when it comes to something as dangerous as not wearing a condom. Especially for gays. The fine for them should be double, given the significant health risk.

After all, if government insists on being in the business of protecting us from our own indiscretions and bad decisions, it might as well take its role seriously, and start by addressing the proliferation of AIDS. After that, it can get on with enforcing the seatbelt laws. It’s simply a matter of setting the right priorities.

Mass Murder and Self Delusion

"THIRTY-THREE DEAD” read the headline as I collected my paper from the doorstep. “Gunman massacres 32 at Virginia Tech University and then kills himself.”

Another day, another madman, I thought to myself, as I made my way to work. And I thought little more of it. No disrespect to the victims or anyone affected by this atrocity. It’s just that I try not to expend time thinking about horrible stuff that is beyond the ability of humans to predict or prevent.

I don’t ask “why” every time something bad happens to strangers. I don’t look for reasons and I don’t look for cures. I just accept it and move on. Maybe it’s because I’m a male and we have the neat ability to compartmentalize stuff. May it’s because I’m an insensitive clod and uncaring lout. Or maybe it’s just because, as I’ve grown older, I’ve come to realize that sometimes bad things happen to good people and, quite often, life just isn’t fair.

Sometimes I feel very, very alone. Few others appear to think this way. In fact, everyone seems to think that every problem has a cause and society has an obligation to find that cause and take care of it so nobody else gets hurt.

Most people, it would seem, are not satisfied with simply acknowledging that sh*t happens. They want to examine the sh*t and poke through it looking for small undigested bits of food to analyze. It’s as if they believe that through their analysis they will somehow be able to design a diet that produces sh*t that smells like roses. Sorry folks, but some people turn to sh*t no matter what you feed ‘em. Nothing to see here. Move along.

A gun man goes on a rampage. Gun control fanatics poke their heads out of their grant funded burrows and claim that nothing like this would happen if only we would ban guns. Gun advocates, on the other hand, claim that the killer would have been stopped short if all students were allowed to carry concealed weapons. Anti-drug zealots point to the fact that the killer was on some sort of pharmaceutical. Therapists and psychoanalysts speculate about his childhood. Community activists use the opportunity to demand that the government put more social programs in place. A spokeswoman for some toilet tissue company claims that if the murderer had only wiped his bum more often with their pillow-soft toilet tissue, he never would have been in that ghastly mood to begin with.

And then there’s the famous “reverse blame” trick. The killer was an immigrant from South Korea. South Korea's Foreign Ministry reportedly expressed condolences and said South Korea hoped that the tragedy would not "stir up racial prejudice or confrontation''. Hmmm, now where have I heard that before? Wait….I know, we hear it from Muslim community leaders every time some whacko Islamic nut-job kills people here in the West. Apparently it’s all the rage these days whenever there’s an attack by someone of a non-white persuasion to turn it around and pretend to be scared of a backlash. It never happens when the killer is white though and the victims are not. You’d never hear a representative of the white community begging a non-white community to please restrain themselves from “racial prejudice or confrontation”. After all, that would suggest that the non-white folk could actually think racist thoughts. And as we all know, only white folk are like that.

In any event, I digress. Aside from the fascinating social and political overtones that mass murders typically offer, I really don’t think too much about them. And, I firmly believe that trying to figure out 'why' these things happen is often neither useful nor sensible. Punish the perpetrators when these things happen. That's pretty well all we can do.

After having our so-called experts study human behavior and social constructs for decades, we are still no closer to stopping stuff like this from happening. The lunatics still pop-up from time to time to make the experts look ineffective and useless. Sometimes I think that the experts are really nothing more than social activists with degrees - more interested in invoking social change than actually finding a solution. That said, they do, however, serve one useful purpose: They make us forget our powerlessness. They make us feel like there’s something we can do to prevent the next big one. And, like self-deluded fools, we buy into it.

Quick: name me an important Canadian value. Strength? Naw. Honour? Nope. Courage? OK, stop it, you’re starting to crack me up. No silly, the most important Canadian value, next to tolerance, is compassion. Sigh.

Everyone wants to be compassionate. No, wait, I mean everyone is expected to be compassionate. So, everyone does their utmost to make everyone else think they are compassionate. And would a compassionate person deny some nice research scientist a tax funded grant so she can do more research on why people behave badly and kill other people? Of course not. Why, that would be positively un-compassionate.

OK. I know what you’re thinking – “What a heartless goof this guy is”. As if we are really that different from one another. In reality, the only difference between me and you, is that I’m not fooling myself into believing that I am something I’m not.

If you are like most people, you probably think of yourself as compassionate and caring. You don’t like to see others suffer. Me neither. But that doesn’t make me (or you) caring and compassionate. It just makes us normal, self-absorbed people, capable of occasionally furrowing our brows and displaying short bursts of quasi-empathy. Daily I pass homeless people in the street. Momentarily I feel bad for them, but I don’t take any of them home. Do you? Daily I read about murder, rape, starvation, abuse and genocide in the papers. Momentarily, I feel sorry for them, but It doesn’t affect my appetite or my sleep. Does it affect yours?

I seem to be incapable of feeling anything other than a brief, distant touch of something remotely resembling sympathy when strangers are killed. All I really care about are people who are part of my life. It’s sad about the dead students in Virginia. It’s a sad thing. But it’s not a sad feeling for me. Not particularly. If I was to feel sad every time a complete stranger was murdered, I’d be a pretty dour guy. Do you know how many people get killed every day around the world? Enough to make feeling sad for them a full time gig. And who wants to go through life like that? Better to just be a self-absorbed, pitiless cad. And best to be honest about it. I may be a pitiless cad, but at least I’m not self-delusional.

They Knew Who They Were

In 100 years the white race will have no nations of its own. But every other race will.

Just think about it.

No – wait a minute. I mean, all you folks who are not white think about it. All you white folks, never mind. I didn’t mean to actually ask you to think about it. After all, that would require effort. And I wouldn’t want to interrupt your busy day. And anyway, your cultures are hardly worth preserving anyway. If they were, you’d be doing it already. Right my Dutch, British and Canadian friends?

Quick - name me five multicultural countries.

I bet you didn’t name a single country in Africa, Greater Asia, the Middle East, South America, or Central America - did you. Every nation you named was in North America or Europe – wasn’t it. Nations that were founded and developed into the most desirable and successful societies in the world by white folk. And nations that were, until a few generations ago, inhabited mainly by white folk.

But not any more. Now they are ‘multicultural’ societies - the only societies on the face of the planet where the founding majority race actually decided to commit cultural genocide on themselves. I know it’s hard to believe, but its true. Virtually all nations that were once culturally unique to white folks are now multi-hued tribal hodgepodges with no common understanding of their culture, heritage or future.

It frightens me to contemplate that, in a few short generations, white folks like me will have no culturally unique societies to call their own. Whether you are a white Canadian, a white citizen of France, a white German, a white Swede, a white Fin, a white person from the Netherlands or a white anyone. Not a single white person on this planet will be able to live in a nation that is culturally unique to them and that they can call their own.

But everyone else will.

It’s a testament to the accomplishments of white folk, I guess. Everyone else wants to be where we are to bask in the glow of our success, drink from the fountains we have built and eat from the buffet tables we have set. And that’s OK. Generosity and sharing is what Christianity (the basis of all western white cultures) is all about.

But, in the process of sharing our wealth with the world, did we really have to give up our cultures too? Did we have to sell-out all that our forefathers struggled for, fought for and believed in? Did we have to abandon our identity and our past in such a cavalier and unnecessary manner? No one put a gun to our heads. No one threatened us. We had a choice all along – we could have done what every generation in history has done and required newcomers to our countries to bend to us. Instead, we decided to bend to them.

With no precedent to look to – no successful historical models to refer to - we decided that it would be a good thing if we, on purpose, let millions of foreigners come to our countries, form ethnically separate tribes within our borders and essentially ignore our cultures.

With no proof that such action would have any positive results for our children, we white folks somehow decided that other cultures must be given equal consideration and respect within the borders of our own nations. My God, can anyone tell me what borders are for, if not to help people protect and preserve their cultural identity and way of life? Why do we have any borders at all if our culture is so unworthy of defending?

We have become brainwashed. And me as well. Even as I wrote the preceding paragraph, I felt slightly dirty - like the comments were somehow racist or something. Imagine. How on earth is it racist for a people to want to live their lives within a secure border, among people like them who share the same history and understanding of life?

And do you want to hear something sick and twisted? You know how white folks are constantly told that it is racist to prefer being around their own kind? Well, if you think about it, this preference is, in fact, the very basis for multiculturalism itself. We are told that folks from foreign cultures need to form their own communities so they can be with their own kind, have a sense of belonging and be happy. Get it? It's racist if we do it to them, but perfectly acceptable if they do it to us.

Of course, aside from the sick and twisted, there’s also the sad and ironic. While multiculturalism lets foreigners in western societies surround themselves with their own kind to the exclusion of all others, it also erodes the ability of the founding white race to enjoy the same privilege within their own nations. The more foreign cultures there are vying for space; the less space there is for the founding culture to enjoy and the more space the founding culture is forced to abandon to foreigners.

Even now, entire neighbourhoods and cities are being overrun by people whose main intention is to grow their foreign culture within their host nations and increase their influence and political power. Their communities are largely insular and separate from traditional white culture. And every square mile of land they occupy, is a square mile lost to white culture.

Maybe its poetic justice. Years ago, whites colonized many of their nations by force, now they are colonizing ours by stealth through the back door with our permission.

Whatever the case, if you are white you should cherish the little bit of culture you have left here in the West. In 100 years, your race will have no nations to call their own. They will likely not even have any nations that they control politically, what with the astronomical abortion rates and miniscule birthrates among whites.

Like lemmings rushing towards the cliff edge, white folk are on a journey to oblivion. Voluntarily, and almost eagerly, they have taken steps to ensure that future generations of their kind are politically disempowered and culturally marginalized. They have implemented social policies that will surely relegate them to minority status in their own nations within this century. Eventually, they will be just another multiculti, minority voice crying out to have their interests known amongst dozens of other multiculti voices, each focused solely on their own needs. It is the natural outcome of this culturally fragmented, tribal society that we have willfully created.

For a brief shining moment, white people had it all. They were rulers of their lands and masters of their destiny. They lived safely together, immersed in a comfortable cocoon of cultural familiarity and belonging. They shared a common purpose and set of values and a common identity. THEY KNEW WHO THEY WERE.

Nowadays, whites don’t know who they are, where they are, where they are going or where they’ll end up. And the saddest part is not that they don’t know – it’s that they don’t care. As such, they deserve whatever unpleasantness destiny typically delivers to such complacent, unappreciative dandies.

Wherever white people end up, though, I know one thing - there’ll be a lot of other people there who don’t look like them and don’t think like them. A lot of other people who share nothing with them in the way of cultural values. A lot of other people who have a drastically different idea about what their society should look like. And a lot of other people whose first priority will be to defend their own cultural interests and take care of their own. Something white people sadly failed to do.

The Pearl Harbour/Nine-Eleven Connection

On December 7, 1941 the second biggest deception in American history occurred.

Planes bearing the colors of the Japanese air force swooped down from the skies over Pearl Harbour raining hellfire on the American forces below. It was, in the words of President Franklin Roosevelt, “a date which will live in infamy”. And it does. We still talk about it today. It was the first time the US had been attacked on their own soil since the war of 1812. It was the catalyst that spurred Americans into entering the Second World War and joining the allied forces in their battle against Hitler’s Nazism. The rest is history.

Well, maybe the rest is history. But what about the attack itself? Does the historical account reflect what really happened?

Sometimes, history gets the story wrong. Sometimes it does so on purpose. Like in the case of Pearl Harbour. Even after all these years – after countless movies, documentaries and television shows were made, and innumerable books written - there’s still one carefully hidden truth that history may have neglected to tell you about Pearl Harbour.

Before telling you what that truth is, however, I must give special credit to two individuals who have inspired me and whose strength has given me the confidence to write these words today. They are genuine American icons – my heroes: Rosie O’Donnell and Sean Penn.

Ms O’Donnell and Mr. Penn are no strangers to controversy. Both have put their careers and very lives on the line so that Americans could know the truth about nine-eleven. I'm sure that they left no stone unturned in their valiant and exhaustive efforts to get to the bottom of what occurred on that fateful day. It must have pained these patriotic Americans greatly to have to doubt their beloved government and consider, as I have, that their government was actually behind the attacks on nine-eleven.

However, our suspicions were apparently well founded. There is plenty of evidence to show that the sinister nine-eleven plot was carried out by the CIA (and probably Mossad) using pre-planted explosives and remote controlled aircraft. And, as many have speculated, the whole purpose of the deception was, apparently, to galvanize public opinion against the enemies of Israel and trick Americans into supporting an eventual attack on George Bush Senior’s arch enemy – Saddam Hussein. Saddam is dead now. And dead men tell no tales. Convenient? Definitely. Coincidence? I think not.

It is only because of the testicular fortitude shown by Ms O’Donnell and Mr. Penn that I am able to summon the courage to tell you what I know today. They have lead by example, and I would not be able to live with myself if I did not follow.

For the past several years I have poured over every written account of the Pearl Harbour bombing and every inch of film shot on that day. And only after extensive analysis can I say with 100% conviction that nine-eleven wasn’t the first time the American government in collusion with Jews staged a fake attack on American soil.

They did it at least once before - on December 7, 1941 at Pearl Harbour.

Much of the film from that day is somewhat grainy and out of focus but I am certain that the planes used in the attack were clever duplicates painted to look like authentic Japanese war planes. I have also deduced that the pilots were, in fact, American death-row convicts who were kidnapped from prisons by the CIA, drugged and given plastic surgery to make them look Japanese. They were then implanted with a brain-controlling micro-chip before being strapped into the seats of the planes and sent hurtling towards Pearl Harbour from a secret aircraft carrier in the Pacific.

I have also discerned by analyzing film footage that the explosions on the ground were not caused by bombs that were dropped. Rather, judging by the timing of the blasts, there must have been explosives planted before the attack – probably by the CIA and their loathsome Jewish conspirators - which were, I surmise, detonated by remote control.

Clearly, Pearl Harbour was an insidious deception cooked up by President Roosevelt and the Elders of Zion to get the American public to buy into WWII so they would enter the war and save the Jews from their Nazi enemies. Just like nine-eleven was concocted by George W Bush and the International Brotherhood of Stone Masons to rally Americans against the Israel’s Islamic enemies. Same tactic – different Jewish enemy. The parallels are exact. In both cases, the attacks came in waves, planes were used and the pilots committed suicide by crashing their planes while screaming in a foreign language Get it? Dead men tell no tales. Especially those you can’t understand. Convenient? Definitely. Coincidence? I think not.

Is it any wonder they tried the same trick again with nine-eleven? After all, it worked the first time. And I predict that it will only be a matter of time before the American imperialists and their soulless Zionist conspirators try it again. Only next time, we’ll be ready for them. We’ll know what’s going on. With Rosie and Sean to inspire us, and me to ensure that the truth is told, we won’t be fooled again.

Terrible Thoughts and Puerile Predictions

Maybe you think it, but you dare not say it:

1. The white gene pool is suffering because many of the smartest white women in Canada are not having any children.

2. All young men should get a vasectomy at age 20. Being a father these days means being 50% mommy, so mommy can be 50% daddy. And if things go bad, men don’t have a chance in Canada’s women-friendly, man-hating family court system. Best to just snip, snip. The risks outweigh the reasons not to.

3. Kids who don’t have two loving parents of the opposite sex, start life at a disadvantage.

4. State funded daycare is a communist travesty geared to transfer parental responsibility to the state so the state can raise our kids for us in the manner it deems appropriate.

5. No one locks his door more tightly than a thief. That’s why the state trusts us less than we trust it.

6. Immigrants have a lot more kids than people born here. Eventually they will dominate and replace the founding culture with some other culture. And it might not be a better culture. Then again, it might. After all, what’s here at the moment could stand some improvement.

7. Strong, independent, conservative minded Christians created the best nations in the history of the world. Then they let soft, valueless, left-wing secular humanists destroy them.

8. One reason Canadians can’t get good health care is because they have to wait in line behind the hundreds of thousands of immigrants and refugees who enter Canada every year.

9. No one over age 50 should be allowed to permanently immigrate to Canada unless they are rich. We can’t even take care of our own old people properly. We don’t need any more.

10. Bob Geldof and Bono are pompous, misguided communistic jerks who have made themselves the laughing stock of every despot and dictator in the world.

11. In general terms, non white people are more racist than white people.

12. 100 years from now, every European nation except for Britain will be run by Islamic governments. Soft, purposeless, secular Europeans will be no match for their aggressors’ strong resolve and fanatical loyalty to their religious ideology.

13. 100 years from now, Canada will have the highest standard of living in the world, next to Australia. We will be self sufficient in water, oil, natural gas, electricity, wheat, livestock and most vegetables. We will be famous for pioneering cures for cancer, AIDs, Arthritis and other maladies. Citizens will live to be 150 and remain healthy all their lives. We will also have a mighty army. Patriotic young Canadians will line up to serve their beloved nation and revel in spreading peace and freedom through out the world. We will fight tyranny and oppression on many fronts around the globe and be a beacon of strength, steadfastness and uncompromising principle. We will also be known for having the most open, transparent and incorruptible government and political structure in the world. The future will be ours.

14. 100 minutes from now, I will be waking up from this dream. It was pretty accurate up to number 13 though, wasn’t it?

You can tell my age with carbon dating

I am a hypocrite. A seething mass of contradiction. I say one thing and do another. I do not walk the walk or talk the talk. I am unable to reconcile my beliefs with my actions. I live one way and expect my children to live another.

I am a man and the father of girls.

On one hand, I look at the world through the eyes of a man. And I despair. I see how feminism and women's abandonment of the home has pretty well destroyed white western societies. Birth rates are so low that white people will be reduced to small powerless minorities in their own nations within this century. Real estate is more or less unaffordable for most single parent families, and other one income families, thanks to the proliferation of dual income households. Our sons are drugged into docility by prescription happy doctors and career focused mothers. Kids are committing suicide in increasing numbers. Many kids are uncivil and fat, having no mother at home to keep them in line and feed them properly. They are also terribly spoiled and self centered, thanks to guilty career obsessed parents who make up for their lack of time with an excess of tolerance and material gifts. And men have fared no better than the kids under the thumb of feminism. Many are punitively garnished for support and routinely denied joint custody of their children by our man-hating women-friendly family court system.

On the other hand, I look at the world through the eyes of a father who has daughters and no sons. It makes me feel a bit better. Certainly my girls will benefit greatly from our feminist-centric society. Once they clue into what’s going on, they’ll probably get off on holding all the cards. They’ll be able to have good careers. They’ll be able to leave their husband for no good reason whatsoever and still get the house, kids and fat support payments. And they’ll probably love being able to choose from the vast array of men out there who would be willing to be mommy half the time so they can do more important things.

Or maybe they’ll suffer a blow to the head, go insane, and decide that being a mother is the most important thing they could do. And maybe they’ll seek out a man to marry who will be willing to support his family throughout their children’s formative years so they have Mom there when they need her. Naw, that’s just plain crazy. What woman in her right mind would do such a batty thing?

In any event, I can tell you this - whatever path my daughters chose in life, I have no doubt that they will grow up to be strong, independent-minded and successful. They could be no less with me as a father. I would raise them no other way.

As for me, I’ll just sit here and watch fascinated as my body slowly fossilizes. Soon, they’ll haul my antiquated ass off to the museum where children will gawk at the sight of me while a tour guide describes in an icily snide tone how men like me became extinct.

Then all the kids will go home, turn on Jerry Springer, nuke a pizza pocket and wonder what’s keeping mommy so long at the office.

It's a Bad Trade-off For Any Dad

My daughters don’t know it yet, but they owe their entire existence to a simple decision my wife made. What was that decision, you ask. Simple - She decided to be a stay at home Mom. That, in turn, lead me to decide to have kids with her. It’s as simple as that. (And, oh yeah, the love and deep emotional feelings and stuff also had a bit to do with it.)

I could probably be very happy spending my life with a career oriented women if there were no children involved. But, I would never-ever willfully marry and have kids with a career woman. Why on earth would I? It would be nuts for me to put myself out like that.

Look, maybe women are genetically equipped to be dad 50% of the time, but I am not genetically equipped to be Mom. Most men aren’t, I think. They just do it because – well, I don’t know why, exactly. I guess it’s because they weren’t as discerning and smart as me in choosing their spouse and plotting their life’s course. It’s kind of mean to say, but, I wouldn’t trade places with any of ‘em. I don’t care if their TV is bigger than mine and their house worth more. My life is way better than theirs.

Having my wife at home gives us tremendous freedom and takes a lot of pressure off us and the whole family. Well, except for the financial pressure. But, that’s a sacrifice we choose to make. While the dual income families enjoy the extra stuff their extra income awards them, We enjoy the quality of life our traditional lifestyle awards us. I bring home the bacon, my wife takes 100% care of the household. No rushed 7:00 AM dropoffs at the daycare centre for me; and no frantic rush hour driving to make the 6:00 PM pickup . No leaving work when one of the kids is sick.. No watching my exhausted wife stumble through the door at 6:30 PM with a briefcase in one hand and a bucket of greasy chicken in the other. No laundry, dishes, cooking, cleaning, shopping, or any housework. My wife does it all, baby. And not only that, she’s got a heart of gold and tremendous strength of character. She also looks half her age and has a body that I would happily die for. And, oh, she doesn’t mind when I go to the pub to have a pint with the guys. (Hate me, it’s OK, I understand.)

I have always said, and I truly believe, that any man who makes a decent living should think long and hard about having kids with a working woman. Why would any man take on so many additional headaches just to be able to buy more “stuff”? And, after all, in the end, that’s all he would get for his troubles – more stuff. He wouldn’t get happier. He wouldn’t get more satisfaction out of life. He certainly wouldn’t get laid more. (Stressed out working women make tired lovers.) He wouldn’t get more family and personal quality time (Family and personal time is much more plentiful for fathers who come home to a clean house, a home-cooked meal and a closet full of laundered and ironed clothes.) All today’s dual income families get is an extra income stream to buy extra “stuff”. (Laughably, a lot of that second income stream often gets used up paying for the stuff necessary for mommy to work outside the house in the first place – expensive daycare, a second car, transit fare, lots of nice clothes and shoes, a lot more meals out & takeout, guilt gifts for the kids, etc.)

If you ask me, it’s a bad trade-off for any dad (and for many moms, I would wager.) Is it any wonder that fewer men are getting married and many don’t want children. Can’t blame them really.

At heart, men are simple creatures. They are not prone to overanalyzing their lives like many women are. They think more than they speak and act more than they think. They are at their best when their role is clear and they know what is expected of them. Once upon a time, their world was like that. Mine still is.

I often sit and wonder why more dads don’t go off the deep end with all the gender gymnastics and parental uncertainty they have to deal with these days. It must be hell going through life not knowing exactly what the hell it is you are from one minute to the next – Momdy or Dadmy.

A few days ago, I was waiting for my morning train to work and it was delayed. While waiting, I happened to be standing beside two men who were conversing. They had apparently not seen each other in a while. One was telling the other that he had a one year old daughter and his wife was expecting their second. He and his wife were on different shifts. He would leave work, pick up their baby, take her home and spend the rest of the night tending to her. Baths, feedings, clean-ups, the whole thing. Apparently, the baby was an all-nighter. He had to give up playing hockey, he said. It was really sad. He sounded less than happy. In fact, he sounded resigned. Resigned to his destiny.

Destiny? Maybe his. But not mine.

Personally, I would never willfully choose such a life for myself. I am surprised that so many men still do. Amazing, isn’t it, how far a bit of sex will go. One day you’re having some great lovin’ and not really thinking about the future. And the next you’re munching on leftover KFC, doing the laundry and changing a poopy diaper while Mommy works late at the office with Raoule.

If I had a son I would be advising him as follows: “My son, freeze your sperm at age 18 and get a vasectomy. Then, cavort at will in the garden and pick the most beautiful flowers to decorate your bed. Never get married and never, ever have kids unless you find someone who’s willing to be a full-time Mom to your children and a full time wife to you during your children’s formative years. You deserve no less, my son. And settling for less, makes you less of a man.” That’s what I would tell him.

But, alas, I have daughters, not sons. So my advice to them will be different. I will advise them as follows: “My darlings, get University degrees, have careers and make lots of money. Then, around age 30, marry a good man and have a few kids. Then, go back to work and leave the kids with me and grandma during the day. After all, my sweethearts, you don’t need no man to support you. You can support yourself. If your husband is any kind of man, he’ll understand.” That’s what I’ll be telling them.

What? How dare you. I am not a hypocrite. Boys and girls are different, that’s all. They need different life strategies to prosper. I’m just trying to steer them in the right direction so they’ll be happy. It’s the least a good father can do.

Don't Worry, Be Envirohappy

Wasn’t Y2K supposed to bring down western economies and topple all the evil Zionist/Christian capitalist cesspools of greed and inequity? I remember reading that Nostradamus predicted that the end of the world would occur in 2000. Or maybe it was Osama Bin Laden or something. Whatever the case, Y2K turned out to be a dud, just like all the other doomsday predictions of all the other nutcase chicken littles that litter our historical landscape.

In the 1970s we were told by many concerned scientists that all the earth’s oil would be depleted in 25 years or so and if we didn’t stop driving and start turning down our thermostats we would all suffer a horrible fate. That was almost 40 years ago. And to quote Mark Twain: it would seem that rumors of our deaths were greatly exaggerated. Huge new reserves of oil are being found every year all over the world.

And there was another false alarm in the 1970s. Newsweek ran an article on the pending global cooling crises. Honest. Back then, scientists from all over the world had joined together to warn us of a coming ice age. (Sound familiar?) Temperatures would plummit, crops would die and, then, so would we - alone and freezing in the dark. And not just the people in western Canada, as Pierre Trudeau suggested. Everyone.

Scientists, it would seem, are not at all infallible.

These days the angst-ridden, socialist scare-mongers have invented a new demon to trot out and terrify us with – global warming. Oh, excuse me, I meant “climate change”. Hell, it’s only been a few years since the capitalist-hating, white-guilt troupe first arrived on the scene with their latest scheme to bring down the west and already they’ve rebranded themselves. It’s no longer “global warming”. After all, that term actually appears to mean something and its purveyors might one day be called to task if “warming” doesn’t literally occur in the manner they predict. So, they concocted a new term that is so shifty – so oblique and shadowy in nature - that no one will ever be able to nail it or them down.

And they are clever. Unlike ‘global warming’, ‘climate change’ can’t be disproved. The climate is constantly changing. A term like “climate change” can mean something one day and something else the next. Is this year colder than last year? Run for the hills, it’s ‘climate change’. Has the temperature in the arctic been a few degrees warmer in the 1990s than in the 1980s? Egad, stock up on canned goods and dig a shelter. It’s ‘climate change’.

Yep. Climate change is the perfect concocted crisis for a liberal to hang his hat on. It can’t be proven now; and by the time it can be disproven, its purveyors will be dead of old age. They certainly won’t be dead because of non-existent global warming. Damn. There I go again. Sorry. I mean “climate change”.

Throughout its history, the earth has been going through a continuous cycle of so-called climate change. For awhile it was hot and dinosaurs roamed. For awhile it was cold, ice caps formed and mastodons trudged about. This stuff occurred naturally for millions of years before people even started burning fossil fuels. How do we know it’s not just occurring naturally now – if it’s occurring at all?

Recently I saw some pictures on the web showing how ice formations on Mars are shrinking - just like our polar ice caps apparently are now. Wow. I never imagined that the emissions from Al Gore’s limo could actually permeate earth’s atmosphere and travel hundreds of millions of miles to Mars where they could actually start a global warming (ooops, I mean climate change) phenomenon. Apparently, white Christian capitalist western democracies are not only the plague of mankind, they are also the plague of martiankind. Or, maybe solar activity has something to do with it. Naw. It’s got to be us evil white capitalists. After all, David Suzuki tells us so.

You better just believe it and buy into it 100%. If you don’t, you may just as well be a Christian in Stalinist Russia, a Jew in Nazi Germany, a epileptic in Salem, or a non Muslim in Saudi Arabia. If you doubt the religion (or ideology) of climate change, you better just keep it your dirty little secret, else you will be vilified or worse.

Environmentalism is the new gay. All environmentalists are fabulous. It’s a wonderful way to be and no dissenting views will be tolerated. I predict that, pretty soon, a new word will be introduced to us. 'Envirophobia'. Enviromentalists will be a protected group under our Charter of Rights and freedoms and 'envirophobia' will be featured in a prominent slot on Wikepedia – right beside its brothers: homophobia and islamophobia. You will not be allowed to refute or even think badly of the beliefs of environmentalists.

Already, environmentalism has permeated our consciousness and dominated the media and our education systems in a manner that rivals the spread of AIDS in Africa. And like AIDS, it’s a disease that most of its victims expose themselves to voluntarily - despite of how bad it is for themselves and their society. It’s also a lot like socialism – a mental disease that has caused nothing but misery and hardship wherever it is imposed. No wonder so may rabid environmentalists are socialists. One serves the purpose of the other. Socialism wants to crush western success; and environmentalism will crush western success.

Yep, it's a mental disorder. Why else would it be called environMENTALism?

Look, we really need to wake up. If we allow the enviroradicals to win the day, our society is doomed. Our entire civilization revolves around fossil fuels. Our food, clothing and everything else is transported by train and truck. And don’t forget, here in Canada, we live in a country that is cold much of the year. We need to burn stuff to keep warm and to power our industries.

And one more thing. Even if the purveyors of doom and gloom are right and C02 emissions are putting the planet in peril (and that’s a big if) Canada only produces 2% of the globe’s greenhouse gasses. So even if we closed half our electrical plants and factories, pulled half our vehicles off the road and cut our personal consumption in half, we would only reduce total global emissions by 1%. Meanwhile Russia, China and India, three of the biggest polluters, would continue to puff out their pollution at unchecked rates.

Maybe some Canadians would be willing to freeze in the dark while waiting for a solar powered bus to take their sorry unemployed asses to the soup kitchen, but I am not. Maybe I’ll consider it if David Suzuki, Al Gore and every envirohappy movie star in Hollywood starts driving a tiny hybrid car, moves to a solar powered bungalow and starts leading by example. Till then, they can just take their pathetic, hypocritical rhetoric and bite me.

Lazy is as Lazy does

I’m a lazy SOB. You are too. Don’t deny it. OK. Maybe on a relative scale, based on the current reality, you probably aren’t any better or any worse than any of the other lazy SOBs out there. But, compared to someone who lived a few generations ago, you’re definitely a lazy, slothful SOB.

You wake up in the morning. You don’t have to bother yourself with trying to read a complicated dial to tell what time it is. Just read the numbers. 7:00. And if you want to nod off for another few minutes, just hit the snooze. 7:09. And again. 7:18. And again 7:27. Oops, it’s getting late, better get up. And don’t even try and figure out why every snooze feature on every freakin’ clock radio in the bloody world is set at 9 minute intervals instead of, say, 5, 10 or even 15. The world’s greatest scientists have been trying for decades to solve that little mystery. The truth is, no one really knows. So just put it out of your mind and get up, hit the button on the coffee maker, turn on the TV to see what the weather will be like, check your blackberry for urgent messages and head for the hot shower. It all seems so natural and right. These are not luxuries at all. They are simply essential tools to help your sorry ass survive in this stressful, challenging world. If your ancestors were still alive, however, they might disagree. They were up at dawn, lighting the coal stove, drawing water from the pump and emptying the chamber pots.

None of this nonsense for us though. We have evolved. No exertion necessary. All we need to know how to do to survive today can be done with one button pushing finger or one knob twirling fist. And I mean everything.

We don’t get up to change the channel. We sit inert and push a button. We don’t light a fire to cook, we twirl a knob on the stove or push a button on the microwave. We don’t use elbow grease to wash our clothes or dishes. We lean over and push a button. Argh. Be careful. All that leaning is going to wreck havoc on your fragile back. We don’t need to hold a pen and move our arm to write or do a calculation. We just rest our elbows on the desk and push a few buttons on a computer or calculator. OK, technically they’re called keys, but they’re really densely compacted square buttons. Even erasing takes less energy. And there’s no rubber debris to sweep off the desk. That, in itself, probably saves thousands of people a year from dieing from exertion.

It is virtually unfathomable for me to grasp that years ago accountants, bookkeepers and clerks did all their calculations by hand and kept everything meticulously organized in paper files. And what about the great prose and poetry classics? All were written by hand on paper with a quill or pen loaded manually with ink. And no spell check. How did they do it? I would be sorely challenged to organize my thoughts and compose anything that way without pages full of strikeouts and erase marks. And I can’t even imagine having to walk to the book case or, heaven forbid, the library, to look up words or research anything. Not when the internet is right there with any bit of information I need.

And don’t forget music. It used to be that we actually had to get up and turn over a record in order to listen to an entire album. Now we just hit 'shuffle' on our CD players or Ipods and furgedaboutit. Oddly, we don’t seem to enjoy music as much as we used to. Maybe its because most of today’s music is substandard crap. Or maybe it’s because the effort required to actually do something is directly proportional to the amount of enjoyment derived from the experience. Hey, call me crazy.

Even our cars are made to save us the pesky responsibility of working too hard. No more window-elbow from rolling down the windows. We just press a button. No more changing gears. Just put the car in D and drive. No annoying clutch to work. (My left leg is so grateful.) Power steering alleviates the need to work too hard turning corners. And I’m sure those digital presets on the radio have saved a million lives. And then there’s the intermittent wipers which save us from the interminable agony of having to turn them on and off when precipitation becomes unpredictable.

Buttons, keys, knobs, levers and switches; silicon chips and circuit boards; on board computers and electronic sensors; voice activated computer and cellular technology; remote controlled doors and ignitions; stuff that turns on and off by itself. What more could a lazy SOB possibly ask for. Surely we have attained utopia.

And the absolute best is when our stuff talks to us. Don’t bother running for the phone. Good heavens, you could break a sweat. Just let the answering machine take it. And don’t worry about missing your email. Your computer will tell you when an urgent message comes in. Sorry about the spam. Our bathroom scales talk, the appliances talk, the cars talk, the machines that answer the phone when you call the service centre to complain about a broken talking machine talk. Our educators tell us that we should listen to our kids more. Hell, who’s got the energy after wading through the labyrinth of voice prompts when we call the school board.

And god almighty, even the elevators talk. Where I work, a soft feminine voice emanates from the elevator walls sweetly announcing every floor when the car stops. She even lets us know whether we are “going up” or going down” when the door closes. I don’t expect that I will ever go postal, but, hey, you never know. And if I do, I won’t arrive at work with a shotgun and go after my coworkers. Oh no. I’ll march straight into the elevator and send that nice automated voice straight to techno-hell.

Then I’ll sit in the lobby, call the elevator company and wait for their voice mail to finally connect me with a real person. The way I figure it, if I attentively follow the automated instructions and press the buttons like I’m told, I'll be out on bail before I get to talk to a real person. Or maybe I’ll just ignore the voice prompts, pretend to be on a rotary phone and wait a few minutes for an attendant (“who will be happy to serve me”) to come on the line. As we all know, that’s really the only way to get service over the phone these days.

Hail the Herouxville Heros

Earlier this week a great kafuffle arose throughout the media when a tiny village in Quebec called ‘Hérouxville’ announced that anyone wishing to move to their village should be willing to adhere to certain social standards. Here’s a few excerpts from the document they published:

“We would especially like to inform the new arrivals that the lifestyle they left behind in their birth country cannot be brought here with them and they would have to adapt to their new social identity…..We consider that men and women are of the same value….. a woman can: drive a car, vote, sign checks, dance, decide for herself, speak her peace, dress as she sees fit, walk alone in public places, have a job, have her own belongings and anything else that a man can do……killing women in public beatings, or burning them alive are not part of our standards of life……We listen to music, we drink alcoholic beverages in public or private places, we dance and at the end of every year we decorate a tree with balls and tinsel and some lights. This is normally called "Christmas Decorations" or also "Christmas Tree" letting us rejoice in the notion of our national heritage….boys and girls play the same games and often play together. If you came to my place we would send the kids to swim together in the pool, don't be surprised this is normal for us…..”.

You could almost hear the sharp, collective, intake of breath nationwide as sensitive, enlightened Canadians cringed. Media pundits and talking heads wasted no time condemning this initiative. Accusations of racism and xenophobia spewed forth from their gaping maws like vomit from a drunken frat boy. Multiculturalism, they said, would not only save the world, it could also cure hemorrhoids, reverse global warming and increase a woman’s bust by three cup sizes. Throughout the media, the message was clear and consistent: Multiculturalism is wonderful and the people of Herouxville should be ashamed.

And, of course, no good dose of public outrage would be complete without an appearance from Canada’s ubiquitous ‘community spokespeople’. And they didn’t disappoint. A multitude of ethnic and non-Christian groups trotted into the spotlight to share their outrage with us.

Here’s what Steven Slimovitch, national legal counsel for B'nai Brith Canada, said: “It (the village’s statement) tries to make a mockery of this whole debate about reasonable accommodation, and it tries to say that these are our rules and if you don't like them, don't come here.”

Gasp. Imagine the noive. Just because those pesky French Catholics founded a community hundreds of years ago and built it into what it is today, they think they can run the place. Talk about un-Canadian. And not only do they expect to be able to set certain standards in their own community, like equality for women and public Christmas displays, they actually expect newcomers to accept and adapt to those standards. How nutty is that?

Clearly these Herouxville troglodytes – these ignorant Catholic peasants - have refused to be converted to the religion of multiculturalism. Damn heretics. Imagine, here we are, in 21st century Canada, and there are still people around clinging to the absurd notion that Canada’s founding cultures should be celebrated, protected and perpetuated.

Something apparently drove these people over the edge. What could it have been I wonder? Did they wake up one morning and suddenly notice that Canada has largely become a nation with no history and no shared values or identity? Did they become concerned about their small community suffering the same sad fate?.

Did they somehow clue in that the term ‘multiculturalism’ is really code for: ‘destroy whitey’s culture’ and decide that participating in the destruction of their own culture was, well, kinda stupid?

Did they, one day, notice all the stories in the media about Muslim cabbies refusing to transport drunken passengers; Muslim students demanding special bathrooms in schools to wash their feet before praying; and female Muslim police officers and doctors refusing to touch males for religious reasons? Did they scratch their heads and decide that they didn’t need such nonsense going on in their community? (Clearly, they must’ve missed the last few episodes of “Little Mosque on the Prairie”)

Or, maybe, their women are big enough up-top already, so they figure they don’t need multiculturalism.

Whatever the case, they are right to be suspicious and cautious about allowing the multicult cult to seize control of their community. Because wherever the cult festers, the outcome is always the same: the founding host culture loses ground; and the invading guest culture gains ground. And, never doubt it, in the game of cultural preservation, it’s all about gaining and losing ground. After all, ground is a finite commodity. There is only so much. It does not magically multiply itself and it does not vanish into thin air. In order for one culture to gain ground, another must lose it. Every Islamic mosque and school built in Canada where males and females are segregated is another piece of ground lost to traditional Canadian culture. Every young girl forced to marry someone her father chooses is another human lost to Canadian culture. Every woman shrouded in black cloth from head to toe, hidden and separate from us, is another women lost to Canadian culture. Every time we allow newcomers to ignore our cultural values and traditions, we lose another piece of ourselves, our history, our culture and our identity. We lose, and they gain.

And I bet they won’t be giving it up to us as eagerly as we gave it up to them. Cultimulcheralism, you see, is a door that only swings one way. They demand that we recognize their cultural values, but we must not expect them to recognize ours – even though we are the founders of the feast and they arrived only after the food was cooked and the table was set. Thus is the sick, twisted pathology of cultimulcheralism.

Definition: ‘Cultimulcheralism’ – Cult-ee-mulch-er-all-ism – ‘values shared by a fanatical, ideological, left-wing ‘cult’ which seeks to convert Canada’s founding white Christian culture into a generic, mushy, meaningless ‘mulch’, while preserving and revering the uniqueness of any and all foreign cultures that come here’.

The people of Herouxville have apparently spent many generations building a culture and a community that they love. They have traditions, values and a way of life that means a lot to them. And they are apparently unwilling to see that way of life compromised or challenged by newcomers. I fail to see what’s wrong with that. And I find it sad that so few other Canadians can summon the courage to defend their traditions and values in a similar manner.

People who move to a community as newcomers should conform to the culture of the community, not the other way around. And if they can’t accept this simple, universally understood rule of common courtesy and civility, they should save themselves and the community a lot of grief by not moving there in the first place.

Kudos to the good people of Herouxville for standing up for what they believe in and not surrendering their history and values to the invading hordes of cultimulcheralism like so many other Canadians have done.

Being Both a Man and a Dad - Not Easy These Days

There’s a fine line between genius and insanity. The line’s also pretty fine between pleasure and pain. I’m no authority on genius - and even less of one on insanity (although some would differ with me on the latter). I am, however, an expert on pleasure and pain and the thin grey line that divides them. You see, I’m a dad. I walk that line every second of every day that I’m around my kids. One moment I’m stepping on the pleasure side of the line. And the next, I’m stumbling around on the pain side. Back and forth; back and forth. Good; bad – Happy; sad – Pleased; mad.

I live in a world that is not of my own making. A world where kids rule and parents crawl. It was not supposed to be this way. It’s unnatural to have the world revolve around children. They’re supposed to be seen and not heard. They aren’t deserving of our endless attention. They shouldn’t be allowed to disrupt our lives and be so demanding. But they do, and they are. And we let them. Boy do we let them.

I figure its all about supply and demand. Years ago families were large and there was a big supply of kids, so they and their demands meant less. Their input was unnecessary for survival. They knew little of any importance. They didn’t incessantly demand to be heard like they do today because they knew that they had little of any value to add to any discussion. And, when they did interact with adults, it was mostly to listen and learn; not to spout off as though they were equals. Because they were not equals. Most of the time, they lived in their child’s world and adults lived in their adult world. It was natural, and it was right.

These days, families are not just small, they are microscopic. One child families are common. And what value do you suppose parents place on only child, compared with the value parents place on one out of 6 or 10 children? A helluvalot more. An unhealthy amount more.

Kids are treated like gold. They are pandered to and made to feel as though their views are as important as their parents. Parents don’t tell their children what to do any more – they engage them in discussions so that a “mutually beneficial outcome can be achieved”. Oddly, in doing this, parents are not elevating their children to their level; rather, they are reducing themselves to a child’s level and diminishing themselves and their authority in their children’s eyes.

The world was not designed to revolve around our children. And men were not designed to tolerate children who believe that the world revolves around them. It’s unnerving; it’s unnatural; and it’s positively unhealthy to a man’s ego and sanity.

Men were not designed to subjugate themselves to their offspring. To even entertain the idea that a child should have the right to question their authority runs counter to every Y chromosome in a man’s body. Personally, I am not genetically capable of calmly discussing options with a whining or screaming child. Nor am I inclined to look favorably upon a long drawn out discussion with a petulant child when I already know the outcome will be the same as I have already decreed.

It is no accident that past generations of children were better behaved. They knew when dad said no, he meant no. They didn’t enter into debates with their dad because they knew it would be folly. And, as a positive result, dad didn’t have to waste his valuable time debating with a mere child. When disagreements started they were often circumvented by a quick, efficient smack on the bum, or the threat of one.

Men only live once and his lifespan is considerably shorter than a woman’s. Why on earth would any sane dad waste so much of his valuable, irreplaceable time engaged in fruitless circular arguments with his children when other, more efficient and effective methods are available to successfully modify their behavior.

When my children make demands or put up a fuss when I tell them to do something, it humiliates me to have to pander to them. Sure, I'm human, and sometimes I make the mistake of lowering myself to their level. But I hate myself afterward. All I can think as my daughters resist my authority is “I gave you life, you ungrateful brat. I feed you and clothe you. Everything you have you owe to me. I sacrifice everyday for you. Everything I do, I do in your best interest. I would die for you. You have no right to show me such disrespect”. And they don’t. They have absolutely no right whatsoever.

A few weeks ago I was standing at the side of an outdoor public skating rink watching my kids skate around. I overheard a father talking to his son. He was pointing out the correct way to skate. His son, in a petulant voice, said: “ You can’t tell me what to do”. The father immediately assumed a humble stance and, in a pleading tone said: “I’m not telling you what to do, I’m just trying to help you. If you want to learn, you should listen to me.” The boy, about nine, didn’t look impressed. No wonder. There was nothing to be impressed about. And I wondered, if a father doesn’t have the right to tell his nine year old son what to do, who does? Do we live in a society where no one has the right to tell children what to do without entering into a lengthy debate about it? And if a child refuses to respect his fathers guidance and knowledge in such simple matters without coming back with a smart-ass rebuttal, what chance will the father have later on when it comes to more important things?

And day by day, it gets worse. Dads and parents in general continue to lose ground. They lose it to their children, who become increasingly more demanding and less obedient. They lose it to their children’s schools, who demand that parents teach their children grammar at home so they can concentrate on teaching them personal values. They lose it to the media, who sexualize children and expose them to violent, obscene and suggestive imagery at every turn. We lose it to busy body, left wing social activists who continually come up with new ways to transfer parental authority to the state, like when they launch court challenges to criminalize parents who give their children a few slaps on the bum or advocate for mandatory helmets for all kids who go tobogganing.

Years ago, when children knew their place, the family was big and it was inviolable. (‘Inviolable’ is defined as “unbreakable, sacred, firm, unchallengeable”) back in those days, the family came before teachers and government. There were no self righteous socialists or radical feminists marching around trying to dismantle and disempower it. And the media celebrated the human qualities that were good and admirable, rather than celebrating our most shameful decadent desires like it does today.

Nowadays, the family comes before practically nothing. And it's about as unbreakable, sacred, firm and unchallengeable as the marriage contract around which it is formed. That is to say, not very. Families have become so insignificant and unimportant, in fact, that many people choose to have none. And those who do choose to have one, have one so small that it is practically meaningless in terms of perpetuating the species.

I have only two children so I guess I shouldn’t talk. After all, I too am a qualified runner in the ‘white extinction race’. I guess I should be deferring to my children more and caving in to their demands like most new age parents do. I guess I should be more tolerant when they are obstinate and adopt a humble, pleading stance. But I’m not and I won’t. And I am appalled and astounded how alone I am in my sentiments – how separate and different I am from all the soft, tolerant, sensitive, new-age dads out there.

But I am not ashamed that I am different from them. I am proud. I look at them and I feel sympathy. They can’t be enjoying themselves.

You’ll Be Wrapped Around My Finger

“I will turn your face to alabaster; when you find your servant is your master.”

When Sting wrote those words back in the 80s, I bet he didn’t have Canada’s health care system in mind. And yet, these many years later, it could very well be used as our health care theme song.

And there’s a twist. The Canadian version of the song has a surprising role reversal. Playing the role of the master is: the health care system. And, playing the role of the servant is: me, you and all other middle class Canadians. Yep it’s the faces of Canadians that have turned to alabaster, after finding out their health care Servant has become their Master.

Hmm, just a minute. “Servant” may not be a strong enough word to describe Canadians’ relationship with their health care system. Rather, it’s more like “slave”. After all, like slaves, we Canadians are not permitted to obtain any medical treatments except what is provided under the whip of our communistic state health-care master.

The whole situation is completely and utterly perverse.

Think about it. Canadian doctors routinely turn away new patients because they have too many patients already. Statistics Canada reports that 14% of all Canadians have no family doctor. That's one out of every seven Canadians. Here in Canada, it is the doctors who are in demand, not the patients. Tell me, what service provider actually tells customers to go away? What business has clients competing for its services rather than the other way around?

A while back, I read an article in the newspaper about a Canadian doctor who was telling all his smoking patients that he would not be their doctor anymore. It was his way of sending a message to them about their smoking, I guess. Well, the message was received alright – and it was a message saying that he was the master and his smoking patients were his servants – excuse me, slaves – to be disposed of at his discretion, with, apparently, no adverse affects on him or his income. Such is the reprehensible world of Canadian communist medicine. A world where doctors hold all the cards and citizens beg to get into the game.

Here in Canada there are upwards of 800,000 people waiting for surgery at any given moment. Some wait months, some wait years. Some die or get irreversibly worse waiting in the queue. Such is your lot in life when you are a slave and have no control over your medical destiny except what little is allowed you by your master.

We supposedly live in a free and democratic society. At least that’s what we are told. Not so free, though, when it comes to seeking our own medical treatment. This has always puzzled me. How did Canadians become so stupid and naive – so narrow mindedly socialist – so as to buy this damaged bill of goods? We walk around with our chests pumped up and our noses in the air, relishing the sensitivity and compassion we show to our poorest people, all of whom have complete medical coverage. Unfortunately, in providing them with this coverage, we haven’t raised them up to the level a middle class person should receive. We’ve dragged the middle class down to the same level of service a poor person would receive. (Making everyone equally miserable is what socialism does best, or didn’t you get the Memo?)

Yep, the middle class can, apparently, just go to hell and wait months for cancer treatment and heart surgery; just as long as the poor can go to our hospital emergency rooms with a sprained finger at $800 bucks a pop. ($800 that is, ironically, being paid by the sick and dieing middle class through their taxes.) It is so uplifting to be an enlightened socialist. Have we attained health care utopia or what? Pinch me. It’s all so perfect I must be dreaming

We are so free here in Canada. We have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion. But, oddly, we have no freedom of health – arguably the only freedom where life literally hangs in the balance.

We are free alright. Free to lie for days on stretchers in hospital corridors. Free to wait months for cancer treatment. Free to live in pain. Free to lick the boots of our almighty health care master while we die like dogs waiting for permission to be treated. Ahhhhh, It’s good to be a free Canadian.

Look, it is one thing to want to give everyone, especially those who cannot afford it, adequate health care. We all want to do that. But, it is another thing entirely to pass laws making it illegal for anyone to seek their own treatment when the public system is failing them. It is, in fact, not just perverse, it is downright fascist.

And anyway, despite the agonized protestations of those who would deny us our freedom of health and keep us powerless and enslaved, there is really no proof that allowing additional access would destroy the public system. In fact the opposite is true. Many enlightened nations such as Finland, Sweden and France have public health care for everyone while allowing citizens to buy additional insurance or pay for their own treatment if they desire. Please note that I used the word “allowing”. Imagine, we actually live in a world where the dying and the suffering have to be ‘allowed’ to take measures to extend their own lives. Shouldn’t such freedom simply be seen as a human right rather than a gift to be given or taken away by the state? What the hell is the matter with us? Have we become so pathetically used to crawling to government, that we need its permission to save our own lives.

Here in Canada, and all over the Western world, people are growing old, millions of babies are being aborted and couples are having fewer and fewer children. In a few short decades we will be in the midst of the biggest demographic crisis in the history of the Canada. There will not be enough competent young Canadian people to replace the old as they retire. Young immigrants often take low paying jobs because they lack the necessary language skills and Canadian experience to assume other positions. The old will require substantial amounts of health care and there will not be a sufficient working tax base to pay for it. Luckily, the old people will have mortgage-free homes and oodles of money socked away in retirement plans and investments. Hopefully, by this time, these Canadians (who will number in the many millions) will have woken up and demanded freedom of health. Because, if they do not, we will see suffering in this socialistic nation of ours like we have never seen before.

Who Wants to Live Forever Anyway?

I’m getting old too darn fast. There are more years behind me now than in front of me.

I used to think that being immortal would be pretty cool. Imagine - never dying; never growing old. It’s the ultimate dream, isn’t it? The unattainable prize that everyone thinks about at some moment in their lives.

When I was younger I WAS immortal, or at least I acted like it. Sometimes, between bursts of youthful exuberance and flurries of foolhardy risks I would experience rare moments of introspection. Sometimes I would think about mortality and wonder whether older people worry about death and wish for immortality more than younger people. It seemed sensible that death and mortality would weigh more heavily on the mind of an older person than a younger one. One would think that mortality would become more and more an issue as a person’s remaining time became less and less.

But now that I’m *ahem* getting up there, I have come to realize that, for me, quite the opposite is true. The older I get, the less attractive immortality looks. I see the changing world around me and realize that I really don’t want to live forever. Not on this planet, anyway. With each passing day I am becoming a creature of a different time; a different era. A different world. Day by passing day, I become less and less comfortable with what our society is becoming and my place in it. Vague feelings of disconnect grow stronger. Sometimes I feel as though I no longer belong here.

Sure, it would be wonderful to be able to witness what the distant future holds for my family. To walk my great-great-great-great-granddaughter (Dr. INP, the Prime Minister of Canada) down the aisle at her wedding ceremony; to hold her first born in my hands; to be there down the road to offer support, comfort and love during those times when my family needs it.

But, there’s more to life than family. In order to live, one must interact with the world. To be there with my family down the road, I would also have to be there in all other respects - in their time and in their world. Yikes. I can barely tolerate the thought of what the world would be like in 25 years, let alone in one-hundred or two-hundred years Hell, sometimes I can barely tolerate the thought of what it is like today.

Whatever the case, as you can probably tell, I’ve pretty well come to terms with my mortality. In fact, in a weird way, I almost appreciate, rather than resent, the limited time I have on this planet. Whether by default or design, our natural lifespan seems, to me, to be just perfect. Not too short to be fleeting and not too long to be tiresome. And the knowledge that it’s all going to come to an end someday certainly makes every experience that much more precious. In fact, I would venture to guess that if we weren’t mortal, nothing at all would be precious.

So, in celebration of this precious life, from this mortal, middle-aged man to you, a gift. Three suggestions for making the most out of your all too finite life

1. Have your children before you get too old. If you do, you may very well get to meet your great-grandchild, just as my great-grandmother did with me. It's a mistake to artificially postpone parenthood just to acquire more stuff. And don’t wait for the right time. It may never come. And anyway, when is it ever the wrong time to give life? Just do it. And, may I add - speaking as a man who will be in his sixties when his last child is in University - do it early, get it over with and then you and your spouse can enjoy your later years free from the little blighters.

2. Do not – I repeat – DO NOT change with the times. Respect the generation that spawned you and try to act your age. Sure, movie, TV and music stars are always reinventing themselves. But that’s because they are shallow, narcisstic idiots, desperately clinging to the illusion of youth. They have no sense of self worth beyond what they see in, or snort off, the mirror. The reason they need to constantly “evolve” is to sucker new generations into buying their crap so they can stay rich and famous. So, they whore themselves out to every new trend that comes along. Trust me – this only works when you have a good plastic surgeon and publicist. It’s not hip for a forty year old to listen to Madonna or Fitty Cent, greet people with “whatup” and dress in ridiculously oversized clothes. It’s pathetic.

3. Finally – when your time finally comes – die well. Unless you go suddenly, you’ll likely have some time to come to terms with your pending demise. So remember, people are watching. You are only as good as your last gig. Go out like a whimpering sobbing bag of jelly and that’s the way you’ll be remembered. Despite what they say about taxes; death is really the only inevitable thing about life. If you have to face it, face it with all the dignity, strength and resolve you can muster. If you are going to teach your children or family anything, let it be how to die. It will not be a lesson wasted.

For now though, if you are still reading this, I hope that last suggestion can be deferred for a long, long time.

Redefining Racism

Are you racist? You probably don’t think so. Most racists are blind to their own racistness. Anyway, don’t worry. Even if you are a racist, you’ve got lots of company. Haven’t you heard? Everyone’s a racist. Well, every sane, rational person anyway.

Worried? Never fear. You need not live the rest of your life in doubt. Just take a moment and complete this handy dandy bigotry test. Then you’ll know for sure just how much of a filthy racist you really are.

For each question score yourself either 0, 1 or 2 - with 0 being an absolute no, 1 being a maybe and 2 being an absolute yes.

Ready? Here we go……

1. Have you ever noticed how many young black single mothers there are in our welfare housing and how many young black kids have no father?
2. Has the thought ever crossed your mind that blacks dominate basketball and football because black men, as a group, have a genetic physical advantage?
3. Do you agree that it is sensible for airport security to pay a little extra attention to Muslims?
4. Many important jobs and positions are occupied by Jews – doctors, dentists, lawyers, actuaries, entrepreneurs, business leaders, investment bankers, etc? Have you ever thought that maybe they have some latent genetic predisposition to excel at commerce and intellectual endeavors?
5. Do you feel at all uncomfortable about the fact that illegal Mexicans will comprise over 50% of the population of California within a few decades, essentially relegating the founding culture to minority status?

OK. That’s it. You’re done. That wasn't so bad, eh? Now tally up your scores. Any total score over 0 and you are a racist. 1, 2 or 3 makes you a run of the mill, garden variety racist. 4, 5 or 6 makes you a moderate racist who should probably seek counseling. 7, 8 or 9 makes you a hard core racist who should be taken out and severely caned. A 10 makes you suitable for honorary membership in the KKK and a quick death before a firing squad.

OK, maybe not. But that’s the way the CBC, our halls of academia and countless other left wing institutions, groups and individuals would look at you. In this day and age, a racist is someone who simply notices stuff that is happening and talks about it.

In actuality, if you didn't score 10 in the test, you should take a long look in the mirror and adjust that tin foil hat you’re wearing. You are apparently not in full grasp of the reality in which you live. Black baby mothers ARE overrepresented in our welfare housing and black fathers are routinely absent from their childrens’ lives. In America 70% of all black babies are born into fatherless homes. Muslims constitute a greater terrorist threat than any other group. Jews, per capita, do occupy a hugely disproportionate number of financially affluent and high intellect positions in our society. And experts predict that illegal Mexican immigrants and their descendents will be the majority in California in a few short decades.

These are not racist lies invented for the purpose of vilifying a certain ethnic or religious group. They are simple truths. Truths, however, that apparently only racists can recognize.

Which came first, I wonder, the chicken or the egg – the racism or the truth. Are racists genetically gifted with an innate ability to see the truth, or are people who see the truth magically transformed into racists because of it? Maybe neither. Maybe racists are just people who are too stupid to know when not to speak the truth.

Look, I think we have reached a point in our enlightened, progressive society where we can start making some important distinctions. For example – it is not racist to notice that people who belong to certain ethnic or religious groups often share certain common traits. It is racist, however, to want bad things to happen to them simply because they belong to a certain group and to treat individuals differently in accordance with the group they belong to.

We are told all the time that diversity and multiculturalism strengthen our society. If this is so, it must be because each culture has something good to add to the mix. Well, if we are going to admit that cultures have certain collective good things about them, it is not a stretch to think that they may have some collective bad things too. In fact, it should be apparent to anyone who isn’t pathologically blinded by political correctness.

Stereotypes exist because they have a solid grounding in personal experience. Certain groups do exhibit certain innate mental or physical abilities. Why else do black men dominate basketball, football and Olympic sprinting if not because there are more black men possessing the necessary physical attributes to excel in these sports than any other group? Of course, this way of thinking is not permitted because once we notice physical differences between groups, we then might notice mental, intellectual and emotional ones. And remember, we are all supposed to be equal, except for opportunity. Those who do not believe so are racist.

It would be racist to suggest that every black man is a bad father and good at basketball, every Muslim is a terrorist and every Jewish person is an intellectual and financial whiz. But is it racist to notice that certain groups do have more people, per capita, in possession of certain traits than any other group and logically attribute those traits to their group?

I have two daughters ages 11 and 6. My 11 year old’s best friend is a Tamil girl. A terrific kid. My 6 year old’s bestest buddy is an adorable little Muslim boy named – you guessed it - Mohammed. This doesn’t bother me at all. As individuals, I am perfectly capable of judging them and their families based on my personal experience with them. The fact that I have grave misgivings about Tamil and Islamic terrorists doesn’t play into my feelings for them as people. Nor does it affect my behavior towards them as individuals.

Both my children owe their lives to a wonderful high risk neo-natal surgeon working out of Mt. Sinai Hospital. A Jewish man. I admire and respect him greatly. My feelings for him are unaffected by any understanding I might have about Jewish people in general.

The bottom line, I guess is this:

It’s one thing to perceive that people in certain communities exhibit certain common traits. It is another thing entirely to treat people differently because of that perception. We are constantly told that if we stereotype people, we are racist. Apparently, we are not to be trusted to behave in a civilized manner towards people unless we pretend that all groups are all equal in all respects under the skin. We are constantly told that the only reason people exhibit certain abilities, tendencies and characteristics is because of the social situation they find themselves in. I believe that this is crap. It is undeniable that certain groups, in general, do have a higher number of people who possess certain notable characteristics than other groups – both positive and negative. Maybe some are due to socialization, such as with radical Muslim terrorists; but I believe that some are due to genetic differences inherent in their groups.

Realizing this but not allowing it to influence the way we treat people as individuals is the key – and it’s not a hard thing to do. Most of us do it already. All the sensible rational people, anyway. Maybe someday we’ll be able to have an honest dialogue about it without some self-righteous, know-it-all calling us racists.

Christmas Dad - Lessons Learned.

The tree is up. The presents are bought. Plans are made. Four days before Christmas and we are ready.

Too much stuff bought with credit cards though. Come January, ouch.

It’s all good though. All worth it really. The looks on the kids’ faces when they first look under the tree. Me wearing a goofy Santa hat, handing out presents one by one with everyone getting to enjoy the ooos and ahhs of everyone else before moving on to the next present. It’s something I learned from my wife’s family. We’ve been going there for Christmas pretty well since I met her. They taught me a lot about Christmas.

Santa, of course, will be the unseen star of the show. Cookies and milk will be left out, with my wife and I taking some nibbles and swigs just to make it look authentic. Gotta be careful these days. The older the kids get, the more they notice mistakes. Especially when you mention Santa. Several times this year, in conversation with my family, I accidentally slipped up and referred to something Santa brought the kids as something we gave them. Each time, my oldest daughter piped up: “But dad, you said Santa brought us that. Oooops.

Yep, Santa can be a dicey subject when you’ve got an 11 year old, and often before that age. This year my eldest is 11 and she’s taking some flack at school for her continued belief in Santa. She’s been asking me about Santa for a few years now. Many of her peers know he’s a fairy tale. My daughter is losing hope. A few years back, she asked me if Santa was real. I put her off and took some time to think about it. I decided that there were two rules I could not break. One, I could not lie – not at her age, where the desperation to believe is almost overshadowed by the fear of not believing. Two, I could not be responsible for shattering her beautiful, innocent illusion. She was at an age where fibs were no longer appropriate. This would take some finagling.

So the next time she asked me if Santa was real, I answered: “He’s as real as you want him to be, honey”. She seemed oddly satisfied with this. Like she understood that it didn’t matter if she believed or not. Whatever the case, I would support her. Big sigh of relief.

My youngest is 6. She still has the innocent trust in wondrous things that my oldest will never have again. And it’s my job to preserve it. One major rule in our household is that our oldest must never, ever, ever, suggest to her sister that Santa Claus isn’t real. Of course my oldest is, at this point, teetering on the brink of non-belief but hanging on for dear life. She may have wondered why I was telling her not to say disbelieving things if she herself still kind of believed.

I told her: “Whatever you believe, whether you believe in Santa or not, you are never to express disbelief to her sister. Your sister should be given the same privilege as you – to make up her mind for herself." Again, she seemed satisfied with this. Another big sigh.

And then there's the most important part of Christmas, the reason the season exists - shopping. Being a woman, my wife loves shopping. Thankfully, she often takes mercy on me at Christmas and tries to do as much without me as possible. Having both an x and a y chromosome, I seem to have an innate aversion to lengthy shopping trips. Determine what you want to buy, find out where to buy it, drive there, go in, locate object, pay for it, walk out of store, drive home, mission accomplished. Total time elapsed: 47 minutes, 32 seconds. Works for me.

But not my wife, or pretty well anyone else’s wife, as I understand it. For them shopping isn’t a mission – it’s an excursion. A leisurely romp through the isles and shelves of every #@*@# store in the #@*@# Mall. With men in pith hats, clutching butterfly nets, walking three paces behind.

But it’s all good though. At least my therapist tells me so. Except for the nasty problem with the anti-Christmas bunch.

They used to bug me a lot. I couldn't figure it out. Why would anyone want to remove the word "Christmas" from Christmas? Lately, though, I’ve found myself feeling pretty indifferent about the whole thing. I sometimes wonder - just what am I fighting for - what am I trying to protect? Our society? Our way of life? Naw. Not unless it’s the society of 40 years ago. Because the one we got now ain’t so hot baby. Hardly worth fighting for, in fact.

While we fight for semantics - to preserve the word Christmas - all around us our society continues to decay in a cesspool of commercialism, celebrityism, consumerism and decadence. Most of us seldom give God a thought as we breeze through our busy days. Unless, of course something goes wrong, or we are having an orgasm. Then it’s “Oh God”. “Oh God”. Maybe God is honoured to be summoned at such important moments in our lives. I couldn’t say. Maybe he sees it as an inconvenient interruption from more important matters.

The way of life I'd like to fight for is the way of life we used to have here in Canada not two generations ago. A way of life: where kids can run and play outside without parents becoming concerned; where people have time to get to know their neighbours; where people set down roots, raise a family and die where their heart and soul lies; where kids don’t spend all their time wanting stuff; where adults don’t spend all their time wanting stuff; and where people are encouraged to be self-reliant and independent from government interjection, not pandered to by a government that uses dependency as a tool to grow its power.

Getting more people to say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays” ain't gonna make our world like that again. It’s going to take a lot more work than that.

Whatever the case, it’s all good. The day approaches and time will stand still, just for a moment. Like on that fateful night 2006 years ago. Remember, every time you refer to the date, you refer to the amount of time that has passed since his birth. And that, my friends, the secular, non-denominational, pluralistic Christmas Grinches will never be able to take away.

Merry Christmas everyone.

Wallowing In Christmas

Christmas decorations are everywhere. In some places, they were up the day after Halloween. Almost two full months before Christmas, and we are ready to go.

I guess people want to extend the personal Christmassy feeling for as long as they can. After all Christmas is a very special time of year – a time that fills us with good cheer and benevolence. Maybe they think that they are making the feelings more poignant by pretending that it’s Christmas in early November.

Of course, the opposite is true.

It is common knowledge that the more we have, the less we appreciate what we have and the less important those things are to us.

What’s your favourite food? Imagine eating it for every meal for two whole months. Every Breakfast, every lunch, every supper and every snack in between. Then, at the end of the two months imagine having a big celebration where you serve the same blasted food for dinner. Methinks the specialness of the meal would be somewhat compromised.

Or, imagine walking through your front door two months before your birthday only to find elaborate birthday decorations all over the place. Something tells me that after living with that every day for two months, the actual birthday itself will be a wee bit anti-climatic.

Or what about hugs. What if you gave everyone a big, warm hug every time you ran into them – every co-worker, every neighbour and every new acquaintance. Something tells me that hugs would become significantly less meaningful to you.

It’s the same with Christmas.

Not only do we have to live in a culture where the real meaning of the day - forgiveness, hope and peace on earth – is buried beneath a perpetual avalanche of crass commerciality and superficiality. We have to do it for two whole months.

Some people I know don’t mind. But I do. I think most people, especially those with children, would agree that Christmas should be special. The definition of ‘special’ is:

“Surpassing what is common or usual; exceptional”

What we have done with Christmas, with our incessant wallowing in it, is to make it common, usual and unexceptional. By extending Christmas day into a two month, light filled celebration, we have made the actual day a lot less ‘special’ than it should be.

And I, for one, grieve because of it.

Orthodox Evangelical Atheists

I find atheists amusing - in a sad “see the homeless man dance a jig for a dollar” sort of way. I watch them make fun of orthodox, evangelical Christians and wonder where they find the hubris. After all, they are really not that different from one another. Both are smug and secure in the belief that they are right. Both are often inflexible and intolerant of any views that conflict with their own. Both can be close-minded and bigoted towards those who do not think like them. Yep, sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between orthodox, evangelical atheists and orthodox, evangelical Christians.

Don’t tell that to orthodox atheists, though. They think that their disbelief in God sets them apart from believers. But it doesn’t. In fact, the opposite is true. It joins them at the hip. Atheism is a belief system based on disbelieving what believers believe. Without the people who believe, atheism would cease to exist.

It’s the sad truth about atheists – God can exist without them, but they cannot exist without God.

Hmmmm. Maybe the ‘joined at the hip’ analogy was a little off. After all, the relationship isn’t exactly symbiotic now is it? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that atheists have a parasite/host relationship with believers. They feed off the host. The host however, could get along just fine without them.

Look, I am not a hard-core believer and I am not an atheist. I am just a man who continues to look for answers and tries to keep an open mind. However, I can’t help but feel sort of sad for orthodox atheists. Theirs is a paradoxical reality, where their faith is based on having no faith and their beliefs are based on having no belief. They believe that they do not believe. And they do not believe that they believe.

They believe that they do not believe that they believe that they do not believe that they believe that they do not believe…….that they believe……that they do not believe……Arrrrrgh! It’s a wonder their brains don’t just collapse into themselves and implode like a black hole.

Imagine standing up in public looking up at the moon and shouting that you do not believe that the moon is actually a living organism that is telepathically controlling our minds.

People would think you are nuts.

But you can stand up in public and proudly announce that you do not believe that there is a God who created the earth and who parted the red sea for Moses.

And no one would bat an eye.

Do you know why? Do you know why no one would think you are nuts? It’s because you would be denouncing something that over 2 billion people believe in.

Get it? If people don’t believe it, it cannot be denounced. If it isn’t thought to be at least a possibility, it cannot be denied. But once people believe in something, it becomes fair game.

Let’s cut to the crux of the matter – the only reason atheists exist is because Christians, and others who believe in a God, give them something to deny. Once the last believer is dead and gone, so too will be the last atheist.

Seems to me then, that atheists should be a little more appreciative of the believers. After all, without believers, orthodox, evangelical atheists would have to find something else to give their lives meaning. Personally, I recommend that they direct their skepticism towards that big, green-cheese, extra-terrestrial entity glowing in the night sky.

A Primer and Quiz for Left Wing Nutbars

How does the left-wing mind work? Or, maybe a better question is - Why is it that the left-wing mind doesn’t work?

Some people think that left-wingdom is a pathology; A mental illness that prevents the brain from processing information correctly; A psychological disorder that causes the unfortunate sufferer to have crippling episodes of self loathing, wild attacks of delusional naïveté and an irrepressible need to embrace anything and everything destructive and corrosive to their civilization. Maybe it’s no accident that the poor, unfortunate individuals who exhibit these monstrously disabling symptoms are called leftists. After all, it’s the left hemisphere of the brain that controls our ability to think logically. And, as we all know, left wingers are about as good with logic as Bill Clinton is at being faithful to his wife. That is to say, not very. Maybe that’s why they all love Slick Willie – he reminds them of themselves, nasty stains and all.

To be a left wing-dinger is to have completely and utterly divorced yourself from the real world in which you live – to inhabit some sort of mythical dream world where Iranian society is the moral equivalent to Canadian society and America the very embodiment of Satan.

Cultural relativism and Anti-Americanism, you see, are the main cornerstones of the left-wing psychology (or should I say the left-wing psychosis).

Just test any lefty you know. Say something like – “You know, America has got to be the most culturally influential nation that has ever existed. Its awesome presence is everywhere around the world – books, movies, music, TV, Coca cola….” Then, stand back and watch the lefty’s head explode. Or, maybe mention that we sure are lucky to be living in Canada, a nation founded by Christians, rather than one of those Muslim nations. Then, run away, quickly, before the bulging-eyed lefty throttles you while screaming insanely about the Crusades and pedophile priests.

Maybe you know people like that. Maybe you know people who are teetering on the edge of left wing insanity. If so, toss ‘em this handy-dandy leftwing Primer. It’s all they’ll ever need to know about being a lefty. And then some. Here we go.

Dear lefty person:

(Ah-ha, there’s your first lesson. Notice the salutation isn’t Dear ‘Mr. Something’ or, Dear ‘Ms. Something’? That’s a big no-no in lefty-land. And don’t even think about calling someone ‘Mrs’. That’s grounds for murder in some leftist circles. To be a good lefty, one must never ever differentiate between the sexes. Never say Foreman or Tradesman. It’s ‘Foreperson’ and ‘Tradesperson’. Also, note these helpful terms for future reference: ‘Personhole Cover’, ‘Personager’ (that’s an office boss type person); ‘Personure’ (that’s gender-neutral cow droppings), Huperson (Like in ‘Huperson Beings’ or the ‘Huperson Race’). And so on. Make up your own. Have hours of safe, non-biased gender-neutral family fun. Your kids will love it.)

Anyway, Here’s today’s lesson:

To be out in Left-field, you must never ever criticize any culture or ethnic group except white Christians. And you must loudly and aggressively stand up against anyone who dares suggest that western societies are in any way better than those in Africa or the Middle East. Whenever anyone dares show pride in their White Christian heritage, you must quickly come back with a scathing comment referring to slavery, colonialism or capitalist imperialism (whatever that means). If anyone dares to mention Muslims in the middle east castrating their daughters and decapitating people for converting to Christianity, you must snarl back that American foreign policy is the real cause of everything bad in the Middle east. However, should anyone express pride in being something other than white, Christian, Hetero or English, you must smile widely, show your appreciation and support, and never say anything negative in response. After all, hasn't the person been victimized enough by evil White, Hetero, Christian men already, without rubbing salt in the wound?

To be a Left-over, you must have the childlike stupidity (ooops, I mean innocence) to believe that humans have the capacity to live together in harmony and create a world where everyone is treated equally and no one has more than anyone else. To believe this, you must believe that our natural individuality, indomitable spirit and healthy egos can somehow be tamed or enslaved. Or, maybe, you’re not stupid at all. Maybe you are just pretending to be, so people will not suspect the true nature of your shriveled, vile soul. Maybe you are actually like 99% of all lefties out there who, somewhere deep inside, know the truth – that humans will never be equal and the smart and strong will always want more and get more than the stupid and weak unless they are taken down a peg or two. And, you so want to be part of the group that does the taking down, don’t you? Sure you do. All Left-overs do, deep in their conniving black hearts. It isn’t helping the poor that drives them as much punishing everyone else.

Finally, to be a true left winger you must have this inexplicable subconscious need to tear down all the things that your culture was built on – faith, family, procreation, national defense, individual pride, and freedom from undue state interference. You may not realize it because you are a lefty and your brain is addled by the pathology that grips you, but, the truth is that, you hate yourself, your skin and your culture and what you really want - nay, crave – is the destruction of your society.

Do you see yourself in any of this? Just a little maybe? If you do, you’re in luck. A team of twenty NDP experts have developed a short test that will tell you whether or not you are a left wing nutjob. And the best part is – it’s free. So, as my gift to you, here it is. Get ready to see the true you revealed. Ready set…..go.

1. If you believe that society must provide a permanent free house and lifetime welfare for everyone, even sane, able bodied people, while requiring nothing of them in return, you are a left wing nutjob.
2. If you believe that the proliferation of single mothers and fatherless children in our society is a perfectly natural development in our proudly progressive and enlightened society, you are a left wing nutjob.
3. If you believe that poverty and criminality could be eliminated if only government would spend more money on social programs, you are a left wing nutjob
4. If you constantly worry about poverty even though most welfare recipients are rather plump, have DVD players and send their kids to school in NIKE runners, you are a left wing nutjob
5. If you believe that, for the most part, poor people and criminals are not personally responsible for their situation and society as a whole must take ownership for all social ills, you are a left wing nutjob
6. If you truly believe that radical Islam is a religion of peace and no more dangerous than evangelical Christianity, you are not only a left wing nutjob, you are a dangerous delusional moron and an enemy of freedom and democracy.
7. If you are concerned about gender inequity, but only notice it when men perceivably have the advantage and say nothing when women routinely cripple men in family court, get a slap on the wrist after killing their babies, and serve jail time in country cottages, you are probably a left wing nut job. Or maybe you’re just a run of the mill feminist hypocrite.
8. If you believe that it’s a matter of employment equity for females to join the army to fight big swarthy men hand to hand on foreign battlefields but understand why they cannot compete with men in any Olympic sport requiring strength, agility or stamina, then you are either a left wing nutbar or you’ve been brainwashed to think like a mindless feminist peon.
9. If you believe that Canada would be perfectly alright with no army at all, you are a mega left-wing nutjob and should be forcibly conscripted and sent to Afghanistan for a year to shovel out latrines. As a lefty, you’d be little suited for any other military role.
10. And finally, if you believe that borders are an impingement on the dignity and basic human rights and freedoms of the citizens of the world, you are most definately a, first class, primo, left wing nutbar.

So, how’d you do? Are you a left wing nut bar? If so, peace be unto you. And remember, Jesus loves you. (Not sure if I believe in Jesus or not – but boy, does his name ever rile up the left wingdings. Oddly, the name of Allah doesn’t seem to bother them at all.)

Inverse Outcome & the Definition of Insanity

Virtually everything we do today requires less effort and less time than it did when our parents were our age. And yet we are more stressed, less contented and have less time to ourselves than virtually any previous generation in recorded history. Here’s what the Dali Lama has to say:

"It is fascinating. In the West, you have bigger homes, yet smaller families; you have endless conveniences -- yet you never seem to have any time. You can travel anywhere in the world, yet you don't bother to cross the road to meet your neighbours. I don't think people have become more selfish, but their lives have become easier and that has spoilt them. They have less resilience, they expect more, they constantly compare themselves to others and they have too much choice -- which brings no real freedom."

Wow. the more choice we have, the less free we are. That's profound. And the easier life gets, the more unsatisfied and discontented we become. Know why? It’s because of a little thing called Inverse Outcome™. (Patent pending).

“Inverse Outcome” is when you do something and get a result that is the exact opposite than what you expected. A result that seems to defy all logic and reason.

“Inverse Outcome” is when people rise from starvation and poverty to create the most well fed societies in the history of mankind, with food stores and fast food outlets on every corner, and new medical disorders pop up called bulimia and anorexia.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you spend 17 years teaching your children your values and morals and then they go to University, are promptly brainwashed, and return as rabid, anti-American, socialist/feminist nutbars. And oh yeah - you are the one paying for University.

“Inverse Outcome” is when we outlaw private health care and create a wonderful “free” public healthcare system that gives poor people the same access to medical care as middle class and rich people. Then we watch incredulously as poor and middle class people with no family doctor wait months for critical treatment and lay on stretchers in jam packed hospital corridors - while the rich go to other countries for immediate, state-of-the art treatment.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you register and ban guns, and gun crime actually goes up.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you elect a Conservative, Republican President and he then turns around and allows your nation to be overrun by illegal Mexican invaders (oops, I mean immigrants.)

“Inverse Outcome” is when people rise from illiteracy and poverty to create the most successful, prosperous, comfortable societies in the history of mankind and then develop all these mental disorders relating to stress, depression and anxiety.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you sacrifice throughout life to save for retirement and then find that people who pissed their money away are as well off as you because they get full government pensions while yours is reduced dollar for dollar for any payment you receive from your savings.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you vote for politicians expecting them to keep their promises. OK, that’s not really “Inverse Outcome”. It’s more like “Inverse Intelligence”.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you are a teenage girl and buy into the state influenced idea of radical feminism and sexual equality and then find yourself as a single mother with no idea how to provide for your child.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you form very powerful unions in the three most important companies in North America for the purpose of helping employees; and then make such excessive demands that foreign, non-union (car) companies take all your business away, and you lose your job.

“Inverse Outcome” is when people rise from the subserviance of monarchies and colonial landlords to create the most free democratic societies in the history of mankind, and then allow their government to regulate them so severely that permits have to be obtained to cut a limb off a backyard tree or for kids to sell Lemonaide on their front lawn.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you have an abortion with the expectation that it will not stay in your head for the rest of your life. But it does.

"Inverse Outcome” is when you have children with the expectation that they will care for you when you get old and then, when you get old, discover that they don’t give a sh!t about you.

“Inverse Outcome” is when you have an accidental child that you initially regret and she/he turns out to be the one thing that enriches your soul the most.

Yep. It’s the pathology of “Inverse Outcome”. Sort of like Einstein’s definition of Insanity: “doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results”. Both are great examples of how far we have to go before we even begin to understand our selves, our world, and the others that share this world with us.

Lets Let 'Em Stew

I do not support the war in Iraq. We should be allowing these faulty societies to stew in their own crapulence. It is not our place to invade and rescue them. Iraq was an autonomous nation with its own borders and culture. It was no different than North Korea or China in its rejection of human rights and freedoms. George Jr did his dad a favour . It’s as simple as that. Saddam is now imprisoned and the Bushes are loving it. Saddam was, previously, the leader of a nation. Not the leader we would prefer, but a leader none the less. Who are we to decide who should be the leader of a foreign nation? And why did we single out Saddam among so many undesirable leaders? Maybe because we could? And because it accomplished certain, as yet, undisclosed political objectives?

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about our role in the world and have concluded that we should cut the middle east loose. Let them deal with their own problems. (Except for nuclear issues. In that case we need to act immediately and punitively.) They will not gain freedom by having it imposed on them by us. They need to do it on their own. Either they, as a people, can summon the strength, or they cannot. Nothing we can do will help them. They need to help themselves, just like we did here in North America.

It’s a common theme among conservatives that individuals should help themselves, rather than look to government to help them. Why then do we abandon this simple truth when it comes to the middle east? Why do we trust our government to go there and force our way of life upon people when we would not tolerate this approach in our nation? Is government not a thing to be distrusted?

Look, the question is simple - either we trust government or we do not.

Personally, I do not. In fact the only entities I trust less than corporations are governments. Or maybe it’s the other way ‘round.. Whatever the case, here we are. We are trusting our government to seize control of a foreign nation and give them a way of life that they very well are not ready for or want.

It’s pretty easy for us, here in our world of secular, commercial, consumeristic plenty, to make value judgements about other nations. We are pretty smug in our understanding that all others must want the same thing that we have. Well, maybe they don’t. Maybe they really are different from us. Maybe Islam really is what they want.

Sure, when they come here, they should live by our rules. But to impose our rules halfway across the globe in nations that know nothing about our values – well, there’s a word for that, and it’s colonialism.

Let me be clear. I do not respect Islam or the societies it dominates. Islam has a lot of work to do before it becomes worthy of my respect. But I do not presume to have the right to force my values on them when they are half way across the world living in a culture that is so different from ours that we could never hope to understand it.

That’s OK though. Because a culture that unleashes such monsters among us, does not deserve our understanding. Rather, it deservers our unrelenting attention and criticism.

WAHCMB Anonymous

Bob: “Hello everyone, my name is Bob and I am a White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeder….*sob*”

Group: “Hello Bob”

Group Leader: “Welcome to White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeders Anonymous ©. You are among friends here. We all share your pain. We understand the tremendous shame and guilt you must be feeling. We are here to help.”

Bob: “*Sob*..... th..th..thank you. Thank you....*sniff*. I...I’m at the end of my rope. I hate myself. I hate everything about me. I...I hate being a White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeder. It makes me feel....dirty inside. Oh God....tell me....will I ever be able to look at myself in the mirror again? Will the disgrace and humiliation I feel ever go away? Why did I have to be born this way? Why? Why?”

Group Leader: (Putting a hairless arm around Bob’s shoulder) “There, there now, it’s going to be all right. We are going to put your demons to rest. You are not the only White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeder in the world who hates himself. There are millions in North America alone who want to dye their skin brown, cut their willies off and convert to Islam. Of course most of these are Democrats and Liberals, but that’s a subject for another day. Today, we need to concentrate on you. Here, why not just sit down and tell us what’s going through your mind.”

Bob: “It’s the, the utter hatred I feel for myself and all other White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeders in the world. Take this wretched whiteness for example. What is that exactly? White is the absence of color. It’s like I have no color at all. Like I’m a non-entity. Meaningless. Without worth. And then there’s the crimes against humanity perpetrated by my white, colorless ancestors. Slavery, theft of resourses from the colonies and land from the North American Natives. This cursed white skin. It carries with it a horrific legacy of suffering and death. I hate my skin. I hate it. I hate it. I wish all white people were dead.....*sniff*”

Group Leader: “Is that all you hate?”

Bob: “No, I hate being an Anglophone even more than being white. I cringe at the thought of my ancestors killing all those fine French soldiers on the Plains of Abraham to win control of Canada. French is such a pleasant language to listen to. I’d rather hear someone say “Boeuf Bourguignon” than “Baloney” any day. And the colonies – all those colonies, captured and pillaged by English men just like me. So much evil done in the name of expanding English culture around the world. And now look at what’s happened....English is the main language of commerce and business all over the world. People love English language movies and literature. It has spread like a cancer. A cancer I tell you. It’s so oppressive. So stifling. I want to tear out my tongue I am so ashamed. Thank heavens the Arabs are taking over England. They can’t destroy that poisonous Anglo culture fast enough for my liking.”

“And then there’s my heterosexuality. It hangs over my head like a dark cloud. I just can’t help it. I like females. I’ve tried to like men, I even kissed one once, but it made me gag - and I was only 5 years old kissing my grandfather on his birthday. Look at me, I’m not even that concerned about AIDS. If I was gay I would be obsessed with it. Why must I be so heartless and uncaring? If I was gay I bet I’d have a lot more compassion and empathy. I’d also be a lot more popular at parties and better at interior decorating.”

Group Leader: “*Gasp*….I didn’t think it was possible, in this day and age, for anyone not to love gay men. After all – look at how many gay characters there are in positive roles on television, movies and magazines. They are everywhere in the media. My god man, haven’t you ever seen “Will and Grace”? Gay men are fabulous.”

Bob: “What about gay Christian men? Are they fabulous?”

Group leader: “There’s no such thing. In fact, some experts doubt that Christians are human at all, let alone gay.”

Bob: “I knew it. I was brought up in the Christian Church. It’s where I was brainwashed into believing all these outdated things – like fidelity, duty, honor and shame. I still feel shame sometimes - even though I know that no one should ever feel shame about anything, not ever. In fact, I’m ashamed that I am able to feel shame. I know that there is no right or wrong except what we decide for ourselves is right or wrong. And I know that we must never ever judge anyone else for any reason whatsoever. After all, we are merely accidental life forms descended from apes. And the apes were descended from the same stuff as dandelions and lobsters. There is no God and no rules worth following, except the rules we make up for ourselves.”

No, wait a minute....maybe there is no God – no Christ – but I’m sure there is an Allah. Rosie O’Donnell says so. Hey, maybe I could convert to Islam - that would be just as good as believing in nothing. All the feminists and left wing secularists love Islam. They are always standing up for it against America and Israel. My wife could wear a burka. I could pick my daughters' husbands. Maybe I could convince the CBC to air a few beheadings from Iran every Sunday. Arrrrrgh....what am I saying?....I can’t.....I just can’t quit Christianity. I’m hooked. It’s like an addiction. All those damn lessons I learned in Sunday school as a child keep reverberating in my head. Oh God, Group Leader, please help me quiet the voices. What a freak I am.....such a freak.”

Group Leader: “Shhhhhh. It’s going to be alright, Bob. Now, what about the male part of you? Doesn’t it make you feel sick inside to be a male?.....Tell us about that.”

Bob: “All I can think about is how men have killed and waged war against each other throughout history. Never mind that virtually all paintings, prose and poetry of any historical value was created by males - and never mind that males have invented practically everything that is useful in the world including virtually all structures, machines, transportation devices, electronics and medical procedures. That doesn’t matter. Men are evil. They kill and rape and steal. Even now they are oppressing women here in the western world - well, except for all the millions of successful female business people, professionals, teachers, professors, politicians, doctors, lawyers, judges and media personalities. But they are the exceptions. Aren't they?

“Men drink beer, fart and tell sexist jokes. They actually fight each other sometimes when they get drunk or mad. It’s so inhuman.....so unfemalelike. I hate my manhood. I’d cut it off except I might see the light some day and convert to homosexuality. And when that glorious day comes - when I finally become something other than an evil heterosexual male - I wouldn’t want my willie sitting on the shelf in a pickle jar. After all, I’ll need it to participate in hundreds of meaningless, anonymous sexual encounters just like many gay men do. For now, though, I’ll just have to put on a brave face and try and forget that I’m a wretched heterosexual. Maybe I’ll just become an alcoholic and stay drunk all the time. I have to do something to help me forget my terrible lot in life.”

Group Leader: “There, there. We’re almost finished. What about that last part - *shudder* - I, I can’t even say the word. Forgive me. Can you say it for me?......”

Bob: “You mean.....Breeder?”

Group Leader: *Cringe* “Yes. Can you tell us about that terrible part of yourself?”

Bob “Oh God....I never intended to breed. You’ve got to believe me. It was all just a big accident. I met a girl, I fell in love, we got married and we had children. Just telling you about it makes me feel so primitive.....so unenightened. My wife never even considered having an abortion. How messed up is that? It’s like she actually wanted her life complicated by children rather than spend 110% of her energy on a career and other personal pursuits. And I went along with it. My God, I have never even fathered any children out of wedlock. I almost cry when I think of all the missed opportunities – all the interpersonal complications, tensions and emotional turmoil - that I missed out on. It would have added so much depth to my character to father a few kids without staying with their mother. It must be that damned religion thing coming back to haunt me again. That sense of duty, honor and fidelity. Will I ever be free of its wretched soul-sucking grasp.”

Group Leader: “We have made great progress this afternoon, Bob. I think we’ll stop here and spend the coming week thinking about what you said. We’ll meet here same time next week. If all goes well, we’ll make a few appointments for you over the next few months – maybe add some pigment to your white skin, enroll you in French language lessons, set you up with a nice gay man your age and talk to a wonderful Imam I know about converting you to Islam – things like that. Just don’t tell the Imam about the gay stuff, OK? It’s better that way. Trust me”

“In fact…” (looks around to make sure everyone else is gone, leans forward and whispers in Bob's ear)....”the government has a special program you might be interested in - but we have to keep it on the hush hush. It’s called the “One Less White Anglo Hetero Christian Male Breeder At A Time” Program or “OLWAHCMBAAT” for short. Under this program, the government will relocate you and give you a job for life providing you undergo all the alterations I mentioned and promise to never see your offspring or spouse again. It’s a great program – run by the national NDP Women’s coalition, as if you couldn’t guess. And they’ll also....(glances down between Bob’s legs)....arrange to have that ugly male-thing removed permantly, if you want”

Bob: “Oh thank you. I can’t wait to get started” (smiles disarmingly and reaches into jacket pocket) “Just kidding.” (Pulls out a 357 Magnum and blows the Group Leader’s head clean off. Then, checks Blackberry.) “Hmmmmm.....lets see .....next appointment......4:00 PM......OLWAHCMBAAT Program Headquarters.....125 Main Street”

(Walks out to street)....."Taxiiiii"........

The Main Differences Between Women And Men

1. Women communicate by talking; Men communicate by pretending to listen.
2. Men get a spare tire; Women get a bigger trunk.
3. Women hate sexism; Men can’t bring themselves to hate anything that contains the word “sex” .
4. Women paint their nails; Men paint and nail stuff.
5. Men only want one thing; Women want everything else.
6. Men have balls; Women bust them.
7. Women have children; Men can’t bear them.
8. Women pat dry; men rub.
9. Women grow old; Men grow more careful about mentioning it.
10. Women get jobs traditionally held by men; Men get jobs traditionally held by men.
11. Women enjoy having a nice home with attractive décor; Men could live in a stable if there was TV football and beer.
12. Women love to shop all day; men would rather tear off their left nut and eat it raw.
13. Women can wear their blouses with two buttons undone at the office; Men can get away with this only if their name is Gino and they wear lots of gold chains.
14. Women wear high heels; Men get high and act like heels.
15. Men have a hard time expressing their emotions; Women have a hard time shutting up about theirs.
16. Women give sex to get romance; Men give romance to get sex.
17. Women ask “do I look fat in this?” Men never ever lie in response, honest.
18. Women fake orgasms; Men pretend to believe them.
19. Men think about sex once every three minutes; Women get headaches.
20. Women stab in back; men punch in face.
21. Men can pee standing up; Women are somewhat limited in this respect.
22. Women like a man to look deep in their eyes; Men look over their shoulders at a woman’s ass.
23. Men have one of these; women have one of those and with one of those they can get as many of these as they want.

Nine Eleven, Fruit & Vegetables

Of all the 9/11 conspiracy theories out there, the one that annoys me the most is the one about OJ Simpson planning and executing the attacks. I am so sick of hearing idiots whine about the Juice. The Juice brought down the twin Towers. The Juice didn’t go to work on 9/11. The Juice is oppressing the Palestinians (don’t ask me where that one came from – I’m sure OJ couldn’t even find Palestine on a map). The Juice controls world commerce and media. The Juice this – The Juice that.

As the figurative dust settles five years after the literal stuff did, we all need to step back, get a grip and remember who it is that wants to kill us. And it’s not the Juice.

It’s a certain religion of peas. Don’t ask me what vegetables have to do with it. I just know that I hear it everywhere – The people who castrate their daughters, behead journalists and enslave entire nations in the name of their god follow a religion of peas. I guess a lot of them are vegetarians. I know they don’t like pork. Many of them refer to OJ, in a very demeaning manner, as the son of a pig. I hear they actually teach this to their children in school – that the Juice is descended from pigs. And the religion of peas certainly hates simians. I hear stories of their clerics calling OJ the brother of monkeys all the time - and not in a kind way. The religion of peas sure does hate the Juice.

Maybe it’s the vegetarian thing. You know – The religion of peas is named after a vegetable and OJ is named after a fruit. Maybe the religion of peas is fruitaphobic or something – which must not be confused with homophobic, although homosexual men used to be called fruits. Geeeez.….this is all just too confusing. No wonder there are so many Atheists in the world. Personally, I love a good Bacon sandwich in the morning with a nice glass of Juice. I used to like peas. But since 9/11, I’ve sworn off the stuff. Too many bad memories.

Five Plus One Things Feminism Has Done For Me

I visit a certain loony left wing chat board regularly. (http://www.rabble.ca/babble/). It’s a hoot. Recently they had a theme where contributors told of the 5 best things feminism has done for them. I can’t post my comments there as they would ban me immediately. It’s what they do to anyone who isn’t rabidly socialist. So, for posterity, here's my 5 + 1.

What Feminism has done:

1. It has made men less likely to get a job as a cop or fireman. Despite being bigger, stronger and more capable of dealing with physical threats, employment equity requires that less capable women are hired before men. I am especially comforted by the ones who are 5’ 2’’, 130lbs with painted nails and mascara. I’ve seen several. They make me feel so safe.

2. It has given teenage girls reproductive freedom and sexual equality to males. As a result, our society is rampant with single baby mothers, my children’s school is full of troubled children who grow up deprived of a father’s guidance and our jails are full of angry fatherless young criminal men.

3. It has made me appreciate my stay at home mom wife 1000% more. I see my buddies rush to make breakfast and deliver the kids to daycare everyday. I hear about how their working wives are too tired to have sex. I watch their kids dine on take out and get fat as they live their lives deprived of wholesome home cooked meals because mommy has to stay at work late to write a report.

4. It has allowed me to wait longer for medical care. There are only so many places available in medical school and Over 50% of all doctors graduating these days are female. Female doctors work considerably fewer hours than their male counterparts. And unlike men, they take time off when having children. Therefore, they see fewer patients. I cannot count the number of people who have mentioned to me how little their female doctors work.

5. It has picked my pocket dry with its endless demands for more tax dollars to fund government programs like state funded daycare that would not be necessary if they just took motherhood more seriously than their own selfish feminist ambitions.

6.It has deprived the world of millions of intelligent children. Intelligence is largely genetic. Many of today's brightest women are not having children, choosing instead to pursue careers. This has deprived humanity and future generations of their DNA.

Don’t roll your eyes at me. I am not saying that everyone, men and women alike, should not be able to pursue their own private ambitions. And sure, some women cops could take on a man in a physical confrontation, some women doctors work as much as male doctors and some women do have careers with no negative impact on their motherly duties. But not most. Books, magazines, TV, and radio are constantly awash with stories of exausted, conflicted women trying to do it all. Childless career women are apparently the most conflicted of all. In fact, an entre psychiatric industry has grown up around these feminist-caused problems.

What I am simply trying to do here is point out the unintended negative consequences of feminism on men in particular and society as a whole. With every action there is an equal and opposite...well, you know. So don’t call me names. If you can refute that the above realities are not a negative result of feminism, please do so.

Fatherhood, Love and Duty

I love being a father. I dislike being a father. Being a father is the most rewarding, uplifting, euphoric experience of my life. Being a father is the most miserable, frustrating, depressing experience of my life. My daughters are 5 and 10. Sometimes I want to tell them that they have ruined my life. Sometimes I want to hug them and tell them that they are my life. Oddly, when I'm around them, I seldom feel neutral and content in my skin. My emotional life is one of extremes. I go from dizzying heights of profound love one minute, to claustrophobic depths of disappointment the next. For this dad, there is seldom a middle ground.

Mostly, though, I wonder how the hell I got myself into this. No one told me this procreation thing would take such a toll on my life.

A few Tuesday's ago was the first day of school. My eldest had spent the previous week staying with her aunt and uncle, about an hour away. She left her favorite running shoes there and didn't realize it until she was dressing for school on Tuesday morning. Of course, these were the shoes she wanted to wear. They matched her outfit, don't you know. And thus ensued the drama. She cried. She moaned. She ran down the hall wailing. She blamed everyone but herself. Her life was destroyed, she exclaimed. Finally I had had enough and bundled her off to Sudan where I sold her into white slavery to Osama Bin Laden's second cousin twice removed.

OK, maybe not. But imagining it did make me smile. And after the smile, of course, I felt terribly guilty.

And then there's my little red headed five-year old. The next time she listens to me will the first time. You've never encountered obstinacy if you haven't met my daughter. She knows she's not supposed to walk across the street without looking both ways. She does it anyway - on purpose - just to show me that she can. Nothing dissuades her - not discussions, not lectures, not spankings. At the beach, she paddles her float-ring into deep water while looking straight at me and grinning, despite my repeated warnings to come back. If she lives to see adulthood, it will not be my doing, it will be God's.

And despite the parental trials and tribulations, I know that mine are really no greater than those of any other father. So why do they seem to bug me more?

Is it just me? Am I nuts or something? I see all these people out there with their kids looking so happy, so in the moment. Why don't I feel like that? Having children is the most natural thing anyone can do. In fact the only reason virtually any couple doesn't have children is because they use unnatural methods to prevent life from occurring or surgical methods to snuff out life that has begun to develop. And most people seem to take to parenthood rather well. At least they don't seem to be wracked with self-doubt like me. What is wrong with these people? Clearly they are all nuts and I'm normal. Or maybe, they are all just faking it. After all, to look at me, no one would know that my children are a weight that sometimes almost crushes me to death. I hide it well. And maybe there are many others hiding it as well. Certainly there must be. I can't be the only one.

Sometimes I wonder if there aren't more men out there like me, deeply in love with their children but doubtful as to whether their lives would be better had they never had kids in the first place.

Don't get me wrong. I would step in front of a bullet for my kids in a heartbeat. If I could have one wish it would be that they would live long, happy, healthy, contented lives. All I have I would give to them (and am giving them). When the media reports that a child has been abducted I lay in bed, in the moments before sleep, shuddering at the thought. I literally physically shake and shudder. Sometimes my wife wakes up and asks "what’s wrong honey?" Sometimes, I tell her. She hugs me close and we go to sleep like that. Surely, I love my kids as much as any man.

I guess it all comes down to duty. I believe that what I feel for my children transcends love. I have a sense of duty to protect them, nurture them, do right by them and be there for them every day.

And thank god for that sense of duty. It's there even when the frustration, claustrophobia and selfishness momentarily eclipse the love. And sometimes it's all that stops me from going to the store for milk and ending up living in Fort McMurray under an assumed name.

AIDS - Abstinence Is Definitely Smart

For the past week Toronto has been hosting the 16th annual International AIDS conference. Thousands of delegates from all over the world have been sauntering around the city with their official AIDS conference tote bags hanging, and the weight of the world resting, on their shoulders. Mega-billionaire Bill Gates made an appearance, as did mega-letch Bill Clinton. Mega-leader PM Stephen Harper wisely stayed away. The mega-socialist Toronto Star gave the Conference mega-coverage every day.

The prostitutes were there too with their booths, signs and sex toys. They apparently refer to themselves as “sex-trade workers”. As if getting banged by a sweaty stranger for fifty bucks qualifies as a trade. I guess we better start calling crack dealers “drug trade workers”.

Yep. AIDS is a hot topic. It doesn’t really kill many average Canadians though. Not like cancer or heart disease. But it’s sexier. In fact, it’s mostly about sex. Maybe that’s why so many homosexual men and prostitutes are obsessed with it. After all, neither group is likely to consider going without sex. Prostitutes need to do it with a lot of strangers to make a living. Homosexual men need to do it with a lot of strangers because, well, because they can, that’s why.

So, is it any wonder that any fatal, incurable disease that attacks mostly sexually promiscuous people will be of the utmost interest to prostitutes and homosexual men? I can’t blame them for being interested, really. But, what about the rest of us? Why should we care about a bunch of sexually irresponsible people who are willfully engaging in activities that put their lives at risk?

They say that the trail to the top of Mount Everest is littered with the bodies of people who died while attempting the climb. I find it sad that they died. However, it doesn’t affect me too much. After all, these people died while engaging in an activity that they knew very well could kill them. In effect, they killed themselves. The mountain didn’t kill them. They killed themselves.

It’s the same with most AIDS victims here in Canada. Sex doesn’t kill them. The disease doesn’t kill them. They kill themselves.

I did a search on the AIDS Conference website for “abstinence”. Zero documents came up. Zero. Abstinence is, apparently, a word that must not be uttered at the Conference.

As we all know, AIDS is predominantly a sexually transmitted disease. The more people you have sex with, the greater the risk of contracting it. That’s why prostitutes and homosexual men suffer disproportionately from it. It’s also why AIDS is rampant in Africa, where marital fidelity is less culturally prevalent than in most other areas of the world. However, people who abstain from sex before marriage, remain monogamous after marriage and stay with the same partner for life are at no risk at all. Of course, don’t expect to hear this from any of the enlightened AIDSoldiers that attended the Conference. I hear that Bill Gates mentioned abstinence briefly in his speech and was loudly booed by everyone.

Apparently, these people will talk about the elimination of AIDS only if such talk doesn’t involve the elimination of their sexual fun. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They’ll talk condoms because condoms are used for sex. They’ll talk drugs and cures because drugs and cures will allow them to keep having their sexual fun. In fact, they’ll talk about anything as long as it doesn’t involve giving up the one thing that will give them the disease in the first place – recreational sex.

Fair enough. Let them keep their fun. It’s a choice they make of their own free will, knowing full well the consequences.

Throughout history, the Anglo Christian culture – Canada’s primary founding culture - lived in accordance with certain natural laws. A couple would get married, they would stay together for life and the woman would not allow the man to have sex with her until after they were married. It seems like a million years ago, doesn’t it? Truth is, it was only a few generations ago that most people here in Canada lived like that and were happy.

And yet today, we are told that no one should be expected to live such a sexually deprived life and that if it feels good, do it. We have created an entire generation of spoiled, self-centered, unprincipled sexual narcissists. In a mere two generations we have erased the sexual values and principles that have sustained our society for thousands of years.

Odd, isn’t it, that AIDS came on the scene here in North America just as traditional values and sexual limitations were being abandoned. Or maybe it’s not odd at all. Maybe it’s just all part of the ‘cause and effect’ nature of the universe. Bye-bye sexual restraint - Hello AIDS. Or maybe it’s just the earth shrugging off ignorant sexcentric creatures that refuse to recognize the natural rules that govern our continued existence. Natural selection.

We are told that we are all at risk of contracting AIDS here in Canada. We are not. We are told to be very afraid. We need not be. Only people with certain sexually unhealthy behaviors and lifestyles are at risk and should be scared.

Canadians who subscribe to the traditional values our grandparents subscribed to, will live. Canadians who subscribe to today’s valueless culture of sexual promiscuity will continue to suffer and die. And they will have no one but themselves to blame.

Darwin would understand perfectly.

A Sex Trade Worker By Any Other Name...

When I was in my early twenties hanging out on Cape Breton Island, some of my buddies would go off for months to work on the lake boats or oil rigs. When they returned home they would sometimes speak of having ‘bought a whore’ while they were away. We all knew what they meant.

That was a time when words had meaning and speaking the cold hard truth was deemed to be the mark of an honest man. Of course, we can’t use the word “whore” anymore when referring to prostitutes. It’s much too abrasive to our precious politically correct sensibilities. These days, we have to use the term “sex-trade worker”, as if what these women do is somehow legitimate and worthy of our respect.

Well, I’m sorry, but these women have sex with married men for money. Should the wives, daughters and mothers of these men have any respect at all for these women? Certainly anyone with an ounce of common sense realizes that such behavior is immoral and beneath contempt.

In the end, we can dance around the issue all we want and invent any number of cute, obfuscatory terms to describe prostitutes. But, in their hearts, and in our minds, one word will always resonate above the rest.

Hotdogs & Marriage

It seemed like a normal Saturday afternoon when Gus Costantalopolis set up his hotdog cart outside the Holy Church of St. Anythingoes. Like every Saturday at 2:30 PM, the wedding inside was almost over and a hundred hungry attendees were about to come storming out looking for something to tide them over until Dinner. And Gus was ready.

When they came out and the two Grooms had driven off in their limo, Gus started to serve up his tasty treats. But the sight of two men kissing passionately as they stood on the Church steps had unnerved Gus and he got confused.

To one customer he served two wieners and no bun. To the next he served two buns and no wiener. And so on. Soon, he was surrounded by a bevy of disgruntled people shouting and complaining. “Thith isthn’t a hot dog”, one very feminine man lisped. “Yes it is” said Gus. (He was a stubborn man and hated to admit when he was wrong.) “No it isn’t" shouted a hefty woman with a particularly dark six o’clock shadow who had been served two buns with no wiener.

“Yes it is.” Countered Gus. There was no backing down now, he thought to himself.

“Look”, said one particularly helpful man in a bright red evening gown and stilettos “a hot dog is comprised of two completely separate and distinct parts – a wiener which is meat – protein; and a bun which is bread – carbohydrate. Two wieners or two buns do not make a hotdog.”

“Why not?” said Gus. “If I say it’s a hotdog, who are you to tell me differently? Just because the word hotdog has always meant a wiener in a bun, doesn’t mean I can’t change the meaning to suit myself. It’s just a word. I say that two buns or two wieners is a HOTDOG!!”

“I agree with him” exclaimed a very short, stout man in a leather thong and dog collar. “I’m on the Atkins diet and I appreciate getting two weiners and no buns”.

“I bet you do” laughed the man holding his leash.

“ No, seriously” said the leashed man. “This is a matter of tolerance and personal rights and freedoms.” He held up the two weiners. “Who is anyone to say that this is not a hot dog. It satisfies my hunger and it’s served by a hotdog vendor. What more do we need? This is a hotdog, dammit, and I have no intention of tolerating any knuckle dragging, hotdogophobic bigot daring to tell me differently.”

“Hold on. Just one freakin’ minute here.” Shouted the father of one of the grooms. “You can’t just go around changing the meaning of words arbitrarily. A hotdog must have both a wiener AND a bun or it just isn’t a hotdog. Surely you can see that?” With this, he turned to Gus: “I want my money back.” he said. “I can’t waste any more time here. Can’t you see that we are celebrating a Marriage?”

Gus gave them all back their money, folded up shop and went home. Something in the back of his mind was bothering him, but he couldn’t quite put his finger on it.

Women in Combat - Bad Idea

Every so often we hear about someone beating up or even killing their spouse. And when we do, it’s almost always the man who’s the abuser and the woman who’s the victim. It almost never happens the other way ‘round - with the woman as the abuser. Maybe men are more prone to violence than women. Maybe they possess more of a killer instinct. Maybe they lose control more easily. Whatever the case, one thing is indisputable – men are generally bigger, stronger and faster than women and can, in almost all cases, dominate them physically.

That’s why the sexes are separated in sports. There isn’t a unisex Master’s golf tournament or Wimbledon tennis championship. Females don’t box against Mike Tyson. They don’t even Curl against men (for some silly reason, I find that particularly amusing). Most notably, they don’t compete against males in the Olympics. Why? Because they can’t, that’s why. Women cannot compete physically against men. They are weaker and slower. Their centre of gravity is lower. They are more easily injured.

Every time the fabulous Canadian Women’s hockey team wins a tournament, the press is awash with stories bemoaning the fact that Canadians don’t seem to be interested in Women’s hockey. Never do they mention that watching women play hockey is like watching a bunch of talented 14 year old boys play. The level of physicality in lady's hockey is almost laughable. They are less agile and less aggressive than men. In fact, I'd bet that the Canadian National women's team would have a hard time beating any run-of-the-mill senior men’s team from any small town in Canada. The reason people don’t watch women’s hockey is because it’s not anywhere near the same caliber as men’s hockey. The best men players are the best in the world. The best women’s players are, well, pretty good for a bunch of girls playing a boys game.

Everyone knows that women cannot compete against men in any sport measured by speed or strength. If they could, they’d be doing it already.

So why, in God’s name, do we send them into combat to fight against men? Have we lost our politically correct minds?

War is not a game. The winner doesn’t get a trophy and the loser doesn’t get a second place ribbon and honorable mention. The winner gets ownership of the land and control of the people on it. The loser gets to crawl home, if (s)he’s lucky. If (s)he’s not lucky, (s)he is crippled, mutilated, brutalized, tortured, enslaved, or maybe killed. The welfare and future of entire nations rest in the hands of the people fighting their wars.

Don’t roll your eyes at me. Maybe all you’re used to are bully wars where your nation slaps a smaller, weaker nation around, launches missiles from afar and eventually saunters home when the war threatens to affect political careers. Maybe you’ve never experienced the fear and dread that comes with the prospect of having your nation overrun by foreigners and your very way of life destroyed. (And I’m not talking about Canada’s immigration system, either, although I could be.)

Arguments can and have been made on many levels supporting the exclusion of females from combat roles. The sexual tension that arises when testosterone driven alpha males are confined with women in small areas on submarines or other sea-faring craft has caused many problems in the US navy. Each year, a large percentage of females take pregnancy leave from such assignments. Pregnant women make poor soldiers.

And then there’s the innate reflexive instinct that real men have to protect women. Men in uniform are not pencil pushing metrosexual boys who cringe pitifully when swatted with a swath of employment equity pamphlets. Regardless of what they are told to think, many of them will still revert to a protective stance when women are in danger. And that puts everyone in the battle at risk.

In the end, the real reason females should not be in combat roles is that they are not physically capable of defeating men in hand to hand combat. Only in the movies can a 140lb woman beat up a man.

And if you think I’m a sexist idiot, I’ll make a deal with you. Best two out of three. You choose ten female names blindly at random from a list of Canadian soldiers serving in battle in Afghanistan and I’ll choose ten names blindly from a list of Iranian soldiers. We’ll seal them, unarmed in a gymnasium and open the door only after everyone on one side or the other has been killed. In the second round, we’ll remove the bodies of the Canadian women, replace the hurt Iranians with fresh soldiers, pit them against another ten randomly chosen Canadian women soldiers and arm them all with knives. Winner gets the other’s country.

Someday, we may have to rely on our soldiers to defend our freedom and our very way of life on a physical battlefield. Or, maybe someday we’ll need them to quell a violent internal uprising of an entrenched and militant Canadian ethnic tribe. You may trust women to do this. Me, I’m thinking of buying a Koran and getting a head start on what will be the inevitable outcome of such folly.

Skinless Criminals.......Yuck!

When I buy a chicken breast, I buy it with the skin on. And I cook it ‘till it’s golden brown. Yum. Sure, I know it’s full of grease and fat, but for me the skin is the best part. I never buy the skinless cuts – you know, the ones that resemble the criminals and violent offenders described in our media. Skinless and colorless. Yuck.

It seems that not a day can go by without some miscreant trying to abduct someone, assault someone or kill someone. Today, I read a short article in one of our newspapers entitled “Attempted abduction in east end” The article told of a 14 year old girl, and a man who apparently tried to pull her into his car. The article described the man as:

“in his 30s to 40s, with a heavy build, very short hair and a possible broken nose.”

See? Skinless! No skin whatsoever. The least the paper could have done was let us know that we should be on the lookout for a guy coated in a bloody slime with tendons, sinew and muscle hanging out all over his body. That certainly would help in identifying him. There can’t be too many guys walking around looking like that. And yet the media thought it appropriate to hide that important fact from us. Why?

OK, so I’m being a smart-ass. We all know that there are no skinless people walking the streets. Brainless, maybe. Heartless, probably. Gutless, definitely. But not skinless. We’ve all got skin and our skin’s got a tone. Some of us are real dark, some of us are real light, some of us are somewhere in between. Some of us, like the “black community” actually define who we are by our skin tone.

And then there’s this wee thing called ethnicity. Thanks to our cultimulcheral Canadian dogma, many of us identify ourselves by our ethnicity. But, never doubt it, to be an ‘ethnic’ means to have certain skin qualities. Skin color and ethnicity are virtually one and the same for most people. Believe me, there isn’t a single black person in Canada identifying him/herself as a ‘Chinese-Canadian’ on the census. I am so sure of this, in fact, that I’m offering a free dinner of jerk bok-choi and chicken-fried corn pone to anyone who can prove me wrong.

So, if ethnicity and skin color form such an integral part of who a person is, wouldn’t it be reasonable to refer to these important physical characteristics when describing someone?

If you were stopped on the street and asked to describe Oprah Winfrey by someone who never saw her before (Ok, ok, that’s a stretch I know - but work with me here, I’m trying to make a point), what sort of a description would you give? Would you say that she’s a slightly heavy woman, well dressed, with heavy make-up and relatively long dark hair? Or would you do what anyone with half a brain would do and mention that she’s black. Of course, you’d have to do it in an off-hand manner, sort of like in passing, so as not to appear that you’ve noticed. You know, something like this: “Well, lets see, she’s kind of big boned. She’s very well dressed and wears a lot of make up. She’s got dark hair. And .....oh, what else?.....Let’s see....oh yeah.....she’s sort of....well.....black. Not that it matters of course” Then grin sheepishly and casually saunter away like you never mentioned it.

Wouldn’t it be silly to act that way? And yet, daily, the media bombards us with a litany of woefully inadequate descriptions of skinless, colorless perpetrators. And then we are asked to keep our eyes open and call crimestoppers if we happen to spot one of these hideous, skinless aberrations.

Being afraid to mention someone’s skin color or ethnicity when describing them belays, at best, a neurotic predisposition toward political correctness. At worst, however, it can be a cynical manipulative ploy to purposely prevent someone from discovering the truth. Like when our media sources describe wanted perpetrators. With them it’s all about manipulation. A deliberate omission of a crucial fact for the sole purpose of preventing us from encountering certain simple truths.

They see themselves as the guardians of our perfect, cultimulcheral, socialist utopia. They refuse to report a criminal’s color or ethnicity to ensure that certain groups, the ones that would otherwise be the subject of a disproportionate amount of negative coverage, are not identified as such. They seek to protect us from our own thoughts - thoughts that might rise up if we are told the truth. So they withhold the truth in the hopes that their thoughts will supplant our own.

Such noble intentions. Such a righteous purpose. Such an abandonment of their journalistic principles. Such a condescending pack of lies.

Yes lies. The omission of an important truth can be as much a lie as a lie itself. And what have these lies accomplished? Speaking for myself, they have accomplished the exact opposite of what was intended. When I read or hear the description of a perpetrator in the media and the color or ethnicity of the perp is conspicuous omitted, I figure right away that the criminal isn’t white. After all, since when did the media care about protecting white people from discrimination and stereotyping? Yep. Skinless = non-white.

Second, haven't the brainiacs in the media considered that describing a person's color or ethnicity is crucial in helping people identify the person being described? They are, after all, the most defining physical characteristics of all, next to gender. In omitting such important details from a description, the media is giving the perpetrator a big advantage and hindering anyone who might otherwise have noticed him. They are also doing a tremendous disservice to the victim and endangering any potential future victims. Oh well, what’s a few more victims anyway? Our media messiahs have bigger priorities. Like, controlling our minds so we don't think negative thoughts about any particular group of people.

Thankfully, most of us are cognizant, rational human beings with the capability to observe our world and the capacity to extract truth from it based on our personal experience.

Regardless of what the media hides from us, if we maintain this ability and trust our gut-instinct, we will be OK in the end.

Regulate my children, please....

This is the letter I am sending to the Toronto District School Board.

To Whom it may concern:

I am writing to express my concerns about the number of parents and children flagrantly violating school board rules on our play grounds.

Last weekend I took my two daughters – ages 5 and 10 – to a local playground adjacent to Anson Public School in Scarborough. As they were playing, I happened to glance up at a sign carrying the Toronto School Board logo that listed four rules.

One of the rules said: “Walk, don’t run”.

I immediately shouted to my oldest daughter who was in the process of running after her soccer ball. I took her aside, showed her the sign and explained how important it was for her to follow the rules.

“But dad”, she said to me, “I’m a kid and I’m playing. Kids are supposed to run when they play”.

Imagine, a ten year old girl having the audacity to question school board rules. I was appalled at her response and gave her a 5 minute time-out, during which time I lectured her about how our society and civilization are based on rules and regulations and without them, there would be anarchy. I thought she understood, but no sooner had I let her rejoin her sister in the playground, than she started running again. Her sister did too.

I was feeling mortified until I noticed that all the other kids were also running around and their parents were saying nothing about it. So, I walked over to the mother of one particularly rambunctious little boy and politely pointed out the sign to her and asked her to please stop her child from running around. She looked at me like I was an alien or something and walked away. I then approached a few other parents with the same request. One of these shrugged and said “What can you do?” Another told me to bugger off. But, it was the reaction of the third that really got my blood boiling. When I pointed out that it was a rule of the School Board that kids were not to run in the playground, do you know what she said? She said, "Apparently these social activists have nothing better to do than regulate the speed a child’s legs are permitted to move. They should be spending their time figuring out how to teach our semi-literate high school grads some proper grammar.” You could have knocked me over with a feather. Who could have known that people could harbor such unsavory sentiments?

I spent the next half hour watching my kids like a hawk and calling out to them every time they started to run. Twice I had to give them time outs and a lecture about respecting rules. Finally, I just gave up and took them home. As we walked away, I looked back over my shoulder at the uncivilized kids running around on the playground and their disrespectful, rude parents. Oh well, at least someone knows right from wrong, I thought to myself.

I have no idea how these people can sleep at night. What sort of example are they setting for their children? Just because kids tend to run around all the time is no reason to let them. Disallowing running in a kid’s playground may be about as nutty as disallowing eating in a restaurant, but, hey, that’s no reason not to do it anyway.

Sadly, though, all too often we forget that rules are like virtually anything else in life. When you don’t have any, you realize how badly you need them. But when you have too many you just stop noticing them. The trick is in striking the correct balance. Just remember, with every frivolous, politically correct, nonsensical rule you people come up with; the less respect children will have for the really important rules.

Everyone at that playground, adults and children alike, recognized how ineffective and downright silly it is to post a no running rule at a kid’s playground. Why then, did this simple fact elude you?

It is important that the people running our school boards live in the real world and create real life solutions to real life problems. Running in a play ground is not a problem crying out for a solution. It is a natural and healthy childhood behavior.

And anyway, shouldn’t you be focusing on more important social engineering initiatives like maybe helping our obese kids lose weight. Just don’t recommend that they go running, at least not in our school playgrounds. After all, that would create a policy conflict. And we couldn’t have that.

Yours Truly,

Slippery Slopes and Health Care

Holy Moly. Don’t do that. Do you have any idea how dangerous it would be? Think of the repercussions. Once the wheels are in motion they will be impossible to stop. Just one itty-bitty step in that direction and god knows where we’ll end up. You’ll set us on a slippery slope to oblivion. Or maybe even someplace worse. Like America. Aaaaaargh. My hair is literally standing on end at the thought. Talk about creeped out.

Anyway, these days it doesn’t matter what trendy causes you support or which ones you oppose, there’ll always be a slippery slope for you to slide down.

Tell me, if you had to name the most tired, overused, worn-out debating strategy in the world, what would it be? Sleep-inducing Rhetoric? (If you can’t impress ‘em with intelligence, baffle ‘em with bullshit) Fabricated Statistics? (There are three kinds of lies – lies, damnable Lies, and statistics) Demonizing Your Opponent? (“Racist, sexist anti-gay; right wing bigots go away…” ).

All are very effective debating strategies. But not as effective as mine. Mine is a tried and true show stopper. A veritable juggernaut of belligerent bafflegab.

It’s the Slippery Slope Strategy.

And never has this strategy been put to more effective use than in Canada’s health care debate.

My God people, do you have any idea what would happen if we allowed Canadians to purchase their own health insurance or health care? Within no time at all, the public system would crumble, hospitals would close and millions of poor Canadians would be suffering and dying. In fact, all that prevents the poor from dying a brutal, painful death are the laws against private health care. Just let one American (Capitalist bastards) MRI provider set up shop in Canada and before you know it, bodies of poor people will be piled like cord-wood along the sides of the road and plaintive voices will rise in the morning air: “Bring our yer dead- Bring out yer dead”.

Pause for full dramatic effect.

Admit it, you were actually buying into that nonsense. It’s positively hypnotic, isn’t it.

One solitary private health care clinic = slippery slope = total and complete decimation of our public healthcare system.

Of course this is complete and utter nonsense. There are already many private health care delivery services here in Canada.

Many employed people have Extended Health Care coverage. If they get sick, they get special treatment from our health system. They get to stay in semi-private rooms instead of wards. They get dental, chiropractic and drug coverage. And then there’s the people who have Government workplace insurance coverage (WSIB here in Onario) and are injured in the workplace. Thanks to the influence of their powerful government sponsored health insurer, they get pushed to the front of the line with respect to specialist appointments, physiotherapy, medical scanning, medical testing and surgeries. After all, we must get these people back to work to alleviate the financial burden on our public insurance program. The rest of us can wait.

And then, of course, there’s the rich, connected and famous. Sports stars and Politicians get Cadillac service. Have you ever heard of any Canadian hockey star or Politician waiting for any medical treatment? And then there's the movie stars. Can you imagine Sarah Polly, or maybe Kiefer Sutherland, finding a peculiar lump on his or her anatomy and then patiently waiting months in line with the rest of us for a Doctor's appointment, a specialist’s appointment, testing and, ultimately, chemo or surgery. No way. Ain’t gonna happen. They probably wouldn’t even try to slip into line ahead of the rest of us Canadians in the public system. After all, it’s a public system and they are above that. They’d probably access one of Canada’s many private clinics or go stateside. And yet these privileged, elite ‘stars’ are the first to lecture us about the evils of private health care.

Well, it’s hard to argue with them. After all, private health care IS a very slippery slope. Yadda yadda.

And yes, you did not read me wrong. There ARE many private health facilities in Canada where only the influential and rich get treatment.

Paul Martin, Canada’s late, great (did I really say great? ) Prime Minister gets his treatment from a doctor in Quebec who operates a private, fee-for-service clinic. Yep. That’s right folks, while this millionaire shipping tycoon denies us regular Canadians the right to buy our own health care, he actually does it himself.

Socialist Quebec, by the way, has the most private clinics in Canada. It’s their dirty little secret. And there are many more of these clinics in many provinces across Canada.

It may appear to some people that these clinics are proof that the slippery slope theory is valid. After all, it had to start somewhere. At some point in history there was one or maybe just a few of these clinics. And, from there, they grew to the point where, today, they are all across Canada.

However, if the concern is really that one or a few private health providers will actually put Canada on a slippery slope towards a totally private system, why have these providers been allowed to propagate? Could it be because the very Politicians and connected people who continually lecture us about the evils of private health actually use these private providers themselves?

In reality, maybe the health care slippery slope issue isn’t as black and white as the rich and connected would have us believe. After all, they don’t actually oppose the slope, although they want us to believe they do. They just want to make sure that only a few privileged people get to descend down it – as long as they are among the few.

So, at this point we need to make a decision. There are three choices.

The first is the least equal: We can continue to allow only the elite to access a quicker way back to good health through private care, as we do today.

The second is the most equal: We can eliminate private care totally and make the elite wait as long as everyone else. Until they die, if necessary.

The third is a compromise - more equal than the first and less equal then the second: We can make private care available to everyone and give anyone, who can somehow raise the money, the freedom to seek their own health care as they choose.

Equality is an important thing. So is freedom. Between the two – equality or freedom - which, do you think, is more important when it comes to saving your life?

The Death of Artistic Mastery

Quick, name your favorite modern day musician or composer. Tell me, how do they compare, in terms of pure genius or creativity, with Beethoven, Mozart, Strauss, Bach or Tchaikovsky? Be honest now. In your humble opinion, who is the greatest artist living today? Does he (or she) even come close to Michelangelo, DaVinci, Rembrandt, Picasso, Renoir or van Gogh? Chances are, no. Who’s your favourite modern-day poet? How do they stack up against Burns, Keats, Dickinson, Wordsworth, Browning or Tennyson? Do the words “hold a candle” come to mind? And then there’s the realm of prose. Tell me, which of today’s writers are as good as Shakespeare, Poe, Homer, Milton, Dickens, or Conan-Doyle? Will their works stand the test of time as well as these masters have? Did you know that only the Bible has sold more copies than Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s books?

Here we are in the 21st century. So smug and self absorbed. So full of ourselves. So comfy. So pampered and secure in our lives of convenience and instant gratification. We’ve got it all baby. And oh how we’ve grown over the past few centuries. Grown in scientific, medical and technological knowledge. Grown in our awareness of the planet and our environment. Grown in our tolerance of those who are different and in our empathy towards those who are worse off than us. Most of all, we’ve grown in physical girth.

Why is it then that we have failed to grow in terms of artistic ability?

It would appear that as we grow physically obese in our world of plenty, we also grow artistically and culturally flabby too. The more we feed our faces with KFC and our brains with reality TV, the more artistically and culturally deprived (or maybe depraved?) we become.

Our bodies have reached the height of lifestyle comfort. Yet our souls have plunged to the depths of artistic mediocrity. Why? Why do all of today’s artists seem to pale in comparison with those who lived so long ago? What facilities did the great writers, composers and artists possess those many years ago that today’s bevy of so-called artists don’t? Was it something in the water?

Ask yourself - where are the Mozarts of today? How many 12 year olds are writing brilliant symphonies? (‘Lil Bow Wow doesn’t count.) Where are the great poets and story tellers? Sure, there are hundreds of big box stores loaded with books and CDs. But how many of these works are truly great? How many are even mediocre? And how many will be remembered and loved a hundred years from now like the works of the above geniuses are? Not too bloody many. None I bet.

And yet, we think we’re really something. We strut around in our well appointed living rooms watching our widescreens and munching on take-out. The vast majority of us live lives that would have been the envy of the aristocracy a few centuries ago. The world is our oyster. We’ve got twice as much stuff as generations past, but only half as much artistic talent. Weird huh?

Artistically and culturally speaking, we have replaced quality with quantity - taste and discretion with gluttony and excess – an appreciation for fine literature with a hunger for disposable, voyeuristic pap - a respect for literacy and genius with a discomfort for making anyone feel less worthy or less intelligent than anyone else - an admiration for the exceptional with a insatiable appetite for the commonplace.

And most notably (I think) we’ve replaced the class system of old, where the elite were clearly distinguished from the rabble; with a modern societal system where there are hardly any elites or poor and virtually everyone is comfortable and middle class.

And therein, says I, lays the rub.

Years ago, when many of the masters lived and produced their exceptional work, there was a small elite class in most nations, a huge mass of rabble and virtually no middle class at all. The elite were sophisticated and literate. They set the cultural tone. They reveled in enjoying the finest in culture and art their society could provide. They had money and good taste, which they used to sponsor, preserve, propagate, purchase and appreciate great art and literature. To them, it was what separated them from the rabble. In return, the greatest artists and writers produced works that met with the approval of their elite consumers.

The rabble, on the other hand, being largely semi-literate and unsophisticated, were detached from any real artistic or cultural experience. They had no money to spend on art, concerts or books. And when they were exposed to such things, they looked to the elite for an example of what was good and bad and tried to emulate their superior taste. They had the sense to know their own limitations. They knew their place.

Today in the Western world there is no rabble. No.....wait a minute....that’s not exactly right. What I mean to say is that, today, all the people whose forefathers were once rabble, as mine were, are now comfortably middle class in appearance. But never forget, even with all our money, spending power, education and social enlightenment, most of us are still the descendants of rabble. In fact, maybe deep inside, we are still rabble - complete with the sensibilities and artistic soul of rabble. Our bodies may be residing in a nice house in a comfortable neighbourhood, but our souls still live in houses with dirt floors.

And here we are in our wonderful, modern-day, western societies. We dominate all aspects of day to day life through our mass, insatiable consumption. This includes controlling what is produced, appreciated and purchased as art. The elites are no longer in control. In fact there are virtually no more elites. Most of today’s rich were once rabble themselves. Capitalism does appear to have its warts as well as its benefits.

So here we are. The small number of those descended from the elite have been silenced by the overpowering number of those descended from rabble. There is virtually no one left of higher breeding to demand higher standards from the artistic world. Artists now answer to the rabble disguised as the middle class and rich. And they produce art for the rabble in accordance with the expectations and standards of the rabble.

Us rabble no longer look to the elite to set the standards for artistic accomplishment. We have imposed our own taste and sensibilities on the art world - taste and sensibilities honed through centuries of living as, well, rabble.

And there is no going back. Humanity will only ever experience one golden age of literature, music and art. And that age has passed. But don’t weep for it. After all, look at what we’re producing today, complements of our sophisticated, middle-class rabblry. There’s Harlequin Romances, Stephen King, Fitty Cent, Michael Moore, Brittney Spears, Reality TV, Abstract Expressionism, Dogs Playing Poker on Black Velvet, and innumerable, crass, valueless, anonymous, disposable, stainless steel sculptures nestled in every shadow of every massive concrete office tower in every bloody city in the freakin’ world. Don't look for a statue of David, the Mona Lisa or a Sistine Chapel. You won't find any. Nor will you hear anything like Beethoven's fifth or read anything like 'A Tale of Two Cities'.

We have the highest standard of living in the history of mankind; endless strip plazas, dollar stores and drive throughs; and a fabulous welfare system that allows all poor people to live in a comfortable, warm apartment. No one lives like rabble anymore. But no one produces exceptional, historically significant art either.

I wonder.....did we trade one for the other? Or was it really just something in the water?

I'm A Feminist Now

In past columns I explained why I decided to become a Quebec separatist, despite being a unilingual Anglophone living in Ontario; and a Muslim, despite being a proud descendent of Christians.

This week, I’ve decided to become a feminist. The truth be told, I find today’s rag-tag bunch of whining, Marxist/feminist girlies kind of pathetic, really. But I’m gonna join their merry band nonetheless. Yessir. (Oops, sorry, that was inappropriate. I mean yes person.)

Yep, I’m gonna do it. I’m gonna march through the streets on “National Female Oil-rig Roughneck Day” celebrating all the woman who revel in a good filthy day’s work – all three of them. I’m gonna support our female cops and firemen (Oops, I mean firefighters), even if they do leave most of the heavy lifting to the boys. I’m gonna support our women in the army, even if they really have no place at all in hand to hand combat and are used mostly for strategic photo-ops so Canadians can watch the news, see the 130lb girls in fatigues, clutch their chests, sigh and think of how utterly enlightened we are. Sure, boys, maybe there are no girls in the elite military squadrons where physical capabilities are paramount. But, hey, that’s because the army is a sexist anachronism. If we are to trust the defense of our society in hand to hand combat against big swarthy men, we should trust it to females. Any reasonable, new-age person would.

I’m gonna support our Family Court system, even if it has become nothing more than a mechanism to punish and degrade men. I’m gonna support our criminal justice system even though it always treats females better than males, gives them lighter sentences for the same crimes and houses them in much more comfortable surroundings. I’m gonna support gender quotas in our medical schools, even though female doctors don’t put in as many hours when they enter practice thus providing the public with less service than a male doctor would. Oh well, another few weeks wait won’t kill you.

I’m gonna support state funded day care even though it’s used mostly by comfortable middle class mommies who could, with a little sacrifice, stay at home with their kids but who would rather make you and me pay so they pursue more fulfilling work. I’m gonna support endless social programs for women, especially for single mothers, even if they became single mothers on purpose to get a free welfare apartment and monthly cheque. I’m gonna support abortion on demand so that all our teenage daughters can pretend their uteruses are equal to a prostate gland.

I’m gonna support our schools, even though they are emasculating our sons. I'll laugh as they impose female-friendly curriculum that stresses collaboration over competition, sensitivity over strength and empathy over ambition. I'll snicker as boys' grades fall and fall while girls' do better and better. And no more dodge ball. Horrors, someone might get hurt. If a boy kisses a girl in the playground, he should be expelled. After all, that’s sexual harassment. Maybe he's just five, but that’s no excuse. Brute. Point a banana at a buddy and say ‘bang’ ‘bang’ – home you go. You little savage.

I’m gonna support filling traditional male dominated jobs with women. Jobs like doctor, lawyer, police officer, firefighter, university professor and bus driver. The traditional female dominated jobs however must stay the same. Maybe women are 85% of all elementary school teachers and nurses. But that’s a natural thing, not a matter of discrimination. Best to leave it just as it is. If you think differently, expect me to be on your ass immediately. Sexist pig.

I’m gonna support all employment equity programs. Even if they compare totally incomparable professions for the sole purpose of paying women more. A secretary has every right to be compared to a surveyor. An office manager has every right to be compared to a civil engineer. After all, aren’t we all equal under the skin? Why should male dominated jobs be paid more than female dominated ones? We can’t expect females to actually qualify and apply for the male dominated jobs. That would be unfair. So lets just pay ‘em the same and it’ll all be alright.

I’m gonna support ALL modern-day feminist causes. I’m gonna march in the streets. Come join me to celebrate National Women’s Day; National Women of Color Week; Women’s Career Week; All Women are Men's Victims Day; All Men are Scum Month, Kick A Man in the Balls Week; And my personal favorite – National Transgendered Cross-dressing Genitally-pierced Obese Feminist Refugee Week.

Yep, what else would a good, new age, enlightened, left-wing feminist do? I’m buying into it all baby. Lock stock and barrel. And no, I don’t feel the need to shower hourly. Why would you ask such a question?

Q: How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: Ten. One to screw in the bulb, Two to lend moral support. Three to apply for a government grant. And four to march around loudly bemoaning how women are under-represented in the light bulb screwing industry.

A little while ago I would have laughed at that joke. Or at least offered a sad, wry grin. But now I am appalled. Appalled I tell you. Appalled and outraged. Haven’t women suffered enough at the hands of men without rubbing salt in the wound?

Anyway, you may be wondering what has brought about this miraculous transformation. How could someone like me – a delightfully cynical and yet exceptionally balanced individual – descend into such complete and utter psychosis? How could I appear perfectly (reasonably?) sane one minute and the next throw off the chains of reason and embrace something as unbalanced, unenlightened and bigoted as Twenty-first century feminism.

Why, my daughters of course.

After all, I’ll be gone someday and I ain’t got no sons. So why the hell should I care?

Why shouldn’t I want a world where my daughters have the advantage? I’ve been thinking about it and have come to the conclusion that I had it all wrong. Women, particularly my daughters, should have the advantage in the workplace, in the courts, in the schools and Universities. Women should have the advantage today and men should feel guilty about ever having it in the first place.

My daughters are all that matter to me. So, I've decided to stop defending my gender and start thinking solely about them. After all, what have all the men in society done for me lately? Why should I defend their right to equity and fairness? Imagine how much easier it will be for my daughters if I and all other men just stop opposing the feminists. And, as a good father, shouldn’t I be supportive of a system that makes it as easy as possible for my daughters to succeed?

Boys, I’m sorry but I’ve made my choice. It might be unfair, but, still, the feminist way of thinking dominates most of our public institutions and social fabric. Give up boys. You are toast. No one stands up for you. No one cares. Girls rule. My girls will rule. And with little ol’ feminist me supporting them, and all of society behind them, there is nothing they can’t do.

A Conundrum of Confusing Cliche Contradictions

I love the English Language. Of, course it’s the only language I know. But still, I am completely captivated by its infinite complexities, exquisite beauty and incomparable elegance. The thing I love most about it is the endless array of figures of speech, clichés and euphemisms. And, as with anything good in our society – such as art, music, prose and poetry - the best of these wonderful linguistic idiosyncrasies date back many years. So, this is my tribute to the wisdom, humour and profound simplicity of a people who lived in an era long since past but whose lessons still hold true today for those who will listen.

Wait a minute. What am I saying? Maybe there are some lessons here, but I’ll be damned if I can figure out what they are. In fact, the more I think about it, the more confused I get. Here, let me give you a few examples.

Maybe you remember when they used to say that you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. And you can’t teach old dogs new tricks. However, you also remember that necessity is the mother of invention. And where there’s a will there’s a way.

Give a man a fish and you’ll be feeding him for life, give him a net and he can feed himself. God helps those who help themselves. However, you should always do unto others as you would have them do unto you and give ‘till it hurts. On second thought, you should always look out for number one.

A stitch in time saves nine. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Look before you leap. Patience is a virtue. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. Yet, time and tide wait for no man. He who hesitates is lost. You should never put off ‘till tomorrow what you can do today. Opportunity never knocks twice. Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead.

Strength is a virtue. No quarter asked nor given. Never say die. Only rats desert a sinking ship. Better to live with honour than die with shame. Might makes right. Surrender is not an option. However, he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day. Hey, maybe take up journalism. After all, the pen is mightier than the sword.

Sometimes you have to put your foot down and stand up for what you think is right. After all, quitters never win and winners never quit. But never forget, you should love thine enemy and the meek shall inherit the earth so maybe you should just give up and turn the other cheek.

And, don’t forget, you should never borrow from Peter to pay Paul. After all, neither a borrower nor a lender be. Take care of the pennies and the dollars will take care of themselves. Just don’t spend them all in one place. Make sure you save for a rainy day. A fool and his money are soon parted. Waste not, want not. On second thought, you can’t take it with you, so might as well spend like a drunken sailor. After all, money isn’t everything. In fact, it's the root of all evil. And aren’t the best things in life free?

Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy wealthy and wise. However, if you really want to get ahead you should burn the midnight oil, put your nose to the grindstone and work around the clock, 24/7.

All is forgiven. Let bygones be bygones. Forgive and forget. Let the past remain in the past. To err is human; to forgive, divine. Two wrongs don’t make a right. What am I saying? Revenge is sweet. As ye sow so shall ye reap. An eye for an eye. I’ll exact my pound of flesh and take back what is mine. I’m nobody’s doormat. I’ll show you. You’ll be sorry.

Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know. But don’t get too chummy. After all, familiarity breeds contempt.

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Better to be a jack of all trades than a master of none. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket. But, you shouldn’t spread yourself too thin. Stick with what you know.

Birds of a feather flock together. Ye shall be judged by the company you keep. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck. Like father like son. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Yet, we shouldn’t rush to judgment and we should never judge by appearances. Every man is an individual and deserves to be judged on his own merit. Yadda yadda.

Curiosity killed the cat. Don’t ask the question if you don’t want to hear the answer. Speak when you are spoken to. Mind your own business. Don’t be a nosey Nellie. Keep your mouth closed and your eyes open. Yet, its good to be in the know. Knowledge is power. Seeing is believing. Fate favours the prepared. Its good to have an inquisitive mind. You should question everything.

You should look on the bright side. Keep a positive attitude. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Don’t let life get you down, Don’t worry, be happy. Keep your head up. Keep smiling. But, for god's sake, don't lose touch with reality. Get a hold of yourself. Get a grip. You're wearing rose colored glasses. Your head is in the clouds. Come back down to earth. No one trusts a person who smiles all the time.

A Whacky Conspiracy Theory

Lets play a game. Lets pretend that you are a socially aware person. You vote NDP or Liberal. You would never vote Conservative. You find Conservatives scary. You despise the Republicans in the USA. You believe that social programs are what defines us as a caring and compassionate society. Large corporations frighten you. You are environmentally aware. You have never seen a logging company that you could support or an environmental group that you would condemn. You revere David Suzuki and stand behind the Kyoto accord 110%. You are pro choice and support same sex marriage. You are anti capital punishment and any privatization of universal healthcare. You have never thought to blame any poor person for being poor or criminals for being criminal. Rather, you believe the cause of their plight is social inequity and can be cured with more government housing and a well placed government program or two. In fact, you have never encountered a government program that you would scrap. You adore state funded multicultural programs and mass immigration. You are suspicious of traditional Anglo Saxon Christian values. You believe that state funded daycare is a human right. In short, you are like virtually every teacher, school board bureaucrat and university professor I have ever met.

And suppose that, as an enlightened, socially conscious Canadian, your concern for our future has lead you to seek a position in the education field. It’s a natural choice. After all, you want to make a difference. You want to participate in the shaping of young minds so that our children grow up embracing the correct values. Your values.

So you run for a school board position and win. Many like-minded people do the same thing. You sit at the board table surrounded by your peers and you get to work. Other like-minded people run for political office and are also elected. They also get to work at running our educational Ministries and writing our schools' curriculum.

Other sensitive, caring people become teachers. They too are drawn by the opportunity of shaping young minds and building our future society into a utopia where no child is left behind and no one is ever affected detrimentally when they act irresponsibly or foolishly.

And they never speak of it, maybe they don’t even acknowledge it to themselves, but they are all really after the same thing: to make our children think like them and be like them - to require our children to embrace their values. And so, the emphasis in our education system swings from celebrating knowledge and academic achievement to celebrating tolerance, open mindedness and wanton charity. The smartest children are forced to slow down so that the slower children don’t miss anything. They cease teaching Canadian history. After all, history is the realm of white Christian folk and newcomers to Canada might feel somehow lessened by having to learn about the exceptional achievements of such people. They cease to award prizes for high marks in math or grammar and start to celebrate the students who are helpful and sensitive to the needs of others. No child is ever failed and held back a grade regardless of how little effort they put in. Scores are no longer kept in school sports. Preserving a students self esteem becomes more important than ensuring that they can read and write. Protecting the mediocre students becomes more important than celebrating the exceptional ones. Winning is seen as a slap in the face for the losers.

And our children grow up. The lazy and unmotivated are lead to believe that they deserve the same rewards in life as those who are dedicated, hard working and ambitious. In fact, they enter adulthood demanding it.

But, of course, they are unable, on their own, to achieve what their more principled, disciplined peers achieve. And they get mad. They can't understand it. Haven't they been taught that everyone is equal? What is this injustice? Maybe somewhere deep in their subconscious they realize that they have been duped. But it is too late for them to change. Far too late. They have been conditioned for life.

So, some join unions and revel in the fact that they will never be expected to perform at a higher level than their co workers. Some girls, having never learned that irresponsible decisions have negative consequences, get pregnant and go on welfare. The boys who get them pregnant, having gone to the same schools, take no responsibility either. Others get menial jobs or go on welfare. They grow bitter and envious of those who have more than them. And having no recourse, they crawl to government for assistance. Of course they don’t see it as crawling. They don’t see it as lowering themselves. They don’t see it as a loss of personal autonomy and self respect. After all they have been taught that everyone deserves to be treated equally and that government should always be there to take money from those who produce and give it to them, regardless of the effort, or lack thereof, that they put in to help themselves. In their eyes they are simply demanding their rightful entitlement. In reality though, the poor wretches are crawling. They are just too blind to see it.

And tell me, who do you think these people vote for? What political and social initiatives do they support? Do you think that they would vote for a political party or support anyone who speaks out in favor of self sufficiency and independence from government interference in society? Do you think they would ever consider supporting smaller government or fewer social programs given that they themselves have a god given right to such programs? Of course not. They support those who promise to take more from the people they envy and give more to them.

And so the circle is complete and perhaps unbreakable. Socialist minded people have fashioned an educational system that ensures that Canada has a ready and continuing supply of semiliterate, demanding, insatiable government dependents who will feel compelled, by virtue of their dependence and social conditioning, to support the values of those who created them.

But it's not so bad. It's a good thing really. Surely you see? lt must be this way. Power must be kept in the right hands. The compassionate hands. The hands that are, after all, by virtue of their owner's high level of enlightenment, entitled to wield power’s reins.

After all, we have to keep those terrible, profiteering capitalists and evil conservatives in their place. Sure, maybe they create all the wealth and jobs. Maybe they have, through their principles and work ethic, created the very society the socialists are now plundering. But the poor have rights too, don’t they? From each according to his ability; to each according to his need. And there’s lots of need out there. Those in control wouldn’t have it any other way.

Convert Before It's Too late

I’ve decided to become a Muslim.

OK, maybe not a real Muslim. That would probably take some time and effort. I’d likely have to learn a bunch of stuff from the Koran. Maybe even go to a Mosque a few times. Sounds like that would be a lot of trouble. So, I’m going to become a virtual Muslim. A quasi, neo, semi-Muslim. Maybe not in body, but certainly in spirit. I won’t pray five times a day. That’d be a pain in the ass. Especially the getting down on the knees part. Ugh. Way too strenuous. But, I promise to drink five beers a day and face Mecca while doing it. Allah will understand. After all, it’s the thought that counts.

I used to think of myself as a Christian. Maybe not an engaged, practicing Christian, but at least someone who respected and loved what Christianity stood for. But, I have come to understand that this Christianity thing is finito. A phase that has passed its best before date. These days I see Christianity as a lame, sad joke. A mere shadow of its former glorious self.

It used to be that real Christians went riding around on horseback smitin’ blasphemers and pounding heretics upside their ugly heads. Stuff a man could sink his teeth into. These were noble, selfless men. All they wanted was to save their fellow man from eternal damnation. Those they couldn’t save were beheaded or burnt at the stake or some such thing. Heck, a man’s gotta have some fun.

Those were the days.

OK, maybe some Christians went a bit too far in the promotion and endorsement of their religion and their god. (Kinda like what Muslims do today.) But they meant well. To them, it was unthinkable that anyone would not believe in their god and his teachings. To them, religion was a matter of importance – something to be proud of. These days, Christians are almost apologetic in the way they go about their lives. It’s almost as if they are embarrassed by their god.

Amazing, isn’t it, how, in a few short years, the followers of a religion could go from resolute adherence to flagrant disregard.

A short while ago, a public art gallery displayed a work of art. The work of art consisted of a glass jar full of the artist’s urine. Submerged in the urine was a metal crucifix with Christ attached. The artist called his work "Piss Christ". Nice.

Oddly, the Gallery was not burned to the ground. Thank heavens Jesus is not Mohammad. Imagine what would have happened.

And then there’s Martin Scorsese’s movie, “The Last Temptation of Christ”, which was, at the least, disrespectful and, at the most, sacrilegious. The movie was screened to critical acclaim in Christian nations. There were no riots. No one was killed. There were not even any demonstrations of any significant note.

Christians have become cowards. Weak kneed girlymen. Timid, uncertain and hesitant. Afraid to stand up for their beliefs. Scared to take action against those who would subvert and destroy their religion. And, never doubt it, there are many who wish to wipe out Christianity from western culture. And top of the list isn’t Muslims. It’s secular humanist atheists. These knuckleheads are everywhere – in our media, in our Universities and education systems, in our unions. And they never miss a chance to speak out against Christianity. Oddly, though, they are strangely quiet when Muslims riot, rape, murder and commit genocide in the name of their religion and their god.

In modern western culture, Jesus has been portrayed as a homosexual and adulterer. His mother Mary’s image has been smeared with cow dung and publicly displayed as art. In a nation formed and built by Christians, all images relating to Christianity have been removed from all public spaces. This, in the name of the separation of Church and state. Never mind that the concept of the separation of church and state came about to protect the church from the state and not vice versa. Never mind that only feeble minded cretins are offended by a nativity scene at Christmas or a sculpture of the ten commandments at a court house.

It pains me to say it, but, in some ways, I admire Muslims more than I admire Christians. Muslims stand up for what they believe in. They are fiercely proud of their religion and they actually take action to defend against those who would ridicule and belittle their god.

Christians, on the other hand, take no action when their god is defiled.

Consider this. Christians believe that Jesus is the son of god. He was sent to earth to deliver humans from their sins and provide a way for them to redeem themselves and obtain eternal life in heaven. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.” (This is from the Bible - John 3:16) I wrote that from memory. I learned it as a child. Some memories last forever.

In other words, Christians are supposed to believe that in order to get into heaven, you HAVE to believe that Jesus is the only path to salvation. You must accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior, and strive to live in accordance with his teachings. Of course, the rub here is that if you do not accept Christ as your personal savior, you’ll go to hell. That’s pretty serious stuff.

So, what do today’s sensitive, compassionate batch of Christians do? Why, they allow Christ to be demeaned and minimized in their culture. They form a societal model that glorifies multiculturalism and promotes the idea that all religions are equal and valid.

If all religions are valid. Then none are. If my god is as valid as yours, then I might as well worship your god. After all, why should I limit myself to one god when I can walk along the god buffet and choose the one that appeals to me the most?

It would seem that a lot of Christians have replaced Jesus in their lives with intangible secular concepts like tolerance and multiculturalism. They use these elusive, vague ideals to justify their disinterest in their own religion. Their fridges are full, their houses are warm. They have become apathetic. They believe they are going to heaven. But, apparently, they have stopped caring if anyone else is going.

Look, either Jesus is the only way to heaven or he is not. And if he is not, then Christianity is a farce. But if he is, Christians are doing everyone else a grave disservice by not standing up to those who defile him. Shouldn’t they be trying to convince everyone to convert to Christianity rather than meekly standing by watching all the Muslims and other non Christians go to hell?

Islam has given its followers pestilence, illiteracy and poverty in the nations they dominate. But, for some odd reason, it has also given them resolve. On the other hand, Christianity has given its followers health, literacy and prosperity. But, for some reason, it has also given them self doubt.

It would appear that the less you have to lose the more desperately you cling to what you believe. And the more comfortable you are the less you believe in what has made you comfortable in the first place. An old western saying is that “there are no atheists in foxholes”. What this means is that it’s easy to be an atheist when there is nothing at stake and your life is not on the line. Perhaps if we had more foxholes, we’d have more Christians. Who knows.

Whatever the case, one thing is clear. The future will belong to those who, as a group, know who they are and have the resolve to defend their identity. The future will never belong to those who continually question who they are and, therefore, cannot summon the resolve to defend who and what they are.

That’s why I’m betting on the Muslims. At least they know who they are and what they stand for.

Truth, Honesty and Dodos

Can you remember the last time you told a lie? Chances are you won’t have to think back very far. How about the last time you were lied to? You are a fascinating person. See? That was just 2 seconds ago. And you believed me. Didn’t you? And I don’t even know you. Sometimes I wonder if anyone can actually tell a lie from the truth anymore. When you think about it, we are surrounded by lies 24/7. They permeate our very existence. They define our very society and us as human beings. Most of us lie and all of us are lied to dozens of times a day. We don’t give it a second thought. If the truth were a bird, it’d be a dodo.

OK. I’ll admit that the vast majority of lies that we encounter do not have a big impact on our lives. They don’t cause any measurable harm or pain. Some people call in sick when they are not. Many respond to people who ask how they are feeling by saying that they are 'fine', when they are really feeling like crap. Some get back a bit more change than they are owed at the store and keep it. Some tell their wives that they don’t look fat in those slacks or that supper was delicious. Or, ladies, how about that last time you faked an orgasm so he would finally roll the hell over and let you get some sleep?

These are small, understandable lies. We rationalize them away and tell ourselves that they are justifiable and not that important. But it wasn’t always that way. (OK, maybe the fibs about supper and looking fat date back to the stone age, but that’s a matter of self preservation for god’s sake. No man tells the truth when their life is on the line. Let’s have a bit of perspective here.) Generally speaking, though, for the most part, don’t you think that lies are morally wrong and that people actually were a lot more honest just a few short years ago?

I do. In fact, I know they were. Important deals were done with a handshake. (It’s how my grandfather bought his house). When people gave their word or said something, it meant something. Divorce was rare because the words ‘commitment’ and ‘fidelity’ actually carried some moral weight. When teachers disciplined kids and told their parents that they had misbehaved, parents trusted the teacher’s judgment and gave their kids a good licking themselves for good measure. These days, however, our little darlings can do no wrong and woe be to any teacher that suggests otherwise.

Somehow, over the years something has changed. We have gone from a society where the truth was understood to be black and white, to a society where honesty is no longer an absolute and truth is a grey area to be debated, questioned and, often, exploited.

Depending on how old you are, you might remember the old days when honesty was expected from everyone and truth was an absolute matter-of-fact. These were comforting, straight forward, unambiguous times. People knew right from wrong and truth from fiction. It seems like a long time ago - almost like it was on another planet. Truth, as an absolute is almost impossible to imagine in today’s cynical, superficial, secular, valueless society.

I remember reading in the newspapers a year or so ago about a woman who stumbled upon a bag of money in the street here in Scarborough. It was an official bank package that had apparently fallen out of an armored car or something. Without a moments hesitation she marched over to the bank and turned the money in. The press was notified and this simple act of honesty made headline news for days. She was made out to be a hero - a human of rare and exceptional character. When, really, all she did was be honest. These days, it would seem that, honesty is in such rare supply that we are literally shocked when someone actually puts it before their own selfish interest.

I've been thinking a lot about this lately and have identified five specific areas of our lives where the truth is routinely compromised.

First there is the personal realm, where lily-white lies in our personal relationships and everyday lives occur daily. Please see above. (No, baby, I mean it, you positively skinny in that dress.)

Second, there are the lies perpetrated by corporations and individuals for personal profit. Some are implied, others are explicitly dishonest. Car companies that tell us that their vehicle is the best thing since sliced bread. Tide is better than Cheer. Campbells is preferable to Liptons. Enron and Worldcom are in good financial shape. The price of gas is not influenced by greed and profit, rather by so-called market forces and foreign policy. A party isn’t a party unless you pay a visit to the liquor store. A gift of Barbie will make your daughter’s Christmas exceptional. A life without Leaf tickets is not worth living. Yep, ma’am, your furnace/car/roof needs a total overhaul. We live in a world of lies and selfish exageration and innuendo. No one is to be trusted.

Thirdly, there is the spin perpetrated by various charitable and non government organizations for the purpose of currying favour & donations and influencing the way we think. Some seek donations by implying that men are horrible abusers and women are always the victims. Some use statistics to garner public attention and donations. They use numbers relating to people affected by any given ailment and disability. The number of AIDS victims is routinely exagerated in order to garner pity and public support for a problem that would not exist except for sexual promescuity and infidility. “Over two million Canadians have diabetes” says the ‘Canadian Diabetes Association’. That is one in 15 Canadians. Tell me, does one in every fifteen people you know have diabetes? Does the number they use include those who have not yet been diagnosed? How do they come upon this number? This sort of creative accounting is used a lot in our society to curry support and sympathy.

Fourth, there is the media. No reasonable person believes that the media reports unbiased facts. No one really believes that they can trust newspapers, television stations and radio to provide a balanced, unprejudiced viewpoint. Media sources never have and they never will. Private media sources are owned by rich people. And rich people have their opinions and biases. It is perfectly understandable that someone who owns a media company will invariably use that company to perpetuate and support their own personal political and social views. You would too. Be honest. But, when the news does not deal in facts, and instead deals in perspective and ideological manipulation, is this not just another way of lying? I’m not saying they shouldn’t have the right to promote their own beliefs. After all, in a free society, independent companies and people must have the right to own media companies and influence public opinion. Otherwise, here in Canada, only the CBC and their government benefactors would. Whatever the case, neither government, its media consorts, or independent media sources, speak the real truth. Whatever they say is always distorted in the prism of their biases. We must always be aware of this when we listen to what they say and temper our judgment accordingly.

Then, finally, (number five) there’s the most insidious, selfish and evil sort of lies imaginable. Those perpetrated by politicians and bureaucrats for the purpose of holding onto or gaining political power. Surely, there can be no greater lies that these. It is no coincidence that few Canadians trust government or politicians these days. It’s almost a given that they lie. We all know it. We all expect it.

This, in and of itself, should tell us how pathetically used to lies we have become.

Face it. Lies are everywhere. They define us as individuals and as a society. Therefore, they define our future. All that we are, and hope to become, is dependant on lies.

And here’s the rub. (You knew it was coming.)

It is really about values folks. Our forefathers expected to trust each other and be trusted in return. Truth was a reality to them. Lies were an exception.

And hey, wouldn’t ya know it, they believed in this being called ‘God’. He made rules and if you didn’t follow them, you’d go to hell. Normal, regular people believed in God. After all, they didn’t want to go to hell. So, normal, regular people followed his rules, spoke the plain, simple truth and lied (and tolerated lies) a helluvalot less than we do today.

These days, most of us either don’t believe in God or seriously question his existence.

God’s rules no longer matter. And with no rules, comes no truth. And with no truth comes no honesty. After all, honesty cannot exist without truth. And truth cannot exist without a common, understood set of rules that define what truth and honesty is.

We, as a society, are in big trouble. We no longer have any rules to help us define what truth is. And if we can no longer define truth, we can no longer know exactly when truth exists. And if we can no longer know exactly when truth exists, we can no longer pass judgment on anyone who lies.

Therefore, the future belongs to liars.

Get used to it.

Cultimulcheralism

Every year, hundreds of thousands of foreign migrants come to Canada for a better life. They leave the countries their cultures turned into cesspools of filth and degradation and come here to enjoy the peaceful prosperous society built by the Anglo-Saxon, Christian culture. Once they arrive, however, many shun contact with other Canadians and stick together in their own little ethnic tribes within our cities. They live, socialize, play and even work only with people who look, act and think like themselves. It is the way things work here in cultimulcheral Canada.

Definition: ‘Cultimulcheralism’ – Cult-ee-mulch-er-all-ism – ‘values shared by a fanatical, ideological, left-wing ‘cult’ which seeks to convert Canada’s founding white Anglo Christian culture into a generic, mushy, meaningless ‘mulch’, while preserving and revering the uniqueness of any and all foreign cultures that come here’.

Now, I have no idea how this fanciful experiment in state-sponsored, cultimulcheral social engineering will turn out. With a few exceptions relating to the criminality and reproductive irresponsibility of certain tribes of people as well as others having unfortunate ties with terrorism, we seem to be doing alright so far. Things are relatively peaceful. People seem to get along. So far, so good. Maybe we’ll be OK in the long run. But, certainly, the odds are against us.

It is a self-evident truth that people of different cultures are usually unable to live peacefully together within the same borders for any length of time. Isn’t it bad enough that the French and English here in Canada still eye each other with suspicion after hundreds of years? Was it really wise to add millions upon millions of people from multiple other cultures to the mix as well, and then give them government grants for the express purpose of helping them preserve their own foreign cultures within Canada's borders while distancing themselves from traditional Canadian culture? Shouldn’t the goal be to integrate immigrants, not segregate them?

All we hear these days are spokespeople from one culture or another demanding concessions and money from the government to address the issues specific to their cultural community. We are no longer a cohesive nation. Rather we are a nation of a hundred cultural solitudes, each jockeying for a position where their culture can receive more government funding and have greater political and social influence. Political parties run ethnic candidates in ridings where large numbers of constituents are of the same culture as the candidate. They know that people will tend to vote for someone of their own color and culture. For Canada’s cultural minorities, it is considered perfectly natural. When white people do it, though, it’s racism.

Recently, in the papers, I read about a Chinese-Canadian running for election in Markham Ontario. He was soliciting votes in an Indian neighborhood. (See, even our neighborhoods are referred to in terms of the ethnic group that lives there.) Luckily for him he had spent many years in India. At one front door an Indian man looked at him skeptically. But when the Chinese-Canadian man spoke to him in Punjabi, the Indian man allegedly smiled and said “Your really are my brother. I have 12 votes in my family that I will deliver to you”. Wow. Speak the guy’s foreign language and ‘presto’, you’re his brother and he’ll vote for you. Pity the poor Anglo Canadian politician who tries to get a vote there. Maybe if we all learned Punjabi we could all be this man’s “brother”. I don’t know about you, but I’m enrolling in a PSL course tomorrow.

And that’s the cultimulcheral Canada that we are building folks. A nation where cultural minorities are encouraged to think of themselves as a foreign immigrant first and a Canadian second. A nation where immigrants expect Canada to adapt to them rather than vice versa.

Cast your eyes around the world and witness the fruits of cultural cohabitation. There’s Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland; Muslims and Buddhists in Thailand; Jews and Arabs in the middle east; blacks and whites in the USA; Serbs and Croatians in Yugoslavia; Hindus and Muslims in India; Christians and Muslims in Indonesia; Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka; Vietnamese and Cambodians in Cambodia; Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, race riots in Paris.….the list is endless.. Think about it - time and again, history has shown that whenever large numbers of people of different cultures and sensibilities live together, it seldom turns out well.

And yet, like drunk lemmings, Anglo Christian Canadians and their descendants scramble towards the cliff-edge of cultural extinction and gleefully fling themselves over. Hey, what difference does it make? It’s pretty well all over anyway. White Anglo Christian Canadians have far fewer babies than immigrants and many, many more abortions. In addition, Canada depends largely on immigrants to replace our dying elderly population. In fact we welcome around 250,000 migrants a year. The way things are going, it’s really just a matter of time before the culture and the people that created and nurtured this great nation becomes nothing more than an irrelevant, fringe, minority group. Oh well, at least as a minority, they’ll be eligible for government grants and Charter protection. At least I hope so.

The thing that really astounds me is the willingness, nay, inexplicable eagerness, with which Anglo Christian folk and their descendants have embraced the idea of no longer being the majority in their own nation. It is as though they want it to happen - some sort of masochistic white guilt or latent self-loathing that prevents them from being proud of their own culture. (In conversation, I’ve mentioned to some people I know that white Christians in Europe and North America have built the most comfortable, successful, free nations on earth. I’ve gotten back haughty, indignant retorts mentioning the Crusades or internment during WWII or slavery. Surely, white folk are the only people on earth who hate their own skin color.)

It’s puzzling. Anglo-Saxon Christian values have brought freedom, success and comfort to Canadians. Many foreign cultures, on the other hand, have brought nothing but pestilence, poverty and oppression. And yet, when plotting a course for the future, we refuse to give any deference to the familiar, successful, domestic Anglo Christian cultural model. Rather, we actually encourage newcomers to isolate themselves inside their own ethnic enclaves, ignore the founding culture and adhere to their foreign cultural practices and traditions.

Most rational, normal people in this world tend to want to protect their cultures. In fact, many have and would fight and die to protect them. Here in Canada, however, we white Anglo Christian Canadian folk don’t subscribe to such unenlightened barbarism. We meekly stand aside and barely raise a peep as the traditions and values that made our nation great are slowly marginalized and drowned in a tidal wave of Cultimulcheralism.

What culture in the world has ever participated so willingly in its own destruction? What culture has ever thrown open its borders with the implicit intent and inevitable outcome of reducing its own relevancy within its own borders? I’ve heard of cultural genocide, but cultural suicide? Surely, this must rank as one of the most momentous acts of selflessness and cultural sacrifice in the history of mankind.

A more fascinating study in cultural development (or destruction) you will never find. Anthropologists will have a field day a few centuries from now as they study this baffling deviation from human behavioral norms. The way I figure it, they will be asking each other one of two questions - either: How could these people be so foolish as to willingly give up their position as the majority in a nation they founded? Or: How did they know that this zany social experiment would be such a success? God, I hope it’s the latter.

Harpies, Feminists and Moonbats

I’ve been thinking about trying to explain feminism to my 10 year old daughter. I figure she’s ready. I’m sure some people might think that a man has no business trying to explain a female concept like feminism to a female. And maybe there’s some merit in that argument. But I’m going to take my best shot anyway. After all, it’s important that my daughter at least has a chance to develop a balanced viewpoint about gender equality before today's radical feminists and leftwing moonbats in our schools, universities and media get a hold of her.

And if anyone is suited to convey a balanced opinion on feminism, it’s me. After all, just look at me. I’m an obsolete, anachronistic social dinosaur, just like feminism. I have passed my ‘best before date’, just like feminism. And I admire and respect women, just like feminism.

I’m going to tell my daughter that feminism was born because, years ago, women were considered less than equal to men. In fact it was less than one hundred years ago that women were first allowed to vote in Canada - in Western Canada, to be exact. (Yep. That’s right. Traditional, red-neck, gun-lovin’ conservative westerners were the first Canadians to give women the vote. Ironic, eh?) In addition, women had almost insurmountable obstacles placed in their way when they tried to enter professional and political occupations. Yesterday's feminists fought to break down these barriers. They were heroes.

Today, however, it is a totally different story. A goodly portion of our political representatives are women. The next president of the United States may very well be a woman, either Dr. Condoleezza Rice or Hillary Clinton. (Go Condi! Imagine, a black conservative woman as President. You gotta love that!) It's the same with government ministers, professors, doctors, lawyers, judges and CEOs. The majority of university students are female. Most women work. Many are the bosses of men.

The feminist movement accomplished what it set out to do. And then, something truly unfortunate happened - it was co-opted by socialists. You must have noticed. These days, it's not uncommon to see hard core socialists, disguised as feminists, screaming in the media about some imaginary inequity or other. And most of these groups are tax funded. Many hate men & marriage. And all adhere to the same time-tested formula for stealing our tax dollars. What's the formula you ask. It goes something like this:

1. They scurry around, looking under any rock they can lift, hoping upon hope to find something they can paint as sexism.
2 Then, once a year or so, they pull their tax-funded heads out of their tax-funded behinds and scream “sexist” at the top of their lungs.
3 They release a report full of questionable data and skewed statistics showing how men continue to victimize women.
4. The CBC and other socialist media corporations gushingly rally behind them giving them lots of sympathetic coverage.
5. They send their press clippings to Ottawa along with an application for more grant money.
6 When the cheque arrives they slink back to their tax funded burrows and dream of the day when sperm can be manufactured artificially and all men are dead. At least, that's the impression they give.

Meanwhile back here on planet earth where normal people live, the rest of us just sigh and shrug. It’s almost worth paying out of pocket to get these harpies to shut up for awhile. They have degraded and tarnished the word “feminist” to such a degree that most women these days wouldn’t be caught dead using it to describe themselves.

Feminism used to be about equality. Now it’s about having and keeping the advantage. Like in child custody cases, where dads almost never get custody; and in incidents involving violent crime, where women perpetrators are almost always given lighter sentences than men and then incarcerated in much more comfortable surroundings.

Feminism used to be about busting down barriers. Now it’s about busting men’s balls. Like when they teach young women that "marriage is the chief vehicle for the perpetuation of the oppression of women" and any sexual encounter with a man is akin to allowing the man to rape them. (I'm not making this up, although in a rational world I would have to.)

Feminism used to be a movement that welcomed women of all political and social opinions. Now it’s a movement run and populated mostly by loony, hard-core, left-wing moonbats.

Feminism used to be all about the rights. Now it’s all about the left.

In fact, these days, when feminist groups speak out, it is often about matters relating to something other than women. Most times they seem to be more interested in suff like: bigger government, state-funded multiculturalism, affirmative action, limitless immigration, higher welfare rates, the environment, differentsexuality, the evils of America or some other so-called progressive initiative that has nothing to do with the advancement of women's rights. (Kinda like how socialist union leaders are always supporting hard-core, left-wing causes that have little to do with their union mandate.) Many feminist groups, it would seem, are now focused on much loftier social engineering goals. It is almost as if they subconsciously know that, in order to get the attention of the public, they have to broaden their focus because most women just aren't buying into the nonsensical "females are victims" BS they are selling.

I mentioned Condi Rice earlier. Now, you would think that feminists would be thrilled to have a women as Secretary of State and in line for the Presidency. But they're not. Feminist groups despise her. Know why? Because she's a conservative. A few years ago, a newly crowned Miss America - Erika Harold - gave a few speeches to students in which she promoted sexual abstinence. Feminist and homosexual groups went through the roof. Know why? Of course you do. These days, if you want the support of the feminist movement, it's not enough be a woman, you also have to be a left-winger just like them.

Now, you may be wondering why feminism shifted its focus from promoting women’s rights to promoting socialist doctrine. Allow me to speculate. Ask yourself this: what do virtually all socialists, communists and people on the political left have in common? Right. A shared belief that equality of outcome must be assured for all and government must support us all from cradle to grave.

It was a no brainer, really. Today's feminist movement had to embrace left wing ideology because today's feminism depends on having a big, strong, generous government to punish anyone who doesn’t toe the equality line and to hand out oodles of dough to fund programs that benefit women and punish men. The road to their prejudiced version of equality is not free. It’s a toll road. And we all pay the toll so that they can promote their radical, socialist, feminist ideology.

And the cost is in the $billions. The number of Canadian women’s groups who get tax dollars are legion. Expensive media campaigns casting men as abusers and villains are quite common. Unabused women take the children and leave their spouses simply because they are "unfulfilled" and are given a subsidized apartment and government cheque. Costly Commissions, Tribunals and various bureaucracies respond to all complaints regarding equity, regardless of how frivolous. High priced, state funded daycare encourages women to let the government care for their children while they pursue more ‘fulfilling’ work. And for every subsidized day care space they use, we all pay through the nose. And then there’s the multi-billion dollar gun registry boondoggle, which was spawned because feminist groups pressured Canada’s Liberal government after Muslim lunatic Marc Lepine massacred 14 female engineering students in Montreal. Lepine was a monster. He does not represent all men. No more than Karla Homolka represents all women.

Feminism used to be a proud movement of visionaries with a noble cause. These days, feminism is, for the most part, nothing more than a movement of radical, left-wing splinter groups sowing the seeds of anarchy and unrest while slurping down copious amount of tax dollars from the public trough. Feminism was once something worthy of our respect. Now it’s something worthy of our suspicion.

That’s what I’ll be teaching my daughter. Any good parent would.

Fathers, Feminism and Parental Responsibility

They used to call them bastard children. The ones with no father. They were pitied. Their mothers were shamed. Their families were disgraced. Needless to say, there were not a lot of these kids around in most communities. Social pressure and strongly held religious beliefs discouraged bastardy. Fathers stayed with their families. Mothers did too. And - guess what - except when parents died, virtually all children had both a father and a mother. Unlike today.

Today, siring fatherless children is looked upon as an esteemed career choice in our welfare housing communities. Many women have multiple children by multiple men and live better on our generous welfare system than many working people. The men take little responsibility for raising their children, brag about how many they have conceived and bask in the glory of their studhood.

Meanwhile, their sons grow up to be marginalized, angry, fatherless young men with a penchant for filling each other with hot lead. The daughters drop a few babies before age 18 and spend their days watching Oprah and looking out their apartment windows at the suckers standing in the rain at the bus stop headed for work.

It didn’t used to be this way. But, over the past few decades, our society has changed dramatically. And not for the better. The twin scourges of socialism and radical feminism have swarmed across our landscape like the wretched, festering locusts that they are. And when they arrived, it was game over.

The scourge of socialism brought with it a free apartment and monthly cheque to any female who has a functional uterus and decides to use it. This state-sponsored, sex rewards program hasn’t exactly lessened the plague of fatherlessness. If anything, it’s been a major contributing factor, as should be expected.

And then there’s the second scourge – socialism’s sister – radical feminism. Thanks to this nifty social construct, women are no longer viewed as men’s sexual superiors. Now they are merely men’s equals. Men used to have to wait until after marriage to partake in their wife’s wondrous gift. Women held all the cards. Not any more. Now men can usually get whatever they want after a few dates. It’s no longer a gift to be anticipated, cherished and given in return for a lifelong commitment. Now it’s like a burger picked up at the drive through. You know the old saying about buying the cow? Is it any wonder there are so many children born to single mothers these days?

Anyway, as you can probably tell, I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the pandemic of promiscuity and bastardy sweeping across the face of our society and have decided that men should take no responsibility for it at all. After all, it’s not their fault. Consider that the problem of single motherhood and absentee dads has only been around for 30 – 40 years in our culture. Over those years men haven’t changed much. In fact men haven’t changed much since they were clubbing females over the head and dragging them into caves. They’re just doing what they’ve always done – trying to get women to have sex with them. The only difference is that now women are letting them have their way a lot more. And as a result of these bad decisions, a lot more unattached women are getting pregnant and sentencing their kids to a fatherless life.

And it’s not men’s fault. Really. Think about this – the only thing that men contribute to the creation of life is sperm. That’s it. It is the woman alone who has the capacity to create life inside her. And it is the woman alone who has sole dominion over that life for the first nine months of its existence until it comes forth into the world. If the woman wants to terminate this burgeoning life while its in her belly, she can do it and the man has no say whatsoever. After all, it’s her body, isn’t it? And isn’t he just a sperm donor with no rights at all?

However, once the woman, in her generosity, allows the baby to be born, everything changes. All of a sudden, this baby becomes the financial responsibility of the sperm donor – a poor wretch who had no rights at all up until that point. Why is this? If a woman has sole control over her body and all that grows in it, despite needing sperm to create what grows in it, why does she not have sole responsibility for what comes out of her body, despite needing sperm to create what comes out?

Women know the risks when they have sex. They know that pregnancy could occur. And yet, when they engage voluntarily and casually in sex solely to satisfy their own selfish carnal desires, and the natural outcome occurs, they expect the sperm donor to support their illegitimate offspring, even if he’s made no commitment to them or to a relationship.

Thankfully, I am in a stable, loving marriage. My children live under the same roof as I do and receive my love (and lectures) everyday. I believe the nuclear family model to be the most elegant, efficient, effective and successful social construct in the world. I also believe that men who abandon their mate and children are scumbags, as are women who purposely exclude fathers from their children's lives. Children conceived after a commitment has been made should remain the father’s responsibility. However, the same should not hold true for men whose sperm produce children in the bodies of women who demanded no commitment from them prior to conception.

As noted above, men today are much the same as the men who lived one hundred years ago when virtually all families stayed together and virtually all children had a father. They haven’t changed. Women have. And society has. Nowadays, men find themselves in a world where the carnal candy store is open 24-7. And no one in society is slapping their hands when they reach for the bon bons before paying for them. And when they feed their faces, they aren’t actually stealing anything. They are just partaking of what is freely offered by a equal and willing partner – a partner who has chosen to ignore the risks to her future, her body, and the future of any life that is conceived in her body. And if a woman gives her body freely to a man who has made no commitment to her, knowing full well what the repercussions could be, why should the woman not take full responsibility for those repercussions? And why should the man have to take any responsibility at all?

Walking Along Life’s Road, Listening to Government.

“Hey, we can do that. No problem. Absolutely. Without a doubt. Yep. Definitely.

Whatever you need. Just ask. I identify with your concerns. I get it. You can count on me.

You got it. It’s done. I won’t let you down. I’ll be there for you. You can depend on me.

I understand. That is a legitimate concern. That is a priority of mine.

That load looks heavy. Here, let me carry a bit of it. There, isn’t that better.

I told you that we are here for you. We walk together. You are not the boss of me and I am not the boss of you. We are equals.

Oh, heavens. You look tired. Here, let me take a bit more of that load off your back.

Yes. You look better already, with only half the terrible load that you did before. Oh, think nothing of it. It’s my pleasure. Really.

Without a doubt we are partners. Share and share alike. Equal burdens for each of us.

My goodness. You look terrible. Fatigued. Under the weather. That load must be unbearable. Here, let me take some of that weight off your shoulders.

Ugh. Oooo. That’s heavy. Look at you, with virtually nothing to bear. And look at me. My back is breaking. And yet, I welcome the burden. You deserve a lighter load. It is your right. Why should you bend under such weight when you can let me carry it?

Here we are. On this journey together. Remember when your grandfather carried the entire load himself? Thank god we have advanced and are more enlightened today. You should feel no shame for letting me carry your load. It’s a privilege to help you out.

You look exhausted. Why do you look so laboured? Oh, yes. That small pack you are carrying. It does look heavy. Here, I already have a heavy load, a bit more won’t make a difference at all.

There now. Isn’t that a lot better. You have nothing to carry and I have it all. It’s a tough go, but I told you that I will always be there for you.

Goodness gracious, you can hardy even walk. You must be exhausted. Here, let me support you. Don't worry. Happy to do it. I don’t mind carrying you at all.

I’m getting very tired. Aren’t you glad that I am carrying you. You have no idea how heavy this is. You and all that you own. It's a terrible burden.

I’ve been thinking. You should compensate me for taking care of you and your heavy load. No. No. Don’t take any of it back. I’m happy to carry it all. But wouldn’t you feel better if you gave me a little something for helping you out?

I don’t want much. How about your children? Kids are such a bother anyway. I could take them off your hands and care for them. You could pursue more meaningful, satisfying things. Like making money. Don’t you trust me? I do so much for you already. Only a true friend would sacrifice so much for you. Surely, I would teach your children right from wrong and give them my values. And my values are your values. It’ll work out just fine.

Great. Don’t you feel better?

Only thing is, now I carry you and your children. You can't even carry yourself.

That’s OK though. After all didn’t I ask for this load and didn’t you give it to me voluntarily?

It’s sad that you now have nothing. But don’t worry. I’ll always be here to care for you, nurture you and your kids and give you everything you need. Doing that for yourself would be such an inconvenience. And you have grown so accustomed to your dependence.

Your welcome. No, honest, I really mean it. Your welcome.

Hey, remember when I said that I was not the boss of you and you were not the boss of me? Do you recall when I noted that we were equals?

Unfortunately, it would appear that a lot has changed since then. I carry everything and you carry nothing. How can you possibly suggest that we are equals? That is simply not fair. And don’t forget that I have your children.

Relax. There’s no problem. Just enjoy the freedom. Enjoy having no accountability for your own life. After all, I love you. Haven’t I freed you from the pesky responsibility and worry of caring for yourself and your loved ones? Certainly, you must love me too. I know you do.

It is as it should be. We know best. Do as we say and there will be no problems. We own you lock stock and barrel. Ask how high. Go on, ask. Good. I haven’t even asked you to jump. You are learning well. You are truly a good Canadian.”

Christmas and Global Equality

It’s almost Christmas – the season of the three ‘G’s. No, not Goodwill, Giving and Generosity, silly. I mean: Gimme, Gimme, Gimme.

Christmas is the perfect time to contemplate our pleasantly plump, overfed posteriors and our “I’m the centre of the freakin’ universe” mentality. It’s a plastic world baby. The card is god. All that we are and can ever hope to be is measured by how much we owe and how much stuff we got. And lard tunderin’ jeesis by’, we got a lot.

We are the safest, richest, most comfortable, well fed society in the history of mankind. We are also the most wasteful, self absorbed, superficial and valueless society in history. No one has ever had so much (or appreciated it less). The more we get, the more we want. Gimme, gimme, gimme. And yet, as we sip our Timmys, eat our chicken wings and watch our DVDs on our flat screens, there are billions of people in the world who have virtually nothing. They live from day to day, illiterate, eking out a living anyway they can, dying of disease, and basically living the same miserable lives my ancestors did a thousand years ago under feudal rule.

And by George, never doubt it, everything we have, everything that is important to us, depends on keeping those wretches right where they are, wallowing in poverty.

It’s the terrible truth no one dares utter. Sure, we all feel sympathy for the billions suffering in Africa, India, Asia, South America and the Middle East. We feel the knots in our stomach when we see the World Vision infomercials or see pictures of a famine ridden African village. Sometimes we even give a little bit. Maybe not much, but every little bit helps. And after all, money doesn’t grow on trees. I don’t know about you, but the dinner out, the four DVDs and the new ink cartridge for the digital photo printer pretty well tapped me out for this week.

But still, despite our scepticism and self absorbed materialism, somewhere inside, we all care. We would have to be totally soulless not to care at all (My apologies to you atheists out there. I’m sure you care too. Even if you are merely empty, barren, soulless husks whose lives have absolutely no meaning whatsoever.) Many of us would love to see every starving person have a bowl of rice, piece of meat and litre of clean water a day. And that could probably be accomplished with a little cooperation between governments, NGO's, corporations, businesses and individuals. But I wonder how many of us have actually contemplated what the total effect would be on our planet if everyone in the world had the same standard of living as us here in Canada.

We eat a lot of seafood. I don’t know about you but as I write this I have a nice bag of shrimp, an Orange Roughy fillet, a pound or two of smelt and a nice piece of Chilean sea bass in my freezer at home. (Sorry about the bass. It’s endangered, I know. But, hey, I like bass.) Last week I had a nice order of Halibut and chips at the local fish and chips place. I would suspect many Canadians eat as much if not more seafood than me. I also have fresh vegetables, fruit, canned goods and different types of meat in the house. Tell me, what do you think would happen if every single one of the 6.4 billion people on this planet sat down to the same meals as my family does in a nicely furnished, heated and air conditioned home, with full cupboards and fridge, several closets full of clothes and footwear, a car or two in the driveway and every other accoutrement of modern life.

I’ll tell you what would happen.

The oceans would be depleted of any edible life forms. The world’s oil and natural gas supplies would be gone in a matter of years. Much of the world's arable land would be over cultivated, depleted of nutrients and useless. Many trees would be cut down to build housing and furniture. With fewer trees, oxygen would be less plentiful. And, with a couple billion new cars and houses using copious amounts of fuel and electricity, the ozone layer would burn off and melting glaciers would flood the earth. The cockroaches would dance a jig on our corpses.

However, in the years leading up to our deaths, there'd be lots of stuff for us to do and many challenges to overcome as we introduce our greedy values and high standard of living to the rest of the world.

The number of industrial farms that would be needed to provide all the people of Asia, India and Africa with the same amount per capita of beef, pork and chicken as we eat here in Canada would be astronomical. What would these trillions upon trillions of animals be fed? What effect would the increased cow flatulence have on the atmosphere? Imagine how many cows would have to be raised and slaughtered to put a McDonalds in every village in the third world like we have in every town in Canada and America. Never mind "billions and billions sold". How about "quadrillions and quadrillions"? Imagine how many chickens would have to take a bath in boiling oil dressed in 11 different herbs and spices to satisfy the cravings of an entire planet for KFC. Imagine how many seven year olds would be forced into factory slavery in China to stock 10,000 new Walmarts worldwide.

It’s all fine and good to want everyone in the world to be as well fed and prosperous as we are. But once you get to thinking about it, you’ll realize that it just can’t be done. By all measures, in practical terms, it is clearly impossible.

We could, however, maybe, provide simple, adequate food, clothing and shelter for everyone if we really wanted to. And certainly this is an admirable goal. However, this is what we already do for our own poor here in Canada. And as we all know, whatever we do, it is never enough for those interest groups, leftist anarchists and compassionate socialists who continually petition to have those who make no contribution to society brought up to the same standard of living as those who do. And the same would occur with respect to foreign aid. Maybe we could provide every person in the third world with a basic standard of living. But as long as the evil, imperialist, white west continued to munch on lobster and filet mignon, watch widescreen TVs and drive nice cars, there would always be voices shouting about the perceived inequity and pleading that everyone in the world has the right to good steak, lobster, TV and their own cars. Either that, or no one does.

We need to face reality. To give us all the same living standards, we would have to climb down as many rungs on the standard-of-living ladder as the third world climbs up. We would have to give up a lot with respect to meals, belongings and comfort of life. There are some who would advocate, nay, demand, that we all make this tremendous sacrifice. To them I say, you first. After all, they eat sea food too.

The sad truth is that every underprivileged person in the world could never be brought up to the same level as the privileged. To do so, we would likely have to strip our planet until there was nothing left. Then we would all die. Sure, everyone on earth would have a nice car and a cool CD collection, but we would all still be dead nonetheless. And the extra-terrestrials who arrive here a thousand years from now would be able to identify the socialists by the smiles on their mummified faces - their dream of total equality finally fulfilled in the only way possible. After all, only in death can all people truly be equal.

Merry Christmas. Now go out and buy a homeless person a pack of smokes. Hell, make it a carton. It’s the least you can do.

Tanked Twisted Totaled Tipsy

Have you ever been three sheets to the wind? Under the influence? Half in the bag?
Inebriated? Feeling good?
Drunk?
Bent? Blitzed? Bleary Eyed? Blasted?
Fried? Toasted? Pissed? Plastered?
Looped? Loaded?
Hammered?
Sloshed? Smashed? Shit faced? Stewed?
Tanked? Twisted? Totaled? Tipsy?
Cockeyed?
Gonzo?
Wrecked? Wasted?
Zonked?

If some alien life form landed in Canada and tried to find out what Canadians love the most and measured it by the number of words we have to describe it, surely drinking alcohol would win, hands down. (OK, I admit, there are a lot of words that describe sex. But this is a family column and I’m not going there.)

Have you ever driven after having a few drinks? How about as a passenger with someone you were having drinks with? Be honest now. If you have, you’re not alone. Many, many Canadians have. Sure, we pretend that drinking and driving is bad, but deep inside we all know it’s actually a cultural norm here in Canada.

Tell me, if you were asked to list two things that are central to our society, what would they be? Maybe TV and fast food? How about computers and music? Me, I’d pick cars and alcohol. Most of us drive and a lot of us drink from time to time. And if we were really honest about it, we’d admit that a lot of drivers have, at some point in their lives, driven with a few drinks in them. You’ve probably done it yourself. I’m not talking about sloshed, just a few widdle drinks. If so, you could be a criminal. Fingerprinted, publicly shamed and severely punished. Hey, you might be a monster, but, don’t worry, you’ve got lots of company.

Check out any bar in Canada anytime during the day or night. Virtually every single person walking out of there and into a car is quite likely approaching, or over, the limit. And yet we incessantly demonize anyone who drinks and drives to such an extent that they are considered by many to be no better than rapists or armed robbers. In our zeal to protect all people from all things, we have criminalized something that millions of Canadians do occasionally with no undue ill effects to society. And consider this - unlike rapists or armed robbers, who are arrested because of actual harm done to others, people who drive after drinking are arrested merely because they are judged by arbitrary means to be more likely to cause harm. This is pretty draconan stuff.

I met a guy the other night who, a year ago, had a few drinks and was clipped by a car while walking across the street. He wasn’t drunk, or so he says. The bar where he was drinking is being charged. The driver’s insurance company is suing him. I guess someone will start a group called MADW – Mothers Against Drunk Walking. Such is the insanity of the world we live in – a world dominated by salivating litigation lawyers and trust-me-I-know-what’s-best-for-you, security obsessed women.

Obviously, driving while loaded is stupid, irresponsible and dangerous. Anyone who harms other people while driving sloshed should be severely punished. However, what about people who drink moderately and then drive? Some people may drive better with a .06 or .08 blood/alcohol level than others do totally sober. And 99.999 percent of people who drive after drinking moderately never hurt anyone. But still, MADD and others keep demanding the limit be lowered. And we all "tut tut" and nod at them sympathetically while getting behind the wheel or watching as others get behind the wheel after having a few drinks. Are we a nation of hypocrites?

Lets just cut to the chase, shall we. It seems to me that if we really wanted to catch drunk drivers we would place a mobile breathalyzer outside every bar in the country and pull over everyone who came out. This would likely cost less than our foolish multi-billion dollar gun registration program. In fact, if you think about it, two billion dollars would buy two hundred million $10 cab rides. And there are only 30 million people in Canada. Maybe all cabs should have breathalizers installed, with the government picking up the tab for drunk customers. This too would be easily affordable, considering how much money is stolen and wasted every day by our corrupt Federal Liberal government.

Anyway, where was I, oh yes – nabbing all bar patrons as they emerge from bars. What a great idea, eh? Of course, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of drivers would lose their licenses. (There’d likely be no drivers left in Fort McMurray. heh) This would lead to fewer car sales, less gas sold, less work for anyone who services vehicles, sky high insurance rates, rampant unemployment for convicted people who jobs require them to drive and less booze sold, especially booze sold in bars. In fact, it would likely destroy the bar business entirely. And we’d need thousands of additional police, lawyers, judges, jail cells and courtrooms to deal with the legal fallout. The tax loss for the government and the economic price to our nation would be astronomical.

So that would never do. I guess it’s best to just keep complaining and pretending (wink wink, nudge nudge) to be outraged at something millions do and something we could pretty well eliminate if we really wanted to.

Sympathy, Not Condemnation

Live from the Satireland newsroom:

In France, a series of demonstrations involving tens of thousands of emotionally distraught young Muslim men are beginning to abate after the French government called in 2200 police officers and declared a state of emergency.

The demonstrations were apparently touched off by the deaths of two young Muslim men who were accidentally electrocuted while hiding from police in a state power plant. Apparently, Muslim men who die in such a way, receive only 35 virgins in paradise, instead of the requisite 72 virgins given to those who die while killing Jews and other infidel swine.

“What a gyp” one overwrought demonstrator was heard to exclaim as he gently smashed the windows of a local food store and reluctantly threw in a Molotov cocktail. “How can any self respecting Muslim man settle for a measly 35 virgins? I am so angry right now I could just behead someone.”

It has been speculated that the underlying cause of the riots relates to a general feeling of resentment amongst young Muslim men, most of whom have known nothing their whole lives but welfare and free housing. With nothing to do as they crawl out of bed at noon, these gentle souls have no choice but to sit on their stoops, smoke hashish and bad mouth the French all day. "This could drive even the strongest among us to despair.” a prominent CBC commentator was heard to say. “They need our sympathy, not our condemnation” she sobbed, as she donned a burka in solidarity while chanting “Death to American Imperialism”.

Meanwhile, earlier today, local French newspapers ran headlines featuring a middle aged white conservative Christian man who happened to mention to a reporter in passing that he dislikes unions and disagrees with gay marriage. French citizens were appalled at the insensitivity of this wretched throwback to the middle ages. One protestor took a moment from throwing bricks at police to spit on the ground in a show of contempt for such incivility. “May the white, Christian, homophobic, capitalist scum rot in hell” a French journalist was reported to have said as she gathered up some left over pheasant and foi gras to help feed the protestors.

However, local authorities are rising to the challenge of dispelling the protests. Jacques Chirac made the following announcements yesterday: "Henceforth, bacon will be outlawed in France. Sharia law will replace the French civil law model and all judges will be replaced by Mullahs. A new government ‘Ministry of Stones’ will be set up to provide special assistance to families who wish to discipline a daughter who shames them. All females will be required to wear a veil. The French border will be thrown open for 24 hours at the beginning of every Ramadan to anyone mumbling suspiciously, wearing a ticking backpack and carrying a Koran. And, finally, as the piece de resistance, France will nuke Israel.”

It is expected that these measures will go a long way to appeasing the downtrodden protesters and reversing decades of abuse and racism levied against the Muslim community in France.

Gangstas are Not Cool

Hey kids, repeat after me. All together now: "Gangsters are bad. They shoot people. They sell drugs and commit horrible violent crimes. I would never be a gangster because they are scumbags."

Very good children.

Yep, you guessed it, something’s eating me. I just went to pick up my 5 year old from her Sparks meeting (Sparks are the kiddy version of Brownies). The meeting is held in the school gym where both my kids go to school.

And it’s Halloween season. Boo. I vant to d'link your blood.

Anyway, in the front hall of the school, near the entry to the gym, the school set up a table to display Halloween pumpkins decorated by students. Most are really creative and cool. One is not. It’s a pumpkin with a scowl and a sign announcing “I’m a Gangster”. Oh, nice.

We all know that schools are now more social indoctrination centres than academic institutions. Kids know that being sensitive and caring is more important than being discliplined and smart. They learn that evil corporations are raping our societies and environment and to trust nanny government implicitly. They are taught to love multiculturalism and be suspect of traditional white Christian culture.

Oddly, somewhere along the way, our schools seem to have forgotten to teach our children a very simple social fact - that gangsta culture is vile, reprehensible and loathsome. In fact, it would appear that they allow students to express respect and admiration for gangstas.

When I saw the pumpkin I went out to the car, got a pen and napkin, wrote “Gangsters Suck” on the napkin, went back into the school and stuck it on the pumpkin. I hope the poor kid who made it sees my comment. I hope he (or she) is offended. However, whatever they feel, it could never match the offence I felt when I saw this piece of artistic excrement sitting in my children’s school.

Tomorrow I’ll be calling the Principle and my school trustee. I might even write the Minister of Education. I’m going to ask them if next year I can expect to see pumpkins labelled “I’m a Nazi” or maybe “I’m a Rapist”.

Next weekend we’ll read in the papers about a few more shootings and murders committed by gangstas. And surely, many misguided children with stupid parents will think that these fools are cool. Hey, maybe, somewhere between showing our kids how to put on a condom and teaching them about the joys of socialism, our schools could somehow fit in a lesson or two about the poisons of gangsta culture.

The Truth About Kashechewan

Things are looking mighty grim on the Kashechewan reserve on James Bay. I’ve seen pictures in the media of their streets and even the inside of their homes. The issue of clean water aside, garbage, trash and filth are everywhere in their environment. Their back yards resemble a war zone. One resident’s basement looked like an alley in Bangladesh. Or at least what I would imagine an alley in Bangladesh to look like. Litter and garbage littered the floor. Empty bottles, food wrapping and containers were everywhere.

And I asked myself, how can people live like this? Why would anyone allow the streets of their community, let alone the inside of their own homes, to deterriorate to such a horrific extent. What kind of people would live amongst trash and filth here in civilized Canada without cleaning it up and why would they have such little respect for themselves and their environment?

Is this a natural cultural phenomenon? Certainly not. To believe such a thing would be to believe that these people are somehow genetically inferior. So, if this disorder is not cultural, it must be due to their social condition. And what is their social condition? Easy. Their social condition is one of complete and total government dependency.

Therefore, the equation is evident. Total and complete government dependency equals total and complete social failure.

The people of Kashechewan are not an anomaly in Canadian culture. Rather, they exemplify the normal social outcome that people can expect when they give up their god given right to personal autonomy and allow government to take total control of their destiny. Look at any welfare housing complex anywhere. You’ll find similar evidence of squalor and failure.

The fate of the poor, unfortunate people of Kashechewan should be a warning to us all.

People who allow the almighty, omnipotent state to provide for them can expect to eventually be abandoned by the very state they depend upon. It is inevitable.

After all, the state doesn't even know your name. Neither does it know your children's name or your parent’s. It only cares about itself and its own perpetuation. It will support you only as long as it benefits itself. And, when you are totally and completely dependent and it somehow determines that it can abandon you with impunity, it will. After all, you are only as important to it as the outcome of the next election.

The lesson is thus: depend on government at your own peril. Unfortunately, the people of Kashechewan and every other native reserve and government welfare housing development should have already learned this lesson by now. But they have not. Their willing dependence on government continues and is supported and promoted in many media sources. In fact, anyone who speaks out against government dependency with the aim of reducing such dependency is often painted in the media as intolerant, insensitive and even racist.

Pity.

Trust the Village and It'll be all right

Do you have any young kids? I do - two daughters. One ten and one five.

My ten year old is a willowy brown haired beauty. She’s feisty, opinionated and, thankfully, not that into popular culture. My wife and I can take credit for that. After all, today’s culture is poisonous. There’s no rap music in our home, no music videos on TV and no teen magazines with half naked teenage sexpots strutting their stuff. We don’t allow it.

Our youngest is a bundle of energy. Flaming red hair and a temperament to match. If you never believed in stereotypes before, my obstinate, red headed beauty will give you pause. She is everything you have ever heard about red heads and then some.

Being a dad these days is a tough go. There is so much out there that is contrary to any reasonable parent’s sensibilities and moral beliefs. Magazine covers in every storefront with half naked girls and women strutting their sexuality as if all they are is dependent on how sexed up they can look. Music videos that make it clear that if you don’t got the booty, you just ain’t happenin’. Horrible ebonic slang that ensures the marginalization of anyone who speaks it. Kids on commercials and TV shows that get to mouth off to their parents and stay up ‘till all hours of the night.

I worry. I worry about the culture we have created. I worry about the messages that our media is sending our kids. I worry about all the tired, sensitive, overworked, gutless parents who capitulate to their children’s whining demands to appease their own guilt. I have to compete with these parents. Every night I hear how so and so gets to stay up late and eat at McDonalds five times a week.

I remember reading that Hillary Clinton once said that it takes a village to raise a child. I don’t give her credit for this profound little gem. I’m certain it was said by someone before her. In fact it’s more or less a philosophical social staple for many parents these days who have too much on their minds to raise their own kids. And don’t doubt it, when these parents say “Village” they really mean "society". Of course, they don’t really expect the village (or society in general) to raise their children. They just want society to take some of the pesky parental and financial responsibilities off their hands so they aren't unduly inconvenienced by parenthood.

Hey there. Reality check. Society cannot raise your children in the same way you can. If you let your children listen to 50 cent and your daughters dress like whores, society will not protect them. In fact, society will only encourage them. Or haven’t you noticed?

Parents, if there’s a problem, it’s you. You have the power. Whatever your kids become is your responsibility. Sorry to have to break this to you, but society will always disappoint you. Especially today's valueless secular societal cesspool. Society isn’t equipped to care for your children or love your children or rescue your children from bad things. If anything, the opposite is true - we need to rescue our children from society.

Oh, and to all you socialists out there, please feel free to substitute the word "government" for the word "society" in any of the above text. Sorry.

Frooosh Goes The Magic Dust

Centuries ago, all scientists believed the earth was flat and that all heavenly bodies, including the sun, revolved around it. Oh, those whacky scientists.

Tell me, do you believe in reincarnation? I didn’t used to, but now I’m not so sure. After all, look at today’s batch of scientists. Don’t they remind you of the flat earth bunch of 500 years ago? Take their explanation of how human life came to be. Almost all, without exception, believe in evolution. Excuse me, I mean the “theory” of evolution. It is a “theory” after all and not a scientific law like the law of gravity or something.

The sun rotates around the earth. Einstein’s ancestors were plankton. Riiiiight. Good to see that scientists have remained consistent in their absurdities throughout the years. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

Millions of years ago, or so the “theory” goes, a sun somewhere went supernova. The gasses and particles exuded from this explosion floated around for awhile, mixed, mingled and eventually, from this concoction, life emerged. Don’t worry that this part of the “theory” violates two fundamental scientific principles - the law of thermodynamics, which states that complex molecules cannot assemble spontaneously; and the law of biogenesis, which holds that life cannot emerge from non-living matter. These pesky details are not important. Just have faith in the professional guessers in white lab coats. After all, they’re smarter than you could ever be. If Copernicus were here, he’d tell you - the scientific community is always right.

And don’t even bother asking where the sun that started this momentous chain of events came from. It just existed. That’s all you need to know. Apparently there were suns and stuff out there forever and ever. There was no beginning. Kinda like eternity as mentioned in the bible.

Lets review. So far, we have this so called scientific “theory”, which apparently violates two scientific “laws”. Hmmmm, looks like we better change the laws eh. After all, the alternative would be to question the “theory” of evolution. And we all know what that would lead to – questions about creationism, God and stuff. And that subject matter is just too creepy for a good secular society to contemplate discussing.

So, as we are taught in school, it all started with a big bang. (I wonder: If a sun explodes in the cosmos and there’s no one there to hear it, does it really make a bang? Maybe it’s more like a “Kraaaack” or maybe a “Frooooosh”. I hope not. “The big Froooosh” doesn’t sound nearly as compelling as the “Big Bang”.)

In any event, the explosion and all that dust and stuff was just the beginning, What about what came after? That, of course, is the other big sloppy part of this so called “theory” – that all life on earth evolved from the microscopic life forms spawned from that magic dust. Never mind that there is no fossil evidence of transitional forms of life between single-celled organisms and complex invertebrates. Never mind that there is no evidence of transition between invertebrates and fish, or between any species of fish for that matter. Most tellingly, there is no real fossil evidence showing the so called "descent of man". In fact, there is such a dearth of evidence that you could actually take all the human-like skeletal imprints and structures that scientists use in support of the “theory” of evolution, and fit them all inside an average SUV.

It would appear that with evolutionism, we have to take a lot on faith. It’s a lot like a religion, really, with one big difference. Most religions require a belief in some sort of higher power(s), intelligent design or immortal soul. Evolutionists, however, have disgarded the idea of intelligent design, choosing instead to believe, on faith, that the emergence of life was just a marvelous spontaneous accident. You, me and Peter Pan are just cosmic anomalies created from magic dust. Here for a short time and then gone. Purposeless, souless, and futureless.

Honestly now, is it any wonder that popular culture today is so focused on sex, instant gratification, materialism and superficiality? After all, if this is the only turn you’ll ever have at the buffet table and no one is watching you or judging you, you’d be silly not to feed your face good. And fill your pockets too.

Whatever the case, it should be plain to everyone that scientists have latched onto this “theory” of evolution as a means to explain what is unexplainable. It’s a convenient crutch for them to lean on when challenged. A curtain behind which they can hide their ignorance and nurse their fragile egos when asked questions to which they do not have the answers. I suppose some would say they are just like priests. When challenged, they default to the standard platitudes: “Well, it’s a mystery”; or my personal favorite: “You just have to have faith, my child”.

And we do have faith, don’t we. We do believe. Some believe in God, some believe in science. However, whichever way you lean, you have to believe in the one common element that ties evolutionism and religion together – the belief in eternity.

Of course, the idea of eternity is originally a religious one and isn’t scientific at all. It’s a belief based on faith, not empirical evidence. And guess what? Faith is also a religious concept. Imagine that - scientists using religious concepts to convince people to believe in their “theory” of evolution. Now that’s ironic. Oh well, we could hardly expect people who believe that all things come from something else to have an original idea, now could we?

Soul Mate Mythology

I once had a friend who was a secular humanist, atheist, agnostic, Darwinist, non believer. During his journey through life, on his way to hell, he met a girl and fell in love. “She’s my soul mate” he told me. “How can you have a soul mate when you don’t believe you have a soul?” I asked him. I didn’t get invited to the wedding. They divorced two years later. ‘Soul mates’, it would seem, are not eternal.

I’ve been in love a few times. Had my heart broken. Broke a few myself. Then I met my wife. We’ve been together almost 18 years now with two beautiful daughters. She’s the best thing that ever happened to me and a gift that I will never fully deserve nor, probably, appreciate. I love her and would die for her.

But she’s not my soul mate. How could she be? After all, there’s no such thing. It’s a myth. A great big, sappy, mushy, unrealistic fabrication created by some two-bit hack romance novel writer to make the girls clutch their chests and sigh big wheezy sighs. Or, maybe some phony baloney Casanova came up with the idea when he realized that it could part a woman’s knees like Moses parted the red seas. Yep, it would appear that these days, the ‘soul’ has become just another guard rail keeping us on the road of carnal fulfillment and instant gratification.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that we don’t have souls – that’s for far wiser people than me to debate - just that our souls don’t have a mate.

Here’s the rub: if you believe that people actually do have soul mates you have to believe that there is no one else in the world for them. Certainly, it renders the term “soul mate” relatively meaningless if everyone has a few thousand soul mates out there to choose from, or even a few hundred. Or even a dozen. If the term soul mate is to mean anything, there can only be one for everyone. Isn’t that the inference when people use the term "soul mate" - that there is no one else in the entire world for them?

And yet there are (how many?) around 6.5 billion people in the world? But, only one you. A wonderful, witty, interesting, intelligent, startlingly attractive and singularly unique person. (Keep reading, there’s lots more disingenuous, gratuitous flattery to come.).

So, first of all, how likely is it that your unique, one-of-a-kind soul could have a mate in the first place? Second, how many mates do you think are out there for it and how likely is it that you could find one among the 6.5 billion other unique one-of-a-kind souls in the world? After all, you come in personal contact with how many other people in your entire life where the chance arises for a intimate relationship – a few hundred maybe? Let's be generous and say a thousand. That’s 6.5 million to one odds that you'll actually encounter your very own soul mate among the 6.5 billion souls on earth. Ask any bookie, they’ll tell you, those are terrible odds to bet on.

And what about people who find their so called soul mate, are divorced or widowed, and then find another? How lucky is that eh? And what about those who have two or more souls mates on the go at any one time. Wow. Now that’s what I call beating the odds. Those folks should go live at the race track. They’d clean up.

And that’s just dealing with the present day. How many people, do you think, have lived in the last 50,000 years? A couple hundred billion. Half a trillion maybe? Did all their souls have potential mates too? I just had a terrible thought, what if the singular, unique soul that was a mate to yours lived 2000 years ago. That would be a drag.

And yet, in spite of the tremendous odds, coupled with the fact that soul mates are about as real as Santa Claus, there are still a lot of people out there who actually think they’ve found their ‘soul mate’ It just goes to show, insanity is not the sole domain of Islamic terrorists and members of the Michael Moore fan club. Many normal people apparently have their own personal delusions to deal with, especially when it comes to affairs of the heart.

Once upon a time, people were content to fall in love, get married and live their lives together. There seemed to be no need for such pie in the sky, golly gee, intangible concepts like ‘soul mates’. And even if there was, at least they believed they had a soul, unlike many people today who believe that souls are imaginary except, of course, when they can be exploited as romantic fodder to satisfy their selfish needs for sexual gratification and companionship.

Just remember, if you have a soul mate, or are looking for one, that means you believe you have a soul. And if you believe you have a soul, then you have to acknowledge the existence of a higher power. And if you believe in a higher power, you have to accept that he or she has some control over your destiny. And that should give you some comfort. Because anyone who believes that their soul has a mate shouldn’t be left in control of their own destiny. They’re just not mature enough.

Oh, and by the way, sorry that there was no more insincere gratuitous flattery. I just said that to get you to keep reading.

Remembrance Day is For Everyone

Every year, on Remembrance Day morning, I take my two daughters to our local cenotaph in Toronto to partake in the service. They are both still too young to fully understand exactly what it’s all about, but every year we go together. It is important to me that, when they become adults, they carry with them a realization of, and appreciation for, the sacrifices made by the brave men who fought and died defending the world against tyranny and Nazism and the strong, courageous women who kept our nation together during those horrific times.

On the drive to the cenotaph I see the schools filled with our young people. I see sidewalks, plazas, cars and shops teaming with immigrants of many different skin colors, religions and ethnic backgrounds.

Then I arrive at the cenotaph to see a small group of people who are mostly white and up there in age. And I wonder, where is everyone else? Where are the representatives from all the ethnic communities? Where are all the young people and children? Was Remembrance Day designated an “old white persons” day by our government?

Sixty years ago our world was being torn apart by a fanatical madman who was in the process of taking over Europe and all the countries around him. It is estimated that Hitler was responsible for the deaths of over 10 million civilians. This doesn’t even include the soldiers who died fighting him.

Imagine what madness would have ensued if Hitler had not been defeated and had won control of all the resources in Europe and Russia. Imagine that madman in possession of Russia's nuclear capabilities. Imagine how many would have died. How long do you suppose it would have taken him to move on to Africa, India, Asia and other parts of the world? Surely, our world would not be the same today. In fact, it is not inconceivable to imagine that the world would be so different that many of the people who have immigrated to Canada since WWII would never have been able to come here at all. Our lives would be so different that the spouses we have today may never have entered our lives and the children we have may never have been born. There may not even be a Canada as we know it today. All that we are, all that we have, we owe to those who suffered and died defending our way of life.

And yet, here we are, those born here and those who immigrated here, people of all ages and ethnic backgrounds, all of us owing a tremendous debt of gratitude to the Canadian soldiers who died defeating Hitler. Why is it, I wonder, that so few of us feel inclined to demonstrate that gratitude by attending Remembrance Day ceremonies?

Surely, our veterans deserve better. So, in the spirit of Canadian inclusiveness, I’d like to extend a invitation to everyone, especially our ethnic community leaders, to put aside some time this Remembrance day morning. Wear a poppy. Rally your family, friends and constituents. Take your kids out of school. Call your local Legion, find out where the closest cenotaph is and attend the ceremony. You will not believe the feeling in your heart when the National anthem plays and the veterans stand at attention with the Canadian flag waiving proud and free. Sure, there’s the Lord’s prayer and some Christian references. But who do you think the Canadian soldiers prayed to as they were being massacred? You don’t have to worship their god to appreciate the strength their faith gave them. And your being there will show them that you appreciate the profound sacrifice they made.

I invite everyone to join me, celebrate our freedom and pay respect to those who gave us that freedom. It’s the least any of us can do for those to whom we owe so much.

Language and the Truth

Years ago, people with mobility problems were called crippled. Over the years, this term has been dropped in favour of handicapped, or disabled, or physically challenged, or differently-abled.

When I was growing up there was a severely mentally handicapped girl living next door. No one I knew made fun of her. In fact many of us often took extra care to be nice and help her. When I referred to her in conversation, I referred to the retarded girl. Not in a mean way. There was no intent to offend. To me, at that time, many years ago, it was simply what she was. I was a child and to me it was a matter of fact.

In today’s society the words “crippled” and "retarded" resonate almost like a slap in the face. Maybe because they are direct, unambiguous terms that invoke strong, direct images and a powerful emotional reaction. At some point, someone, somewhere was sufficiently offended to start a campaign to erase the words from our vocabulary. They told us the words were bad and we vowed never to use them again.

Today, we use the same terminology – differently-abled - to describe people with many different kinds of challenges, including people who cannot walk and people who suffer from mental deficiencies. One size fits all. No potentially offense words, but no recognition of individuality or differences either. And no truth.

Those who actively promote these linguistic changes usually do so because they believe that it will create a more caring society – one where no one is ever excluded or offended. I’m sure that many of them actually have good intentions. However, I never forget what the road to hell is paved with.

People in positions of influence and authority - especially bureaucrats, politicians, businessmen and priests - have long understood the power of the spoken and printed word. Control language and you not only control people’s thoughts and emotional responses; you diminish their ability to act and think as individuals. In essence, through language, they can collectivize and control us, body and soul.

Bill Clinton said he acted ‘inappropriately’ with Monica Lewinski. It’s inappropriate to serve white wine with beef. What he did was much worse than that. Our ability to think and see the world clearly is being challenged every day by people in positions of power who never use clear direct language. And the less clear the language, the more difficult it becomes to discern the truth.

In his old stand-up routine, George Carlin provided another good example of how our language is being engineered to shield us from the truth. Years ago, soldiers used to suffer from "shell shock". Two syllables. A blunt, effective term that conjured up negative images. And that will never do. So it was replaced with a kinder, gentler (and longer) alternative - “battle fatigue”. Four syllables with the true meaning of the words almost obscured, but not totally. So they came up with “post traumatic stress disorder" - a virtually meaningless, ploddingly long, eight syllable monstrosity that effectively obscured any meaning whatsoever. Mission accomplished. No offensive language. No negative imagery. No truth.

There are thousands of other examples of how our language has been softened to the point where many words and terms mean absolutely nothing and invoke no emotional response whatsoever. People don’t lie anymore, they are imprudent or make unfortunate errors in judgment. No one is raped, but many are sexually assaulted. You can’t buy a used car but there are many previously enjoyed ones. Men are no longer impotent, but they do have erectile dysfunction. CEOs don’t steal, they misappropriate. People don't die in Hospitals, there are just the occasional negative patient outcomes. Governments don't tax us, they simply engage in income redistribution. They don't have a department of war, they have a department of defense. And they have no soldiers, just peacekeepers. Employees don't get fired, they seek employment opportunities elsewhere. And Companies don't fire people, rather, they undergo an internal reallocation of resources or downsize (Oh, sorry, "down" is so negative. Now they call it rightsizing.) In some cities cab drivers are called Urban Transportation Specialists. Honest! People don't move, they relocate. Children aren’t rambunctious, they suffer from attention deficit disorder. Draft dodgers are called contientious objectors. And there are no old people anymore, just seniors or elderly folks. Notice that, in all cases, short, clear, powerfully visual words have been replaced by longer, ambiguous ones that provide false comfort, trick our perceptions, and hide the true meaning of what is going on.

Is it any wonder that people in our society are growing more and more detached, disaffected and indifferent. After all, years ago I felt sad and sympathetic when someone told me about a cripple - maybe because I knew what a cripple was. But I feel very little of anything today when someone uses the term differently-abled - maybe because I have absolutely no idea what differently-abled means. I guess those who forced this language change on us didn’t foresee that little wrinkle.

Maybe I shouldn’t let mere words influence my emotional reactions. But I do. We all do. I think it’s sad that we are losing so many words that have clear meanings, which invoke clear, strong, visceral responses - and replacing them with limp ambiguous drivel. Sure, there are fewer words for people to take offense at these days, but if it diminishes our ability to think clearly, communicate accurately, and act compassionately and confidently as individuals, is it really worth it?

We Come In Peace (To Save Canada)

In my dream, benevolent extra terrestrials descended to Canada and took over the federal government. They then issued the following proclamation:

“We have been studying your society for a considerable time and can stand by no longer while you fritter away all that has made you successful. We have watched your deceitful, corrupt, self-serving Liberal government slowly kill your democracy and strip your nation of its priceless traditions and values. You have become a weak, complacent, unprincipled people. You do not deserve to be saved. But we pity you. And we can no longer stand back and allow this atrocity, this cultural genocide, to continue in Canada. It is a crime against humanity. Therefore, we have assumed control. Effective immediately, for your own benefit, the following adjustments will be made to your laws and public policies:

PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE: Your politicians behave like baboons. To remedy this, no noise or vocal outbursts will be permitted on the floor while the house is in session except by those asking and answering questions. Penalties for violating decorum will range from fines to expulsion from the house by the Speaker. The Speaker will be a non partisan judge appointed by a Committee made up of Provincial Premiers. The Speaker will operate Parliament like a court of law in that he/she will have the authority to force government to provide direct answers to all questions or hold it in contempt. There will be a two term limit on all elected MPs and a one term limit on the Prime Minister.

ELECTIONS: Only citizens will be eligible to vote. Elections will be held on a fixed date every 4.5 years, rotating between the spring and autumn so Canadians do not get bored. (You do have such short attention spans.) No polls will be published within 30 days of an election. Electronic, web based, or mechanical voting of any kind will be outlawed. Many Canadians barely understand a pencil and paper. In addition, data is much more easily corrupted and manipulated than physical paper ballots.

CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS: The Charter is hereby suspended. Past decisions will be upheld. No future court challenges based on the Charter will be entertained by our court system. No longer will the destiny of Canadians be determined by unelected elitist Supreme court judges based on their flawed, biased interpretation of this vague and ambivilent document. There are sufficient protections under law to maintain fairness and equity in Canadian society. Let government write the laws and the courts interpret them. And let this dichotomy be unbreachable.

SUPREME COURT: Judges will be appointed by the PM for a 7 year term on a rotating schedule. To assure a smooth transition, new appointees will sit in as observers on trials and deliberations for one year before taking over from their predecessor. An all-party Committee will conduct public hearings on the appointments, question prospective judges and have the ability to veto the PM’s decision.

IMMIGRATION: The number of immigrants will be reduced. Canadian culture is undergoing radical change at a rate too fast to be managed effectively and for the sole purpose of sustaining the corrupt ruling party’s hold on power. Furthermore, Canada will accept only one immigrant over age 45 for every 200 immigrants under age 45, unless they put up a $100,000 bond. There are already too many old people in Canada to care for.
- - Illegal refugees arriving unannounced on Canadian soil will have no rights to a lawyer. They will be detained until their cases can be heard. All decisions will be final. There will be no appeal. Rejected claimants will be deported immediately. Unemployed refugee lawyers will be reassigned as Wal Mart greeters across Canada.
- - All immigrants and refugees whose applications are accepted will be assigned to communities throughout the nation so as to facilitate integration and avoid the continued proliferation of today’s harmful culture of exclusionary mono-cultural tribalism and Liberal vote buying.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE: The parole system will be eliminated. Criminals will be required to serve their entire sentences. Parole will be replaced by an effective program to rehabilitate and integrate criminals back into society. A life sentence will mean life. Concurrent sentencing will be outlawed. There will be no plea bargaining except to reward someone who testifies against another criminal. Importing hard drugs or dealing in large quantities of same will bring a life sentence in jail. Considerable jail time will be given for carrying or using handguns in crime. Paedophiles will be jailed for life after their second conviction. The Youth Criminal justice Act will be scrapped in favour of a new regime focused primarily on restitution and public shame. Shame is a powerful deterrent.

GOVERNMENT GRANTS AND SUBSIDIES: no further grants or government funding will be given to any political or social activist group. Groups with a worthy cause will be able to rally support among the public and obtain private funding. The public should not be expected to pay for their ideologically driven leftist escapades and social engineering missions. Likewise all corporate welfare including grants and tax breaks to profitable corporations will be eliminated.

MULTICULTURALISM: This divisive program will be eliminated. Canadians should celebrate their similarities as human beings, not focus on their differences. Newcomers should adopt the values and respect the traditions of Canada. Those who would ignore Canadian values and traditions, chosing instead to wallow in their own foreign culture, should do Canada a favour and go back to where they came from.

GUN REGISTRY – This program will be eliminated. It is a hideously expensive, useless travesty of Liberal malfiescence and incompetence.

BILINGUALISM – This program will be eliminated. It is deeply biased and is the mechanism through which Canada’s Francophone minority has seized control of the nation to dominate virtually all areas of Canada’s government and bureaucracy. Even today, Quebec is allowed to be unilingual French while the rest of Canada is forced to be bilingual. In the interest of fairness to the Anglophone people, this mechanism of French oppression must be dismantled.

NATIONAL CHILDCARE – This program will be eliminated. If the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, it has no business in the nurseries or the rest of the house either.

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY – This program will be eliminated. White men have been punished enough.

CBC – This travesty of unbalanced journalism and covert right arm of Liberalism will be eliminated. Airfare to Cuba and North Korea will be generously provided to any employees who wish to seek refuge in a place where their ideology will be embraced.

SENATE – This government body will be eliminated. If our senators have any use at all, except for producing reports that Parliament ignores or exercising blind partisan loyalty, they have not demonstrated it lately.

GOVERNOR GENERAL – This position will be eliminated. There is no other choice, really. With no CBC, there will be no one qualified to become GG.

ARMS LENGTH FOUNDATIONS – These institutions will be eliminated. The very fact that the Canadian government formed secretive mafia-inspired foundations to handle $billions of tax dollars and then made it illegal for the Auditor general to check their books says it all.

MILITARY: Some surplus plus funding from the eliminated programs will be diverted to increase the Canadian army to 250,000 bodies. Additional ships, submarines, and aircraft will be purchased and deployed. If necessary, mandatory participation will be invoked as is the case in Switzerland. Disabled vets will be well taken care of. Canada must be able to defend itself in this world of villains and tyrants. Let this be the first few steps toward attaining this crucial goal.

ETHICS COMMISSIONER: The EC will be appointed by the official opposition and report directly to Parliament.

HEALTH CARE: there will be a carefully structured and regulated implementation of some private services for essential treatments and surgeries using the health care systems of enlightened European nations such as Sweden and Finland as models. This will be expanded as necessary. The number of doctors, nurses, facilities and equipment will be increased until everyone has a family doctor and access to timely care.

FISHERIES: An increased Navy presence will conduct comprehensive, continuous patrols of Canadian waters, impounding foreign fishing boats in violation of our limits. All violators will be subject to criminal proceedings in Canada.

KYOTO: Canada will immediately rescind all Kyoto commitments and leave the radical left-wing environmental junk-science to the nations gullible enough to believe it. Protesters will be entered in a draw to win a Hummer.

OIL: Significant effort will be expended to develop policy that will allow Canada to become self sufficient in gas in 10 years, never to rely on the middle east again.

CRTC: The CRTC will lose all disciplinary powers. Anyone who feels offended at something written or said can take action through the courts. Freedom of speech and truth in the media will take precedence over protecting Canadian’s overly fragile sensibilities.

RCMP – The head of the RCMP will not be appointed by the Prime Minister, but rather by a non partisan committee. This will free our politicized national police force to conduct thorough, competent investigations of our government when corruption arises, for a change.

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE: Canadians who contribute continuously for 10 years will be eligible for one year’s coverage at 100% of their pay if they lose their jobs through no fault of their own. Canadians who accrue 20 years of contributions will be permitted to cease contributing altogether until they collect from the system.

CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL: The Tribunal will be disbanded immediately. There are already sufficient remedies under law to punish those who discriminate and harm others. Canadians do not need another partisan appointed, unaccountable bureaucracy to promote the agenda of the nanny state and circumvent the individual rights of Canadians.

NATIVE AFFAIRS: Even we, as all knowing benevolent extra terrestrials, with the wisdom of the ages to draw upon, have no idea what to do about this. We are not Gods. Sorry, but you’re on your own with this one.

As our noble benefactors finished their speech, Canadians everywhere rejoiced. Then I woke up. But, oh, what a dream it was.

Driving Tips For Ignoramuses

“Ignoramus”. I like that word. It’s got a certain ring to it don’t you think? My mother, rest her soul, used to use it when she was perturbed with someone. So, in loving memory of her, I’d like to dedicate this column to the ignoramuses of the world. You know who you are.

On second thought, there are just too many ignoramuses out there for me to cover in a single measly column. So, I’m going to have to drill down, peel away the layers, deconstruct the paradigm, cut to the crux of the issue. (Geeez, with verbal diareah like that spewing from my keyboard, I could be a high priced consultant.) Anyway, after careful consideration, I’ve decided that if there is one type of ignoramus more widespread and worthy of our attention than any other, it is the ignoramus driver. Oh yes. You know who you are.

Maybe you’re one of the drivers who got their license from a cereal box. Maybe you think the world revolves around you and are just too self absorbed to be courteous. Maybe you’re just too stupid to care. Whatever the case, here’s a few tips. Please take them to heart.

First, turn signal etiquette:

- - When you are at the end of a driveway or parking lot waiting to enter traffic, put on your turn signal. This way everyone else knows which way you plan on turning. It’ll make everyone’s life easier, trust me.
- - Signal when you are changing lanes, especially at high speed. If you don’t, you’re not just an ignoramus, you’re a dangerous idiot.
- - In fact, signal anytime you’re making a turn or changing lanes. And turn the darn thing off when you’re done. No one likes driving for miles behind someone whose blinker is going non-stop.

Next, some general driving tips for ignoramuses:

- - First off, turn the cRAP music down. Nobody wants to hear that brainless, monotonous unmusical garbage blasting out with its vile, repulsive lyrics. Most cRAP is an affront to every civilized person in this society. (No hate mail please. If I wan your ‘pinion, you ho, I’ll axe for it. What up wit dat? No wad I’m sayin’?)
- - When you are approaching a red light and it’s possible to move to the left, please do so. That way anyone coming up behind who wants to make a right turn can get past you and won’t have to wait for the light to turn green. It’s called consideration.
- - When you are first in line to make a left turn after the light turns green, for heavens sake, move well out into the intersection. Don’t just sit there over the crosswalk. There are other people behind you who would appreciate getting through the light this time ‘round. They’ll like you better if you let them.
- - If you’re going to drive under the speed limit stay in the right lane. Better still, sell your car and take the bus. You’ll lower national stress levels by at least a couple of points.
- - If you are not going to drive over the speed limit stay the heck out of the left lane. This too will lower stress levels all ‘round.
- - If you need to apply make-up while driving you are apparently too ugly to be out in public. Go home immediately, draw the blinds and get stinking drunk. Then get some cosmetic surgery.
- - If you drive alone in the car pool lane (or what is referred to here in Toronto as the “diamond lane”) give yourself a pat on the back. Your gas tax pays for the pavement. In other words, you pay more tax than public transit riders. Punishing people who pay more tax makes no sense. And, ironically, the fine you’ll receive is also a tax. If a cop tickets you, ask them how it feels to be a tax collector. I bet they’ll be plenty peeved. On second thought, never mind.
- - When someone lets you merge in front of them, give them a wave and a smile in appreciation. If you don’t, they’ll think you’re a jerk. And they’ll be right.
- - If you change lanes on the highway more than twice a minute, continuously, to get ahead of the cars in front of you, you are an impatient twit.
- - If you speed past a car only to have it slowly pull up beside you at the next light you should feel like a fool. If you don’t, I recommend some serious self-reflection.
- - If you drive with kids in the car who are not appropriately buckled in you should go immediately to Canadian Tire, buy a hammer and proceed to hit yourself in the head with it until you knock some sense into yourself. And, with every blow, repeat this out loud “I am a mega-ignoramus.”
- - Ditto, if you smoke in the car with children present. Only, instead of a hammer, make it a baseball bat.
- - Finally, for the dyslexic among you, that red octagonal sign at intersections does not say “POTS”. It is not a reminder to go home and start supper. Nor is it an invitation to slowly roll through the intersection without stopping so you can get home faster.

The preceding has been a privately funded, public service announcement. Your welcome.

Here Lies Natural Law - R.I.P.

I’m writing this column au natural.

Oh, relax. I don’t mean naked. Although it’s hot enough these days to warrant it. I mean that, as I write this, I am living under the same roof as my wife and children. We actually have a functioning ‘natural’ family unit. I get to kiss my kids good-morning and good-night every day and sleep in the same house. Surely there is no love more encompassing or more ‘natural’ than the love of a dad for his kids. None more than mine at least.

Without a doubt, the ‘natural’ family unit – one man, one woman and their children - is the most elegant, efficient, successful, and totally ‘natural’ social creation in the history of mankind.

Have I used the word ‘natural’ enough yet? Four times in two short paragraphs. Redundant? Maybe. But there’s a method to my dadness. I’m just setting you up for this week’s tirade on the subject of ‘Natural law’.

‘Natural Law” is a term that refers to the laws of ‘nature’. You know, the laws that govern how we exist in the natural universe. In ancient Rome, ‘natural law’ meant the instincts and emotions of humans and animals – instincts such as procreation, self preservation and the love we feel for our offspring. (Please note: there is no mention of government or government programs there. Government is NOT natural. Unlike the natural family, government is a cold, unnatural, artificial and temporary social construct.)

If I had to provide a scenario showing how natural law applies to the human race, I would do it like this: ‘One man and one woman form a life-long monogamous relationship. They have children. They raise their children in their family unit. They impart their values, ethics and principles to their children. They care for their aging parents. Their kids grow up, find mates and form their own family units. The kids nurture their children and care for their aging parents. The cycle continues in this way. And so on and so forth.’

From the beginning of time, the sanctity of the family unit as enshrined in ‘Natural Law’ was all that stood between us and oblivion. It sustained us. It is, irrefutably, the very reason we have survived as a species. Unlike some animals, humans are totally helpless for a long time after birth. Throughout the ages, if human babies did not have a parent to remain with and nurture them and another parent to protect and provide for them, they would not have survived. It's the same with old people. They depended on their children to help and support them as they aged and died.

Anyway, as we all know, these days here in Canada it’s a heckuvalot different. The family is slowly being replaced by government as the most important institution in our society. And the natural cycle of life – the truth of natural law – is being cast aside by a generation of selfish, narcisstic humanists and misguided, state-worshipping socialists.

We shouldn’t be too hard on them, though. Lets face it, Natural law is a drag. It actually requires disclipline, self-sacrifice and an adherence to a shared set of societal values. Yuck. On the other hand, our benevolent Canadian government asks nothing. No sacrifice or discipline is required. In fact, the less you do for yourself the more the state will do for you. The more irresponsible you are, the more responsibility the state will take for your life. The fewer pesky morals, ethics and principles you adhere to, the more you will need to go begging to the state for help and the more of your soul the state will own.

It’s a religion, really. What Jesus is to Catholics, government is to humanistic socialists.

Unlike the natural family, whose sole purpose is to raise children to be independent, responsible, well balanced, self sufficient adults; the unnatural, artificially created Canadian state is quite happy if you remain dependant forever. It is the way it maintains power. If you require nothing of the state, it will, in the words of Marx, whither and die. It will grow weaker, smaller and less intrusive. The government knows this and preys on our vulnerability. Just look at Canada’s new national childcare program. The government does more, you do less and you become increasingly unable to survive without it. (Oh, by the way, I offer my apologies to socialists for using the words of Marx against you. But, lets face it, poetic justice is sweet.)

Most socialistic societies, like Canada, develop in the same way. The people always start off as the master and the government as the servant. But, as years pass, the roles become reversed and the servant becomes the master. Tell me, here in Canada, who is the master - the people or the government? Who depends on whom? Who crawls to whom? Who fears whom? Who is patronized by whom? Who is controlled by whom? Clearly, these days in Canada, the people are the ‘who’ and the government is the ‘whom’.

Freedom is power and power is control. However, there can be no freedom, power or control without personal responsibility. The more responsibility the government assumes over your life, the less freedom you have and, the more power and control the government has over you. Cause and effect!

Believe it or not, I actually have a point to make here, and it is this: after tens of thousands of years of success, the ‘Natural Law’ cycle seems to have broken down for a lot of people here in Canada and in much of the western world. These days we have little need for ‘Natural Law’. There is no need to cleave to the family in the interest of procreation or self preservation. After all, we now have our omnipotent, unnatural nanny-state to take care of us from cradle to grave. And, like pavement over grass, the government continues to spread while the natural family is slowly smothered underneath.

Someday, however, government will no longer be there to care for us. History shows that all governments fall. For us to think that our society, with its frail, pathological dependency on government, will be spared, is just plain foolish. In the end, the families that adhere to the principles of natural law and look inward for strength, rather than to government, will survive. Those who depend on government will fall with the governments they depend on. Maybe not tomorrow, but someday.

My kids are still young. And maybe, as they grow, they too will be swept up in the new-age Canadian socialist culture of government subservience. Maybe they will grow to love and depend on government, just as so many of their peers inevitably will. (Certainly, it is what they are being taught in school and through the media.) And this makes me fear for the future of my descendants. But, in the end, if they choose this path, it will not be because of me. It will be in spite of me. And in this, I can take some comfort. For, at least I tried to teach them the natural truth.

The Enemy Within

Our western democracies are under attack by individuals who hate our way of life and seek to destroy everything we stand for. They loathe our traditions. They detest America and Israel. They despise white skinned Christians. They hate capitalism. They want to replace our values with theirs.

I bet you think I’m referring to radical Islamic terrorists. Sadly, I’m not. I’m referring to the plethora of left-wing politicians, artists, media outlets and interest groups that dominate our social and political landscape. They are the enemy that we should really fear in our war on terror, because they are the ones who seek to destroy our will to resist the terrorists. Consider how they have behaved thus far:

1. In September 2001, radical Islamic terrorists killed 3000 Americans in the WTC attacks. Since then, the left has blamed America, rather than those who perpetrated the acts. As I understand it, they are currently arranging for the WTC Memorial to be mainly a museum showing controversial images of 9/11 and ‘discussing America’s role in the world’. (this is code for: ‘discussing America’s evil imperialist activities’.) What should be a simple, respectful memorial to the dead is in danger of becoming a socialist indoctrination centre, portraying America in a less than complementary light and instilling feelings of guilt and self loathing in all weak minded people who visit.

2. In July 2005, radical Islamic terrorists killed over 50 people and maimed hundreds more in four suicide attacks in London. Within days the media started carrying stories of frightened Western Muslims who feared reprisals. As a result, Western non Muslims became the intolerant villains, all Muslims became the victims, and the dead became incidental participants in the Muslim’s victimhood. If their objective of the left is to make the more insecure among us lose respect for each other and our society, they are surely on the right track.

3. Anytime America, Israel or one of their allies strike back against terrorism, leftists always moan about how retaliation is counter productive and mean spirited. Inexplicably, when we are attacked, they sadly shake their heads and note how the terrorists are merely striking back in retaliation for the misery their people have suffered at the hands of American imperialist foreign policy. Their blatant hypocrisy may seem obvious to many of us, but, rest assured, some westerners will listen and buy into it. As a result, their resolve will be weakened, and with it, that of their entire nation.

4. And where are the many left-wing feminist groups? When there are terrorist attacks you would expect feminists to rally around their flag to defend the culture that gave them the freedom be the majority in our medical schools and university law programs. You would expect them to denounce societies where raped women are stoned and daughters who dare choose their own mates are killed by their fathers. But they do not. Rather, they are either silent or vocally opposed to any and all measures taken to protect ourselves; thus implicitly promoting angst and doubt among their supporters and fellow citizens.

In order to wage war effectively, an antagonist must be familiar with several important military strategies and utilize them effectively. For example an antagonist should seek to destroy the enemy’s morale and morals and spread confusion among them. Clearly, the left is becoming very good at this. They incessantly rail against traditional Western values and morals. They continually cast the West as the villains and the terrorists as the victims. Their goal is to confuse us so we will question our moral right to defend ourselves.

An antagonist must also try to control media outlets and public information sources. Ask yourself this, what message do you commonly see on the CBC, in the Toronto Star and New York Times? Is not America commonly cast as a heartless, capitalist, imperialist, juggernaut and Britain as its likewise cruel accomplice? Are Muslim nations not portrayed as the unfortunate victims, prevented from controlling their own destinies by the greedy, oil hungry, capitalist West? Just ask Michael Moore, he’ll tell you.

It doesn’t seem to matter to them that all nations of the world where Muslims control the government are non-democratic, oppressive regimes where the people, especially women, suffer under Islamic law, while the rich princes, despots and elite live in luxury. It doesn’t seem to matter that millions of moderate Muslims have fled their homelands to enjoy the freedom and opportunity of Western democracies. In the eyes of leftists and much of the Western media, capitalist North Americans and Europeans are always at fault. They hammer this message daily. And, sadly, some of us buy into it.

If there is one thing we can take from these unfortunate developments, it is this: We are facing a radical Islamic enemy of tremendous resolve and conviction. If we cannot summon the same resolve and conviction in defending our way of life from their attacks – if we continue to gaze at our navels and question our very right to exist – we will lose this war. We will not deserve to win. And the terrorists, with the help of their Western left-wing apologists, will win. We must not let them.

Spanking, Is There Anything It Can't Do?

Here in new-age Canada some people actually think that spanking should be a criminal offense. Imagine, administer a few light taps on your child's bum and end up in jail. I have no idea where these people come up with this stuff. Obviously they have not done their research. Spanking is an effective, tried and true disciplinary method for dissuading children from exhibiting harmful or inappropriate behaviors. In addition, most people are not aware of the many side-benefits that spanking provides to families and society in general. Here, let me give you a few examples:

1) Chairs last longer in homes where children are spanked. Children with stinging buttocks tend to stand a lot more and sit a lot less than the average child. This saves wear and tear on chairs. Parents who buy fewer chairs can invest the money saved in their child's education
.......spank your child - secure his university education.

2) Our nation is safer when children are spanked. The next time you are spanking your child you might want to try tapping out a few messages in morse code. This will turn a simple disciplinary activity into a learning experience which will prepare your child for a rewarding career in the armed forces.
.......safeguard democracy - spank your child

3) More spanked children learn to write with either hand. Trying to block the blows to one's buttocks with one's writing hand can sometimes result in an injury to the hand. As a result, the child is motivated to learn to write and eat with his opposite hand while the injured hand heals. Thus the lucky child learns a new skill that will be invaluable in adult life
.........spank your child - promote ambidexterity.

4) Spanking helps develop artistic ability. Does your child have difficulty distinguishing between subtly different shades of red - like, magenta, rose, crimson, burgundy, pink, sunset, blush, etc? Well, your troubles are over. The next time you are spanking him, use a mirror so he can see the gradual change in his bum's color. Be sure to point out each shade of red to him as it occurs and spell each word slowly. Within a few months you will have a child who will probably grow up to be a talented painter.
.......support the Arts - spank your child.

5) Spanking builds a national identity and brings people together. Have you ever wondered how those Olympic athletes learned to run and jump so well? Yep, everything they are, they owe to spanking. You’d be surprised how strong and resilient young people grow when they are running through the house, leaping over furniture and jumping out windows, trying to avoid a good licking. These are the kids who go on to win the gold for their countries.
.......spank your child – help build National pride.

An Unsolvable Riddle?

Wait for it. You’ll hear it any minute now. Wafting over the airwaves, staring back at us from our newspapers, inundating our perceptions. Plaintive cries for tolerance and understanding. Chastising looks and comments from our political leaders as they beg us not to blame the entire Muslim community for these loathsome sub-human acts of depravity perpetrated against the British people. If you listen closely you will almost be able to hear the sound of the air moving as the media and our politicians spin around, turning their backs on the victims of Thursday’s terrorist atrocities in Britain and forming a tight circle of protection around our Muslim communities.

It happens every time an attack occurs. The victims become a subtext and those who share the aggressors’ religion become the main focus. Is it just me, or does anyone else feel like screaming: “I am not the racist. I do not hate Muslims. I do not desire the death of anyone. Do not plead with me to be tolerant. Because in doing so, you are assuming that I am not tolerant. I deserve more credit than that.”

I recall when Osama Bin Laden named Canada as one of the so-called Christian nations that should be targeted by terrorism. He also named Britain, Spain and the USofA – all of which have been attacked. One by one, the nations Osama hates are getting their comeuppance in the name of his god. Someday, it will be our turn here in Canada.

We truly are screwed. Some of us will surely die at the hands of these monsters. It is only a matter of time. We face an enemy that believes that any man who dies while killing those who do not subscribe to their radical version of Islam will be sent to paradise and given a bevy of beautiful virgins. I don’t know about you, but I’m not a radical Muslim. That makes me a target. They would kill me without ever knowing my name. A harem of virgins is a mighty powerful intoxicant.

Tell me, how do you fight an army that does not wear a uniform? How do you defeat people who believe that they fight for god and that everyone who does not worship their god must die? How do you fight a person who has been raised from childhood to crave the deaths of any one who is not like him while hiding like a cowardly animal amongst innocents? Such duplicitous, conniving individuals are capable of anything.

And, do not doubt it, this is not about poverty or capitalism as some may suggest. This is all about religion - a religion where certain radical adherents believe that all who are not like them must die.

Did the 9/11 terrorists scream “give us economic fairness - give us refrigerators and more food” as they ploughed their jets into the twin towers? No. They screamed “Praise Allah”. Everything they do is driven by what they perceive as justifiable under their religion. Do not listen to those who would tell you different. Just as the misguided adherents of Christianity were the enemy a thousand years ago as they killed those who rejected their god, the adherents of radical Islam are the enemies today. They do not want economic equality. They want us to convert to their religion or die.

Right here, right now, in Canada, we have radicals who subscribe to these beliefs. They live two lives. On one hand they send their children to our wonderful free Canadian schools. They enjoy free Canadian health care. They reap all the benefits of living in a free society created by us infidels. Infidels who welcomed them to live with us here as brothers and sisters.

On the other hand, while they smile at us on the street and take advantage of our tolerance and good will, they secretly plot against us and dream of the day when we are dead. They are here. They are among us. And they will attempt to kill us. Just as they killed the Americans, the Spanish and, now, the Brits.

There is nothing we can do. And they know this. It is their ace in the hole. We surely cannot demonize all Muslims. That would be horribly wrong. I have grown to know several Muslims in my life, one in particular is a kind and wise man. He is very active in his Muslim community and seeks to spread peace and understanding in all that he does. In many ways he is a better Canadian than most white people I know, including me. And there are many like him – Canadian Muslims who share nothing with the terrorists with respect to hatred, malice or insanity.

So what do we do? The enemy is among us and he is unidentifiable. Many here in Canada share the description of the evil ones while not sharing their evil beliefs. Yet, those who share their description risk being perceived as sharing their evil. It is a terrible quandary.

Unfortunately, it is a riddle that may not be solvable. A tolerant nation that welcomes all people into its midst takes upon itself the risk of welcoming those who hate us. A nation that denies sanctuary to anyone who shares the same religion as those who hate us is intolerant.

And yet, this is the choice that we must eventually face: Remain an open and tolerant society and accept the fact that our tolerance will inevitably cause death and misery among us, or limit our tolerance and possibly save Canadian lives.

A Tale of Two Families

There’s a nice little street in a nice little town. On this street, two houses sit side by side.

In one house there is a nice, well adjusted family. They live their lives with some semblance of discipline. The parents nurture their children, care for their property and get along quite well. They are active in the community and frequently help the less fortunate.

In the other house, chaos reigns. The family is exceedingly dysfunctional. The parents behave like petty tyrants. They spend all their money on themselves and ignore the needs of their children. The children are beaten and seldom have enough to eat. The property looks like a war zone.

One day, the major of the town - Bob Delgoff – learns of this unfortunate situation. And being a good, compassionate man, he decides to do something about it. So, he pays visit to the Nice family. Once inside their home he proceeds to lecture them in a most sanctimonious fashion. “You need to do more to help your neighbours.” says Mayor Bob. “You have so much and they have so little. You should be ashamed.”

“But Mr. Mayor,” says Mr. Nice, “Mr. and Mrs. Tyrant spend all their money on themselves and neglect their children terribly. They are the cause of their own problems. Why aren’t you lecturing them instead of us?”

The mayor, having no retort to this unexpected bit of irrefutable logic, sputters something unintelligible and makes a hasty retreat.

The next week he is on the local TV station with Mayor Nobo of a neighbouring town, announcing a benefit concert with proceeds going to Mr. and Mrs. Tyrant. "We must help their children." Mayor Nobo exclaims. "They are innocent victims and we must do all we can to save them."

Everyone feels sorry for the Tyrants' children and the concert is a huge success. Being the good citizens that they are, the Nice family attend the concert and give generously.

Mayors Bob and Nobo make a big public display of turning over the proceeds to Mr. and Mrs. Tyrant. They make the front page of the local paper and the evening news.

Mr. and Mrs. Tyrant promptly buy a 60" Plasma screen, a satellite subscription and three crates of Rum. The children are locked in their rooms so the parents can party throughout the night.

The following week, two of their eight children are found dead of starvation and a third is hospitalized with pneumonia. Everyone feels sorry for them. Another concert is organized.

But, this time, the Nice family doesn't attend.

Something's Amiss With Marital Bliss

Holy Matrimony Batman. Gays and lesbians can now marry anywhere in Canada. It is the law of the land.

I must admit that, for a long time, I had my reservations about whether this would be a good thing or not. But, after a lot of thought, I’ve decided that I simply don’t care anymore. Sure, in my heart, I will always believe that marriage is solely between one man and one woman. However, I also believe in a lot of other antiquated things as well. Like, for instance, that divorce should be serious business and married couples should be treated with higher regard than common law couples. Talk about old fashioned, eh?

It should be clear to everyone by now that marriage lost most of its relevancy long before gays and lesbians were let in. The advent of no fault divorce and equal treatment for common law couples did more to degrade and devalue marriage than gay people ever could. In fact, when you look closely at those unfortunate social developments, gay marriage seems almost innocuous in comparison.

I think it’s time that all the supporters of traditional marriage faced it: gay marriage hasn’t rendered the institution of marriage meaningless; it’s already been relatively meaningless for a long time now.

And who do you suppose we can thank for setting us on this path of Holy Matriphony? Let me give you a few hints: he’s a man who told his sons that communist Russia would be the nation of the future; a man who admired and wanted to emulate Fidel Castro; a man who rode his motorcycle through the streets of Montreal during the second world war wearing Nazi paraphernalia. Now, you may ask how such a short sighted person could have gained the power to destroy marriage. Simple. Short sighted Canadians elected him Prime Minister. Need I say more about Pierre Elliott Trudeau?

Here’s how it went down. In 1967 Trudeau passed legislation making it easier to get a divorce. From there, things continued to slide until eventually we arrived at where we are today, with no-fault divorce - a legal process where a marriage can be dissolved by one party only, for no particular reason whatsoever.

Imagine, the most important personal contract in the history of humanity is now the only contract that can be broken by one party only, without the other party’s consent. Thanks to the wheels set in motion by Trudeau, a contract between you and your plumber to fix your toilet is more binding than a marriage contract.

Oh, and incidentally, did you know that mothers initiate 70% of all divorces involving children and two-thirds of the time it's because of a “lost sense of closeness” or “not feeling loved and appreciated”. Hmmm, when you think about it, maybe women are more of a threat to marriage than homosexuals. (That was a joke. No hate mail please.)

So, as divorces became easier to get, more people got them. As a result, people started looking at marriage with suspicion and distrust. After all, if so many married people were going to get a divorce, wouldn’t it be much simpler to just not get married in the first place? So many didn’t.

Of course, as we all now know, common law relationships are far less stable than married ones. And many people found themselves single after living common law with nothing to show for it. They didn’t have the same protections under the law that married people had. It didn’t matter that they were free all along to either convince their partner to marry them or find one that would. That wasn’t good enough. They wanted the same protection and property rights as married people, without the pesky bother of signing the necessary legal contract.

So, with various tax-funded feminist and leftist groups scratching at Parliament’s door, the government started passing laws giving common law partners the same rights as married spouses with respect to such things as succession law, property, government programs, pensions and support payments. By government decree, common law couples became equal to married couples, without ever having to make an equal commitment. Pretty sweet deal if you ask me.

Once upon a time, a man and woman would make a public vow to each other and sign a legally binding marriage contract signifying to the world that they intended to spend the rest of their lives together. It was a contract that was respected. It meant something. And it brought with it special privileges that people of lesser resolve – i.e., common law couples - were not eligible for.

These days, people who sign a marriage contract and make a lifelong commitment have no more rights than people who can’t be bothered. A couple willing to pledge allegiance to each other for richer or poorer, in sickness and health, until death do part, are now no more valuable to society and are treated no better than a couple who shack up and just happen to last a few years.

Of course, when it comes to the devaluation of marriage, we shouldn’t forget the media proliferation of shallow, superficial people using marriage as a publicity stunt. Take, for example, Brittney Spears’ weekend marriage. And then there’s the many reality TV shows where a bevy of beautiful, attention starved miscreants compete to marry someone of equally low personal quality.

Is it any wonder that marriage has been reduced to a sad, pathetic parody of what it once was?

Anyway, I still believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman. They would marry freely, choosing their own mate, with no cultural coercion or blackmail by their parents or community. Those who married would receive the benefits and respect that such a profound and freely offered lifetime commitment deserves. Anyone else of the opposite sex, same sex, different species or whatever, who chooses to live together, would be free to do so, but would have no spousal rights whatsoever.

We were all born to heterosexual couples; the vast majority of us to married ones. Without them, none of us would be here. These couples have created and nurtured us and our world. For untold centuries these couples had their own word to describe and celebrate their special and unique unions. And that word was marriage. It was once thought that they deserved their own word. Now, according to some, they no longer do. But still, the word itself remains in our vocabulary, despite having little resemblance to its original meaning. We can only hope that it, in its new guise, serves the future as well as it, in its old guise, served the past.

Whatever the case, it has been quite a while since marriage has held any significant meaning for heterosexuals. If things continue as they are, someday marriage will mean nothing at all. Some may believe that this is because homosexuals were allowed to share it with heterosexuals. As for me, I sincerely welcome homosexuals to this quickly disintegrating institution. Still, I cannot help but feel a little feel sad for them that they were not allowed to share it with us before it came to mean so little.

Boy Scouts Bad, Girl Scouts Good

It’s a girl's world. Boys are toast. I wouldn’t want to be a boy growing up today for anything. The deck is stacked against them. It used to be that boys could be boys. They fought and wrestled. Some bullied. Some were bullied. Some triumphed over bullies. All persevered. After all, they were boys. They had boundless energy and endless bruises, scrapes and abrasions. They were boys and the world was there's.

These days, boys can be kicked out of school for pointing a banana at a buddy and shouting ‘bang, bang’. In North Carolina, a first grade boy was expelled for kissing a girl classmate on the cheek. The school referred to his behavior as ‘sexual harassment’. (I bet the outcome would have been different if he’d kissed a boy. He’d likely have been given a commendation for such enlightened behavior.) In any event, I bet we’ll see the same scenario unfold here in Canada soon. It is inevitable. Boys who behave like boys are bad. Boys who behave like girls are good.

Take, for example, the unfortunate, hyperactive boys who are routinely drugged into a vegetative state of docile capitulation by their drug-company influenced doctors and oh-so-busy parents. You never hear of this with girls. Lets face it, these days, being a normal, exuberant boy is almost a crime. Or, at least, a terrible inconvenience for their parents.

Right now, as I sit here, I am so happy to have two daughters and no sons. After all, the era of males has passed. It was a respectful run, but all things must come to an end. The majority of university students studying law and medicine these days are females. Girls are doing better in school than boys and entering the workforce in record numbers. Males are portrayed in many TV commercials as sniveling, bumbling weaklings, trying to cook supper and clean the house. While women are strong and decisive with meaningful careers. Check it out the next time you’re watching the boob tube.

OK, I’m raving. I’m chewing on this like a pit-bull on a Chihuahua. Why? Simple. Today I found out something that has turned my world upside down. Something that chilled me to the bone. Something so monumental and historically significant in the area of equal rights that it makes everything else pale in comparison.

Today I found out that girls can join Cubs and Scouts but boys are not allowed to join Brownies or Guides.

And let me tell you. It made my Y chromosomes run cold. Surely the end of the world is near. The end of a world where males have any chance at all of not being trodden under by the unstoppable surge of female dominance. Give up boys. Your subservience is inevitable.

Apparently, the battle of the sexes is no longer about females fighting for equality. It is now about males sharing everything and females sharing nothing.

I always thought it quite reasonable for boys and girls to have their own little groups and organizations to the exclusion of the other. The Canadian Brownie/Guide website agrees and shares the following bit of wisdom with us:

“Guiding provides an accepting and nurturing all-girl atmosphere where a girl can be herself.”

Cool. Seems sensible to me.

Still, I can’t help but wonder, if girls need an all-girl atmosphere to be themselves, who are they when they join Boy Scouts? Do they then become someone other than themselves? Surely not. So, if girls can be themselves around boys in Scouts, why can’t they be themselves around boys in Guides? And, most importantly, if they need to have their own organizations, why would they object to letting boys have their own organizations too?

And here’s another quote, this one from the British Girl Guide website:

“Girlguiding believes that the needs of girls and young women are best met through an organization catering specifically for girls.”

Again, I think this is totally sensible.

Too bad the same thinking does not appear to apply to boys. It seems that the needs of boys are not best met through an organization catering specifically for boys. Rather, the needs of boys appear to be best met through being forced to share their little groups with girls, whether they like it or not.

And it doesn’t stop there. I also discovered that, while not only are boys excluded from brownies and guides and girls allowed to join cubs and scouts, there are also ‘Girl Scout’ troupes. And, of course, they also exclude boys from membership. So, while ‘Boy Scouts’ are a sexist anachronism, ‘Girl Scouts’ are perfectly acceptable.

Personally, I think that this is feminism gone mad. What’s wrong with little boys having an association just for them, where they can learn stuff and play with each other away from the icky girls? Who’s rights are threatened by allowing them to have such groups? More notably, what angry, misguided person actually launched a lawsuit to force boy scouts to let girls in? Heck, I’d hate to be a braincell in their head. It would be awful lonely.

Oh well, c’est la vie. There are probably no girls who really want to be cubs anyway. Just as there are no boys chomping at the bit to be brownies. The sad thing is that these innocent children are pawns in a much bigger game. A game instigated by parental social activists where phony rights that children never wanted or needed in the first place are foisted upon them. Rights that apparently apply to one gender only.

As I mentioned, I have two girls. They are my world. One is a Guide. The other will be a Brownie in a few years. I want to live in a society where they have the same rights as boys and the same opportunities to be whatever their capabilities allow them to be. They may make nothing of the fact that they are allowed in boy’s groups while boys are not allowed in theirs. Or, they may notice and actually like it.

I hope they don’t learn to like having more rights too much. After all, that would make them no better that the males their mothers and grandmothers fought to be equal with.

A Culture of Fear

Last week was a scorcher. There were several major smog alerts. I read that smog kills upwards of 6,000 people a year in Ontario. If you want to live, for god’s sake stay inside. And never let your children out of your sight. Pedophiles are everywhere. According to the National Missing Children's Services, more than 66,000 kids went missing in Canada in 2002. There will be more terrorist attacks in North America, and likely in Canada. Guaranteed. No one is safe. Not long ago a cow was diagnosed with mad cow disease. Please, put down that hamburger. What the heck’s the matter with you? Are you crazy?

Public Health Attorneys in California warn that potato chips cause cancer. Apparently, so does hydrogenated vegetable oil, soy, barbecued foods and garbanzo beans. Growth hormone is injected in all chickens these days. If your children eat eggs, they will reach puberty at an abnormally early age and die prematurely. Better get a burglar alarm for your home. There’s a lot of crime out there. Get one for your car too.

Look at that kid on the bike. My God, he doesn’t have a helmet on. No knee pads either. His parents should be shot. The Canadian Safety Council would freak if they saw that. Whatever you do, don’t go into that neighbourhood after dark. A woman was assaulted there last month. It’s just not safe anywhere these days. I hear that housing prices can’t be sustained at this level. Surely, the market will crash soon. And when it does, millions of people will go bankrupt. Our economy will be decimated. We should all be very worried.

Personally I thought Y2K was going to do us all in. But somehow we survived. At least for now. The rainforest is being cut down. Soon there will be no oxygen to breath. All the fish are all being caught and eaten. Soon our oceans will be empty. But that’s OK, We won’t be around to see it. All the fish are full of mercury and other carcinogens. Every bite brings us closer to death. Ironic, isn’t it, how the oceans we killed will end up killing us.

GM will be laying-off 25,000 employees. Entire cities will be economically destroyed. David Suzuki tells us that the earth is heating up and that global warming is a threat to all life on this planet. We are all in terrible danger. The glacier is melting. Oceans will rise and envelop the earth. Tornados, hurricanes, floods, forest fires and earthquakes are destroying dozens of communities. We are in big trouble.

The Canadian Foundation on Compulsive Gambling warns that gambling is highly addictive. Keep away from the casinos if you know what’s good for you. Lotteries are bad news too. North Korea has nuclear missiles armed and ready to go. World war three is surely just around the corner. Seventy-five percent of all Canadians have some sort of mental illness. How do you feel today? A little depressed maybe? That sounds like cause for concern.

According to the Heart and Stroke foundation of Canada, more than 40,000 Canadians have strokes each year - about 16,000 of these prove fatal. Maybe you’ll be next. Don’t take those nail clippers on the plane, they’ll arrest you. Hmmm, that swarthy man over there looks suspicious. Don’t swim in the water. It’s polluted. You’ll get sick and maybe die. Quebec is going to separate. Our country will be lost. We will all suffer. Smoking is banned in bars. Bar owners warn that their businesses will close and thousands will be unemployed unless the ban is lifted. Unemployment frightens me.

It’s really, really hot today. Don’t go outside or you’ll get heatstroke. Lawn pesticides will give you cancer. A meteor destroyed the dinosaurs, and someday one will destroy us too. It’s just a matter of time. You’d have to be crazy to give blood after so many Canadians got AIDS and Hepatitis C from tainted blood. Your son is just too active. That’s worrisome. Lots of boys are on Ritalin. You should try it. It’ll fix him right up. Conservatives have a hidden agenda. They scare me.

The Canadian Institute of Actuaries warns that there are too many old people and not enough young people in our society. If we don’t significantly increase immigration there will be a demographic catastrophe. AIDS doesn’t just affect gay men and drug users. We are all at terrible risk. Marijuana is a gateway drug. If you smoke it you’ll become a crack addict. Keep that pit bull away from me. They are all killers. Evangelical Christians will destroy our society. They scare me.

According to Statistics Canada, one third of children age two to eleven are overweight. Most will develop serious health problems when they grow up. Thirty people a year die of food poisoning. Are you sure you want to eat in that restaurant? Hate crimes are increasing. 50% of all marriages end in divorce. You think your spouse loves you? Ha. The world trade organization is out to enslave the world. Free trade will destroy our social safety net. Big corporations are evil. They terrify me.

Our heath care system is disintegrating and will not be there when we get old. Neither will the Canada Pension Plan. It’ll be bankrupt by then. World oil supplies are drying up. We must find alternative fuel sources or perish. When we get old we will surely get sick and starve to death in the cold.

Nice tan. Aren’t you worried about melanoma? The ozone layer is terribly thin. Here put on some of this sun screen. What the heck’s the matter with you anyway? You’re making me very anxious.

The dollar increased in value this morning; this is bad news for exporters. The dollar dropped in value this afternoon; this is bad news for importers. According to Canadian cancer statistics, at least 18,000 Canadians die of lung cancer every year. It’s the country's number two killer. This means that there's a good chance one day you’ll get it. For god’s sake, put that cigarette out. I’m really frightened for you.

A little while ago, a man died of Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) in Asia. The entire planet panicked. Surely birds will be the death of us all. Mark my words. Our city’s Chief Medical Officer of health warns that the next great plague is just around the corner. Maybe it’ll be a mutated strain of the West Nile virus, SARs, influenza or cholera. One thing’s for certain: we are all in grave danger. And we should all be afraid. We should all be very, very afraid. Twenty four seven.

In fact anyone who isn’t afraid all the time must be suffering from some psychotic disorder that allows them to distance themselves from reality and escape to an imaginary world. Quite frankly, such crazy, irrational people scare the beejeebers out of me.

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

It’s all been a pack of lies. All this talk about the evils of so-called two-tiered health care. Lies. All lies.

On Thursday the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark ruling that sheds significant light on the magnitude and depth of the lies; a ruling that promises to shake the very foundations of our nation’s state-run health care monopoly. In essence, the court ruled that the Quebec government’s prohibition on private health care insurance violates the rights of Quebecers to receive timely medical treatment and confirmed what we already know - that people are suffering and dying because they are forced to wait in line to access the public system. Furthermore, the court noted that, based on the experiences of other western democracies, it does not appear that private health care leads to the eventual demise of public care.

Imagine! For decades, Canadians have been told that so-called two-tier heath care would destroy our beloved universal heath care system. And now our Supreme Court tells us different. Think of all the sick Canadians who suffered because the government would not allow them to seek treatment outside the public system. Many lived in tremendous pain and even died waiting for treatment. Now we find out the government actually had no right at all to impose this onerous restriction on their rights and freedoms.

Now, let me be clear. I am not out to ruin the public system. I have no desire to deprive any Canadian, poor or otherwise, of health care when they need it. But, let's face it, the middle class is getting shafted here. There are tons of people out there defending the poor. And the rich need no one to defend them. That leaves only the middle class. You know, the people whose taxes mostly pay for the system. Tell me, who is defending their right to quick and effective health care? Who is protecting their right to live and be healthy? No one, that's who. Rather, sick middle class Canadians who need timely medical treatment have been blocked at every step by misguided leftist ideals and neo-socialist government restrictions on health care access.

It’s all just a big scam, really. We've been played for fools. Lets face it, here in Canada, the poor don’t have access to the same fast acting, well functioning health care system as the middleclass. Rather, the middle class have access to the same waiting lists and slow, unsustainable system as the poor. In essence, here in Canada, the middle class have been moved to the same level as the poor with respect to heath care access, not vice versa.

Of course, many rich and connected Canadians simply go south of the border for quick treatment. They have also have access to illegal private Canadian clinics that are hidden from poor and middle-class Canadians. As I understand it, our fabulously wealthy Prime Minister, Paul Martin, gets his treatment from a private clinic in Quebec. No waiting in line for that boy. Is my displeasure displaced by thinking that this is simply unacceptable?

And it's the same for most rich Canadians. Here in health care la la land, a tiny rich, elite segment of society have quick access to essential, life saving, private medical services while the government prevents the rest of us from doing the same. Some may ask how we have come to this. Perhaps Indian-Canadians would see the parallels with a caste system. As for me, I recognize the failings of our universal health system as the only possible outcome of any myopic, socialist-run scheme geared at making people artificially equal. As is always the case, the ruling class and elite benefit equally, and everybody else suffers equally.

The next time you hear some rich, elitist, left wing twit like Kiefer Sutherland, Michael Moore or Sarah Polly gush over Canada's universal heath system, you might want to ask yourself this: how long would they wait for a specialist appointment if they found a disturbing lump somewhere on their anatomy? Do you really think they would wait in line with us? They would be gone stateside in an instant. And yet they think they know what’s best for us. It is sad that we give them any credibility at all. Rich socialists really annoy me with their oxymoronic values.

As I understand it, aside from Canada, only Cuba and North Korea have outlawed private health care. Even such bastions of social enlightenment as Sweden, France and the Netherlands allow their citizens to access some private health services. Is it not sad that Canada has chosen to align itself with oppressive Communist countries when it comes to health care, rather than follow the examples of progressive European nations?

When I was growing up on Cape Breton Island in the sixties, everyone had a family doctor. And you could get in on a day’s notice. The doctors were well off and lived in the largest homes in town, just like today. People paid when they could and somehow even the poor received good care. The government helped out only as necessary. Lineups were pretty well unheard of. Today’s Cape Breton is very different. Under today's state monopolized system, vast numbers of residents have no family doctor and people wait considerable lengths of time for specialist appointments and treatments. It’s the same here in Toronto today. And it’s the same virtually everywhere here in Canada.

It has been noted many times that our health system is unsustainable and that people, in a free and democratic society, should have the right to seek out their own care rather than die on waiting lists or stretchers in hospital corridors. But, so far, the loud defenders of universal health care and their formidable media bodyguards have succeeded in stifling any meaningful debate by effectively demonized anyone who dares question the status quo. Even in the face of the court ruling, I don’t expect them to change their tune anytime soon. But maybe, while they contemplate the ruling, they could stop running around like chicken-little for a moment and answer the following simple question for me:

‘Can you prove to me that a careful and highly regulated implementation of some private healthcare services in Canada would have an overall negative effect with respect to access to the public system? Please provide statistics and examples with a focus on refuting why private health care has not had such an effect in France, Sweden and the Netherlands.’

Oh, never mind, I already know what their response will be. I can almost hear them and read their picket signs as they march in a circle:

“Hey hey, Ho ho, Two tiered health care’s got to go”

It is the level of intellectual discourse one can expect these days from the obsessive purveyors of our state run health care monopoly. Meanwhile, how many more of us have to suffer in pain on waiting lists and die prematurely before we stop listening to them and start doing what’s best for middle class Canadians for a change?

Wasted on the Wrong People

Remember that old saying: “Strike while the iron’s hot”? Well, I've got an updated version: "Strike while the weather's hot". That's what one thousand of Ontario's professional hydro employees are doing these days. It's ninety degrees in the shade. Not a very comfortable time to be walking the picket line.

Where I come from, Cape Breton Island, unions have historically played an integral and significant part in many people’s lives. More so, perhaps, than here in Toronto. So, I feel that I am suited to provide a unique perspective on this situation.

Twenty years ago I moved to Toronto from Cape Breton in search of employment. When I arrived I was a staunch union supporter. How could I not have been? Back in my grandfather's day many Cape Bretoners were subject to horrific working conditions and massive exploitation by unscrupulous and heartless corporate coal mine operators. Workers were paid pennies for crawling on their hands and knees all day, a mile underground, breathing toxic dust, while digging coal by hand. They were paid by the pound and quite often cheated by the company they worked for. They were virtual slaves and had no recourse but to unionize. They fought some hard battles for their rights. My grandfather told me stories of freezing, starving miners marching on the mining office in the dead of winter and being beat bloody by club-wielding company mercenaries on horseback.

I don’t think I’m much different than most Cape Bretoners, or other Canadians for that matter. I am proud of my forefathers’ sacrifices. I fully support the right of workers to organize and am very aware of the significant role unions have played in giving us all a higher standard of living and safer working conditions. But, I cannot help but feel a little disillusioned with some of our unions today.

I have noticed that some union members these days are very highly paid. Professional athletes, for example. Their so called ‘unions’ have to be the most puzzling and blatantly ridiculous misuse of unionism that I have ever witnessed. Is it not a travesty that these millionaires are allowed to form a union? And then we have our doctors. They pay dues and reap the benefits of membership in their ‘associations’, which are, in actuality, unions. They defend their incompetent members, control who is licensed and influence what wages are paid to their members.

Surely, the inclusion of these well paid professionals under the union banner has done nothing to give unionism credibility in our society. Is it any wonder that many regular working Canadians have little sympathy for unions these days?

And what about the striking hydro professionals. As I understand it, they are all engineers and managers. Their average annual salary is $80,000 a year. Many make over $100,000 a year. Imagine, in our society, we have privileged, educated, highly paid hydro professionals demanding the protection of a working person’s union and willing to hold the public to ransom to get what they want.

If my coal mining forefathers were alive today to see what unionism has become, they would probably just shake their heads. They would not understand. Personally, I don’t understand either. Unions are supposed to protect the common workers – the workers who need protection. They were never intended to be a security blanket for affluent sports stars, well-heeled academics and university educated professionals. Surely these people should be able to take care of themselves.

Clearly, we have a problem in our society. Highly paid professional people who should, by any reasonable historical standard, have no right to union protection are often the most vocal and adversarial defenders of their own privileged unionized positions. As a result, the word ‘union’ no longer resonates positively among the public as it did in the past. And the demands of union members no longer have the public support they once did. This is likely because many of us no longer see unions as organizations that seek equality with the rest of us. Rather we see them as organizations that would not hesitate to punish us to preserve their position as our superiors.

Unions can still serve a valuable purpose in our society. It's a shame that they are sometimes wasted on the wrong people.

Beneath the Grass and the Government

People just love their lawns. They are literally addicted to them. They cultivate them, nurture them, groom them, care for them and admire them. Just like they do their kids. Sometimes, even more so. Personally, I don’t have a lawn. I live in a condominium. So, I am not an authority on the subject. In fact, maybe I have no right at all to express an opinion on lawns being as I have no personal experience caring for one. Maybe there’s some existential, deeply emotional, satisfying feeling about having a well groomed lawn that I am not aware of. All I know is that I see them everywhere. Lawns literally dominate our landscape. They consume us. We are veritable lawn junkies. It’s like we are all members of some sort of mindless lawn-cult or something.

Lets face it, lawns are superficial, artificial and downright boring. They don’t represent nature. How could they? After all, they repress nature. They only exist because people expend great effort preventing everything in nature but grass from growing there. I wonder, where the heck are the environmentalists? Why aren’t they marching on people’s lawns in dandelion costumes demanding that evil suburbanites free their lawns from slavery. If they were worth their salt, ‘Greenpeace’ would be all over this by now!

Personally, I like dandelions. I think they’re rather pretty. Lawn owners, however hate them They kill them, in large disturbing numbers. It’s a sort of genocide aimed at weeds. Call it weedicide. Imagine being a dandelion growing on someone’s lawn and seeing some huge, unshaven, weedophobic homeowner lumber toward you, hoe in hand, a maniacal look on his face, a grotesquely oversized pot belly stretching his too-small “Budweiser” t-shirt so that the logo is almost unintelligible. Can you even imagine such a horrific fate? I am literally shaking as I write this. No dandelion deserves to face such unspeakable terror.

Let’s be honest here, lawns are not that attractive. They are flat, characterless, soulless patches of bland emptiness. They demonstrate the obsession of a sad, brainwashed lawnlove culture. I just can’t figure it out. What’s the attraction? I don’t get it. Why do we all want the land in front of our homes to look so blandly similar? Is there no pride anymore in individuality? Is there no respect for nature? Virtually every single home, in every single village, town and city has a spotless, meticulous, woefully generic lawn. Everyone and their dog has allowed this ‘lawn culture’ to take over their lives. (By the way, take the last three letters off the word ‘culture’ and what have you got? Right. Never doubt it, if you are part of a so-called ‘culture’, you are really just part of a big cult. In this case, a lawn cult. You cultivate your lawn don’t you? Remove the last five letters from the word cultivate. Scary, huh?)

So here we are. Everyone believes they have to have a perfect lawn. In fact, it’s like sacrilege to not have one. Call it a cult, or call it a religion, it’s all the same, really. Many of us spend every Sunday worshipping and loving our lawns. Lawns are more important to us than God. We literally revere them and cry when they develop brown patches or inconsistencies. We care less when the church is disrespected or when our children develop acne.

Whether you own a house or simply admire other people’s houses, I bet you like lawns. I bet when you walk or drive by people’s homes where the lawn is shabby and unkempt, you roll your eyes and comment on it. It’s like the state of someone’s lawn reflects on their quality as a person. Like anyone who does not conform with the socially imposed, lawn-cult norm is some sort of deviant - someone unworthy of your respect. And we are all guilty of it. We have all been conditioned through social pressure to buy into this intolerant, discriminatory culture of lawn-loving exclusionism.

If you let your lawn go, your neighbours would complain to you and probably the municipal government. And because everyone else in your neighbourhood is a lawn loving automaton, you would be doomed. You would get no sympathy or help from them. After all, you would be undermining the value of their homes by not making your lawn just like theirs. You might think you own and control your property. But, how you manage your property is really contingent upon the approval of everyone else and whether they choose to complain to the authorities.

Now, depending on where you live, the local government may or may not have the authority to inspect and regulate your property, including your front yard. If they do, they may determine that you are not complying with the necessary standards and codes and ask you to make your lawn more like everyone else’s. And you would. It’s what any good Canadian home owner would do. You would submit to the will of the collective and the state.

Here in Toronto, municipal politicians have taken the opposite approach. They apparently don’t mind weeds at all and plan on banning all pesticide use. Soon, all Toronto homeowners who want a spotless lawn will have to visit their chemical-free lawns daily on their hands and knees, trowel in hand. It’ll be hard work, but it’s worth it.

When I started writing this piece I had the intention of making it a point to note how we have enslaved nature through our lawns – how we have eradicated all other natural plants in order to ensure that our preferred plant slave, the grass, dominated over all things. However, after having thought about it, I’m not so sure this is true. In fact now I believe the exact opposite.

Rather than enslaving our lawn and being dominant over it, I have come to understand that we have actually become enslaved by, and are dominated by, it. The grass is our master, not the opposite. And the government is the master of the grass. If we want to know where we fall on the ladder of significance, it is somewhere beneath the grass and the government.

Think about this next weekend when you are cultivating your lush green master while I am having a cool drink at the pub. How much of your life will you sacrifice to eradicate a few shrubs or dandelions? Whatever the case, you better just get on with it. You might think of it as a pleasure, but, never doubt, it is really a social requirement. Very similar to a job. A job where you are paid nothing; but a job nonetheless. Do it or suffer the consequences.

Oh well, at least your neighbours and the people who pass by are impressed. That has to be worth something.

If You Can't Beat 'em, Join 'em

Week before last, the Liberal government almost fell. All parties were in election mode. We were on the edge of our seats. As a political aficionado, I found it fascinating to watch the Liberal party during this time. Paul Martin was a sight to behold as he effortlessly glided across our nation giving handfuls of our money to anyone who asked. He reminded me of a drunken sailor in the red light district at Mardi Gras. But with a little more class. Just a little more.

And, as much as it really irks me to see my hard earned tax dollars being used by the Liberal party to grease the palms of voters, I can’t help but feel a certain measure of grudging admiration. Lets face it, they’ve got it down pat. Nobody plays payoff poker better than them. That’s why they are the natural governing party of Canada.

So, I’ve been thinking: if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. There will be an election someday, sooner better than later I think. And if the Conservatives are to win that election, they have to just suck it up and get with the game. In other words, they must promise to pay Canadians a shed-load of moola, just like the Liberals do. After all, it must be clear to everyone by now that Canadians expect to be bought off with their own money. We are accustomed to selling our vote to the highest bidder. With that in mind, I would like to offer Mr. Harper a sure fire way to win the election.

Here’s the TV commercial that will seal the Liberal’s fate:

Sixty seconds

Stephen Harper is sitting on the edge of his desk, a Canadian flag hangs behind him on a pole. The walls are lined with books. His hands are clasped in his lap. He looks straight into the camera and says:

“I’m Stephen Harper, the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

"It’s time to move ahead. Away from the corruption, and arrogance of the Liberal party and into a new era of honesty, integrity and good government.

"Your Liberal Prime Minister, Paul Martin has been traveling across Canada buying your votes. So far he has made promises amounting to more than - Fill in an obscene amount here. And we all know where most of the money will end up, if he pays that is, in the pockets of Liberal party members and supporters.

"Well, we have a better idea. We'll give the money directly to you.

"If, my party, the Conservative Party of Canada wins a majority government, we will send every tax paying Canadian a personal cheque for one thousand dollars. We can do this and still be giving away less in total than the Liberals are promising.

"One thousand dollars in cash. It's doable and it's my promise to you.

Fade to Conservative Logo. Voiceover: “This message brought to you by the Conservative party of Canada"

Well, that’s it. A gilded stake thrust through the black heart of the Liberal vampire. I offer it to the Conservatives for free. Of course, it would cost around $22 billion to give every tax filer $1000. Hey, wait a minute, isn't that the total amount that Martin already promised during the recent faux election campaign? Gee, that works out pretty well, doesn’t it?

Laugh if you want. (I'm sort of smiling myself) But, before you dismiss this idea out of hand, I ask you to consider this:

First and foremost, there's the issue of integrity. That is to say, the absence of integrity in today's political environment. Let's face it, people don't want integrity, they want goodies. They love getting money from the government. In fact, they expect it. So, while many Canadians may at first feel offended at the idea of a government offering $1000 for their vote, we should never doubt one thing: greed will always triumph over self-righteousness. Expecting goodies from government is almost a constitutional right here in Canada.

Sure, the Toronto Star and CBC will bemoan the depths of cynicism to which the Conservatives have sunk. And many people will tell their friends that their vote is not for sale. They will hold their heads high and proud as they march into the voting booth. Then, in private, they will quietly mark an X beside the Conservative candidate’s name and spend the rest of the night secretly thinking about what they will do with the $1000. And when the conservative in their riding wins, they will throw up their hands in faux disbelief and claim that they didn’t vote for her/him.

And then there's the little matter of honesty. Buying people off at election time is nothing new in Canada. We already live in a society where government pays for votes. We all know it, we're just too self-deluding to call it what it is. In weeks leading up to the recent Stronach-scuttled election, Paul Martin made approximately $22 billion in promises in the hopes that those who benefit from the promises will vote for his party. If that’s not buying votes, I don’t know what is.

It seems to me that paying people directly would be a much more honest way of doing things. Instead of sneaking around like a Liberal weasel, slipping money in people's back pockets, why not just give them the money right out in the open, above board. If anything, this approach simply takes the corrupt, old school “wink, wink – nudge, nudge” vote buying process and opens it up completely to public scrutiny. It gives Canadians something they never had before in an election campaign - transparency, honesty and forthrightness. Most notably, it is a completely non partisan initiative. Everyone gets the money whether they vote for the Conservatives or not. That way, all Canadians benefit from the program, not just friends of the Liberal party.

Finally, this really IS doable. The cheques could be sent out by the Canadian tax authorities when they process each Canadian's tax return. And it IS affordable. It can be offered as an alternative to tax cuts, with the promise of cuts put off until later, maybe the next election. And we mustn't forget, the Liberals waste untold billions of dollars a year on ill-founded, selfishly motivated, programs and initiatives. Billions sent to arms-length foundations that cannot be audited by our Auditor General. Billions lost on the Gun Registry, HRDC and Sponsorship fiascos. $Billions upon $billions upon $billions given in grants and handouts to thousands of Liberal supporters, community groups, special interests, unions, companies and other grasping, groping Canadians all across Canada. The list is endless. I was turned on to this 'Public Accounts of Canada' report on Andrew Coyne’s blog. The extent of this vast nationwide network of Liberal beneficiaries is positively obscene. I'm not kidding. Here’s the link:

http://www.pwgsc.gc.ca/recgen/pdf/transfer04.pdf

If Mr. Harper has the guts to take this on, we could stop funding this vast, nation-wide, web of liberal dependants and just give the money directly to Canadians. A thousand dollars for each of us would be a good start. When you think about it, it's really just a down payment. God knows, the Liberals have stolen a lot more than that from us.

Lawyers, Politicians & Conflict of Interest

Have you noticed how many of our politicians are lawyers? Isn’t it odd that so many lawyers are drawn to public life? Imagine, all through the Western world we have lawyers, dressed as politicians, writing our laws. First they work as lawyers and administer the laws. Then they switch to a political role and write our laws. Then they retire from politics and switch back to a lawyers role and start administering the very laws they created. Think about it - we have the same identifiable group of people both writing and administering our laws. Is this not a classic conflict of interest?

Just to be clear, lets take a moment to define “conflict of interest”: As I understand it, a conflict of interest” occurs when someone plays both sides of the fence. You know, when someone has a responsibility to act in the interest of one party while having a reason – perceived or real – for not acting in the parties interest. Like, for example, if a hockey coach played goal for the team his team was opposing. That would be a conflict of interest.

Politicians and lawyers clearly have separate, distinct and, some would argue, conflicting roles in society. Politicians supposedly represent us all and accordingly are supposed to create laws that are in everyone’s interest. Lawyers, on the other hand, have very narrow interests. They represent only those who pay them and seek to use the law in a manner that is advantageous to only themselves and their clients. That's where the conflict comes in: Lawyers are able – either in reality or perceivably – to use the laws they created while serving as politicians to benefit themselves and their colleagues as lawyers.

In my view, anyone practicing law should be disqualified from holding public office. Rather, lawyers should be retained as advisors and permitted only to draft our laws in accordance with the wishes of our duly elected representatives. They should not be allowed to write the very laws that they and their entire industry have a vested professional interest in.

In my perfect world, our Charter and or Constitution would clearly state that lawyers, because of the conflict of interest inherent in the participation of their profession in the administration of our laws, are not permitted to serve as politicians and write our laws. A clear and unbreachable dichotomy would be enshrined in law and we would all live happily ever after.

And then I woke up.

Oh well, it was a nifty dream. Of course, it will never come to be. After all, most of our politicians are lawyers. And they probably really like having the power to both create and administer our laws. I have never read of any lawyers questioning their rights or abilities in this respect and I bet I never will. Anyway, even if enough politicians managed to launch an initiative to exclude lawyers from holding public office, I'm sure that every lawyer's society and association in the nation would be launching legal challenges. And we all know who would be ruling on those challenges: Judges. And we all know what judges are: Lawyers. Round and round and round we go.

I could end this here but, bear with me, I have one more point to make.

In their profession, lawyers - particularly trial lawyers - demonstrate a remarkable moral and ethical detachment from the reality of their personal lives. In fact, their personal values can be the very opposite of those they defend professionally. A trial lawyer can swat her child on the bum for being disobedient and then promptly drive to court and ask a judge to make spanking illegal. A trial lawyer can be pro-choice and yet represent a group that is pro-life. The very nature of their profession requires that their personal values be irrelevant when representing the interests of their clients. While the rest of us struggle to adhere to our personal morals, values and ethics in all aspects of our lives, trial lawyers have created a little world of their own where their personal values are somehow separate and unconnected to who they are professionally.

Is it any wonder that lawyers appear to have difficulty grasping why it is a conflict of interest for them to be politicians? After all, their essence as professionals, their very bread and butter, is based on being able to justify and reconcile the conflict of their personal interests and values with those of their clients. It must not be a huge stretch, then, for them to reconcile and justify the conflict of their role as lawyers with that of their role as politicians.

The Declining Currency of Respect

I respect you so much. Really I do. It doesn’t matter whether I know you or not. I respect you anyway. Immensely. More than you’ll ever know. Maybe you verbally abuse your goldfish. Maybe you’re sexually attracted to orange Jell-O. Maybe you’re a hard core communist with a poster of Castro above your bed. Maybe you’ve got a foot fetish for George W. Bush. Whether you’re a heartless capitalist, a hopeless socialist, a brilliant scientist or an illiterate crack addict, it doesn’t matter. I’m a Canadian and I respect you. In fact, I respect everyone equally and unconditionally. It’s what being a Canadian is all about.

As you can probably tell, lately I’ve been thinking a lot about ‘respect’. And I’ve noticed one peculiar thing – everyone seems to believe that they are entitled to it. And more interestingly - everyone seems to believe that everyone else is entitled to it. You’ll notice I’m using the word ‘entitled’. That’s because ‘respect’ has almost become a Constitutional right here in politically correct Canada.

We used to have the right to be free from oppression, persecution and prejudice; free to pursue our dreams and aspirations. That’s more than what most people in the world have. But it wasn’t enough for us. We wanted more. We wanted the right to be respected. But not the kind of respect that we had to work for. Oh no. After all, that would require too much effort. What we really wanted was instant respect, the kind that required no sacrifice at all. The kind of respect that was given automatically, regardless of the character or quality of the person involved.

So, here we are today. Many Canadians believe that respect is a right. Everyone is entitled to be respected by everyone else. That is why I respect you so much, dear reader. It is your right to require me to do so. And who am I to deny you your rights?

OK, I’m being facetious. Sorry, but I’m not buying into this culture of instant respect entitlement. I think it’s a crock. A serious crock.

Now, let me be clear, I’m not talking about civility here, or courtesy. These are not the same as respect. Certainly we should always treat others with courtesy, or at least civility. What I’m talking about is something totally different. I’m taking about respect. Webster defines respect as ‘to consider worthy of high regard’. I can’t help but wonder: if being respected means being considered worthy of high regard, why do we feel it necessary to respect everyone regardless of whether they’ve done anything to be considered worthy of our high regard? After all, if everyone is held in high regard, then no one is. And if we claim to respect everyone, what is it we feel for the people we truly hold in high regard? It can’t be respect. In fact, it is almost insulting to say we respect them. After all, we’ve already given our ‘respect’ to everyone else.

These days, you don’t have to accomplish anything worthwhile to demand respect. And you don’t need to have any particularly redeeming personal qualities. It isn’t necessary to be a principled person, or a wise person, or a person who works hard. You can be an unprincipled, stupid, lazy bum and still have the right to demand respect here in Canada. All you need is a pulse, really.

Tell me, what is respect worth in a society where everyone with a pulse is entitled to it regardless of whether they’ve done anything to earn it? Nothing, that’s what. These days, respect is about as valuable and genuine as the warm, welcoming smile and friendly handshake of a used car salesman. Or, a hug from one hollywood star to another.

This culture of empty, meaningless, rhetorical respect is no more clearly demonstrated than in the words of Wendy Babcock, a representative of a group called ‘Sex Professionals of Canada’. Recently, Ms Babcock wrote a scathing letter to a Toronto newspaper, taking them to task over suggesting that her profession is not respectable. According to her, sex trade workers deserve to be respected the same as anyone else.

When I read this I didn’t know whether to laugh or sigh. Leaving aside the fact that a group called “Sex Pro