Oh pooh ho, I’m getting a little tired of media gibes and media hype surrounding young Justin Trudeau and the Trudeau legacy. Of course, a majority of Canadians when polled would associate his family name with that of his father, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. This is just a natural as Americans recognizing the Kennedy or Bush names. After ten years of Steve, oh excuse me Stephen Harper, why wouldn’t a young dynamic individual stir up some excitement. Let’s face it, under control freak Harper and the blah ‘Conservatives’, politics has become as dull as sitting on a nest of Canadian geese eggs and hoping that they’ll eventually hatch. Come on folks, let’s recognize at least what Obama did for the States! He galvanized a whole generation of American youth to actually become interested in the political electoral process. After all, Canadians and Americans under forty represent their country’s future and should now take a leadership role. Justin Trudeau, at forty-one, has shown that at a minimum he can relate to the emerging common values of young Canadians: including those related to sexual orientation, new technologies, the environment, marriage, work-life balance, the legalization of marijuana, etc. The message appears to be one of hope and change and not of fear and retrogressive social policy thinking. Sure, there will be comparisons made to his father, both his famous and infamous traits. However, it’s been 45 years since his father won the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada, inspiring a whole country. A hell of a lot has changed since then and Justin Trudeau may just be the person to reflect many of those changes on his own terms — hopefully once again motivating a whole new generation of voters.
NRA Report Sees Guns as Path to Safety in Schools
Wow! Here we go again. The National Rifle Association, or as I prefer to title them “Nuts Running Amok”, has come out with a self-serving proposal to arm kindergarden teachers and janitors in American schools. Hehaw, if you already have far too many guns in the neighborhood, why not introduce even more lethal weapons? Indeed, little Johnny and Emma will eventually get the idea that carrying around loaded weapons is simply a part of ordinary everyday life in town. If the NRA had their way and that of their million or so members, every American citizen would be armed to the teeth, shoulders and waistline. Why amicably settle a dispute with one’s neighbor when a good old shootout would suffice. The scary point is that these people are actually dead serious, and I do mean dead. All the shooting range and safe gun handling instruction will never overcome the natural tendencies for humans to panic. Furthermore, such courses of action will never be able to prevent premeditated and preplanned attacks by deranged persons armed with semi-automated or automated assault weapons. As in the case of banks, the first ones to be taken out would be any armed security personnel. Again, the NRA is dealing only with a symptom of what obviously is a much greater problem – too many easily accessible weapons and not enough control over who possesses them. Let’s hope that the vast majority of sensible Americans choose an alternative route for the sake of their children’s futures.
Does a New Pope Really Make Any Difference!!!!
Here we go again. With the anointing of the new Pope, we are all expected to believe that some great changes are about to happen in the Catholic Church. Sorry, particularly because I’m not a Catholic, I just don’t see it happening. Just look at the average age of the Cardinals. Talk about being an old boys club!!! Now, I don’t begrudge Catholics all the ceremony, platitudes and admiration surrounding this most recent anointment. However, when it comes to the really important issues of the Twenty-First Century and the past history of the church, very little is about to change that would satisfy most modern societies. Thank God for the clear division between church and state. If anything, I would hope that the Catholic church will at least demonstrate a little more tolerance, both within and without. Maybe even share a bit of its enormous wealth with the poor. Or is that asking too much?
The Canadian Senate Needs to Disappear, and Soon!!!!
In recent weeks, a number of media accounts have emerged revealing inappropriate spending by Canadian Senators. It appears that some Senators aren’t certain where their “primary residence” is, although their appointment is based on the province which they are supposed to be a resident and to represent. Instead, we have Senators living year round in Ottawa who are claiming out-of-town residential and other expenses based on summer cottages, empty lots, and parental residences. Ouch!!! Now, taxpayers, who are already paying crazy salaries, endless benefits and exorbitant pension plans are on the hook for these additional costs. All for Senators who in many cases are in the Senate a few months of the year. Cushy job, how does one get appointed? Easy, just chum around with the current Prime Minister or work, run for or support the ruling party at some time in one’s past. Frankly, this so-called “honourable” institution of second sober thought needs to disappear. It’s no more than an out-dated anachronism. Provincial/territorial governments have performed quite well without a second level of governance. Can we really afford to continue to fiscally support an old boys/girls club in Ottawa? This is the twenty-first century and the Net Generation is changing the way in which politics is carried out and how societal policies are developed. They won’t stand for the continuance of outdated, expensive and exclusionary processes. At least, I hope that they won’t.
Can Republicans really be serious about their stance on women’s social issues?
The attached recent New York Times (Feb. 24, 2012) article highlighted some of the women’s issues raised by Republicans in recent weeks. As an outsider (i.e. a Canadian), I find the debate hard to believe and almost farcical in its tone given that this is the Twenty-First Century.
Okay Republicans, let’s have a Congressional hearing on women’s health issues (i.e. contraception) and invite only male representatives from a few selected religious organizations. God knows, no woman or women’s organization could possibly have anything important to say about such matters.
The Times’ article alludes to the fact that such anachronistic thinking could very well lead to so-called moderate and independent women voting for Democrats in the next election. Wow, no kidding!!!! First, one can only hope that there are some independent thinking women out there who believe that issues such as contraception and abortion are important to them. Imagine speaking out against pre-natal screening or requiring women seeking abortions to undergo an ultrasound in this day and age.
And what’s up with all these attacks on organizations such as Planned Parenthood? It’s bad enough that the U.S. leads all industrialized countries in the number of unplanned pregnancies among young single women, especially among minorities. Oh yes, let’s not even talk about introducing or improving sex education in one’s schools, as if to say that teenagers aren’t going to think about the subject at some point. This would certainly be news to the huge American pornography industry.
If I were a woman in the United States right now, I’d have to think hard and long about voting for a party with such regressive and demeaning thinking. It’s one thing to have strong religious beliefs, but it’s totally different to have the state impose them on all its citizens. I firmly believe, as did former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau did, that the state should stay out of the bedrooms of the nation. But then again, although a Catholic, he was just one of those crazy socialists north of the American border!
FROLITICKS 