It Takes a Hero

The Chicago Sun-Times decides to stop debasing itself

2012-01-24T15:58:00.000-08:00

Congratulations from the bottom of my ink-stained heart to the Chicago Sun-Times, which this week announced it will stop endorsing candidates during elections

Here's hoping this outbreak of common sense spreads faster than bed bugs because I suspect election endorsements are the single most foolish things newspapers do. Here I'll lay out five reasons why and then suggest a much better system.

I would love to hear some arguments from people who disagree with me on this. Clearly a lot do because over 700 publications made endorsements in the last United States election, which I find inscrutable and weird.

Why printing an election endorsement is insane:

1) It debases - Though endorsements are written by an editor or at most an editorial board, they reflect on the whole paper. The New York Times endorses Obama, The New York Post endorses McCain, etc. All the work your reporters went through to maintain their independence and impartiality? Gone, to the public eye. The institution itself is now formally in the camp of a political party, which is exactly where it ought not be.

2) It lingers - Ottawa Citizen columnist Dan Gardner continually ridicules the Globe and Mail every time the Harper government makes an inept fiscal move. And why shouldn't he? The Globe endorsed Harper for his fiscal chops in 2011. If his government fails and turns our economy into pudding, the Globe will have been wrong. The paper's reputation is now tied to the actions of a politician. Worse, criticizing the government's economic plans will now strike many readers as hypocrisy.

3) It's arrogant - As the Sun Times points out, newspaper endorsements don't have much impact. Of course they don't. Most voters have made up their minds by the time endorsements come out in the last days before an election. And even if you are undecided, who wants to be told how you should act? Especially by the profession most people rank somewhere between used car salesman and date rapist. Any first-year psych student can tell you this is not how the human brain works.

4) It's alienating (and probably bad for business) - So you're a newspaper and you endorse candidate X. Those who support him/her/it will probably nod smugly, maybe tweet it, then stop caring. But boy, are people who back candidate Y going to be pissed. They'll tear into your logic. They'll accuse you of being a conservative/liberal shill, and maybe they'll stop subscribing to a paper so clearly in the bag for that asshole candidate X. Congrats, you've lost all credibility with half your readers. Was that really worth it?

5) It's Archaic - We've supposedly evolved past the age when newspapers were openly partisan. That dark age was decades ago (or, alternately, a half-dozen time zones away in the U.K.). Most newspapers now look down their noses at the Sun chains of the world that don't even feign balance. So how can newspapers claim to be modern champions of objective scrutiny while they're still clinging to the one act that most defined the days of biased, agenda journalism? I'll say this for the Sun papers, at least they accept who they are and don't try to dress it up.

Ok, so the counter-argument to all this is that editorial writers sometimes do have intelligent, thoughtful arguments for why one candidate is the best choice. Why should they silence themselves on such a critical issue for some ideal of impartiality that most people don't buy anyway?

Here's what you do instead: be humble, be personal, and be careful.

Don't hide behind the banner of the paper. Have the writer or editorial board put their name(s) on the piece. Then, don't tell people how to vote. Instead, tell them how you will be voting and explain why as best you can. Keep in mind that every political platform benefits some people more than others. Look beyond your own situation and write persuasively about which platform will help the greatest number of people. Avoid talking points used by the parties.

Andrew Coyne of ~~MacLeans~~ PostMedia provided an elegant example of just this kind of thing last year.

It's that easy. And in this digital age, as an industry struggling with the issue of printing words on paper and handing them out individually, we should really jump at the easy solutions when we can.

Happy Trails

2012-01-23T15:07:00.000-08:00

Best retirement wishes to my boss Dan Leger, who revealed today he was stepping down as director of news content for the Chronicle Herald after something like 35 years in the business. Dan will continue to write a weekly column for the paper when he's not pursuing his twin hobbies of sailing and fighting crime.

Dan was an incredibly supportive boss though he clearly was prone to some mental gaffes as he hired me and all. To mark his retirement I thought I'd relay this anecdote about him even though I wasn't there to witness it and for all I know it's apocryphal (again, Dan hired me even *after reading this blog.* What a guy.)

Once upon a time there was a Chronicle Herald columnist named Peter Duffy who wrote about Coronation Street and gas being too expensive and shit like that. As a young reporter working for the rival newspaper I was pretty sure he was the worst writer in the province, but lordy did some people ever love him. He was apparently the highest-read columnist in Nova Scotia, which I blame on grandmothers.

One time the Herald ran a front-page story with a necessary and relevant quote that contained swearing; I can't remember the details. Duffy - ever the champion of mindless political correctness - penned a column harshly criticizing his own paper for printing cuss words and not treating their audience like five-year-olds as any decent, family newspaper should.

Duffy apparently walked into work the next day with this coy, canary-chomping grin expecting his boss, Dan, to be all offended and mad. When Dan didn't say anything Duffy flat-out asked him. Dan shrugged him off by saying "Peter, I'll defend your right to print whatever insipid thing you choose."

Here we see a great example of the old adage: "If you don't agree with freedom of speech for those you suspect to be borderline mentally incompetent then you don't believe in it at all." Happy retirement, Dan. I know you'll enjoy it.

Oh, and what ever happened to Peter Duffy? Don't worry, after he retired from the paper Mayor Peter Kelly went on to hire him as his speechwriter so now the taxpayers pay his salary! What a world! And just because I can never resist a chance to repost this, here's a link to Duffy's two most infamous columns wherein he claims, in all seriousness, to have been anally raped by a ghost.

NDP Numbers Don't Add Up

2011-11-17T19:03:00.000-08:00

[Quick note off the top: this mostly abandoned blog is not at all associated with my work life and shouldn't be taken as such, but I've got no other quick outlet so I'm going to post this here for now.]

So the federal NDP released their new membership numbers today and it was widely reported that they received a solid 13% boost in membership, from 83,800 members in October to 95,000 members in November.

This bump is exaggerated for a few reasons. In reality it's probably about half that amount.

First off, the NDP previously had a separate category for 'federal' members that weren't tied to any province, which totaled just over 3,000 people.

This category was dissolved when they decided to allocate each federal member to their respective province. Fair enough. But when the chart was released today there was no mention of this. Instead it just showed the October breakdown by province and the November breakdown, and let reporters do the math. Reporters weren't told that a separate category of 3,000 members had been quietly re-allocated.

So that alone brings "new" memberships down from around 11,000 people to around 8,000, or 9%.

But there's more. The new numbers show NDP memberships doubled in Nova Scotia from 1,300 to 2,600. That's a pretty impressive leap, considering the provincial party is coming off of years of minority government that concluded in a sweeping NDP majority (memberships are shared amongst the provincial and federal parties).

When I checked on the numbers back in September I was given the 1,300 figure federally and then a number of around 2,500 provincially. After asking about the discrepancy I was told provincial staff keep closer track and the gap was likely due to the federal ranks not being updated yet.

So now we're in the midst of an NDP leadership race and all eyes are on the membership numbers because we all want to see how big the Quebec surge turns out to be (Quebec has no provincial wing so it's starting from damn near scratch). Lo and behold, there's a healthy boost across the country!

But is there really? Did Newfoundland's ranks really jump from just 200 to 1,184 last month? Did they not get the memo that the populist uprising was six months ago? Maybe it's a time zone thing. My guess is that, like Nova Scotia, the numbers hadn't been updated in a while and many months of growth were only now being factored in.

Add the Newfoundland discrepancy to Nova Scotia to the federal book cooking and your 13% growth is already close to cut in half before we even get to the big provinces. So were the numbers today really an accurate reflection of the party's growth? I report. You decide.

...Ok, I'll decide too. It's kind of bullshit. Look I get that the NDP has had a tough few months. They have an interim leader who isn't exactly setting the world on kindle, let alone fire. They no more look like a government in waiting today than they did the day after the election. They'd really like some momentum and a strong membership turnout in the midst of a leadership campaign would certainly help.

And to be fair, they didn't capital-L Lie at any point. The NDP never claimed to have 13% growth, they just put the stats out and let journalists do the math. Also when I asked questions I was given a prompt and honest response.

But this isn't quite good enough. News stories didn't report "The NDP claim to have 13% growth," they reported it as fact. There is a certain element of trust when we report what a federal party tells us is going on internally, if just because we don't see the numbers first-hand.

I think the chart released today was a breach of that trust. Maybe it was all an accident. Maybe the news organizations that reported the 13% figure have been privately corrected. But when we take a party at its word there's an expectation that 3,000 members (at least) aren't being coyly added in.

God is Dead: An Introduction

2011-05-31T20:29:00.000-07:00

Even before the Darkness came, Nova Scotians viewed the weather at best as a sort of ex-con neighbour. At times it could be warm, friendly, even welcoming - but you would never turn your back on it.

Our worst suspicions were confirmed during the month of May when the sun disappeared, not to be seen for weeks. The first cracks in the public psyche were subtle. People started to listen to Elliot Smith instead of the Beatles. Normal everyday interactions became fraught with tension ("Would you like fries with that, motherfucker?")

By week two meteorologists were hunted down like dogs and publicly executed. By week three sacrificing virgins was openly contemplated. Weddings were cancelled, for who could love at a time such as this?

Last week the Halifax Stanfield International Airport was razed when citizens vacationing down south were deemed too insufferable to be allowed to return. "Maybe some day we can rebuild," Premier Darrell Dexter whispered softly as he lowered the detonator.

Occassionally the sun would peak out and citizens would run into the streets, forgeting that vitamin-D withdrawal had made their skin dangerously fragile. "My eyes!" they would scream as blinded drivers smashed their cars into storefronts. "It burns!"

The sunlight would linger just long enough for acclimatization, then inevitably disappear the next morning. The suicide rate hit 20%. "I just don't know how many of us will live to see June," said Nova Scotia's haggard and unshaven public health officer clutching a handgun at a press conference.

This is all to say that I think we can safely agree there is no god.

Now that it's June, religion has been beaten out of us, and the sun is returning, I invite you to check back here later in the week for a riviting debate/argument/blood feud between myself and my friend Dan Logan on the topic of religion.

Rather than the usual "Is there a God?" stuff we're just going to skip past that part, assume there's not, and bicker over the question of: should athiests fight for athiesm or accept and respect religious practices?

To be continued, as soon as I come back form outside.

Election Update: Ah, crap

2011-04-26T19:15:00.000-07:00

[Writer's note - Usually while writing these posts I sip some whiskey for inspiration but recently I acquired a miserable bastard of a bacterial infection in my foot so today is different. Half of this post was written under the influence of a powerful and legal-but-not-technically-prescribed-to-me-per-se painkiller medication so I really can't speak to any typos and/or general weirdness.]

Dear friends,

Well, it's been over two weeks now since MC Loud's All Night Dance Party kicked off its campaign, and suffice to say it has so far been an unmitigated disaster.

First it was revealed our candidate in Oshawa was actually just a fake name made up by some punk kid. Then our candidate in Fredericton had to withdraw when it became pretty clear he was dead, with our candidate in Fundy Royal serving a life sentence for his murder.

Our guy in Brampton turned out to be a seperatist, which we probably should have asked beforehand but, you know, it was Brampton, while our candidate in Vancouver Centre fell pray to illicit cooking substances and was busted as part of a cumin smuggling ring.

I myself became mired in controversy when that damned Steve Maher stole my tape recorder and published several embarrassingly candid conversations.

I said some unforgiveable things about left-handed people and for that I whole-heartedly apologize. And anyway, in some circles "sub-human" is used as a term of endearment.

Seeking traction, we trotted out a series of promises we thought would grab headlines - annexing Greenland, changing the title of 'Prime Minister' to 'Optimus Prime Minister', naked tuesdays. But research shows that most voters are still unaware that we exist.

It hasn't been all bad. We still have the coolest party name and polls show we're tied with the Bloc in nine of ten provinces. But still, it's clear we needed a wedge issue. Well now we've got one: Democracy.

Basically, we're against it. You maybe thinking, 'but that's not a wedge position at all. Every party is kind of anti-democracy.

And that's true. Every election begins witht the parties wildly alleging that this unfortunate turn of events is the other side's fault with such unsettling vigour that you kind of feel like our 308 MPs were all sealed in an elevator and tasked with figuring out who farted.

It's all but consensus that a multi-party government that represents a majority of voters is not only less democratic than a single-party government that represents a minority, it's a heresy akin to spitting on the queen.

And thanks to our first-past-the-post-fuck-second system, only voters in swing ridings really have the power to determine government (and then, only some swing ridings. A Bloc-NDP race is important and all but has no bearing on who will be PM [or at least it never did until this election turned a wonky shade of mustachioed orange.])

But despite all of this, the other parties still go on and on praising democracy, which, frankly, is a little irresponsible. Half the world is turning itself inside out fighting for the right to vote long after us Westerners have learned that democracy is just like any shiny new toy - flat-out bitchin at first but once you've had it for a while you get bored with it and eventually don't even want to bother.

We know that 40% or so of citizens agree with us, we just need to win them over. Admittedly, getting the anti-voting demographic to vote to reaffirm their anti-voting bias is one dilly of a pickle. But luckily we've got our Edmonton candidate Seymour Butts on the job of figuring it out.

Canadians: I'm Your Man

2011-04-08T07:28:00.000-07:00

Can you smell it? That strange scent in the air? That's the smell of excitement. Normally excitement isn't something that can be detected by your olfactory system, but today is different.

Today all the rules are broken.

When I say "Canadian politics" what do you think of? If you're like most Canadians, you think of killing yourself. But what if there was a way to genuinely enjoy politics without having to be one of those douchebags you see on Newsworld?

Well now there's a way to damn the status quo. What do we need? One word: Metamorphosis! ("Change" was taken.)

Ladies and gentlemen, I come here today to offer you this metamorphosis.

We currently suffer the choice between a Russian-sounding guy trying to act Canadian, a Canadian-sounding guy trying to act Russian, and a bald guy trying to act like he can win.

But now you have a real option. Today I present to you the newest political party to enter the scene:

MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party

MC Loud's All Night Dance Party is brimming with new ideas, while also harkening back to the old-school days when Conservatives were conservative, Liberals were liberal and New Democrats were new.

My opponents, when they're not too busy littering or torturing cats, will tell you that that there are only two choices in this election. But we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party think you'll spit on anyone who tells you that after you get a load of our platform.

On National Unity

We believe that Quebec should have the power to decide its own destiny and form a distinct country if its people so choose. That said, Canada also has a right to maintain its cool province to uncool province ratio.

If elected, we will reform the constitution so that in the event of separation Quebec will have to take one of the lame provinces, like New Brunswick, with it. MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party realizes that while this may seem kind of tempting, it is on the whole undesirable. Thus we will undertake a series of unity-building exercises. Birch trees will be bulldozed and replaced with maples. Molson Canadian will be forced to taste better or change its name.

On Debates

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May must have been popular in high school as she sure is bad at being unpopular. There's nothing more pathetic than begging others to pay attention to you, so we here at MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party have rejected taking part in any leaders debate even before receiving an offer. We've got plans that day.

That said, I'd like to formally challenge my opponents to a leaders knife fight at their earliest convenience.

On the Environment

Remember the environment? Remember, like, one election ago when it was actually a big deal? Well we plan to bring it back to the forefront. Now, the last guy who did this got massacred on election day so we can't go too crazy here, but suffice to say we pledge to do something. Something that will make the environment better. It will likely involve carbon.

And while our slate of candidates may not exactly be full of doctors or scientists or people who can read, I think even our opponents would have to admit it's not going to take much to lead on this issue.

On Profiling People and then Banning Them From Your Rallies

We promise to always do the decent thing and friend you on Facebook before we creep your profile and add you to our database of enemies.

Stay tuned, voters. We'll continue to roll out our platform ~~as we come up with it~~ over the coming days. In the meantime, remember to vote MC Loud's All-Night Dance Party - for metamorphosis we can believe in.

Fear and Loathing in Hants County

2011-02-07T16:38:00.000-08:00

As a rival reporter to Halifax's Chronicle Herald, I've long had a Sharks/Jets-style rivalry with the paper, complete with stabbings and finger snaps.

But I couldn't help but feel sympathy for the Herald after they released their discreetly-titled video and print feature Nova Scotia Burning!!! (exclamation marks inferred by them but added by me).

Despite exclusive interviews and top level production value around a national story, reaction was overwhelmingly negative. Pushed onto the defensive, the Herald began a spirited defence of the importance of the feature.

I decided to write a thoughtful analysis of the situation to illuminate the difficulties in reporting on racial issues. Then I changed my mind and decided to write a one-act play instead. I hereby present to you - The People vs. The Chronicle Herald; Requiem.

Scene: The Chronicle Herald and Joe Public meet in some sort of dramatic setting.

Chronicle Herald: Hey, what's wrong with you? Why won't you watch my new feature, Nova Scotia Burning?

Joe Public: Well I already followed the whole thing when the story was actually happening. I'm kind of sick of hearing about it.

CH: Spoken like a true racist! Don't you realize that prejudice thrives in silence and procreates in apathy? If we don't shed light on this important issue then it'll just breed more hatred.

JP: But, the story was covered to death. Everyone reported on it. Everyone!

CH: Well, our coverage proves that racism still exists in Nova Scotia.

JP: Yeah, but everyone knows there's still racism. Everyone! Even the racists!

CH: Yes, but Nova Scotia Burning shows how racism permeates every seam of our society.

JP: Really? Because it seems like a very specific, personal feud between relatives? Where's the universality in that?

CH: Look, you pansy, hide from it all you want but we're bringing you a big blast of truth. People in this province have to live with racism every day.

JP: So why not do a feature on that?

CH: ...come again?

JP: If you're going to do a big tell-all on a major story, then fine. If you're going to do an in-depth examination of large-scale race relations, then fine. But don't do one and then claim you're doing the other.

CH: Look, we're the newspaper of record. With great circulation comes great responsibility, and it's incumbent on us to delve into the tough issues. We're not going to just give you that shallow, ambulance-chasing daily hackery. We stand back and provide a mature appreciation of nuanced real world issues.

JP: I see. And what's it called again?

CH: Nova Scotia Burning.

JP: Ah, right.

CH: And be sure to stay tuned for our next racism exposés: Schindler's Bluenose...

JP: Oh sweet Jesus.

CH: The Green Kilometre...

JP: This is embarrassing.

CH: To Disproportionately Pull Over a Mocking Bird...

JP: Please stop.

CH: Africville History X...

JP: Look, I'm tired of being talked down to and told I need to learn every detail of a stupid action by a couple of hicks in order to confront racism. I'm tired of being accused of burying my head in the sand or told I "fear stirring up old resentments" when I say I'm not interested. I'm sick of hearing about the goddamn cross burning. I don't care if you try to dress it up with a reference to The Believer. I'm just sick of it.

CH: Was that the one with Ryan Gosling?

JP: Yeah, it's really good.

CH: You know, I saw that on Showcase a while back. That is an underrated movie.

JP: A great performance.

CH: Oh, absolutely stellar.

JP: So, if it's all cool with you, I'm just going to go on living my life exactly the same as before I saw your feature.

CH: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

JP: See, that's exactly what I'm talking about.

CH: Sorry. That's just a line from our upcoming news feature, A Few Good Maritimers.

Paul Haggis: Excuse me is this the Chronicle Herald? I saw your piece and I'd like to drop off a resume.

Fin.

OK, so it's easy to make fun of the Herald for their occassional tendency to slip into pompousness, but they do deserve some praise.

While the headline was over the top, the stories themselves were done in a thorough, respectful tone. They provided an exclusive look at the Rehbergs, and it really did look professional. (Director Jayson Taylor jumped to the Herald last fall from the Globe and Mail, where he was highly acclaimed. Dude's won one or two Emmy Awards. He clearly knows his stuff.) The people involved in the feature have every right to be proud of their work.

The reason some of us rolled our eyes is the context. There are a lot of issues that deserved as much or more attention but didn't get it. It was hard not to be frustrated that this is where the Herald chose to flex its muscle and splurge on a level of detail and production value normally reserved for whenever Sidney Crosby burps.

But while it seems egregious as a stand-alone, as part of a bigger series of in-depth think pieces it could fit in nicely. That's exactly what the Herald has promised it is going to do.

So, fellow scoffers, I propose we give the Herald the benefit of the doubt. Nova Scotia Burning may go down as a leap into enterprise reporting and the first step in the Herald upping its game.

And if not, at least we'll have the inevitable motion picture adaption directed by Paul Haggis.

The oval of my ire

2011-01-19T20:28:00.000-08:00

Following up my last blog post where I defended cynicism and criticized innovation, it seems I'm now going to attack a beloved project that has united all of Halifax, and argue for more bureaucratic red tape.

Sigh. Let's get this over with.

The way thing's are going, Halifax will have a new permanent skating oval on the central Common. People are going crazy for it, and our politicians aren't exactly bandwagon-adverse, so it's got good odds.

And there are some great reasons to have an oval (for a summary, see this Tim Bousquet editorial in The Coast.) But some huge questions haven't been resolved.

Say you're tripping out one weekend and decide to build a big fort in your living room. It turns out you love the fort and want to keep it. But alas, it means you can't really have guests over and it's impossible to see the TV or water the fern. Once the high wore off, most rational, fort-building people would consider moving it to another room where it would be less disruptive.

The oval, meant to be temporary for the Canada Games and placed with no long-term considerations whatsoever, is our acid fort.

The oval debate is wholly centered around the question of whether to keep it or not. Instead we should be asking two distinct questions: 1) should we have a permanent outdoor oval, and 2) if yes, should it stay where it is now.

Now, I'm as much of a fan as ice-skate NASCAR as the next guy, so I have no problem with question 1. My problem with question 2 is that all of the great things about the present location - it's central, it's a big park, etc. - are also downsides.

That's because for the big majority of the year where we don't have cold enough weather it'll just be wased space. A fifth of our signature park is just gone.

(I should note that some people have climbed out of their drug forts to say it could just be turned into a giant inline skating rink. Are we going to invite the 1980s? Because I don't really know anyone else who inline skates. And even if they did, we'd never normally shove the baseballers, cricketers, soccerers, frisbeers and and dog-walkers to make room for something like inline skating.)

Christ, is this really who I am now? Can I not just let people be happy? Everone loves that damn ice circle. You know, I was such a nice kid. Now look at me. I'm in my mid-20s and I've got the temperament of a 77-year-old Korean war vet.

If you google image search 'oval' you get a bunch of drawings of ovals plus this rando.

OK, gotta get through this. What about putting an oval on the Wanderers Grounds, the Garrison Grounds by Citadel Hill, or potentially even behind the new Halifax Library?

They all offer that same rush - outdoors in the heart of the city - arguably without costing such prime land. And sure, there are downsides to each, and maybe the oval wouldn't fit in any of those spots. Maybe we don't go for a full-sized oval. Maybe we have a small one somewhere central, even the common, and put a long-track in Dartmouth or wherever.

The argument has become baseball vs. skating, the Common as sacred land vs. doing something fun. But maybe we could have all of these things. Maybe we can have a great oval near downtown and preserve the Common. Maybe not. Maybe it's not feasible or is too expensive.

But why the hell wouldn't we be frantically studying to answer these questions? That's just due diligence.

Imagine if the city put a huge permanent structure on the Common with no studying or consultation. Some poor bureaucrat would be publicly crucified. But that's essentially what it now appears is going to happen.

And also, seal hunt protestors need to grow up and find a real cause! And stop freaking out about someone changing Mark Twain's words, it's not like he burned all the original copies! And Natalie Portman was only ok in Black Swan!

Jesus, how did it come to this? Well, be sure to check back next week when I'll presumably be bashing world peace and giving an impassioned defence of polio.

Waiting for the Feel Good Revolution; Or, In Defence of Cynicism

2010-12-13T15:08:00.000-08:00

Two years ago I sat in a Halifax convention room listening to Bill Clinton give an intensely eloquent and vapid speech for a few hundred doe-eyed people. It took all of my will power not to walk out.

Then I figured, screw it, I'm wasn't working and I hadn't even paid to be there, so I walked out.

I recall this because of a highly entertaining dispute recently between Tim Bousquet, news editor of Halifax's alt weekly The Coast, and (a few vocal spokespeople for) a group of young, upwardly mobile professionals called Fusion. (Full disclosure: Tim and I are both members of a highly ineffective alcoholism support group.)

Basically, Bousquet accused Fusion of being naive Pollyanas, while they shot back that Tim is a cynic who holds back progress.

Funny thing is, they're all backwards. Tim isn't a cynic, he's a hardcore idealist. The Fusion headliners are, if not cynics, playing into inaction.

Tim takes a dim view of the world's prospects - skyrocketing oil prices, looming environmental catastrophe, crippling financial debt, Oprah, etc. He calls for basically overthrowing the system to avert disaster. (Full disclosure: Tim and I co-founded a barbershop quartet in Skokie, Illinois, but it broke up acrimoniously and that son of a bitch still has my cane.)

Meanwhile Fusion's statements come out like, for example, this: "I think one of the most important things a community can do is to engage its citizens in a visioning process to determine collective priorities."

But what happens when you try to take the cliche seriously?

Let's try this one:

Platitude: "We need to be a net importer fo grey matter."

Reaction: "OMG, so true! Repost!"

Identifiable real world consequence: Well, I suppose reducing tuition fees to attract more students to post-secondary education. But then, at a time when we're paying those tuition decreases with borrowed money, how much is affordable? Should we be lowering tuition for rich kids who can afford it, or maybe put money into needs-based grants instead.

Also, attracting bright businesses in the information economy is a no-brainer. But how? Offering economic incentives? Will they just relocate if they get a better deal elsewhere? And again, in a time of deficit, is lowering corporate taxes going to spur enough economic activity to offset the loss in revenue?

From Clinton right on down to Vince the Slap Chop guy, motivational speakers are paid to use linguistic devices to make people feel better, while glossing over ugly truths/product defects.

They are paid, often quite well, to promote a consulting form of slacktivism. From "positivity" to changing your facebook status, the more people are made to feel good about doing nothing the less likely they are to do anything.

Many would interject here and say these motivational speeches are just the first step to rolling up our sleeves and getting to work. But look at what just happened in Halifax.

The decision to fund a multi-multi-multi-million dollar convention centre quickly became polarized. Tim flipped hard to the no-side and chain-wrote his way through a ton of CC-bashing pieces (Full disclosure: Tim and I went to Vegas this one time but I can't really talk about it.)

There were many of us on the fence who thought that Tim was reaching at times, but brought up valid concerns. We waited for the rebuttal.

But no counter-arguments had close to the factual heft of the pieces by Tim and other detractors. There was a lot of talk of the need for optimism, kick-starting the downtown, and other platitudes, but little in the way of data other than pointing to suspect business plans.

I'm not saying there wasn't a case to be made that rebutted the No side. In fact, for the purposes of this piece I'm not even saying the convention centre is a bad idea.

I'm saying that I didn't see anyone wade into the numbers and made that detailed defence. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, so many people were willing to support a project unwaveringly because they viewed it as being on the side of progress and optimism.

That's not a progressive mindset, it's a blind spot. And there are plenty of hucksters out there willing to exploit it with their synergistic, next-gen, game-changing, paradigm-shifting, 2.0 crap of the week.

The feel good revolution isn't a means, it's an end. It is an industry that self perpetuates - more talk, more soul searching, more self-affirmation. We get stuck in a holding pattern, waiting for Godot to show up with his magic answers while real world problems flow on unabated.

I guarantee you the people who set up a fraudulent financial system to make themselves rich didn't do it by debating grand ideals, they did it by manipulating cold, hard details. How are we supposed to fight that if our heads are in the clouds?

So here's my five-part appeal to the bright-side-of-life crowd:

- I know that you have good intententions, that you care, and that you genuinely want to affect positive change. And I know that cantankerous old bastards like Tim Bousquet can be insufferable. (Full disclosure: Tim has very soft hands.)

I'm not saying be like him. It's healthy to have a mix of Debbie Downers and Umberto Uppers. Optimism has its place. But-

- At some point you've got to research and advocate for real policy positions. And they're not going to be innovative or collaborative or dynamic, they're going to be old-fashioned, divisive and slow.

I'm not talking about "It'll take hard work," I'm talking about situations like Afghanistan, where our choices are stay and people die, or leave and people die. It's incumbent on us to decide the best of terrible options.

- Changing the world shouldn't just make you feel giddy or happy. It should charge you with a sense of purpose and self-sacrafice. The last part is important because even simple concepts like "going green" will require making changes that will not be easy, cheap, or fun.

- Draw the line between pessimism and defeatism. Things do go badly. We need pessimism to prepare for those scenarios. Don't assume that looking on the bright side is more valuable, or productive, or true than expecting the worst. That way lies delusion.

- Finally, be critical. There's no going back - people will be trying to spin us in many directions for the rest of our lives. We need skepticism to see through it. Use the journalism trick of the better something sounds, the closer you look at it.

I argue with Tim all the time over his ideas. I think some of his grand ideas for social change are over-simplified and out of reach. I argue for a more moderate approach because I think revolutions are too easily hijacked. So maybe I'm a cynic.

But, to steal some lines from my friend Laura Penny: Cynicism is good. Cynicism leads to being pissed off, being pissed off leads to taking action and taking action leads to social change.

I'll leave you with an inspirational quote.

"Thought = creation. If these thoughts are attached to powerful emotions (good or bad) that speeds the creation," - The Secret.

When you look at that and immediately see bullshit, you're on your way.

(Full disclosure: I am a member of secret cabal of Freemasons that run both the financial sector and the entertainment industry, and have a significant financial investment in keeping the working man down.)

Accidental Genius: George Lucas

2010-11-29T14:47:00.000-08:00

You didn't see many headlines this week saying "Irvin Kershner, director of Robocop 2, died last weekend at 87."

Many of the obituaries of Kershner, who died Saturday, contain decidedly faint praise. The first one I saw called him a "journeyman director."

But the thing no one can take away from him is that he directed The Empire Strikes Back. That may make him the cinematic version of a one hit wonder, but if your one hit is the equivalent of the combined oeuvre of the Beatles, it's not so bad.

When I started this blog with my friend Mike way back when, we thought up some recurring themes. One of them was going to be called Accidental Genius, about people whose blunders inadvertently spark sublime results. I only ever got around to writing one installment, but Irvin, this one's for you.

George Lucas is an awful, terrible filmmaker. For an excellent recapping of why, check out this weird, twisted 70 minute review of Star Wars Episode 1.

(For those who haven't seen it, I realize how absurd that sounds. I, too, once thought I had far better things to do with my time. And like you, I was wrong. All I can say is give it a chance - it is insightful and well worth the commitment for anyone who appreciates movies.)

Yes, Lucas invented Star Wars. But his early scripts are embarrassingly bad. It took the collaberation of a lot of talented people to get the movie to its final form. Lucas did have a fertile mind to contribute. He also had a knack for special effects and a ton of ambition. And he had greed, and that, ultimately, is what saved Star Wars.

After the first movie became a hit Lucas, consumed by a thirst for power that is in no way ironic considering the content of his films, ceded the director's chair because he needed to dedicate more of his energy to fighting the studios for control.

In the early days his railing against the film establishment lead to greatness. After feuding with Director's Guild of America over the trilogy's famous opening title sequence, Lucas left the guild. It's rumoured he had wanted his friend Stephen Spielberg to direct Empire, but this fell apart after the guild dispute.

Pause for a minute and think about a Spielberg-helmed Empire. Picture Yoda training Luke from the basket of a flying bicycle. Picture Qui-Gon Jinn coming in and crying "This lightsaber! This lightsaber could have saved five more gungans." Picture Tom Hanks somehow being involved.

The horror.

Instead Lucas went with the unconventional choice of Kershner, who excelled at character development, to handle the nitty-gritty directing business.

Because he was busy fighting for merchandising rights, Lucas didn't have time to huff around the set saying "The line is I love you too, Harrison, not I know." Because he was busy setting up sub-companies for every aspect of the production, he was too busy to work a big explosion into the ending.

I submit to you that it was George Lucas's terrible vices that saved us from his even more debilitating faults.

Of course years later he would take back custody of the child that was conceived by him but raised by others, and turn it into an insufferable emo kid. With no studio to rail against, no one to challenge his megalomania, Lucas had the complete control he needed to systematically destroy everything people loved about Star Wars and in turn tarnish the childhoods of millions.

Goddamn you, George Lucas.

But we'll always have the original theatrical cuts of the original movies, where Han shoots first, Boba Fett doesn't have an embarrassing Australian accent, and Luke doesn't look off at Hayden Fucking Christensen at the end of Jedi goddamn you, George Lucas.

Anyway, let's hear it for Irvin, who helped make one of the greatest and most beloved movies of all time. The guy who didn't even want to direct a Star Wars movie, but stepped up to the plate and hit a pinch hit, five-run grand slam.

Irvin Kershner, director of The Empire Strikes Back, died last weekend at 87.

Well, I'm off to America

2010-10-12T21:35:00.000-07:00

My fellow Canadians,

I like you guys, but lately you've been driving me nuts.

Everything's been far too Canadian recently and I need a break.

Our country loses a bid to join a group of U.N. hall monitors futily screaming at our peers to stop running and we react by retreating to our rooms to write emo poetry and cry about how the other kids don't like us.

Our government was so distraught it actually tried to claim some offhand negative nellying by opposition leader Michael Ignatieff caused literally dozens of countries to snub us.

Quick, how many opposition leaders of foreign nations can you name off the top of your head?

Yeah.

Meanwhile, though our Prime Minister still won't speak to reporters and access to information laws are being systematically underminded, people decide to freak out because MacLean's Magazine was mean to Quebec. A sensational MacLeans front page? This is not news.

Not content with being content about being kept in the dark, it seems we're now getting openly hostile with people who would inform us.

Some Canadians - even people in the media I respected such as MacLean's Scott Feschuk - freaked out at journalists reporting edited-but-still-disturbing details from the Colonol Russell Williams trial.

"It's never pretty when the media gets to cloak their lurid instincts in the guise of doing a duty," Feschuk wrote on Twitter, presumably after lecturing a hobo on getting a job.

Only in Canada - well, maybe Belarus too - would people argue the public shouldn't have the right to know what's going on in a public courtroom because it's gross.

Come on, Canada, grow some balls. In a land where twitter accounts are assigned at birth and hardwired into our skulls, mabe we could whine about this stuff. But in our world, where buttons like 'unsubscribe,' 'unfollow,' and 'unfriend' exist, we've been given the freedom of choice.

I guess you could argue choosing to fight for not having a choice could be seen as a valid choice... ah, but there I go being all Canadian again.

Closer to home sweet home in Halifax, the debate about whether to put oodles of public money towards a new convention centre was shrouded by secrecy for a long time as government declined to say how much it would cost.

To give government some credit - Christ, there I go again - they did finally unveil the cost of the centre about a week before announcing they would support it. Rather than encourage this openness, Marilla Stephenson, the premier columnist at the province's paper of record, lambasted our elected officials for bothering to level with us.

Rather than analyze the information, Stephenson was exhasperated that the government was still doing their wishy-washy thinking thing instead of taking action. "Why on earth did they undertake the briefing, then?" she chirped.

To amplify this... Marilla Stephenson has scolded the government for not rushing to throw money at a hugely controversial project and only telling the public the cost afterwards.

I've reached my breaking point. I need to be around some assholes. I need to look at someone and think ' I wonder if that guy is carrying a gun.' I need to hate something with as much passion as the synopses in my brain can muster, and not even know or care why.

So I'm off to America, where centrists are fictional, liberals are conservatives, and conservatives are closeted homosexuals.

Where beer is cheap, football has four downs and a man's moral compass is pointed right at the heart of his enemies and instead of a compass it's a handgun.

I need to feel that strange sensation that comes over me whenever I visit the U.S. where anyone who tries to stop me from doing whatever I want is committing a grave affront; where absolute freedom is paramount and I end up screaming "But this is America!" at some 7-eleven clerk in Boston who won't sell me booze at midnight.

So I'm going for a taste. I leave tomorrow but, like a deep-sea diver, I'll first acclimatize myself with a couple days in America Lite - Toronto, with it's new Americany mayor - then I drive down to Washington for the Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert-sponsored Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear on October 30. One can only hope I'll witness a big brawl between tea partiers and Huffington Post bloggers.

I expect one of two things to happen.

1) Immersed in liberty and cheap beer I will emerge like a Chilean miner into a state of enlightenment. I will then return to Canada, start up a grass-roots libertarian party and lead the charge against our nation's paternalistic system.

2) It will become painfully obvious that the US is a crazed, bipolar country veering towards the edge of a cultural and financial cliff that will make the collapse of the Roman empire look like a lesser episode of Seinfeld.

After viewing our country through the other side of this tragic mirror I'll rush back to embrace all that is Canadian and forgive our occassionally infuraiting complacency.

Seeing as Lady Gaga has become America's voice of reason, my money's on the latter.

Either way I figure I come out on top. So I'll see you all in a week. Come on America, don't let me down now when I need you the most.

Don't wish they all could be Dalifornia Girls

2010-08-17T19:03:00.000-07:00

I did not go to Dalhousie University.

Instead I went to the much smaller and seperately chartered University of King's College where I got a combined honours degree in journalism and philosophy (known in the biz as the Dying Industry Special).

Because King's is right next to Dal and they share credits, people often say to me "Oh, isn't King's just part of Dalhousie?" to which I usually reply with some combination of the words "off" and "fuck."

King's students have the stereotype of being Nietzsche-quoting-drum-circle-participating-stoned-NDP-voting snobs who rarely wash. I accept this. I accept this because it is still better than being forced to associate with Dal, and I'd like to thank the Dalhousie Student Union for once again illustrating why.

It started last year when students at l'Université du Québec à Montréal made a big lip sync video to the awful Black Eyed Peas song I Gotta Feeling (sample lyrics include listing the days of the week and repeating "tonight's gonna be a good night" 26 times.)

But it seems they were the first university to do it and they got a ton of media coverage so good on them, I guess. But then Dalhousie (real slogan: Inspiring Minds) decided to one-up their Quebecois counterparts by doing the exact same thing only a year later and with an even worse song.

The result: Dalifornia Girls. I'm sure that somewhere out there the UQAM students are bowing their heads and muttering "touché."

If you haven't figured it out by now,
they're not doing the Beach Boys one.

Fun Fact: They cleverly titled the video "Dalhousie Student Union - California Girls - Lip Dub" so that it is impossible to find it by searching "Dalifornia Girls" in either google or Youtube.

OK, so credit to the DSU for finding one of the rare plays on the word California not already taken by the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, but did picking a song celebrating the polar opposite corner of the continent not raise any red flags?

Sure all the references to sunshine and beaches and bikinis still could apply to Halifax. They just happen to apply to the only four months of the year students are not here.

Most baffling of all is that according to this Dal News piece the organizers narrowly picked the Katy Perry song over... Joel Plaskett.

So Joel Plaskett, one of Nova Scotia's most famous musicians whose songs continually references his love for his home and would stand distinct from the pop music of previous videos, was beaten out by a tune about palm trees and short shorts.

I'd like to stop here and reiterate that at no point was I registered as a Dalhousie student. I did take a few courses there but they were mandatory credits, I swear.

Except for History of Russian Film, which admittedly was awesome.

Anyway, how did this happen? That's like like Memorial University in Newfoundland passing over Great Big Sea to lipdub the Insane Clown Posse. (On further consideration, that would be awesome. MUN students: please do this one.)

It's curious that the university's official news organ chose to rev up the hype machine rather than quietly face palm. The story interprets the video's almost 9,000 hits as "quickly becoming a Facebook and Twitter sensation" and "going viral."

Farbeit from me to point out when something smacks of desperation, but as of this writing there's a little over 10,000 views, which is still less than the student population of Dal. On the Going Viral scale that barely merits a sneeze compared to the Double Rainbow guy who's on his deathbed clinging for life (On the Going Viral scale, being on the deathbed is good.)

Now it appears some commentors are complaining about the video sending the wrong message.

"Female scholars here work hard & deserve better from you," says one commentor on twitter.

"'I'm saddened that in 2010, Dalhousie is proud to be promoting it's university as a place to meet women. Wrong message. Incredibly embarassing for students, faculty, staff and the community at large," reads a comment on DalNews.

Typical politically correct nilly-nannying. Young women today just choose to express their liberation by flocking behind men wearing pimp apparel in videos made to welcome incoming students. Get over it, grandmas.

Progress.

And to be fair, most of Joel Plaskett's songs include lyrics worse than "we freak in my jeap" and "kiss her/ touch her/ squeeze her buns". I'm pretty sure all his references to "the Khyber" are just filthy metaphors.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out for Dal, but it's not something I will personally be following because - and I cannot stress this enough - I did not go there.

Long-form census revealed!

2010-07-21T15:20:00.000-07:00

I've long been a fan of Industry Minister Tony Clement. Back when he was an early promoter of merging the Reform and Tory parties I thought to myself "Well that just makes sense." In 2008 when he was federal health minister I cheered when he tried to shut down Vancouver's Insite safe injection site (needles creep me out).

But I wasn't sure about this long-form census stuff. A lot of people who can count really high seemed pretty mad about the government getting rid of it. I didn't know what all the fuss was about so I tried to get a hold of an actual version of the census.

After a little digging I came across a preliminary version of the 2011 long-form census that had leaked onto the internet. I've got to say, I totally agree with Tony. The questions are just way too invasive and personal to subject your everyday citizen to. For example,

42) How much money did you make last year?

43) How much money would you like to have made last year?

48) How many bedrooms are in your neighbour's house?

53) Describe, in detail, your reaction to the LOST finale.

59) Done anything illegal we should know about?

66) Totally hypothetically, if we were to sell off one of the territories, which one would you miss the least?

70) So what are you wearing?

82) What is your child-to-Jonas Brothers poster ratio? (See calculation chart attachment J)

89) Do you trust that your answers to these census questions are totally anonymous, Larry?

103) With one (1) being 'abstinent' and five (5) being 'aficionado', rate your frequency of casual, unprotected sex.

112) Do you find this census too onerous and confusing? Phrase your answer in the form of a haiku.

116) Ah, I was totally going to ask you something but it's escaping me at the minute. It'll come to me later.

116. b) Oh Christ, this is totally going to drive me nuts.

133) Have you watched CPAC in the last two (2) weeks? How about ever?

146) Have you ever thought about raisins? I mean really thought about them.

167) Including yourself, how many persons in your household have watched the classic 1985 Tim Curry movie Clue?

169) Have you ever felt an inappropriate attraction to someone you're related to? Does it bother you that we can put you in jail if you don't answer this question?

201) Trudeau - visionary or dick?

Bring back Hitler! (but not like that)

2010-04-20T21:35:00.000-07:00

Living in an hyper-litigious society can be fun. You can get way too drunk at your office Christmas party and then sue your work when you fall down the stairs. You can threaten legal action when your waiter brings you slightly overcooked steak. Dentist shoots you a dirty look? Sue. Neighbour's dog piddles on your sneakers? Sue! And god help the octogenarian grandmother who just rear-ended you in the Sobeys parking lot. Ka. Ching.

Truly, it's a good time to be alive (Note: This is in no way a reference to the very classic and very copyrighted 1999 Edwin song Alive)

But there's one thing that's always baffled me. Surely, suing every last doubloon from some poor shmo has got to be a rush. But why do so many people launch lawsuits that only hurt themselves?

I could list many examples. Eeven my amigo Rich Aucoin has been a victim when he stole/promoted How The Grinch Stole Christmas and worked it into his act, to genius results. But this time the lawyers aren't just going after broke Canadian indy musicians. This time they're going after Hitler.

Like 1945 Berlin, the popular Hitler meme has come under attack, only this time with takedown orders. Sure, it steals a clip from the movie Downfall and technically the producers can go all Law & Order on the internet.

But why would they?

According to boxofficemojo the story of Hitler's final days did very well overseas but only scraped the lucrative North American market to the tune of $5.5 million.

I first heard about Downfall when it came out about five years ago and always wanted to see it. But I never got around to it until I saw my first Hitler video about Terrell Owens joining the Buffalo Bills. I was hooked, watched a bunch more of them and soon was intrigued enough to seek out the movie.

There's no way to know how often this cycle was repeated, but in an increasingly DVD-centric market I'd bet it's a hell of a lot. Even further, the movie is fascinating enough for a lot of people to recommend it to friends, blog about it or include it in best-of lists. That adds up. And this is coming from someone who spent a few hours writing a Best Movies of the Decade list one bored evening and had it surprisingly 'go viral' and be viewed by over 79,000 people at last count.

So what reason is there to sue? Principal? Uh, these people are making fun of Hitler. And in the process they're giving your movie loads of free advertising to a market you've yet to break into.

Why not just sue yourselves for releasing a trailer? This whole irrational, knee-jerk decision making that's ultimately self-destructive reminds me a lot of... someone. I feel like I watched a movie about this recently but for the life of me I can't remember who it was about.

So lay off the legal blitzkrieg, Downfall producers. You've found a way to proffit off of World War II in a way that victimizes Hitler. Personally, I would run with that.

Also, please don't sue me.

An Open Letter to Quebec

2010-03-26T09:54:00.000-07:00

Dear Quebec,

Bonjour!

It's been just two months since I last visited you and ever since I've been preparing to go back by taking french lessons and eating lots of your delicious gravy-covered fries.

I love your province. The rural areas are beautiful, Quebec City's historic landscape is breathtaking and Montreal feels wrong in all the right ways. I even love your adorable "french" dialect you so cherish. But while I acknowledge the looming threat of us damn anglos taking over, I think you might have gone slightly overboard with the cultural preservation thing to the point that it's left you with a wee case of virulant racism.

And that's why I'm writing you, Quebec. It's about the Muslim thing.

Specifically, the niqab and your desire to ban it. Look, mon ami, I totally see where you're coming from. I hate the idea of of the niqab. A world view where women should cover their faces in public seems inherently misogynistic to the core, especially when the only sacrifice men have to make is grow out sweet beards.

But the thing is, other people choosing to wear the niqab doesn't actually hurt me, I just don't want them to wear it because I think it's wrong. That's the same strand of logic that prevented gay couples from being allowed to marry for so long, and in some backwater countries still does.

Who am I, as a 20-something male of average height, average weight and average ethnicity, to tell other people what to wear? Like the old saying goes, "if you don't believe in freedom of speech for those you disagree with, then you're a dick."

Besides, do you really think you're that secular? Here's a test: look around and see if you can spot anyone in the zip code who's not Catholic. Last time I was there I talked to several smart, well educated people who had no idea what the protestant religion even involved. They asked me if it involved Jesus, seriously.

If the Pope came to town would you deny him his assortment of funny hats? I thought not. Then again I guess it's not like the strict requirements of the Catholic religion led to any problems for anyone, ever.

Just bite the bullet on this one, mon frere. Do you really want to be known as the one who forced muslim women to choose between their faith and seeing a doctor or going to school? Why not just solve this problem like you do every other and force them to learn french?

Problem solved.

Cordialement,

Paul

PS - Thanks for Mordecai Richler.

How to throw a successful naked sushi party

2010-02-22T19:18:00.001-08:00

When my friend Lizzy Hill invited me to a naked sushi party, I mistakenly envisioned a bunch of butt naked people standing around eating.

"I'm in," I told her.

It turns out you go fully clothed and eat sushi off of naked people who lie as still as possible trying to closely emulate a plate. The tradition started in some crazy country - Japan, I assume; the whole thing reeks of Japan - and made its way over here because we love to follow down their crazy paths. Mark my words, our streets will one day be lined with vending machines despensing the underwear of virgins.

Anyway, I arrived at Lizzy's early to help set up. My first piece of advice for throwing a naked sushi party is to have your guests show up good and hungry. After starving for a few hours your body will be ready to eat off any surface, regardless of what feeble protests of "strangeness" and "hygiene" your brain can muster.

Another good strategy is to get everyone drunk. Lizzy had her friends bring a healthy dose of wine to get loosened up. Drugs would also work but nothing too heavy, eating food off a naked person is weird enough without thinking their nipples are talking to you.

Lizzy was able to use her north end scene connections to find two volunteers(!) for the evening. Setup is key. Two tables were prepared and lined with candles in such a way that things wouldn't seem "too gynocological." Guests were corralled into the kitchen of Lizzy's apartment to get buzzed while the models went to a seperate room to psych up and strip down.

Eventually a bell was rung and the dozen or so guests headed to the living room. The covered in sushi part was weird, but the most striking thing was that both models were physically perfect and totally hairless below the eyebrows. They lay face up and totally still, as if in a trance. Guests were instructed not to touch the models - except with chopsticks - or to talk to them.

And yes, you could see prettymuch everything. The girl - an attractive woman named Natalie who is apparently a burlesque dancer - had sea shells over her nipples but that's about it. Both her and Redman, Lizzy's hairdresser, had floral arrangements over their crotches but they did more to more garnish their genitals than conceal them.

It was surprisingly unawkward. People hung out as they normally would and there was no jackass making too-obvious jokes ("Is that a spicy tempura salmon roll or are you just happy to see me?").

Despite the no-talking rule, one girl sweetly clutched Redman's hand, squeezed it, and repeated "you look beautiful." I, meanwhile, was busy greedily plucking sushi from his shoulder and focusing on not dropping any soya sauce in his eyeball.

For music, Lizzy's roommate Lee searched 'background japanese restaurant music' into youtube, which worked kind of well. Eventually people got on the laptop and started playing whatever came to mind. Hip hop didn't quite seem to match the vibe of eating fish off a seemingly-comatose naked stranger but by that point everyone had drank enough wine that it didn't matter.

So what was the point of it all? Honestly, I have no idea. According to the weabsite SushiOrDeath.com (uh, I choose sushi?), the practice is called Nyotaimori and is a sub-fetish of food play. Others say there's nothing sexual about it. Also Nyotaimori, like freedom, is banned in China.

Whatever it is, it isn't sexual. It's too awkward an environment to be arousing, and yet too interesting to really be awkward. All I know for sure is it's a fun story and Lizzy knows how to throw a hell of a unique party. Also, she makes good sushi.

Mike Danton joke roundup

2010-01-12T14:37:00.000-08:00

Nova Scotians are tickled at the news this week that former NHLer Mike Danton plans to suit up for the local Saint Mary's Huskies. Of course Danton just spent a few years in jail after admitting to a judge that he kind of, sort of, tried to have his father killed.

Like all the best controversies, the Danton matter is pretty hilarious. Here are some of the jokes I heard about it today:

"He called up the Calgary Hitmen, but they weren't looking for any centres." - G. MacDonald (identity obscured by request due to fear of retribution)

"SMU saw something in him, though. The coach said he liked Danton's killer instinct. So he's basically a lock." - also G. MacDonald

“Stieny isn’t going to bother coaching him much because he’s already shown he can’t execute the game plan.” - Adam Richardson

"I hope SMU goes after Gilbert Arenas next." - Ruari Murphy. (I've also heard or said variations of this one involving Michael Vick, Chris Benoit, O.J Simpson and - I don't really get this one - Magic Johnson.)

My personal favourite is from a sports reporter talking about needing backup the first time he interviews Danton:

“You don’t know what it’s like. You just go to a courtroom where there’s all kinds of protection. I have to go to a hockey rink where I’m going to get murdered.”

There are a lot of people bashing SMU for the move. One commenter on the Chronicle Herald website went so far as to say she would boycot Saint Mary's and ban her children from going there, which is too bad because she sounds cool.

But let's be reasonable, Danton is a great pickup for the Huskies. First, he'll be great for team chemistry. The guy's used to spending lots of time with other dudes in a close, personal environment so he'll be a natural team player. After a strenuous hockey game who wouldn't want to hit the showers with a convicted criminal? Plus, on the ice the guy is a sniper (or at least he knows one). And he's a natural enforcer because really, who's going to want to fight him?

That said he isn't a very good physical player and is known for not finishing his hits. But anything that makes AUS hockey remotely interesting is a great move in my books. I may start going to games just to hear what names the hecklers come up with. My vote is for Patty Patricide.

The 20 Best Films of the Decade

2010-01-01T10:13:00.000-08:00

I love movies and I love lists, so I hereby present my list of the 20 best movies of the decade. This turned out to be much harder than I originally thought. In defining 'best' I considered three factors: artistic merit; audience impact; and longevity.

I was originally going to just list the top 20 alphabetically but that seemed too easy so in the end

I ranked them by number. Admittedly, these rankings are mostly arbitrary so don't read too much into them (how the hell do you really distinguish between the 15th and 16th greatest movies in a decade?) Also, documentaries are not included since it's too hard to compare them to fiction.

Feedback and alternate lists are welcome. Let's get to it.

20) There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007)

What is it?
Daniel Day-Lewis drinks other people’s milkshakes.

Why is it great?
To be honest, I’ve never found the character study of Daniel Plainview fully satisfying. We learn so much about how he is but virtually nothing about why. From his initial hatred of humanity to his final descent into loner hell, we’re never given an understanding as to what’s behind it all, which I think limits the character’s impact. Still, when the movie works it really works. When you’ve got one of the best directors alive working with one of the best actors alive in an early American oil epic it’s almost hard for it not to be great. Anderson’s beautiful, patient shots and the brilliant Plainview vs. Eli Sunday scenes are going to be just as riveting 50 years from now as they are today.

19) Super Troopers (Jay Chandrasekhar, 2001)

What is it?
A group of highway patrol officers get up to some shenanigans.

Why is it great?
A lot of people seem to have Anchorman as one of their top movies, and for a while I was thinking of including it. Then my friend Alex shaved his beard into a moustache and I made a crack about moustache rides. Suddenly it hit me – Super Troopers is one of the best films of the decade. It has moments like its brilliant opening that can go toe-to-toe with Anchorman’s best scenes and it did a better job of not slipping into lazy, sit-comy writing. It’s smarter than Harold and Kumar, more consistent than Pineapple Express and more distinct than the pack of Judd Apatow flicks that filled the OOs. Quite simply, it’s the best stoner comedy of the decade.

18) Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki, 2001)

What is it?
A little girl stumbles into a ghost world after her parents are transformed into pigs. A modern-day Alice in Wonderland follows.

Why is it great?
This was an enviable decade to be a kid, as many children’s movies stopped relying on clichés and Phil Collins soundtracks and started treating their audiences with respect. But the one that impressed me the most wasn’t made by Pixar. Containing more visual ideas than 10 Disney movies combined along with a universal story about childhood, Spirited Away is the best animated film of the decade.

17) The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008)

What is it?
Nana nana nana nana nana nana nana nana… Batman.

Why is it great?
I almost went with Christopher Nolan’s excellent rival magicians movie The Prestige instead, but ultimately I’ve got to hand it to The Dark Knight. Sure the whole x-ray vision stuff was goofy and there were some problems with the plot, but it deserves a spot for a few reasons. 1) It marked the growing up of super hero movies. In his flick, Spiderman had to choose between saving Mary Jane or a trolley full of people. He pulled some web bullshit and voila, everyone’s fine. Batman was given the same choice and a main character died. 2) Hack movies like Babel get fawned over for insipid themes like “not communicating is bad.” The Dark Knight deals with dark thematic issues most movies never touch, like the West’s responsibility for terrorism, deceiving the masses for their own good, love not saving anyone and the impossibility of living up to heroic expectations. 3) Incredibly memorable moments, like the bank heist opening. 4) Heath Ledger's The Joker. Not just one of the two greatest villains of the decade, he's one of the best all-time movie bad guys.

16) Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Michel Gondry, 2004)

What is it?
A love story told backwards as it’s forgotten.

Why is it great?
Blah blah blah, Charlie Kaufman, blah blah, Michel Gondry, blah blah. By now everyone knows the praise for the script, visuals, and performances of this movie so I won’t rehash it here. Instead I’ll just say one thing I really respect about Eternal Sunshine is it resisted the urge to romanticize. Instead of waiting for the couple to figure out they’re obviously meant to be together, Eternal Sunshine gives us characters that probably aren’t right for each other and may well be doomed to repeat their mistakes. It’s this heavy dose of reality as much as the script and visuals that made this such a fresh viewing experience. And damn it, we’re all still rooting for Joel and Clementine.

15) 28 Days Later (Danny Boyle, 2002)

What is it?
A brilliantly stylized reinvention of the zombie genre from one of film's most versatile directors.

Why is great?
This is the second most important zombie movie of all time (after Night of the Living Dead, obviously). Where Romero invented the genre as we know it, Boyle reinvented it for the 21st century. But there’s so much more than just the “fast zombies” that makes this movie great. Just watch the beginning and by the haunting scene of Cilian Murphy wandering around an abandoned London you know you’ve got a classic. And yes, 28 Days Later does count as a zombie movie.

14) Children of Men (Alfonso Cuaron, 2006)

What is it?
Clive Own wanders the streets of a ragged, dying Britain. Children inexplicably stopped being born years ago, the youngest man in the world was just killed in a bar fight, xenophobia has manifested into a militaristic dictatorship and – oh shit, is that chick pregnant?

Why s it on the list?
Man, these ten years were pretty thin on great sci fi movies. The 90s finished off on a high with Dark City and The Matrix then this decade tries to carry the torch with god-awful Matrix sequels and Star Wars prequels. The much championed Minority Report and Stark Trek were too shiny and pretty to be considered classics in my mind. Great sci fi should have some grit. Luckily we got quality mind-benders (Primer), space westerns (Serenity) and of course Children of Men, a story that encapsulates despair as well as any I’ve seen. Intriguing plot and strong acting aside, it’s the incredible cinematography that elevates this film to greatness. The stunning, single-shot car heist and city under siege scenes rank among the best of this generation.

(Note: I’d probably have included Serenity on this list of not for that in my mind it’s inherently linked into the TV show Firefly.)

13) Mulholland Drive (David Lynch, 2001)

What is it?
Good question.

Why is it great?
I debated about whether to include this or the longer, stranger Lynch film Inland Empire. Neither are films you can shake out of your mind but ultimately the nod goes to Mulholland Drive. It’s hard to say how the original plan for a TV show would have gone. Instead Lynch salvaged the stillborn pilot to create an enduring work of art. A lot of movies are weird for the sake of being weird while having nothing of substance underneath (take the paper-thin Donnie Darko, maybe the most overrated movie of the decade) but here Lynch delivers something worth digging into and exploring. In the end it’s really quite a simple story, but half the fun is piecing it all together. The other half is watching it - the scene of the opera singer dropping dead during Roy Orbison’s song Crying, thus revealing everything as an illusion, is a contender for greatest scene of the decade.

12) Lost in Translation (Sofia Coppola, 2003)

What is it?
Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson star in a surprisingly non-creepy sort of romance story about two tourists in Japan trying to figure it all out.

Why is it great?
The oughts had a bit of an obsession with movies about people ‘finding’ themselves. Lost in Translation was the best of the bunch and set the bar for the Junos, Little Miss Sunshines and Garden States that followed. People tend to gush over, say, holocaust movies because of their heavy subject regardless of whether they’re well made. Yet here is a movie about two upper-class people fighting ennui and through some truly graceful filmmaking we genuinely relate to and care for them. In this case less is more: Long stretches of no dialogue? Instead take in the excellent soundtrack by Air. Having no plot to speak of? Yeah, well neither does real life. Coppola mixes just the right blend of wistfulness and humour so that by the ending fade out you feel truly satisfied.

11) Battle Royale (Kinji Fukasaku, 2000)

What is it?
In a futuristic dystopian Japan, a class of grade nine students is kidnapped, taken to an island, given weapons and told they must fight to the death until only one is left alive.

Why is it on the list?
Uh, did you see the premise? Usually something that sounds that batshit awesome turns out to be a heap of disappointment. Not this time. This is one movie that knows how to follow through. I sill rank the first time I saw Battle Royale in high school as one of the most mind-blowing cinema experiences of my life.

10) Before Sunset (Richard Linklater, 2004)

What is it?
Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke reunite 10 years after a one-night romantic tryst.

Why is it great?
1995’s Before Sunrise was a charming film about two young people meeting randomly for one passionate night in Europe. Making a follow-up to its excellent ending – will they or won’t they fulfill their promise to meet one year later? – seemed like a terrible idea. Instead, this sequel bests its predecessor in every way. Delpy and Hawke still have some of the best on-screen chemistry ever seen, but 10 years later life has gotten complicated and their discussions have more weight. Instead of a young fairytale romance, here are two adults trying to recreate a fairytale romance. The beauty is in watching them pull it off. Linklater’s direction couldn’t be better – for a film that is basically one long string of dialogue it’s the sparse use of silence that has the most impact.

9) Memento (Christopher Nolan, 2000)

What is it?
The story of a man with no short-term memory hunting his wife’s killer. Oh, and the movie runs backwards.

Why is it on the list?
I feel a pretty deep connection to this movie. At the time of its release it was my favourite film and in many ways it sparked my love of movies. It’s not the only film to do the backwards chronology thing (2002’s Irreversible, which I painfully couldn’t fit on this list, is a notable example) but it uses it brilliantly. What could have been a gimmick becomes an incredibly fresh way to tell a dark, unforgettable story that is still captivating today. This is raw movie-making gold.

8) Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2 (Quentin Tarantino, 2003/2004)

What is it?
Tarantino, master of the literal title, delivers a loving homage to samurai movies.

Why is it great?
First of all, it's one big story so I'm throwing the two movies together. What's striking about Kill Bill is that so much of it is made up of recycled parts. By assembling a mountain of shots and moments and molding them into one Power Rangersesque super movie, Tarantino has surpassed his source material. Only in Pulp Fiction has Tarantino brought style and substance together in such a dynamite package. Plus it rejuvanated David Carradine's career, so huge bonus points.

7) Oldboy (Chan-wook Park, 2003)

What is it?
During a night of heavy drinking a man is mysteriously abducted, kept captive in a hotel-style room for 15 years without explanation and then released. He immediately goes on a quest for answers - and revenge.

Why is it great?
Thank god rumours of an American remake seem to have fizzled out. There is just no way to improve upon this breathtaking film. Like Battle Royale, Oldboy takes a wicked premise and doesn't just live up to it but exceeds it. Chan-wook Park challenges you to keep up to his winding story that ventures miles beyond what mainstream western movies would dare to touch. This is revenge cinema at its finest. It's so good that its also having one of the best fight scenes of the decade doesn't even seem fair.

6) Shaun of the Dead (Edgar Wright, 2004)

What is it?
A comedy? A horror movie? A zom-com? Who knows?

Why is it great?
Sure, it’s quick and funny enough to be on the list for yuks alone. But beyond that, Shaun is actually quite groundbreaking. How many movies, if any, have managed to so finely walk a line between two disparate genres? A hilarious toss up of zombie films while at the same time being a zombie film, Shaun of the Dead is the ultimate case of having your brains and eating them too.

5) No Country for Old Men (The Coen brothers, 2007)

What is it?
The best thriller of the decade.

Why is it great?
Suck it, Stephen Spielberg. Joel and Ethan Coen show that they are the masters of cat-and-mouse thrill ride filmmaking. Everyone brings their A game to this one. You can't ask for better technical camerawork and editing. Its pacing is unconventional but works to a tee. The cast is excellent but the show is stolen by Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh. With the Joker, Chigurh is one two characters that elevated villainhood to new hights. And of course the star behind the screen is Cormac McCArthy, whose faithfully adapted novel this all stems from.

4) Zodiac (David Fincher, 2007)

What is it?
A genre-breaking film about the real life hunt to track down the Zodiac Killer.

Why is it on the list?
Could this be the best serial killer movie ever? I guess it’s not a fair question. While most focus on the mind of the killer (take Fincher’s own Se7en), this movie is about the people hunting him. More truly, it’s about obsession. Fincher puts on an absolute clinic of filmmaking. He juggles an incredible cast of characters (especially Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey Jr.) and a complex, weaving plot that spans decades of dead ends and false starts, yet the movie never stops being gripping. It’s a story that shouldn’t work but Fincher inverts the focus and makes this all about that wing of human nature that refuses – or isn’t able – to let things go. People who derided this film as 'slow' need to go back and see all that's going as they're missing exquisite filmmaking.

3) The Barbarian Invasions (Denys Arcand, 2003)

What is it?
A Quebecois professor is diagnosed with cancer and admitted to hospital. As the end of his life nears, his family and friends gather together to see him off.

Why is it great?
Admittedly, the premise makes this movie sound entirely depressing. It’s not. It’s filled with dark humour, off-colour jokes, womanizing and drug use. This makes the moments of poignancy and insight that much more powerful. Clever, debauched and somehow comforting, this is a personal fable about something we all try to do eventually - come to terms with death. This is also my favourite Canadian film, period.

2) The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, 2001)

What is it?
The wily Royal (Gene Hackman) returns to his family of over-the-hill geniuses to try to trick them into loving him again. Paul Simon montages ensue.

Why is it great?
Don’t even get me started. There are so many classic scenes and quotes in this movie that there’s really just too much to take in in one sitting. Repeated viewings begin to peel away a script, cast and direction that fit together so well the end result is, arguably, perfect. Some people dismiss Wes Anderson by throwing him into the “quirky indy filmmaker” camp, but they’re not watching closely enough. Yes, Anderson’s filmmaking is clever, but he doesn’t sacrifice character or story to be so. And as shown by his recent excellent films The Darjeeling Limited and The Fantastic Mr. Fox, he hasn’t slowed down. But Tenenbaums is Anderson’s best film of the decade (as well as my personal favourite film of the decade) and in the end will likely go down as his masterpiece.

1) The Lord of the Rings trilogy (Peter Jackson, 2001-2003)

What is it?
Star Wars with elves.

Why is it on the list?
In the end, this is inescapable. The Lord of the Rings movies were the defining cinematic accomplishment of the decade.Whether or not LOTR is your style you've got to be impressed by how it cultivated so many millions of die-hard fans. Yearly 11-hour director's cut marathons are now a commonplace tradition.

But it's not just popularity that earns LOTR the top spot. This is old-fashioned adventure filmmaking - a fun, epic, wild ride. In other words, it truly is the Star Wars trilogy for the next generation. People who thought Avatar was a 'game changer' were way off. More CGI is not the answer. It's about making your special effects enhance reality, not become reality. Jackson had groundbreaking technology too but he anchors the films in real flesh and blood so they never become CGI snooze-fests.

This trilogy could have gone so wrong in so many ways. Instead we got that rare movie magic where a beloved series of books now have equally beloved film companions. More than any other movie, the OOs will be remembered for Lord of the Rings.

Don't fear the iReaper

2009-12-21T14:08:00.000-08:00

I was talking to my coworker Alison about the movie Avatar today and she mentioned an interesting quote from Dave Howlett of Strange Adventures, which was " Why is it so many movies that require great leaps forward in technology to be realized usually end up having an anti-technology message?"

It's a good point. The Terminator franchise, The Matrix, Star Wars, Minority Report, Jurassic Park, I, Robot and the TV show Battlestar Galactica all use state-of-the-art technology to warn as about the dangers of state-of-the-art technology. The Transformer movies kind of count, though they're also anti-human in that I wanted everyone onscreen to die.

But aside from the searing hypocrisy, the problem with these movies is they get it all backward. I'm not worried about machines forcibly harvesting my organs, traveling through time to kill my grandchildren or framing me for murder. But what I can see is people paying money to download iPhone apps that do all of those things.

See, Hollywood, robots aren't the bad guys. We want to be enslaved by machines. We've already ground our economy to a halt through incessant facebook checking, embraced 1984-style newspeak by condensing all our thoughts into 140 characters or less and sacrificed all social decorum.

Take the Globe and Mail story this year about Conservative MP Rick Dykstra. Liberals accused him of texting during a Remembrance Day ceremony when photos surfaced of him playing with his phone at the service.

Dykstra swore it was all a misunderstanding and said he was actually live blogging the ceremony, as if that wasn't much, much worse.

Must... inform... masses...

To recap: Our elected politicians are attending ceremonies honouring veterans who fought for us to have the freedom to ignore those same veterans at said ceremonies and instead type up internet posts for people craving up-to-the-second Remembrance Day updates without actually going near old people.

Dykstra and his ilk will be first against the wall when the Google Apocalypse (or Wikipocalypse, iPocalypose, WiiPocalypse, Microsoft Intel quad core apocalypse, take your pick) hits.

If Hollywood wanted to be truly scary it shouldn't bother with the clichéd stories of robots committing evil deeds like imprisoning humanity or befriending Shia Laboeuf. Just show what would actually happen. Give us a scene where the Avatar guy pauses to marvel at the incredible 3D special effects and is mauled to death by a space rhinoceros. Show the machines luring Neo back into the Matrix with promises of unlimited minsesweeper, or have him die when he pauses to send a text message before using one of those phone portal things to escape.

"My twitter followers are not going to believe this."

Your heavy-handed pleas are falling on deaf ears, movie makers. Next time just show us some hover craft battles, cast Will Smith as the lead and leave out the preaching.

As James Cameron has proven, there are things people care about far more than being lectured on their technology use. To quote my amigo Glen Matthews' review of Avatar: "3 hours of naked alien humanoids running around and not one nipple slip? Thumbs down."

Too much irony on the field penalty costs Roughriders Grey Cup

2009-11-30T16:47:00.000-08:00

CALGARY - The Saskatchewan Roughriders blew their shot at winning the 97th Grey Cup after being penalized for a staggering, unimaginable amount of irony on the field Sunday.

"After months of going on about '13th man this' and '13th man that' they have 13 men on the field during the dying seconds of the game?" asked referee Glen Johnson.

"I'm sorry but that jaw-dropping amount of irony is a 10-yard penalty."

The flag, which linguists confirmed was a direct reversal of intention and expectation, allowed dumbfounded Montreal Alouettes to win the game and bewilderingly accept the Cup.

"This a little weird," said Montreal's David Duval, who after the penalty connected on his second try for a game-winning field goal.

"I played terribly the whole game. At one point I punted for seven yards. Seven yards! And yet due to the other team screwing up I'm somehow the big hero.

"Huh. I guess that is pretty ironic."

The bizarre finish was a delight to fans, as the televised broadcast received the highest ratings for any Grey Cup game.

"I tuned in after smoking a couple joints and for the longest time I couldn't figure out why the Steelers and Ravens were wearing such funny colours. Or why they kept not going for it on third down, that just seemed overly cautious to me" said Brent Smuckley of Oromocto, New Brunswick.

"It wasn't until after that crazy finish that I realized I'd inadvertantly watched a CFL game. Who knew such a thing could be entertaining?"

CFL analysts agree this is the most ironic Grey Cup finish since the Hamilton Tiger Cats lost to Saskatchewan in 1980 after a live tiger cat ran onto the field and killed Hamilton quarterback Mike Kerrigan.

Guardian Angels did not make a difference

2009-11-24T16:53:00.000-08:00

Amongst headlines I never thought I'd read, "Guardian Angels made a difference" ranks somewhere between "Black man becomes president" and "Screech sex tape leaked."

Finding new column topics every second day would be tough so maybe I should cut Chronicle Herald columnit Marilla "the thrilla" Stephenson some slack. Then again, at a press conference last week she unsuccessfully tried to cut off The Coast's Bruce Wark by jumping in during the two-second pause between Wark asking a question and Premier Darrell Dexter answering him.

That's a pretty huge breach of interview decorum, so for her rudeness I figured it's worth mocking her ridiculous November 24 column. Italics are mine.

Guardian Angels made a difference
by Marilla Stephenson

THE GUARDIAN ANGELS came to Halifax in an effort to help make our streets safer. But they’re dying a slow death from, among other things, a lack of bureaucratic backing and limited public interest.

Do we really need a citizens-on-patrol organization?

There is no question that at the time when the Guardian Angels decided to come to town, Haligonians were demanding better from city leaders and the police in terms of public safety. We can give the Angels credit for stepping in to try to fill the gap.

We know things were bad because that was the summer the Herald ran a huge front page headline decrying Halifax as Canada's most dangerous city. Of course it turns out that didn't come from crime stats but rather a years-old 'victimization study' that polled people on whether they've felt victimized. Of course, newer versions of the exact same poll no longer ranked Halifax first, but that was never mentioned. After the mayor and police complained to the Herald for, uh, lying, they printed a small "clarification" citing the old study and never mentioning it was out of date.

The New York City-based organization, run by founder Curtis Sliwa, operates in many cities around North America and beyond. But Sliwa found an unusual situation upon his arrival in Halifax in 2008.

"In most countries, there’s a positive working relationship with the police," he told The Chronicle Herald at a graduating ceremony for new recruits 18 months ago. "Halifax is the exception."

This was proven untrue in numerous articles. While the Angels work with police in some areas, Halifax is by no means an exception. The slightest bit of fact checking would have cleared this up, Marilla. If you're not careful you'll get promoted to headline writer.

There were only eight recruits who graduated that day. One year later, instead of expanding, the group was down to four regular members.

Last week, Sliwa told The Chronicle Herald that there were just three members remaining.

That’s the bare minimum to mount a single patrol, which now happens once a week at the most. They focus on the Halifax Commons and the Uniacke Square area.

To reiterate - there are only three people willing to dress themselves up in bright red and walk unarmed through the Commons and Uniacke Square at night and this is... a bad thing?

"Obviously, at some point, we’ve got to increase our numbers," said Sliwa.

He reiterated that a lack of backing from the police has made it difficult to recruit new members.

So police aren't encouraging people to dress in red and walk unarmed through the Commons and Uniacke Square at night and this is... a bad thing?

About 20 people turned out for the first meeting two years ago, with a dozen later signing on to join the group. But they had to undertake training at their own cost and on their own time and then be available for rotating patrols.

Why has the citizens-on-patrol movement found so little support in this city? Is it a lack of things to do, lack of commitment or safety concerns? Whatever the reason, there is no question that the initial sizzle associated with the Guardian Angels has petered out.

Well not doing something because you don't have much to do doesn't make sense so we can rule that one out. Lack of commitment is what you're discussing so it can't be its own cause. That just leaves safety concerns. Hooray for problem solving!

Linda Mosher, a Halifax regional councillor, was a primary backer of Sliwa’s group when they first sought support to set up shop in Halifax.

"I really believe that our policing is better now. I mean, we’ve got more bodies on the force and more (police officers) on the street, and those type of swarming issues and things are not as prominent."

Whether it was the high-profile crimes of two years ago or the push to get more officers onto the streets, there is no question that public safety, particularly in certain communities, was high on the minds of residents when the Guardian Angels came to town.

Yeah, Marilla likes to state the obvious and reiterate old news. Feel free to skim.

During the peak of the outcry, the media was blamed for sensationalizing recent cases, while police officials insisted crime rates hadn’t changed much.

Then the report of the mayor’s task force on crime arrived in May 2008.

Dalhousie University professor Don Clairmont told city councillors, in no uncertain terms, that the problem "isn’t a figment of people’s imaginations."

See? We weren't being sensationalist, guys. In hindsight that headline in big, red ink about us being the most dangerous city in Canada showed remarkable restraint.

He called on the city to play a more prominent role in matters of public safety and security, and chastised council for not doing more to stem the impact of crime on the city.

"In my mind, there is no doubt that there is clearly a problem of violence and public safety in HRM," Clairmont said when he presented his report. "The evidence is overwhelming."

He also dismissed the role that the Guardian Angels might play, saying they would provide, at best, "an ineffective solution."

And perhaps he was right. While the Guardian Angels can supplement policing efforts, especially if they work in co-operation with the police, they cannot replace the police.

In other news, wearing a white coat does not qualify you to perform heart surgery and putting a band-aid on your face doesn't give you the power to rap.

But let’s give credit where credit is due: The arrival of the local Guardian Angels chapter helped bring additional attention to public-safety issues and put additional pressure on Halifax Regional Police. Thanks, in part, to additional federal and provincial funding, there are new officers on the force and a returned focus to street patrols.

But, but, you just spent half your column explaining how everyone was freaking out about public safety. The Angels should get credit for shining attention on something everyone was already paying attention to? That's like commending someone for highlighting 9/11.

An effort to get cheap liquor off the menu at downtown bars may also be helping to restore order.

Yes, but at what cost? God I miss being able to get drunk for six bucks.

So, for now, the disturbing crime headlines are off the front pages.

Psst. Marilla... there's been a huge spike in shootings over the last year. Admittedly, a good chunk of those happened in Preston and other places where black people live. Hardly front page worthy. Call me when someone gets stabbed downtown.

But, at some point, there is likely to be another flurry of high-profile cases that leave residents questioning the safety of our streets and wondering whether more might be done.

Don’t expect help to arrive from the Guardian Angels. Next time, we’ll be on our own.

Wait, are we talking about the Guardian Angels or Batman? Because the ending here is clearly referencing Batman.

The worst thing about this column is it's based on utter fiction. Patrols once a week? Bullshit. I have never heard of a single person seeing an Angels patrol. For all we know there may have only been one patrol - the first one when Sliwa came to Halifax.

I was there for that walk, as was every other media outlet in the city except for the Chronicle Herald. The Herald chose to interview Sliwa afterwards and printed an untrue story about the Angels going to Uniacke Square (never happened, they stuck to downtown).

I'd bet there hasn't been a single Angels patrol since 2007. I'd bet they never once stepped foot in Uniacke Square. Somehow I think we'll survive without them because they were never actually here. You owe your readers an apology, Marilla. But most importantly, you owe Bruce Wark an apology.

Duffy just won't die

2009-09-09T11:05:00.000-07:00

I just got back to Halifax after a two-week vacation in the American midwest only to discover an old nemesis of mine has arisen, zombie-like, back to the public sphere.

Mayor Peter Kelly, in his finite wisdom, had hired former Chronicle Herald columnist Peter Duffy as his speechwriter and community liaison.

Most people were up in arms that the mayor had hired a guy most famous for publicly claiming to be anally raped by a ghost. This must be what first-century Romans felt like as they watched Caligula appoint his horse to the senate. Though to be fair, the horse never claimed to be anally raped by a ghost.

But to be honest, the whole ghost rape thing doesn't bother me that much. While it's goofy and embarrassing, it's unlikely to affect his job performance (spectral sodomy falls under provincial jurisdiction.)

Pictured: Caspar the convicted sexual predator.

Instead why I'm angry is that one of the most out of touch mayors imaginable somehow hired someone even more out of touch to connect to the community. Halifax is a pretty liberal city and Duffy is a guy who dismissed gender reassignment as kids disgustingly mutilating themselves and doesn't like the idea of gay marriage (to be fair he doesn't oppose legalizing gay marriage, instead taking a do-unto-others approach. So at least Kelly is hiring progressive homophobes.)

The bottom line is that in a city swarming with interesting people and unemployed journalists who could use the reported $42,000-$70,000 salary, Kelly hired a guy who made a career of sitting in his cubicle watching Coronation Street and whining about gas prices.

Just to remind people how excrutiatingly bad Peter Duffy was as a folksy columnist I thought I'd reprint a critique I wrote last year of one of his columns. I'd normally say enjoy but in this case I think the proper word is endure:

Why I Hate Peter Duffy, or, How to be the Worst Writer Ever
December, 2007

Every few months I get overcome with masochistic urges and read a column by the Chronicle Herald's Peter Duffy. Today was one of those days.

In Canada it's illegal to rape or murder people, yet we allow Duffy to viciously torture the english language week after week. Every Duffy column is a clinic on what not to do in writing. I've decided to prove it. I present to you, exhibit A. (Bold writing his, italics mine.)

Bad news is all connected somehow
by Peter Duffy

The crisis besetting the world has taken on a life of its own.

The turmoil gets worse, hitting closer and closer to home with new shocks almost daily.

Witness the week’s events in Ottawa.

It’s the butterfly effect become real.

In that legend, the mere flap of a butterfly’s wings causes a chain reaction of conditions that ultimately spawn a tornado.

A butterfly’s wings!

Holy shit! A butterfly's wings? Really? That's so crazy. It's almost like it's a hypothetical example chosen specifically for its insignificance. I'm blown away!

But think about it; isn’t it how this all started?

Somewhere in Anytown, U.S.A., awash in a sea of easy credit, members of a low-income family allowed themselves to be talked into a mortgage on a home everyone, including them, knew they couldn’t afford at a rate impossible to sustain.

Yeah... sort of. Except the butterfly effect and chaos theory demonstrate how seemingly minor events can have unforseen reactions in complex systems. Billions of dollars of unrepayable debt is actually a pretty obvious link to trouble. You might as well call it the Tornado Machine Effect. Also, dude, that sentence doesn't even make any grammatical sense. The rate of one family buying a mortgage was impossible to sustain?

And sure enough. When the chickens came home to roost for them and millions of others, such economic and social chaos was loosed on the world that not even the sturdiest institution was safe, including governments.

Actually, Peter, there are many institutions that are safe, or recession-proof. And what do you mean by "even governments?" Obviously they're going to be involved in a recession. That's like saying, "I shot Bill in the face and afterwards no one's life was the same, not even Bill's."

It’s no stretch to say this week’s parliamentary meltdown in Ottawa is part of that butterfly’s legacy.

We’ve endured a week of constitutional upheaval, the likes of which we haven’t seen since Quebec almost left, back in 1995.

Now we find ourselves in legislative limbo with a government in hiding, thanks to the prime minister’s ill-conceived attempt to choke off public funding to political parties under the guise of economic restraint.

How come the only time you make sense is when you're parroting well-known opinions that have been uttered thousands of times in the last week? What's the point in telling us what we already know?

As if we needed more fear and stress in our lives at this point.

And somewhere over the horizon, those little wings continue to flutter.

God I hate you.

Eventually, normalcy will return.

Oh, sweet. Hey do me a favour and try to talk down to us a bit more.

But it’s likely to be a new normal, not least in Canadian politics.

Perfect, thanks.

Just consider the amazing developments we’ve witnessed this week.

The Liberals and the NDP announced not only could they govern jointly, but they’d be happy to do so for the foreseeable future.

And if that wasn’t surprising enough, here comes the Bloc, offering to prop them up.

Who would’ve supposed a party bent on destroying the country would step forward to ensure it stays together?

Yes, how shocking. Who would've thought a perennial opposition party would want to have the power to single-handedly uphold the government? Who wants that kind of influence anyway? Especially a party which, as described by you, has all the character depth of a Die Hard villain.

It’s opportunistic partisan politics, of course, but the mere fact the Liberals and NDP are willing to work together suggests their ideologies are not as far apart as one might suppose.

In fact, given ongoing voter disenchantment with both those parties, the idea of a permanent merger is not unrealistic.

I suspect it will come, encouraged by the blurring of centre-left lines and driven by economic realities.

Woah there, Mr. Cynical Pants. So you're basically predicting our entire political system turns into an American style Party A vs. Party B system (based on "economic realities," of course. As opposed to economic fictions like the crash in leprachaun stocks). Very controversial view. I look forward to hearing your reasoned arguments for this debatable position. Oh, we're done here? Just going to throw that out there and leave it at that? Ok, moving on.

And then there’s the Stephen Harper Party, formerly known as the Conservatives.

Zing!

After two minority governments, outcomes which speak volumes for the public’s reservations about this man, his days as leader must surely be numbered, especially now he’s been forced to run for the hills.

Actually it's very likely Harper will stay on because... You know what? Fuck it. Why bother? It's clear you subscribe to the russian roulette school of punditry. Just throw out something with no real insight and hope it sounds like you know what you're talking about. You are the Carrot Top of journalism.

Which leaves — the rest of us.

We, too, have a lot of rethinking to do in the wake of this parliamentary crisis.

Yearning for stability, we may decide a return to majority governments is the way to go.

Truly, it’s a good thing that butterfly doesn’t know its own strength.

Wait, what? The whole point of the column is that the world is going to hell but at least the goddamn butterfly doesn't feel guilty about it? Wouldn't it be a good thing if the butterfly knew it's strength so it could settle down and stop fucking up our shit?

That doesn't even make sense metaphorically. The people who bought subprime mortgages presumably get CNN or have some some access to reality. They know about the recession. I defy you to find any way that sentence makes a lick of sense.

Duffy's column also ends with an unrelated note that claims it's "ironic" that markets go up and down, thus demonstrating a Morisette-ian understanding of the English language.

Empty comments you don't even try to back up? Check.

Rhetorical flourish without any regard for factual accuracy? Check.

Basing your entire column on a metaphor you don't even understand? Check.

Simply stunning. Bravo, Peter Duffy. If words had feelings, your columns would be the Saw franchise.

The NDP Dilemma

2009-08-16T10:50:00.000-07:00

At the end of the federal NDP convention in Halifax I got a chance to ask ("future Prime Minister") Jack Layton about what I was really wondering.

“Could it be that the best role for the NDP is a perennial opposition party that serves as an advocate for the left from the outside of government?”

The answer I got was vintage Jack - bold and eloquent while skipping over the real point.

“Some people might think that. But I think the best approach is the one that Tommy Douglas used, which was to take the ideals that we stand for and turn them into actual results for Canadians.”

To be fair, the NDP hasn't been bad at doing that. They hold more sway than ever in this era of minority governments, particularly if they hold the balance of power. During close elections other parties (Ok, the Liberals) will crib their promises to win leftist support and occasionally they can shame and shove their opponents into using some of their ideas.

But that's about it. Even under ideal circumsances they couldn't gain a full percentage point of the popular vote last election and once again finished fourth behind a party that doesn't even want to be in Canada.

It's very likely this is all the influence the NDP will ever have. That's not so bad when you look at the tons of failed parties over the years. But it looks like the dream of forming government is now hurting the NDP more than helping them.

The top ranks of the party really seem to want to move toward the centre and take a shot at contending. But at this weekend's convention there was no mistaking the lack of appetite for that amongst the party's grass roots. Even a modest centrist bill to reduce taxes for small businesses was left to the backburner, presumably because of a lack of support.

On the flip side, a motion to legalize marijuana also got scuttled away so far down the agenda it had no hope of surfacing. Legalization is an issue that makes sense in many ways, has tons of Canadians supporting it and would bring the NDP loads of publicity. It's too controversial for the Liberals or Tories to adopt but is it really too controversial for the fourth-place party? The delegates this weekend seemed to think so, which is crazy. The NDP is playing like they've got a ten-point lead when they should be throwing Hail Marys.

If I were an NDP member I'd be screaming for the party to make up its mind one way or the other - move to the centre and try to win, (still highly unlikely despite Darrell Dexter pulling it off) or be a true advocate of left wing ideas. You can't do both effectively.

Darrell Dexter: Second only to Rodney MacDonald
in leading the NDP to a majority government.

So for now the NDP will continue to tread water and scrounge to pick up a few more fractions of the popular vote.

I'd like to end off on some cheesy words of wisdom quote but can't think of one at the moment. So instead I'll quote something made up by me, just now: "Not winning isn't so bad if you're able to make the most of losing."

Or even better, this election night quote by Jack Layton I just made up: "I just lost to Stephane Dion and Stephen Harper? To hell with this, I'm gonna go get drunk."

The column that (may or may not have) got me fired as a columnist

2009-08-14T12:17:00.000-07:00

Today is Friday and some of you may notice something is missing. About eight months ago my paper got me to start writing a weekly column called Urban Compass. Topics varied but it mostly involved me telling readers which direction was north. I really hated that name.

However the column has come to an end. I've been told by the higher ups in Toronto that from now on the only people who will now have access to my unbridled rants are those who happen to be within earshot, or I guess read this blog.

It all started a couple weeks back during pride week when I wrote a column on how to make Halifax more gay. Though the reader feedback was very pretty positive, I was told it was "too close to the line" and a couple days later informed I wouldn't be writing a column anymore.

However I was told it was because they don't want reporters writing columns because of conflict of interest concerns, not because of the gay column itself. So perhaps the timing was just a coincidence. Either way, this means all my loyal fans (Jill, Nancy) will no longer get their UC fix every Friday.

The column itself has been scrubbed from the website and I've had a few requests to actually see it, so I thought I'd post it here. Enjoy:

With its phallic lighthouses, fondness for sailors and propensity for dressing tugboats up as men, it’s safe to say Halifax is pretty gay.

But it could be gayer.

Despite all the progress being celebrated now during Pride Week, I still know some people who live in this comparably gay-friendly city that don’t want to come out of the closet.

No one should have to live a lie, so perhaps we should do more. There are enough boring straight cities in the world – I’m looking at you, Moncton – so why not make Halifax a real gay icon? Here are some suggestions:

More kilts – Wearing a kilt is the closest a guy can get to cross-dressing without people wondering if they should address him as madam. Why not get everyone in on the fun with special kilt-themed days months.

This works particularly well because it’s subversively gay. Just package it under the guise of Scottish culture and even the staunchest of conservatives will want to feel the breeze.

Downsides – windy days.

Kiss and make up – This one has the extra benefit of also helping to fix our divided political system. After every heated legislature session the leaders of all parties should have to hug it out.

Just imagine how all the anger and vitriol of politics would melt away when Premier Darrell Dexter buries his head into opposition leader Stephen McNeil’s shoulder (or midriff, the guy is like 100 feet tall.)

Note that this would actually be slightly straighter than normal at the moment because Tory interim leader Karen Casey is a female. But this is Nova Scotia so before long all three parties should be run by middle-aged white guys.

Downsides – tear stains expensive to dry clean.

Paint the bridges rainbow coloured – Impractical? Only to those who lack imagination.

Our bridges’ current colour schemes of patchy, camouflage green can at best be described as only somewhat gay. Imagine how famous the bridges would be if we made them icons of pride and unity.

Plus bridges are actually shaped like rainbows, so it’s really a no-brainer. Of course the names MacDonald and MacKay would have to be jazzed up. Perhaps something like Macsamesexmarriage Bridge, or simply The Cher Bridge

Possible downside – increased chance of unsuspecting foreign ships crash into bridge supports; confused leprechauns.

Remove the ‘l’ from the Clock Tower on Citadel Hill – because why not?

Downsides: none.

Here's to you, Mr. Medel

2009-08-04T18:57:00.000-07:00

If you work in journalism it's only a matter of time before you have to write an embarrassingly cheesy story. As long as people keep building homeless shelters or finding new modes of transportation on which to cross the country for sick children it can't be helped.

CTV had a great example a couple months back when they did a story on some New Brunswick woman who went to Israel and took a picture of Jesus. Allegedly.

She shot some fountain and later discovered the photo came out with a bright halo-type blur in the foreground. Naturally she assumed the son of God was lurking around and chose to reveal himself via lens flair to a cheap Canon camera (which is silly. Everyone knows Jesus lurks around us revealing himself in high-pitched sounds only dogs can hear.)

I thought this was kind of cool because the same thing happened to me a few years earlier. It was St. Patrick's day I think. I took a picture of my friend Petra and later discovered she was partially obscured by a glowing, circular light. Like any rational person I realized that the wrist strap of my camera had flipped in front of the lens, caught the flash and reflected back. But had I known Petra and I could have gotten on TV by claiming Christ Almighty had come back to chill with us in lens flair form I definitely would have.

I think I deleted the original photo but here's a sort of similar example, it's really quite common.

From Left to Right: Heather White, wrist-strap Jesus, Myra Bloom

I know a lot of people are still mad at CTV anchor Steve Murphy since the whole Dion language-screwing incident, but on this day he possessed the acting chops of a chubbier Daniel Day-Lewis. Though this woman was stupid even by New Brunswick standards, he sat and nodded politely, even seeming genuinely interested.

Somewhere out there Stephane Dion was laughing maniacally (in french).

This week the bad story baton was handed to Chronicle Herald reporter Brian Medel, widely considered Southern Nova Scotia's Hemingway.

Tuesday's story by Medel (or whoever wrote it first. Medel is most well known for being a serial plagiarist who the Herald continues to employ despite laying off many of their best repoters a few months ago) was about a rural Nova Scotian guy who writes poetry about Sidney Crosby. Here's the lede:

"The 1970s produced Rhymin' Paul Simon.
The 21st century has Rhymin' Paul Blauvelt. He can't help it.
Watching Sidney Crosby stickhandle his way up and down the ice keeps this fan so captivated that he just has to express himself by writing poetry about it all."

Wow, kicking it off by calling the guy the Paul Simon of the whole 21st century. Simon of course being one of the greatest songwriters of all time and known for his beloved lyrics from the profound - "The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls and tenements halls and whispered in the sounds of silence" - to the whimsical - "Who am I to blow against the wind?"

So no pressure. Let's see some examples, courtesy of Medel. From Blauvelt's poem You're The Man, Sidney:

"This goes to show that hard work pays off if one holds on to their dream
It wasn't anything shot of amazing watching the penguins gel as a team."

And from an earlier poem:

"I think God looked down on Nova Scotia from His portals up in Heaven.
He said, 'I'm going to send them a superstar who will wear the number 87.'"

OK, not exactly 'angels in the architecture' level stuff here, but at least they rhyme and have almost the same number of syllables. Maybe we need to see a longer passage to get the full effect. Here's an excerpt from the story of Blauvelt's poem National Treasure, Provincial Gem:

"If he steers clear of injuries
He will only get better with age.
It's time we got some profile
On the national stage"

and

"We've produced other great players.
Please don't take this the wrong way,
But you don't come across players
Like Sidney Crosby every day."

Rhyming "players" with "players" eh? Bold choice. So why is this stuff in our Paper of Record instead of on some junior high kid's Myspace page? I guess it just goes to show how irrationaly in love people are with Sidney Crosby.

There was that story during the provincial election campaign where politicians removed their campaign signage from beneath a "Cole Harbour: Home of Sidney Crosby" sign because some irate wacko put up a "respect our hero!" sign.

Used to be you needed to do something vaguely brave or heroic or at least be a volunteer firefighter to be called a hero. Now playing hockey apparently qualifies you. The Herald isn't even trying to disguise their desperate yearning to french kiss Sid. They're busy pimping their 12-page souvinir edition of Crosby's Stanley Cup parade complete with a poster and online video wrap-up.

They're even handing out Mission Accomplished signs at the parade. Sure, ever since George Bush the term has become a symbol of over-confidence and hubris. Why not just hand out photoshopped pictures of Crosby swimming in the harbour with Peter Kelly? But whatevs, Sidney Crosby!!

Just another great day for the media. As for Brian Medel and Paul Blauvelt, let's end off with some advice from Paul Simon:

"Want to be a writer, don't know how or when? Find a quiet place, use a humble pen."

We live in a lawless toast society

2008-07-15T15:46:00.000-07:00

I wasn't expecting to be enlightened when I picked up the new issue of MacLean's magazine. The cover story was on "the abortion debate we're afraid to have." I'd already escaped the womb and don't have one myself, so I didn't think it would affect me much.

But reading the story I realized something striking - Canada is in desperate need of new toast laws.

Now the story by Andrew Coyne - widely seen as Canada's Hemingway - doesn't specifically address toast. Coyne is more of a dead fetuses kind of guy. But he does go into the "extraordinary fact" that "this country still has no abortion law of any kind." Coyne concludes that "when it comes to abortion, we are literally a lawless society."

Fuck!

And it's not just abortion that's a lawless wasteland. It also applies to something I hold dear - delicious toast. I checked and nowhere in the criminal code is there any law permitting us to make or eat toast. That's right, friends, eating toast is not legal in Canada. Rather, it is, in the words of Coyne, "merely not unlawful."

In fact, all of our laws are too negative, only telling us what not to do. It's always "don't rape people," or "we'll arrest you for peeing in public." We need more laws telling us what we can do.

Where's the law saying "It is OK to heat bread until it is crispy and delicious, smear condiments on it and eat that motha"? It is time to shed light on this legal gray zone.

We, as a society, need to discuss this issue. While most would agree it's reasonable to toast white or whole wheat bread, some people toast everything from banana bread to rye bread. Rye bread! And I'm not coming down one way or another on the toaster/toaster oven issue. I'm just saying it's time we have that nation-wide debate.

Clearly we're afraid to talk about toast. Coyne explains we're afraid to debate abortion, and that's an issue you see insessantly on tv, print, radio and the internet. So if that's afraid, imagine how horrified we are of debating toast.

Also, there's more at stake. Coyne goes on and on about our lack of late-term abortion laws before admitting 99 per cent of abortions take place in the first 20 weeks. How many pieces of bread make it all the way to the burnt phase, only to be cruelly discarded in favour of some other snack. Without discussion, we may never know.

So thank you, Coyne and MacLean's, for reminding us that just because something's not illegal, that doesn't make it legal.

Accidental Genius: Jim Davis

2008-05-04T07:33:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the first of our occasional feature, Accidental Genius. In it, we profile someone who is (or appears to be) completely inept and yet ends up creating great works of art in spite of themselves. If we're lucky, this blog will mirror that formula. Moving on:

Garfield sucks. Ninety-nine percent of the the comics fall into the one of four streams: Garfield loves food; Garfield hates Mondays; Garfield is an asshole; and Jon's life sucks.

Jim Davis started Garfield as a cute and quirky comic back in 1978. Yes, thirty years ago. How do you keep a comic about a cat fresh for thirty years? You don't. But when you're raking in millions of dollars you can't exactly stop. Instead a team of writers (or maybe a bingo machine) randomly arranges the same stale jokes on and on forever.

So Jim Davis is a sellout, right? Well, yes. But it seems subconsciously he's a genius. A guy named Dan Walsh made the ingenious move of taking Garfield out of the strip and leaving only his long-suffering owner Jon Arbuckle. The result, in the words of Walsh, is "an even better comic about schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and the empty desperation of modern life."

Now that's hilarious. The best part is, this is how the comic really should be read. Jon can't read Garfield's thoughts, only the reader can. So this is the "real" view of Jon Arbuckle. It also works when you take out Garfield's thought bubbles.

So what can we learn from this? Davis asks us to suspend our disbelief so we can revel in Garfield's smart-alecry. But the strip works far better when you keep your disbelief and see it from an unintended point of view. If he had tried to make Jon the centre of the strip this never would have worked. Sometimes the most interesting characters and storylines are the ones we tend to overlook. It's like how everyone loved Joey in Friends but no one watched the show based on him. Exactly like that.

So thank you, Jim Davis. By writing a stale comic strip for decades you've taught us all a lesson about challenging our perspectives.

Oh, and if anyone still doesn't believe Davis is an accidental genius, remember that this is the guy that once killed Garfield in a masterfully ambiguous series that forever tinged the character with a depth and sadness unseen in comic strips, and didn't realize it.

Re: Top Five Saddest songs

2008-04-18T08:29:00.000-07:00

Man, how do you respond to someone who challenges you to a sad song contest and then includes "What a Wonderful World?" What, was "It's a Beautiful Day" taken? Anyway, here's my list of the top five saddest songs:

5) Leonard Cohen - Famous Blue Raincoat - Any list of sad songs needs to include something by Cohen. I had a tough time picking one but eventually settled on this tale of betrayal and sadness in a love triangle. When your friend sleeping with your lover is kind of a good thing because it makes her happier than you were able to make her, you know you're in a sad song.

4) Neil Young - One of These Days - There's just something about Young's singing "One of these days/ I'm going to sit down and write a long letter/ to all of the good friends I've known" that makes me weep like a toddler. Can't we all see ourselves later in life looking back on all the friends we've lost touch with along the way? This song is so great because it's not about dramatics like death and heartbreak. It's about eventuality.

3) Ben Folds Five - Brick - This song gets mad bonus points for combining Christmas and abortion. Yes, despite its sing-a-long chorus this tune tells the (apparently true) tale of Ben Folds' girlfriend having to get an abortion the day after Christmas back in high school. This song doesn't just make you sad, but makes you think confusing thoughts like "what if baby Jesus had been aborted?" Also, Brick was actually the song's second title, his first choice being "On the 13th day of Christmas my true love gave to me: a lifetime of emotional baggage."

2) Antony and the Johnsons - Hope There's Someone - Lead singer Antony Hegarty was gifted with one of the most heartbreaking voices ever bestowed on mankind. So when he starts singing about loneliness and a crippling fear of death, it's not even fair. The song leaves you begging for someone to take care of you in the afterlife, only to have a crushing piano solo shatter your dreams. For other uplifting A&J hits check out "River of Sorrow" about dead children, or "I Fell In Love With a Dead Boy" about... well it's not cheery.

1) The Pogues - Fairytale of New York - Continuing the theme of sadness and Christmas, this is the saddest song of all time. Why? Because the music is so deviously happy. It's one of the best songs ever written, with an incredibly uplifting chorus you can barely hold back from singing along to. Then you remember it's really about a lonely guy in the drunk tank on Christmas eve dreaming of his lost love; their new lives in America destroyed by liquor and drugs. Your body wants to celebrate, but your mind knows it's all a cruel, alcohol-fueled illusion. Merry Christmas.

Top Five Saddest Songs

2008-04-16T18:52:00.000-07:00

Some people are half-glass full people. Others are half-glass empty people. Me? I more of a why-bother-drinking-the-water-at-all-when-people-are dying-each-day-from-lack-of-clean-drinking-water. Needless to say, I'm a bit of a bummer at dinner parties. My 21st century-depression is also heavily triggered by music. And so, inspired by the soon-to-come wextra over at Walrus Magazine, I have decided to challenge paul to a sad-off. One rule, though: no artist who only does depressing stuff. So, no Elliot Smith kindof sad.

"1913 Massacre"---Arlo Guthrie version off of Hobo's Lullaby
This song chokes me up every time. I have it on an old scratchy LP record that I picked up at the Salvation Army. The song, written by Woody Guthrie, tells the horrific true story of a Christmas party in the copper mining town of Calumet, Michigan. I'm good up until the line, "And the children that died there were seventy-three."

5) "We Shall Overcome"---Pete Seeger off Live at Carnegie Hall
I always liked this song, but it was my high school music teacher who made me realize how sad it was. The song always brought back memories of singing the song when he went to school in California in the1960s. They had so much hope. Now when I hear Pete Seeger lead the crowd, it reminds me how little all that change and hope did. ANd then I well up.

4) "It's a Motherfucker"---by Eels off Daisies of the Galaxy
Mr. E is a guy I can really identify with. In fact a few Eels songs made my shortlist. None of them could beat the line, "It's a motherfucker, being here without you"

3) "What a Wonderful World/Somewhere Over the Rainbow"
---Israel Kamakawiwo'ole
When I was in elementary school, my grade two teacher used to play these songs on a little record player. I always wondered how people could write such lovely things when everything around me had begun to seem so sad. Israel's version of the two songs with his uke "do, do, dooos" amplifies the sadness that I always heard.

2) "You are my Sunshine"---Jimmie Davis
This song epitomizes love for me. For all the joy love brings it makes you suffer twice as much. With it's upbeat tempo and simple rythm this song suckers you into believe it'll be a happy one, and then, "As I lay sleeping, I dreamed I held you in my arms. But when I awoke, dear, I was mistaken. And I hug my head and I cried." Pow! Right in the kisser.

1) "And the Band Played Waltzing Matilda"
---The Pogues off Rum, Sodomy, and the Lash
This is the only song I have never been able to get through without shedding a tear. I try and try, but I can't do it. Oh, cruel war! I'm a sucker for you every time.

Runner up: Harry Nilsson "Without You"---If you've ever seen Rules of Attraction you know why I picked this song. This song is the official theme song for suicide.

RE: Five things I hate about my cell phone

2008-04-12T10:18:00.000-07:00

Unlike Paul I think my phone is pretty good. I’ve had it for a bit longer than two years. It’s some kind of Nokia. It’s coolest feature is the clear panel on the backside of the phone that allows you to personalize the back of your phone. I cut out a clip from the New York Times that reads, “police chief in Ka…uicide vest had com….15 pounds of high e…was studded with ball…shot th…crowd…e the slaughter,” and so on. The phone also records sound pretty well, which is why my ring tone has been the intro to MIA’s “Pull Up the People.”

But also, little miss Nokia pisses me off to no end. A pretty good cell phone is like finding out you only have prostate cancer. Sure it’s not pancreatic cancer, but it’s no bouquet of roses either.

And so, my top 5 reasons why I hate my cell phone.

5) Texting. Since my monthly income is at a dismal negative $200, I can’t really afford daytime minutes. As a result, I am forced to text, but it's impossible to write a text message without staring at your phone and looking like a mouth-breathing douche bag. And I hate myself for having to look like a dick.

4) Menu button. For some reason the menu button on my phone is in the middle of a small d-pad button. Yeah, that makes sense, let’s put this crucial button in the most unpressable spot. Every time I try to push menu (either to unlock my phone, send a message, view my call list, every other crucial function a phone can do) I either hit up, down, left, or right. This button is also impossible when drunk. Is it too much to ask for a drunkard friendly cell phone?

3) The hell that was switching my plan over from Nova Scotia to Ontario. I called Rogers, and a 50-year-old woman with a thick Eastern European accent was perplexed by question to change my number.Really? Becasue you’d think this was a question pops up regularly. That phone call concluded with telling me that such a switch was impossible without canceling my plan for a cool $200. Two trips to the local Rogers store and two more phone calls, I finally had a new number without costing me a cent. That is if you don’t count the five days I wasted dealing with them.

2) Broken/falling apart. The plastic faceplate has broken off, so now, my ear presses directly against the warm display screen, making any call unbearable. Beyond the frustrating warm display, the lack of faceplate means the corners and edges of the phone dig into my ear as well. At least Paul’s phone doesn’t hurt to use.

1) I can’t get a new one because it’d be some stupid high tech flip phone that’d make me feel like even more of jack ass, or it’d be some pile of shit like Paul’s. Rather than shit more money into a new cell phone I’m going to wait to see what the 21^st century has to offer. There’s gotta be something better than a cell phone, and one day it’ll be affordable for bums like you and me. Until then I’m stuck with my shit-tastic Nokia.

Five things I hate about my cell phone

2008-04-09T14:46:00.000-07:00

I hate a lot of things: coconuts, things that taste like coconut, Subway commercials, emotional intimacy. But my relationship with my cell phone makes those things look as appealing as curling (I love curling.)

I once had a cool phone, but it broke. I didn't mind because it still kinda worked if I held it just so. But I was going on a trip to Boston and New York last fall and I figured I needed a reliable phone. I bought the cheapest one I could find (a Samsung A645). I figured I didn't need any fancy cameras or anything. How bad could a cheap phone be?

Turns out, astoundingly bad.

My phone, which I've affectionately dubbed "fuck you, you piece of shit," was designed to be awful on purpose. There's no other explanation for how one thing can be so flawed. Some examples:

5) Keypad designed by sadistic halfwits. Buttons have but one function: to be pressed. If you design a pressable button, you've succeeded. Apparently this was out of Samsung's grasp. The keys are so close together the human thumb can't possibly hit one without smacking three or four others in the process. Cruelly, the "correct" button is wedged next to Send, so if you misdial a number, be prepared to call that person whether you want to or not.

4) Inexplicably bad reception. Apparently one side of my living room is harder to get through to than the other side of my living room. I blame the couch.

3) Text messaging also designed by sadistic halfwits. Question: What do the symbols . - ' ! @ # % & * < > _ + = : " ( ) / and \ have in common? They're all used more commonly than the question mark according to my phone.

Yes, to type a simple message like "Sup?" you need to scroll through three screens of symbols to find the question mark. But if you're into triangle brackets you're in luck. Come on, Samsung, plus and equals signs? How lame are your friends if they're text messaging you math equations? That said, I suppose this does help explain Samsung's motto of "We're too busy making our buttons smaller to question our decisions."

2) Mysterious echo effect. I didn't even know about this for a long time until people started complaining about hating talking to me on my cell phone. Apparently when my voice is sent out it's given this strange Twighlight Zoney echo that's both creepy and "annoying as fuck." This is especially terrible because my phone was making an ass of me and I had no idea.

1) Won't shut the fuck up. I keep my phone on vibrate so as not to disturb people around me. I'd hate to have my phone go off in a theatre or lecture or something. Why - why?? - then would Samsung put a "make a bunch of noise" button and put it on the outside of the phone where it can be turned on by, oh I dunno, my goddamn leg?

I don't know what this button is actually supposed to do. All I know is every so often I'll hear this female voice pleading "say a command" coming from my jeans pocket. It then keeps repeating "say a command" over and over, no matter how loudly I command it to leave me alone and die.

Everyone hates the sound of other people's cell phones. To design a phone that is designed to yell out randomly without any way to stop it, Samsung and Telus are either evil or disturbingly inept. I honestly don't know which.

The moral of the story? If you try to be cheap, our capitalist society will punish you for it mercilessly.