I rarely stop in at Huffington Post, partly because I have trouble taking its proprietor seriously. Let's see ... Arianna was a conservative who supported a very right-wing hubby's run for Congress in the 1990s and pleased other conservatives with a website demanding Clinton's resignation for the Lewinsky affair, and now she's a darling of U.S. liberals? She lacks credibility in my eyes, and probably always will.
But today I did check out the site, for the first time in many months, and found a link to an interesting piece in The Daily Beast about how celebrity news can hurt. Not because it wounds the feelings or invades the privacy of millionaire celebs who sought the spotlight in the first place, but because it distracts from literally life-and-death matters.
The shocking death of Michael Jackson has so dominated news broadcasts that it has nearly pushed the events in Iran out of people's consciousness, say observers on the political spectrum's right and left sides.
"I think we can agree that the Iranian regime benefits from the media rush to memorialize, explore and reflect upon Michael Jackson and his legacy," says a progressive commentator. Among the effects of the Jacko fixation: The mullahs who run Iran get "more room to violently suppress its opposition during a critical phase.”
Interesting post, but who's to blame? The news media for paying so much attention to Jackson's passing, or the public for being so easily distracted?
Bonus item: Sanford Should Apologize to Bill Clinton.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Do away with question period? Bad idea
My member of Parliament apparently doesn't understand the institution.
"She wishes question period could be cancelled altogether," a Canadian Press article reports.
The article also says she wants more committee meetings closed to the news media.
Looks like someone needs to do a little reading on how Parliament has evolved, and the reasons for things like question period and open committee meetings. Something by Eugene Forsey might be a good start.
Ms. Glover should know that question period exists so that her government can be held publicly accountable for what it does. I seem to recall her party making a big thing of accountability in the past. Isn't it still important now?
The rookie MP told CP she doesn't care for the "theatre" and gamesmanship she's seen in Ottawa. I do hope she expressed that sentiment to the Prime Minister late last year as the government was engaging in theatre and gamesmanship of the worst sort.
(OH LOOK! Another blogger poins out an incident that raises interesting questions about my MP's attitudes.)
"She wishes question period could be cancelled altogether," a Canadian Press article reports.
The article also says she wants more committee meetings closed to the news media.
Looks like someone needs to do a little reading on how Parliament has evolved, and the reasons for things like question period and open committee meetings. Something by Eugene Forsey might be a good start.
Ms. Glover should know that question period exists so that her government can be held publicly accountable for what it does. I seem to recall her party making a big thing of accountability in the past. Isn't it still important now?
The rookie MP told CP she doesn't care for the "theatre" and gamesmanship she's seen in Ottawa. I do hope she expressed that sentiment to the Prime Minister late last year as the government was engaging in theatre and gamesmanship of the worst sort.
(OH LOOK! Another blogger poins out an incident that raises interesting questions about my MP's attitudes.)
Saturday, June 20, 2009
How doctors and insurers are like a passive-aggressive spouse
Many years ago, long before my hair started greying, I hung out with a charismatic social worker who was once a champion runner.
K, as I'll call him here and now, had a distinct charm, a way with the ladies that I could only dream of having. He was neither rich nor handsome, and his once-athletic frame had been painted over by a middle-age paunch. But he was whip smart and sensitive to women's concerns. Apparently, that goes a long way with some members of the distaff set.
One day, at his apartment, I overheard a message on his answering machine. It was from a married woman he knew and went something like this: "K, I'm sorry but I can't go to the party tonight, X [her husband] got wind of it and came up with a million reasons why I shouldn't go."
X, of course, wasn't concerned about his wife's well-being. He was just worried K might steal his wife. X was thinking only of himself and his own interests.
I thought of this event the other day while watching a TV news story about opposition to the "public option" in U.S. health care proposed by the Obama administration.
The American Medical Association and the insurance sector are opposed because, well, they like the status quo. It's been quite profitable for them.
They're like that spouse in my story. They will devise and put forth a million reasons why the people and government should not pursue the public option.
And their motives are entirely selfish. They don't care about the people's well-being. They care only about themselves.
Don't listen to them, America. Don't listen to them.
K, as I'll call him here and now, had a distinct charm, a way with the ladies that I could only dream of having. He was neither rich nor handsome, and his once-athletic frame had been painted over by a middle-age paunch. But he was whip smart and sensitive to women's concerns. Apparently, that goes a long way with some members of the distaff set.
One day, at his apartment, I overheard a message on his answering machine. It was from a married woman he knew and went something like this: "K, I'm sorry but I can't go to the party tonight, X [her husband] got wind of it and came up with a million reasons why I shouldn't go."
X, of course, wasn't concerned about his wife's well-being. He was just worried K might steal his wife. X was thinking only of himself and his own interests.
I thought of this event the other day while watching a TV news story about opposition to the "public option" in U.S. health care proposed by the Obama administration.
The American Medical Association and the insurance sector are opposed because, well, they like the status quo. It's been quite profitable for them.
They're like that spouse in my story. They will devise and put forth a million reasons why the people and government should not pursue the public option.
And their motives are entirely selfish. They don't care about the people's well-being. They care only about themselves.
Don't listen to them, America. Don't listen to them.
Friday, June 19, 2009
One funny, funny girl
Lately I've developed a crush on Chelsea Handler. I don't think any explanation is required.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Book review: The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work
Published in today's Winnipeg Free Press:
The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work
By Alain de Botton
McClelland & Stewart, 327 pages, $33
Reviewed by Mike Stimpson
A "bourgeois ideology" tells us work is one of the main things that can bring us happiness, Alain de Botton remarks in his latest collection of essays.
And if your work doesn't yield happiness, he continues, that work-centred ideology holds that it's your fault. You didn't choose your career wisely, or you haven't tried hard enough.
The Swiss-born Briton examines very different lines of work in this insightful, elegantly written book which is nicely illustrated with scores of photos.
He begins with a chapter describing how an under-noticed part of London takes in shiploads of cargo of all sorts from all corners of the world.
He also explores the operations of United Biscuit as an example of the complexities, hard work and economic risks behind small indulgences in our lifestyles, and looks at the mundane toil and politics inside a large accounting firm.
Other chapters burrow into career counselling, invention and entrepreneurship, the aviation industry, power transmission, an artist's solitary pursuits, and the launch of a broadcast satellite.
The most interesting of de Botton's offerings is his chapter on logistics -- how goods get from their point of origin to, eventually, the shops that sell them.
The way consumers are disconnected from the people and processes behind what they buy at the supermarket reminds him of Karl Marx's theory of alienation, which observes that workers are separated from each other, the natural world and the fruits of their labour.
Two centuries ago, people knew where the merchandise bought came from and often knew the people who produced it.
Economic globalization has changed all that. Store shelves display items from places we've never even visited, produced by people we will never meet.
De Botton spies fresh tuna steaks at a warehouse and decides tracing how the fish got from the Indian Ocean to England might help "mitigate the deadening, uniquely modern sense of dislocation between the things we so heedlessly consume in the run of our daily lives and their unknown origins and creators."
So off he goes to the Maldives, where tuna is caught, carved and chilled. He then follows the product on its flight to Britain and its ground transport to a warehouse and then a supermarket. He even persuades a woman to let him and his photographer follow that tuna to her home where it is served as supper.
He relates his odyssey in a way that is entertaining (in Maldives, he finds himself "unable wholly to suppress fleeting images of a joint future with" the fish processing plant owner's comely secretary) and educational (a newly caught tuna must be killed right away or its panicked blood rush will darken the meat). De Botton tells the story with charming wit and a masterful style.
But his assay of work, beautifully written as it is, seems sadly incomplete.
It's nice that he ruminates on alienation, but he pays short shrift to another "Marxist" matter: conflict between labour and capital.
It's as if de Botton, whose past books include the critically praised Architecture of Happiness, isn't aware of disparities in income and power.
He also doesn't pay enough attention to unglamorous toil. Sure, he spends a little time with those tuna fishermen in the Maldives. But some time with, say, hotel chambermaids or diner personnel would have made this a more well-rounded book.
The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work celebrates some often overlooked wonders of the everyday world, and duly notes parts of it that are dispiriting or just plain dull.
It doesn't, however, pay enough attention to the working class who are the majority of humankind.
But then, what de Botton does deliver is probably perfect for his overwhelmingly bourgeois readership.
The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work
By Alain de Botton
McClelland & Stewart, 327 pages, $33
Reviewed by Mike Stimpson
A "bourgeois ideology" tells us work is one of the main things that can bring us happiness, Alain de Botton remarks in his latest collection of essays.
And if your work doesn't yield happiness, he continues, that work-centred ideology holds that it's your fault. You didn't choose your career wisely, or you haven't tried hard enough.
The Swiss-born Briton examines very different lines of work in this insightful, elegantly written book which is nicely illustrated with scores of photos.
He begins with a chapter describing how an under-noticed part of London takes in shiploads of cargo of all sorts from all corners of the world.
He also explores the operations of United Biscuit as an example of the complexities, hard work and economic risks behind small indulgences in our lifestyles, and looks at the mundane toil and politics inside a large accounting firm.
Other chapters burrow into career counselling, invention and entrepreneurship, the aviation industry, power transmission, an artist's solitary pursuits, and the launch of a broadcast satellite.
The most interesting of de Botton's offerings is his chapter on logistics -- how goods get from their point of origin to, eventually, the shops that sell them.
The way consumers are disconnected from the people and processes behind what they buy at the supermarket reminds him of Karl Marx's theory of alienation, which observes that workers are separated from each other, the natural world and the fruits of their labour.
Two centuries ago, people knew where the merchandise bought came from and often knew the people who produced it.
Economic globalization has changed all that. Store shelves display items from places we've never even visited, produced by people we will never meet.
De Botton spies fresh tuna steaks at a warehouse and decides tracing how the fish got from the Indian Ocean to England might help "mitigate the deadening, uniquely modern sense of dislocation between the things we so heedlessly consume in the run of our daily lives and their unknown origins and creators."
So off he goes to the Maldives, where tuna is caught, carved and chilled. He then follows the product on its flight to Britain and its ground transport to a warehouse and then a supermarket. He even persuades a woman to let him and his photographer follow that tuna to her home where it is served as supper.
He relates his odyssey in a way that is entertaining (in Maldives, he finds himself "unable wholly to suppress fleeting images of a joint future with" the fish processing plant owner's comely secretary) and educational (a newly caught tuna must be killed right away or its panicked blood rush will darken the meat). De Botton tells the story with charming wit and a masterful style.
But his assay of work, beautifully written as it is, seems sadly incomplete.
It's nice that he ruminates on alienation, but he pays short shrift to another "Marxist" matter: conflict between labour and capital.
It's as if de Botton, whose past books include the critically praised Architecture of Happiness, isn't aware of disparities in income and power.
He also doesn't pay enough attention to unglamorous toil. Sure, he spends a little time with those tuna fishermen in the Maldives. But some time with, say, hotel chambermaids or diner personnel would have made this a more well-rounded book.
The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work celebrates some often overlooked wonders of the everyday world, and duly notes parts of it that are dispiriting or just plain dull.
It doesn't, however, pay enough attention to the working class who are the majority of humankind.
But then, what de Botton does deliver is probably perfect for his overwhelmingly bourgeois readership.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Israeli pol's tough talk is hilarious
Max Blumenthal could "feel the hate" in Jerusalem last week (as noted in my preceding post). Now there's evidence animosity towards the Obama administration is very much alive in Israel's government.
The Jerusalem Post reports that an Israeli cabinet minister has sent an 11-page letter to colleagues decrying what he sees as a hostile shift in U.S. policy and suggesting ways the Jewish state could respond.
Among his suggestions, according to the newspaper: "reconsidering military and civilian purchases from the U.S., selling sensitive equipment that Washington opposes distributing internationally, and allowing other countries that compete with the U.S. to get involved with the peace process and be given a foothold for their military forces and intelligence agencies."
He also recommends Israelis and Jewish Americans withdraw support to and undermine Democrats in U.S. elections. That'll send a message, he says, and prompt Dems to pressure the president to change his position.
An "anti-war" commentator points out the story is full of hilarity, for several reasons. Israeli military purchases are made with U.S. money. Israel has been selling sensitive technology to other countries for years and years. The idea of punishing Washington by inviting other countries to get involved in the messy "peace process" is beyond hilarious.
And, of course, it's no secret that Israel has been involving itself in U.S. politics for decades. Surely you've heard of AIPAC.
Rather than devising retaliation strategies and refusing to budge on issues like West Bank settlement, Israeli politicians would serve their constituents better by trying to lower the political temperature and working for a lasting peace.
At least, that's how I see it.
The Jerusalem Post reports that an Israeli cabinet minister has sent an 11-page letter to colleagues decrying what he sees as a hostile shift in U.S. policy and suggesting ways the Jewish state could respond.
Among his suggestions, according to the newspaper: "reconsidering military and civilian purchases from the U.S., selling sensitive equipment that Washington opposes distributing internationally, and allowing other countries that compete with the U.S. to get involved with the peace process and be given a foothold for their military forces and intelligence agencies."
He also recommends Israelis and Jewish Americans withdraw support to and undermine Democrats in U.S. elections. That'll send a message, he says, and prompt Dems to pressure the president to change his position.
An "anti-war" commentator points out the story is full of hilarity, for several reasons. Israeli military purchases are made with U.S. money. Israel has been selling sensitive technology to other countries for years and years. The idea of punishing Washington by inviting other countries to get involved in the messy "peace process" is beyond hilarious.
And, of course, it's no secret that Israel has been involving itself in U.S. politics for decades. Surely you've heard of AIPAC.
Rather than devising retaliation strategies and refusing to budge on issues like West Bank settlement, Israeli politicians would serve their constituents better by trying to lower the political temperature and working for a lasting peace.
At least, that's how I see it.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Not everyone's opinion deserves respect
Obama's speech Thursday in Cairo has sparked as much discussion as anything in his young presidency.
I have my own strong views on the Middle East, but I'm open to considering other perspectives.
Unless the opinions are from arseholes like this lot:
Or this contemptible Fox News jackass:
I have my own strong views on the Middle East, but I'm open to considering other perspectives.
Unless the opinions are from arseholes like this lot:
Or this contemptible Fox News jackass:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
