A New New Deal

 It's another 4:30 wake-up for me. Still not working but trying not to go completely to seed. I got out and walked for a good two hours yesterday after watching my hockey and curling. It was a spectacular day for my sporting clubs, so I thought it'd be fitting to go out and do something, ANYTHING I could that even resembles sport in Covid Korea. Walking. That's about it right now. After getting home with some fresh veggies I made a salad. Then got an email from the job I'm hoping for, so it was a great day! I guess that's why I am up so early today. Two great days in a row is too much to hope for. But count my blessings. I'm not working so I can take a nap if I want. And I most likely will.

Waking up at 4:30 is good for one thing, however. For some reason I do some of my best thinking, and blogging, at that hour. It's often the thinking that keeps me from getting back to sleep and inspires me to drag my arse out of the warm bed and to the computer. Today it was my opinion of the current signs of the times that make me feel like we are in the midst of what I would call a second depression. Maybe a not-so-great depression or a Covid depression. I say this not only because of the struggles of some businesses and most people, but also because of the prevailing feelings and emotions that job/business losses, prolonged social distancing and being deprived of normal activities can lead to. In other words, it's not just the economy that's depressed, but a lot of people are too. 

Now I'm speaking of regular business and small business, which we are constantly told, is the backbone of our economy, not the big boys. They're thriving in the Covid depression because their competition is disappearing drawing them ever-nearer to the monopolies they all crave to be. 

If you continue the video from whence the above clip is derived, you'll see some scary examples of huge businesses getting bigger through consolidation, which is a euphemism for sucking up the competition. The pandemic has only accelerated this phenomenon. From 10 large airlines in 2000 to 4 today. Rental cars - three companies. Beer - 70% controlled by two companies. And you can check this all by searching on the one and only search engine that anyone really uses: Bing. Bing, the best way to Google something. I love that joke. lol

Kroger is one of the best examples of the cold-hearted capitalism that has defined the huge corporations in these times of crisis. They would rather close stores down in Seattle and California than give 2-5 dollar an hour hazard pay to their workers. They know that their workers don't have huge nest eggs they have saved for rainy days. So treat them like the livestock they are. 

Maybe never before have the consumers and workers who have made EVERY rich person rich, been shown so clearly the inhumanity with which those rich people regard us. Nor have their political representatives been clearer in their support for their inhumanity. 

This seems biased. The Rupublican'ts don't care a lick about the people that they claim to be about helping: the common man, which is who the Covid relief bill is going to help. Yet tax relief for the rich is as popular as ever because of this myth that has nourished the GOP lo, so many years, this statement of faith backed by not one drop, let alone a trickle of evidence that equates to the party's version of speaking in tongues. Words like Reaganomics, horse and sparrow theory, trickle down economics, the "free market," "supply-side economics" spring from idealistic memory and faith in their sources rather than contemplation and healthy skepticism, and travel directly to party phraseology with virtually no interlocutor. And if you try to introduce the facts, as the guy pictured above, Robert Reich, has repeatedly tried to do through pictures, videos, books, speeches and political advice, you will realize how deep and unassailable the faith really is. No matter how thorough or modern the study, it will be doubted.

But to remain as un-biased as I can, and so as NOT to blindly trust the source of info like the last two links I have provided for you and believe without questioning, the very thing I have criticized about the Republicans, what are the Democrats and their supporters up to? Before I get to that, it would seem if one does one's historical, economical, ethical and egalitarian studies, times were best right after the war. As the Pink Floyd song asks, "What happened to the post-war dream?" 

In that song, the question, "Oh Maggie, Maggie what did we do?" is posed, but it could be "Oh Ronnie," if sung by an American, and maybe "Oh Brian," for us Canadians. 

The 50's and 60's were largely liberal and largely prosperous for all three nations. We partied for two decades and if you measure on almost any scale, these were the best of times for all three countries. Then the 70's brought "stagflation" and we started wondering if we should be partying so much. And that was the opening these three needed to ooze through. Deregulation, privatization, tax reduction for the rich/tax hikes for others, reign in spending... you get the idea. 

Maude Barlow, a prominent opponent of Mr. Mulroney's free-trade agenda and the conservative revolution personified by Mr. Reagan, said the benefits of those policies were not worth the price paid by the poor, the middle class and the environment.

"It was the triumvirate of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Brian Mulroney that brought the neo-liberal agenda to the industrialized world," Ms. Barlow said.

"Yes, it created wealth for some companies and some individuals, but the legacy has been the creation of a permanent underclass, a greater gap between rich and poor, an assault on social security and an undermining of public health care that continues to this day."

You can read about it in the following article. 

So while conservatives since the 80's have generally taken the above triumvirate's politics and skewed further right (and I DON'T mean "correct") with them, the liberal agenda has been moving to the left at about the same rate. Aside from the gap between rich and poor mentioned above, this has created the widest gap ever between political parties. To the point, illustrated best by the U.S., that there is no agreement between parties even on issues where there is philosophical equality. The Covid relief packages are a good example. I don't believe all Republicans are Krogeresque in their thinking. I know they want to help people who are suffering due to the pandemic. Well, maybe not all, but you can't tell me the whole party voted their conscience against Covid relief. They just voted against the other party.

This article points out how the Democrats are more "progressive" than ever. They're also becoming more popular than ever. This trend has come about in the last 30 years. During that time some politicians tried to foster some compromise between parties by appointing members from opposing parties to political positions, but the compromise has disappeared with the middle class. Economic, and emotional conditions are approaching the desperation of the 1930's and, hopefully without a world war, similar steps to bail our countries out of this dizzying tailspin need to be taken. We're starting to see signs of that. At least in the U.S. But Canada will hopefully follow their lead.  

Opening borders, taxing the rich and reparation payments to descendants of slaves are three examples of policies that are being suggested by the left trending liberals. They mention Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but I'd include AOC and maybe Kamala Harris as well. Very popular ideas like a 15 dollar minimum wage, universal health care, restoration of environmental protection, racial equality, (which was NOT part of the New Deal as you can read in the article below) job creation through government infrastructure projects and a national switch away from fossil fuels to cleaner energy in the Green New Deal... HEY! Have you heard the words, "New Deal" before? That's how FDR helped bail the US out of the Great Depression. He didn't save America single handedly. In fact I've read he didn't even really WANT to do the things he did. He was basically forced to do it by the people who were threatening an all-out general strike. 

Ever heard of the Winnipeg General Strike? Of course you haven't! Most Canadians haven't. The Little Guy only has power for short periods of time followed by much longer periods of powerlessness. So the media, most of which are controlled by the BIG Guy, makes it so battles won by the vanquished are harder to hear about. They don't want us to know how much power we have. 

Do you recall back to the beginning of the Covid layoffs and the first government relief packages, the cries of the conservatives and big business that their workers will become lazy and never want to work again? This is their greatest fear! As I've said before, we, the workers, have the employers by the balls, (remember the elephant tied to a tiny spike in the ground?) we just need to get pissed off enough to exercise our power and they're fucked! Well, we also need an economic situation, an EXTREME economic situation, in which money doesn't have total control over government, which allows radical change that actually HELPS the working classes to be implemented. They had both during the Great Depression, and we have both today. This article explains it more thoroughly, but this, I think, is what I just said: "There are special circumstances, however, when capital’s leverage over government is weakened. One of them is during deep economic crises: The threat of disinvestment by big business is no longer an effective weapon—there is already very low investment. It is in these situations when, according to Block, government officials have more leeway to effect extraordinary transformations of social policies in favor of the working class, assuming these officials are under the unbearable pressure of mass mobilizations and unruly unions. Such a concession becomes a major win for the working class. At the same time, the outcome has the effect of legitimizing the state in the eyes of the working masses, granting rights to a new section of workers and incorporating them into the state through institutional channels, effectively containing what used to be a rebellious movement."

I am on the side of Block in the above debate, but regardless of why FDR did what he did, the situation is similar today, in my opinion, and policies that help the working class are finally going to be passed again! I don't know that Biden really wanted to do much of what we have already seen happening, or wants to do what likely will continue during his term as president, I think he knows he HAS to. And, as I have blogged of, and as the previous quote states, the legitimization of politics is also at stake. The situation with Covid social distancing, job loss, economic upheaval, etc. is ripe for revolution. I think I'd prefer the revolution, but short of that, I think the new New Deal wave that has started, might be fun to ride for a while. Politicians are singing for their suppers, trying to keep their careers and the bogus, antiquated, crooked system that creates them. It's unfortunate that it takes disastrous consequences like stock market crashes and global pandemics for us to see politicians doing what they are supposed to do, but it's just further evidence of the futility of our political systems. Having said that, I think we are in for one of those short periods during which some good stuff happens for the REAL people of our countries. I hope it lasts for longer than I think it will... however,

"...even if AOC and Sanders (and now many other Democrats) push hard for these proposals, none of them will be delivered unless there is sweeping labor unrest and a credible threat to the system itself. Socialists and revolutionaries will play the lead role. The increasing number of strikes seems to be pointing to a new wave of labor unrest. The many decades of capitalist offensive with little or no response from organized labor have reduced workers’ rights to bare bones. Deprived of a public health care option and lacking childcare or paid sick leave, American workers are subordinated to market forces to the extreme: Imagine a cliff and a multitude being pushed by a behemoth, which is capital. It is no wonder that workers are standing up now. The level of contradictions in U.S. society has reached such a high level that the explosion this time will be big. Socialists of all stripes will play a leading role in it, and the political decisions we make today will shape our prospects for years to come.

The lessons from the New Deal are that environmental activists pushing for a Green New Deal and, in particular, labor organizers fighting for some sort of new workers’ bill of rights can’t rely on smart politicians. Only an independent workers’ mass movement will be able to force these kinds of concessions from the ruling class. The owners of capital won’t sacrifice a cent of their profits until they face the economic disruption that mass workers’ collective action can cause, and until they are legitimately scared of the threat of a working class that rises and reclaims what is theirs: the goods, the riches, the world."

The Heavy-Handed Right

 Although I have written an unposted blog entry, I haven't shared in a while. I've been trying to nail down gainful employment, a rather passive endeavor with so little of the good kind being available, and trying my best to enjoy my Covid-limited time off work by spending some of that time with friends. Well, the deadline was March 2 and, as yet, I have no gainful employment. So it's now time to change tack and more actively pursue online teaching as opposed to jobs at physical institutes I have been predominantly concentrating my job hunt on. The visa/payment situation may present some difficulties and the salary will undoubtedly be lower, but I'll likely get some results within a couple weeks to a month. Teaching online, even part time, for 6 months or so won't get me any closer to my financial goals, let alone retirement, but it will get me through the Covid period and hopefully come September, I'll be able to get a job at a school again and with any luck get back to teaching in person.

Before that, however, the world needs to deal with some of its major issues, not the least of which will be our major topic today, and what I am convinced has been the primary contributor to my current occupational futility, the Covid crisis. Well, to be more accurate, the major example will be related to the Covid crisis, but today's topic is something I've been noticing amongst people I like. I often in this blog have bashed, slagged, badmouthed, panned, rebuked, upbraided and criticized people I don't like, one in particular, but this time I'm going to criticize some people I'm going to call the heavy-handed right. I like the heavy-handed right because they are right. Not in the sense that their political leanings are to the right, rather in the sense that I have little doubt that they are right, correct, in their beliefs/statements/sentiments/campaigns. That being said, it is their heavy-handedness that I believe has come with increased support for their beliefs/statements/sentiments/campaigns, that I would like to bash, slag, badmouth, pan, rebuke, upbraid and/or criticize at this time. Not severely, cuz I'm on their side, but gently with a precautionary tale from history.

To use a bit of an off topic example of what I'm talking about, I saw a post from Robert Reich, a guy I greatly admire and respect, that said, well, here's what it said: 

This is something I've posted/warned about that I absolutely knew would be one of the bad things to come out of the recent election. I knew it was going to be used to try to legitimize a broken system. Reich, being a former politician, would never say this, so I will: there hasn't been a legitimate election in the US in his lifetime or mine. There is an endless supply of facts to support that suggestion, many of which you can find in the pages of his own books. I have sprinkled not a few of those facts within the pages of my blog as well. There are many who have availed themselves of these facts and do not trust the vote, politicians or the political system. I am among them. 

But he's right. There are Republicans who, whether they know any of the facts that bring the legitimacy of US politics or their latest election into serious question or not, are continuing a ludicrous, and already violent, campaign to get their Dorito Dicktator into power against what the wishes of the country might have been shown to be if they had been legitimately measured. We can't know for certain unless we trust the notoriously illegitimate election system, but most likely, these people are just douchebags refusing to admit the majority of their country is happy to wave bye-bye to Trump. So he's probably right. I think he is. But that is not what I question. I question the heavy handedness. What's to be done with these people? Remove them from office for supporting the despotic leader of their party, a guy notorious for firing people, particularly people who don't show loyalty? Your cause is gaining power, Bob, this is a good thing. But let's not get blinded by power and start punishing the opposition. This is not the way to win hearts and minds.

What about the people who may not even be Republicans, the MANY people who don't trust the fucked up American system of government? From gerrymandering to supercandidates to corporate interference to the electoral college to the brother of one candidate being the governor of the deciding state in the election and hugely influencing the attempted "recount" of votes there... there is very good reason to wonder why else something that should be so simple, one vote for one person, would be purposely skewed and discombobulated if it WEREN'T to fix the elections. Will it help to get rid of certain members of the US government ostensibly for doubting the outcome of an election we can all safely suspect to have been the usual bag of political tricks, sleight of hand and deception? This would be an awfully harsh precedent to set. It might even result in the opposite of what it is trying to accomplish.

Again, I believe the majority of Americans want Biden/Harris over Trump/Pence. In this way, Reich is right. I also have a demonstrable distaste for the crazies Reich is talking about. But sweeping statements like these are grouping clear-headed folks with the crazies. There are plenty of American citizens who have no more faith in this election than the ones before, some of which we all KNOW were illegitimate including the one that got Trump into office. There's a reason his statements of election rigging were so easily accepted. And shame on America for that! 

Some election doubters are Republican. Some would refuse to admit the legitimacy of the recent election. But they aren't supporting any "stop the steal" nonsense. Are they too helping to incite violence? Will they be punished too? This is the trend I'd like to point out in a tone of extreme caution today. 

Here's an interesting article. It's not long. Read it if you haven't exhausted your four free WSJ articles for the week. Or read this one if you don't want to sign up for the Wall Street Journal. Both articles talk about privileges and freedoms that are being granted to people who can prove they've received their Covid shots, and NOT being granted to people who haven't. When you get past how seemingly unfair this is to those at lower risk or who are just not vaccinated due to the greater needs of other people, you will come to those who are voluntarily avoiding the vaccinations. Many would call them "Anti-vaxxers," a term I have described as ignorantly dismissive a few times on this blog already and I will illustrate again in this post. 

At this time, I would say that the people getting the vaccinations against Covid 19 are right. They are doing what will most help the world... most likely. Their ethics and intelligence are what I currently side with. Those refusing are in the wrong. But are they wrong for not trusting this new, VERY new vaccine? Absolutely not. All vaccines have setbacks. And to dismiss them as ignorant without the facts could show your OWN ignorance. I'm not saying all vaccine refusers even know the facts, nor do all people who take them. What I would like to do is give you some facts here so that the people who believe God will protect them from Corona and Trump said we'll have herd immunity soon so it's gonna happen, don't get grouped with the people who conscientiously object to inoculation on the grounds of legitimate concerns about vaccine safety and ethics related to their creation, production and distribution.  

In order to achieve this, let's look at the history of the yellow fever vaccine. It's a vaccine that's been around for over 80 years, it's safe and almost everyone gets it once and is yellow fever-free for life. This is a vaccine "anti-vaxxers" might even get. But its history comes to bear on our current Covid 19 situation.

Like the examples in the articles above, certain privileges are given to people who can prove they've received their yellow fever shots, and not granted to those who cannot. Entry into some countries is an example though I don't know if it's a privilege to go to a country with yellow fever-sporting mosquitoes buzzing around. The vaccine is recommended for travel to high risk areas like parts of Africa and South America. About 15% of non-vaccinated people contract the virus and severe yellow fever develops. About half of people with severe yellow fever die within 7-10 days. So this is no joke. Frigging mosquitoes!

The name "Yellow Fever" comes from jaundice, a yellowing of the skin, which is one of the symptoms associated with yellow fever. It has noting to do with liking Asian girls. That's just terrible! And only a naughty blogger would even mention that. Let's move on. 

In 1951 Max Theiler won a Nobel Prize for making the yellow fever vaccine better, but it had been in use since 1938. At the close of the 1800's yellow fever was sometimes known as Yellow Jack because of yellow flags that contaminated ships in quarantine flew. It was a huge disruption to trade in this way. For this reason, a yellow fever vaccine would be valuable so there were a lot of investigators claiming to have found the bacteria responsible for yellow fever and the first "vaccines" were produced. Dr. George Sternberg, an investigator appointed by President Grover Cleveland to investigate the investigators, determined that the early "vaccines" were ill conceived and ineffective. So at the beginning of the 20th century there was no progress being made. Only fake vaccines being made by people who wanted the notoriety and money that would undoubtedly come from the discovery of a yellow fever vaccine. This, you will find with research, has been a problem with many vaccines. It happens in the early stages of a vaccine's history, which we are currently in with the Covid 19 vaccine. Not saying these vaccines are fake, just that it wouldn't be as surprising as you might think.

Fortunately for the world, at the beginning of the 20th century there were billionaires like Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller who were trying to help the world with their money even though they had no obligation to do so! The Rockefeller Institute chose to make yellow fever a project of theirs. In 1918 a medical team was dispatched to Ecuador to research yellow fever there. The team included a young doctor named Hideyo Noguchi who had risen from extreme poverty in Japan to get a medical degree. 

Noguchi, the mustachioed guy in the middle, had done successful work with syphilis and venomous snakes, but he would represent another setback for the research on yellow fever, and in the end actually died from it. He was an interesting character being nominated for several Nobel Prizes, but never winning one due to criticism of his work as inaccurate and even a scandal over inoculating children with syphilis. His theory on yellow fever was that it was a bacteria, not a virus and he became increasingly secretive working mostly at night by himself, and in the end paranoid and sloppy with his research. He never doubted his theory even after it was proved wrong. He produced a yellow fever "vaccine" that went into extensive use in the US, Latin America and French African Colonies. He published "successful" results in 7,964 vaccinations, but his results couldn't be replicated. By 1926 distribution of his "vaccine" was quietly discontinued by the Rockefeller Foundation. Maverick doctors, another possible problem with vaccines.  

An early vaccine was produced after the virus was isolated and used for its production and WWII created a massive need for that vaccine. It still needed tweaking, but epidemics of yellow fever in North African war zones led to virtually all US troops receiving the vax from Jan. 1941-April 1942. 7 million doses were distributed at no charge by the Rockefeller Foundation. 

Unfortunately, 60-150 days after vaccination, 26,771 cases of jaundice were reported by US personnel and many more were unreported. Three of every 1000 of the soldiers who reported died. Most press kept this quiet due to wartime secrecy, but the Chicago Tribune noted that 20X as many soldiers had fallen victim to the vaccine than had been wounded in the war to that point. Not to mention the, whoops, hepatitis that came with it.

Then in 1962, avian leukosis virus was detected in the vaccine. Thousands or millions of people had been inoculated with potentially oncogenic viruses. Potentially disastrous, but luckily, 10 years later this issue was laid to rest with no evidence of excess cancer found in the vaccines. 

There have been other issues since including rising incidence of severe viscerotropic (internal organs) disease after vax mostly in the elderly and the introduction of other viruses such as dengue fever and Japanese B encephalitis using the yellow fever vax as a vehicle. So even LONG after its general use, there are problems. 

However, the benefits outweigh the risks. If a person were afraid to get the yellow fever vaccine for the reasons above, I'd understand, but it would be unreasonable given the long term safety and effectiveness the vaccine has shown. After 1962 that is...

But if a person were to refuse the Covid 19 vaccine, which is yet in its infancy and doesn't have such a safety and success record, I wouldn't be too harsh on them. Don't buy a video game until the glitches are worked out. Don't get hair replacement surgery until it stops looking like a corn field on your head. And don't get the vaccine until you are sure the bugs are worked out. Those bugs could actually be life-threatening. But you can be sure in the months and possibly years ahead, people who are thinking logically like this will be grouped in with morons who think they are being shot full of microbots that will record their every move and transmit the details of their private lives to George Soros' computer... or some such craziness. 

And let's not forget that there is no Rockefeller Institute footing the bill for these vaccines. Pfizer and other businesses are. So they are going to want to make a profit. There have been stories about these companies reigning in their greed and keeping prices reasonable, but I doubt that will happen. I doubt even more that a last-minute discovery of a possible danger in the vaccine would hold up the continued distribution. Just watch The Fugitive for another legitimate reason to be wary here.

I'm going to repeat, I am on the side of the people who are getting the vaccine and those who are endorsing the decision. But I hope, given the very good reasons why a person might refuse it, people will not be too harshly penalized for refusing the Covid 19 vaccine. I know those people could transmit the virus and endanger others. I know they could prolong the social distancing and mask-wearing and I will quietly hate them for that, but I can't heavy-handedly say they HAVE to get it or else. I don't think that is the right course of action and doing so just might accomplish the opposite of what is intended. I think the probable outcome of forcing every person in the world to get the Covid 19 vaccine would end the pandemic. This is why I think vaccine supporters are in the right. However, doing so would almost certainly create larger problems by strengthening the resolve of already militant believers in freedom limitations. Also... what if there are some as yet unknown but possibly disastrous side-effects of the vaccine? 

This will be interesting to follow...

Here's a cartoon from the 1920's. It's a bit heavy-handed, don't you think? 

Cigarettes and Elephants

 A peculiar instance of youthful racism from my past surfaced in the rinse cycle of my semi-consciousness today. I had just woken up and in these glorious days of vacation while I am still under contract, but have exactly no work to do for my employer, I am afforded the leisure of not bolting out of the sack, driving some coffee and breakfast into my belly and showering before I'm fully awake. I can ease into an awakened state. I can evaluate the dream I was having just before opening my eyes, mull over some options for the day like chores or meals, writing a blog post or maybe seeing what a friend or family member is up to. I can think about my employment situation and the many different possibilities that lay ahead. And, as I almost always do, I can contemplate the unnatural disaster that is our world. 

Today, during that last part, I was reminded of my high school years and some details jumped up out of long-long-long term memory that brought a smile to my face. The name of a corner store, which wasn't exactly on a corner, but it WAS across the street from the liquor store corner, of the town I went to high school in, Castlegar, popped into my head. Jo Alves! I remembered what may have been one time or it may have been many times, going to buy smokes with my best friend Brian Manning. To be clear, I didn't exactly smoke, I was one of those leeches who never really had enough money to commit to the habit, but was always bumming cigarettes from friends in financial positions in which they could, and had. Brian smoked Player's Filter. No! Wait a sec, I think he smoked Player's Light. 

He sometimes got a full pack, and he sometimes bought what was alternately called a "half-pack," "poverty pack," or a "ten-pack." Not every store sold these. In fact it might have been illegal. But Jo Alves' sold packs for $1.30 and poverty packs for $0.70. How do I know this? Well this is where the youthful racism comes in. The owners of Jo Alves' were Portuguese. They spoke English but with heavy accents that Brian and I found entertaining. Like I say, it might have been once or it might have been more than once, but Brian asked the price of a pack of smokes and the cashier replied, "Dollere therety," with heavily rolled r's. We got a kick outta that and repeated it a thousand times to each other afterwards. Then Brian asked about the half-packs and didn't hear the response, so he asked the cashier to repeat it. "Seventy! Seventy, boy," was the response. So "seventy, boy" was another endless source of mockery for us. Like I said, it was youthful racism and I'm not at all proud of it. I bring it up only to illustrate one aspect of this unnatural disastrous world of ours. 

25 smokes for a buck thirty! That is just over a nickel a cig! I don't smoke, but if I could find cigarettes today at those prices, I think I'd have to start! To be honest, if I could find cigarettes at that price today, I'd buy them by the truckload and sell them all black marketly. I'd be rich before I got caught. But what a foolish thought! That's not the way the Canadian (or ANY) economy works, is it? It's not possible for the little guy to get rich. Only the big guy. But the mechanism is the same, only in reverse. If I found a good price (dollere therety) to buy smokes and then sold them at a greatly increased price that I knew people would pay, I'd be doing what Player's has been doing for years. Difference is, it's illegal for me to do it. But why? That's the billion dollar question. It's exactly what the businesses do! They MAKE cigarettes for a cheap price, then sell them for a greatly increased price that they know people will pay. 

And where cigarettes are concerned, there is a HUGE advantage for the people who sell them: addiction. The manufacturers, distributors, merchants, ANYbody can raise the price of them and addicts will still pay. Do you know what the price of that same pack of smokes would be today? $15.50! I think it would actually be MORE because that is a stat from 2019. And it depends where you buy. Here's a modern photo of a pack of Player's cigarettes:

So let's do some math here. At the time of the story, I believe I was making $7.35 an hour at my after-school job washing dishes and slicing meat and cheese at the Homestead Soup and Sandwich Deli. A pack of darts at a buck thirty would have been... let's say 18% of my hourly wage. If I were to spend 18% of my hourly wage on a pack of smokes that cost $20.50, I'd be making... I hope you're sitting down for this... $114.00/hr. Anybody out there pulling in a hundred and fourteen bucks an hour? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller? ...

Here's another way of looking at it: I was making $7.35 an hour and that was minimum wage. The price of cigarettes went from $1.30 to $20.50 from then to now. So if the minimum wage had kept up with inflation since the 1980's when I was going to high school, a guy washing dishes at the Homestead Soup and Sandwich Deli would be raking in $116.13/hr!!! Minimum wage in BC right now is a whopping $14.60/hr. And business owners are crying about it! 

The Homestead Soup and Sandwich Deli was a happenin' joint! It was so busy, they needed TWO guys in the hot, steamy back room washing dishes, bussing tables and slicing. Me and Chris Schurren (I'm sure I spelled that wrong) worked our arses off! And after the place closed down, we were the guys who stayed behind to sweep and mop and clean the grill. YOU wanna work an hour there for $14.60? Me neither! 

I think the Homestead closed down long ago, but if it were still open, there'd be some poor schmuck bustin' his/her ass for an hourly wage that can't even buy him/her a pack of smokes! And, once again, the owner of the Homestead would probably be whining about the minimum wage laws being too harsh. She/he would say that salaries eat up far too much of her/his profits. 

How did we end up here? Well, if you've read my blog regularly (and who hasn't?) you'd know that there are three things that contribute to the answer to that question: 1. Corporate greed 2. Gov't working for corporations 3. "Weak" people.

We all know of MANY examples of inflation that is completely out of control! Even youngsters. We KNOW we're getting screwed! But we are conditioned by a certain belief system that allows us to accept this injustice, in fact, to add insult to injury, the popular mentality of recent times is that we are not just supposed to accept it, but be happy in it! Does that elephant look happy? No? Well then I don't wanna spend time with her and allow her to infect me with her negativity! Sound familiar?

When I say "weak people" I certainly don't mean it. Does that elephant look weak to you? Me neither. But allowing itself to be restrained by that puny rope and stake IS weak. That's how I see the strong Canadian people. We're elephants! We have a LOT of power, we just prefer to settle for a miniscule portion of what our country OWES us. That elephant could easily rip that stake out of the ground and rampage. Why doesn't she? Well, if she does tricks, they give her peanuts. That's the majority of us. The average Canadian does tricks for peanuts. And we settle for that. We do our best to be happy in that. And when we can't, we just ACT happy in that. Anybody other than me sick and tired of ACTING happy? Anybody else think our country is many times over rich enough for all of us to actually BE happy? So what's stopping us? Effective socialization. A bullshit belief system. 

Let me give you an example of the kind of socialization that we've all had, whether we know it or not, that has subdued our power. Is there anyone who read that line, "what our country OWES us," and didn't have some kind of a knee-jerk entitlement distaste? Be honest. You did, right? Hell, I had one while I wrote it. We're conditioned to believe that feeling entitled to things is wrong. But it's not. Frivolous entitlement is wrong. Proper entitlement isn't. Guess who conditioned us into these feelings that proper entitlement is wrong. The people from whom we are entitled to, absolutely entitled to, a lot more shit than we are getting! Big companies, banks, government. That's about it. 

If you've ever wondered what our government does, or more specifically, what our government does with our tax money every year, this is it. They condition us. In 1867, the government didn't need a budget. They governed, they didn't buy shit. When the world wars started happening, the government asked for a little and the people gave. And just like the cigarette companies, they have increased the amount little by little in accordance to how much a weak bunch of people will give. You don't need to look any further than the fact that we are still giving to fund wars that have long since ended and been paid for to get an idea of HOW weak the Canadian people are. Here's a little quote from a Fraser Institute paper on the history of Canadian taxes:

"Paying for this expenditure changed over time. From 1867 to World War I, the federal government’s revenue was dominated by customs duties, which peaked at 66% of revenue in 1912. The needs of the war effort sparked the search for new revenue, which led to the creation of the first personal and corporate income taxes and the first federal sales tax. Over time, the importance of these three new revenue sources grew and it is anticipated that by 2017 the personal income tax alone will make up 51% of federal government revenue, corporate taxes, 13%, and commodity taxes (GST, excise taxes and customs duties), 17%."

Of course with a purposely supercomplicated tax code that is over 1500 pages, you can't expect the numbers to come out correct. 51+17+13 is only 81. There is 19% missing. But of the 81 mentioned, regular people pay 68% of it while corporations pay 13%. People get zero subsidies and corporations get enough government subsidization to render their overall tax output to either zero or below. That's right, in Canada we are PAYING many of our corporations to make money while we are charged to be their labour force. Another Fraser Institute paper calculated 144 billion over ten years between 1995 and 2004. More payroll tax is paid by employees that corporate tax is paid by the company in most cases. Who do you suppose is footing the bill for that missing 19%? Feel like that elephant now? 

Compare corporations to Canadian people. We were born in Canada. Most of our corporations are not Canadian. They owe the most to Canada for their fortunes. But they don't give SHIT to Canada. Canada is the people, not the government. What they pay for the privilege of doing business in Canada is 13% or less depending on the subsidies our corrupt government gives them. The people who owe the most pay the least. The people who are owed the most receive the least.

Canadians have a birthright. We were born in Canada and have a far more legitimate claim to the riches of the land than do the corporate parasites. Our major industries, mining, logging, oil, wheat, water, that is the land and the land is Canada. The people are part of the land. When someone sells our natural resources, they sell part of us and we get 0% of the sale. This is NOT frivolous entitlement in any way. This is theft. But we have beer. Hockey. If we pull up this stake, maybe we won't get this meagre living we've grown used to.

You'd think that the more tricks the trainers force the elephant to do, the closer that elephant gets to just stomping them and going back to Africa or India or Southeast Asia where it's from. But it seems the longer it's in captivity, the more shit its owners can throw in its face.  Is there a breaking point? 

I remember my Mom's 2nd husband, Phil swearing, before my high school days, that as soon as cigarettes reached a DOLLAR a pack, he'd quit. He's dead now, probably from smoking. He smoked Player's too, but PLAIN! No filters! UGH! Anyway, if he were alive, he'd be obediently paying $15.50 for his cancer sticks just like Canadians are paying more and more tax every year. What we get hasn't changed and our salaries haven't gone up. When indexed against inflation, they've gone down. But we continue to pay our dues in humility and servility.

I'm sure any Canadian who is reading this has already thought of several things that have gone up on par with or faster than cigarettes over the years. If I were to hazard a guess or a few, I'd say beds, glasses, hockey equipment (except weirdly skates), and maybe the number one victim of inflation in Canada has been university/college tuition. A few of our cities like Van, T.O. and Calgary have condos that have shot through the roof, but most housing HAS gone up, but not like the above listed items. Gas? I dunno. If EVER I needed comments on a blogpost it's now! What has risen in price in Canada? Meat? Eggs? Cable? I haven't been there to see.

$100 in 1980 is supposed to be only $330 bucks today if indexed for inflation. So you can see that cigarettes FAR overinflated during the time between the 80's and the 2020's. What other items have gone up outrageously? Here's an article that might give some perspective. It also includes one thing that has actually gone DOWN in price since the 80's. Can you guess what it was? I think you can but don't bust your block over it, just read the article.

Like the frog in the pot who slowly boiled to death, we have had prices creep up while our salaries have stagnated and rather than jump, we've gone down with the frog soup. All of us. Really old people will tell us we just need to work hard to get a cozy retirement like they have, but we know that's a practical impossibility. But we'd rather argue with the old folks than DO something about it. And that's what the evil triumvirate are banking on. Corporations, banks and government are sure we'll acquiesce. Like captive elephants. 

The Impeachment Imperative

 I am up at 4 AM. Not for golf, not for fishing, not for work. I am up at 4 AM watching the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. Part deux. Why is this trial necessary? Most think it is not worth getting up early to watch, indeed, I believe a huge majority of people think this trial is trivial. It won't make any difference. Let's move on. This is the precise state of mind necessary in the good members of the general public under which evil revolution thrives. It is also the precise state of mind that is being pedaled by almost every member of the Republican party at this time. They can wait 4 years. Nothing to see here, folks. In fact, removal from power could be an advantageous position from which to strengthen and define the party's novel and extreme Trumpian ideology. 

It is understandable that people, busy people, people who may not closely follow the exploits of the Trumpian revolution, could have missed portions of it or even not made certain associations between what the Republican party under the leadership of Donald Trump was doing, with other dangerous and bloody revolutions. But when you listen to people like Ted Lieu and Stacey Plaskett reminding us of the progression of the revolution in detail, giving timelines, quotes from speeches and tweets, videos of crowd reaction at the Trump rallies, those rallies start to appear more like what they really were: repetitive inculcation of the young and weak-minded into followers through blind faith rather than intelligent conviction. Toward what end? That too becomes difficult to deny... revolution. 

A lot of people like Donald Trump because he uses simple words unlike a lot of politicians who speak over the heads of the average member of the electorate. I would suggest that because he actually DOESN'T possess all of the best words and is intellectually stunted is only part of the reason for this. History has shown us how effective and efficient this tactic is and how it can be used for revolution. Use language that can be easily understood by the young and simple in order to recruit them to your cause. It's something so simple, even Trump could figure it out! I think of China and Cambodia and how children were informing on parents who would not conform to the revolutions there. Think about the videos you saw of the attack on the US capitol. What do you reckon the average age of the insurrectionist was? Or more difficult (but not always) to discern, the average intelligence level? I used a quote from Thomas Kuhn, the man who wrote the book on paradigm change and how it happens, in a recent post. He talks about manipulation of the suggestible youth and letting the old people who refuse to conform to the new paradigm die. He noticed this (as did I) in science, but it works the same with socio-political revolution. 

And on Jan. 6th, when he came to the conclusion that his revolution was hitting a roadblock, or at least a setback with the election loss, Trump prematurely made his move only to discover that recruiting for his revolution will take more than four years. That is what happened and that is highly impeachable. Without impeachment, the revolution will not die. 

You doubt me. You think I am being extreme. Then read on, please. 

A friend recently tried to convince me of the ingenious nature of Trump's word selection, a topic that he had tried a few times before to batter me about the brain with and one I felt I had to discourage once and for all. He was saying that Trump cleverly calls people nicknames like "Sleepy Joe," "Crazy Arnold," "Crying Chuck," and "Low Energy Jeb" to manipulate public opinion on them. Well, I didn't disagree, I simply said that 5-year-olds do the same thing for the same reasons. It's nothing ingenious. In fact, the 5-year-olds I've known in my lifetime were more creative with their name-calling. However, Trump's handlers, the brains behind the brainless, also know that what works for a 5-year-old can and DOES work for a large portion of any population that has been deterred from being taught how to think, and have settled for being taught WHAT to think. Any of us in education who can't face the reality that this is exactly the direction our field is headed, are probably already victims of this perversion. Some might call it replacing education with religion, or rational thought with blind faith. I'll use a lengthy, but salient quote here from H.P. Lovecraft and I will replace the words "religion" and "religionists" with "Trumpism," and "Trumpists." See if this doesn't work:

"If (Trumpism) were true, it's followers would not try to bludgeon their young into and artificial conformity; but would merely insist on their unbending quest for truth." "With such an honest and inflexible openness to evidence, they could not fail to receive any real truth." "The fact that (Trumpists) do not follow this honourable course, but cheat at their game by invoking juvenile quasi-hypnosis, is enough to destroy their pretensions in my eyes even if their absurdity were not manifest in every other direction." 

Let me ask you if you haven't noticed another thing at Trump rallies: repetition. Endless repetition of slogans, chants, nicknames, and revolutionist strategies. If you've never seen or heard of Jordan Klepper, he's about the best Trump-buster there is. If you think the average Trump supporter is a member of his revolution through intellect rather than brainwashing, just give this a gander. This, by the way, is only the tip of the iceberg. 

How do you suppose these people got this way? Do you suppose they took the "honourable course" outlined by Lovecraft above? Or do you suppose they were just singing songs without considering the lyrics? And I'm not saying these are bad people. One quote Trump takes a lot of heat for, but that has an acorn of truth to it, is when he said there were very fine people on both sides of the violent protests in Charlottesville, Virginia. I believe brainwashing CAN cause very fine people to believe and do horrible things. 

Slavoj Zizek is a guy from the only European country that has suffered three totalitarian regimes in the 20th century - Slovenia. He has a lot to say about the "sheeple" that were mentioned in the Jordan Klepper vid above, but he says it in a no holds barred manner that I like. No bullshit is probably the way he'd describe it. For instance, he said, "Humanity is okay, but 99% of people are boring idiots." That'd be your sheeple. I'm not sure of his calculations, but I like the quote and have sometimes felt like this. You can read it in at least half of my blog posts!

“Property taxes' rank right up there with 'income taxes' in terms of immorality and destructiveness. Where 'income taxes' are simply slavery using different words, 'property taxes' are just a Mafia turf racket using different words. For the former, if you earn a living on the gang's turf, they extort you. For the latter, if you own property in their territory, they extort you. The fact that most people still imagine both to be legitimate and acceptable shows just how powerful authoritarian indoctrination is. Meanwhile, even a brief objective examination of the concepts should make anyone see the lunacy of it. 'Wait, so every time I produce anything or trade with anyone, I have to give a cut to the local crime lord??' 'Wait, so I have to keep paying every year, for the privilege of keeping the property I already finished paying for??' And not only do most people not make such obvious observations, but if they hear someone else pointing out such things, the well-trained Stockholm Syndrome slaves usually make arguments condoning their own victimization. Thus is the power of the mind control that comes from repeated exposure to BS political mythology and propaganda.”
― Larken Rose

Have I not said this before? Add to this certain aspects of, or the entirety of marriage, politics, banking, religion, economics, democracy, social mores... there are so many forms of mythology that are popularly subscribed to! Given a brief, objective examination, any of them could be accurately described as lunacy. Sometimes I think maybe 99% is the right number. Or is it too low? 

But let's return to Zizek. He's an interesting guy! Even though Communism was one of the horrors his country endured, he remains a Communist. His reasoning is something I have also given on this blog a number of times, and it's the extent to which I, gulp, agree with Trump on that one statement of his. Here is how Zizek describes it: "...the horror of Communism, Stalinism is not that bad people do bad things - they always do. It's that good people do horrible things thinking they are doing something great." The video below of this nose-wiping, lisping, swearing madman includes a portrait of Stalin hung in his home for shock value alone, and some awfully thought-provoking insight into how MOVIES have contributed to the American mythology that is almost unanimously followed. 

My favourite, and again something I've shared here before, concept he talks about is misdirected violence. Right now Trump is on trial for the violent insurrection he induced. Like Manson didn't murder anyone, Trump didn't storm the capitol. But he incited violence. In a way, violence is on trial here and in that way, I see a danger. I believe there NEEDS to be violence in most societies to bust us out of this horrific mythology we are in. Zizek believes we need to violently bust ourselves out of our somnambulistic states. I totally agree. Even if it takes the form of the "Fight Club" self-ass kicking, it is necessary for us all. 

To better define the "mythology" that has ravaged America, and I think most of the world, who better to define it than Uncle Noam? 

“Modern industrial civilization has developed within a certain system of convenient myths. The driving force of modern industrial civilization has been individual material gain, which is accepted as legitimate, even praiseworthy, on the grounds that private vices yield public benefits in the classic formulation.

Now, it's long been understood very well that a society that is based on this principle will destroy itself in time. It can only persist with whatever suffering and injustice it entails as long as it's possible to pretend that the destructive forces that humans create are limited: that the world is an infinite resource, and that the world is an infinite garbage-can. At this stage of history, either one of two things is possible: either the general population will take control of its own destiny and will concern itself with community-interests, guided by values of solidarity and sympathy and concern for others; or, alternatively, there will be no destiny for anyone to control.

As long as some specialized class is in a position of authority, it is going to set policy in the special interests that it serves. But the conditions of survival, let alone justice, require rational social planning in the interests of the community as a whole and, by now, that means the global community. The question is whether privileged elites should dominate mass-communication, and should use this power as they tell us they must, namely, to impose necessary illusions, manipulate and deceive the stupid majority, and remove them from the public arena. The question, in brief, is whether democracy and freedom are values to be preserved or threats to be avoided. In this possibly terminal phase of human existence, democracy and freedom are more than values to be treasured, they may well be essential to survival.”
― Noam Chomsky

I believe it is possible for society, even on a global scale, to take control of its own destiny and concern itself with community-interests, but we can only do so by coming to the Fight Club self-ass kicking, mind-blowing realization that we subscribe to so much mythology and that it is fomented upon us by a small number of people with the intentions to control and exploit us for their selfish gain. Zizek says something else profound toward the end of the above video. "Every revolution, if it is an authentic revolution, is not only directed toward the future, but it redeems also the past failed revolutions."  

What Trump is on trial for now is not some "march" on the capitol. Even the people who participated in the assault on the capitol hate when that term is used to describe what they were doing, as Plaskett pointed out. He's on trial for inciting a revolution, one of ignorance and violence. One that would knock the US back to times when racism was enforced with violence. These, presumably, would be the "great" times in the MAGA slogan. These times, in some areas, existed fewer years ago than a lot of people know. In some places and in many ways, they STILL exist. Hence, BLM. Give "Mississippi Burning" or "In the Heat of the Night" a re-screening at your place tonight. It'll do you good. 

The American Revolution was a failed revolution for the people who supported these ideals. Trump's was just a more recent one of the same kind. And if he is not found guilty (which he won't be) there may be another in the future. The work America has to do must start with recognizing that every member of the Republican party who is averting his/her attention from videos of the violent revolt being played during the trial is a co-conspirator and needs to be purged from politics. And then they need to completely remove money from politics and clean up the mess money has made of politics. Jack punches himself in the face. They then need to take some "smirking revenge" on the corporate fat cats who have been constitutionally exploiting the people (protecting the "opulent minority" from the majority) since independence in 1776. Jack blasts himself in the face again and falls on a glass topped table shattering it. 

I'll stick this article between these two changes America needs to make because it is about the best example of the lunacy Larken Rose talked about and the embodiment of both changes. (And just to be clear, I don't agree with Larken Rose on everything) This is a satirical article in a satirical source of satire, yet this CEO, a genuine object of derision and scorn, is not a rarity, but LITERALLY represented in a great many actual human beings, including, you guessed it, Donald Trump. To give you an idea of how messed up our world is, the satire, the hyperbole, the extreme opinion put forth in so obviously a comedic way that it couldn't possibly be construed as libel, is undoubtedly Darren Woods' opinion. I'd go as far as to say that he wouldn't be CEO if it weren't. We KNOW this, don't we? Yet it's an accepted part of the corporate mythology.

They need to abandon the vulture capitalism and greed that is infecting the entire planet and is a scourge on Nature and the environment. Jack picks himself up and throws himself at the wall unit. They need to recognize the power of love over the love of power. They need to stop being assholes to each other and everyone else. Jack feeds himself two more quick jabs. And, they need to regulate Wall Street and the financial institutions in their country so they will go back to the boring entities they were before they turned into a world casino using Jack's money to make themselves rich, or blowing Jack's money to make Jack poor. Jack climbs up his boss, getting blood all over him and making it seem the boss was guilty before the SEC storms in and concludes the obvious.

This is a fight I'd dearly love to see, but it's unlikely to happen. I believe it will be a far more likely possibility if Trump is found guilty and never allowed to participate in politics again. A LOT of people voted for Trump, so his revolutionary rhetoric and inculcation was successful even though he lost the election. His followers might reconvene at the church of MAGA if he were to run again in 4 years. If he is still alive then. And not in prison. It would likely go a long way toward discouraging a proxy revolution lead by a loyal follower or member of his family. And THIS, my dear reader, is the impeachment imperative. 

Now, maybe it's because 99% of people are boring idiots, maybe it's because people are sheeple, I don't know, but impeachment is a far off dream. Realistically, I am just hoping for a few people/sheeple to wake their asses up and see the reality of the situation. Though he won't be found guilty, and most people aren't watching the trial, let alone getting up at 4 AM to do so, I believe it to be important. If only a few people are "punched in the face" by these proceedings, then they are not a waste of time. That's the violence I am hoping will be incited.

Ignorant Meme of the Week

 It's time for the stupid meme of the week. This one was taken off a favoured source of mine, a favourite mine to source for stupid memes, the personal site of our old friend and guitar master run amok, Ted Nugent. I follow his outrageously pro-Trump postings and occasionally comment on how dumb they are. I've had a little push-back from Trumpian/Nugian fans, but I don't dignify them, particularly on the hostile territory that is his personal site. But I thought this one was too stupid to let slide. I invite Nugists/Trumpists to challenge my logic on my home field. I doubt they will. 

I can't presume to know if this post by the Motor City Madman was precipitated by Joe Biden's recent decision (on his first day of decision making) to revoke the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta's oil sands to Steele City, Nebraska. But let's work on that assumption. Here's a map. The dotted line is the pipeline in question.

The KXL has had a rocky history. I've blogged about parts of that history here before. One major part of it we don't see on the map above is the fact that AFTER the "oil" gets to the coast, gets refined in the US refineries (we'll talk more about that later), it will be shipped to China. Obama rejected it in 2012 and vetoed the pipeline in 2015. Trump ran in 2016 on a pledge to approve the KXL, tried throughout his administration to speed up and/or stop the research on its environmental effects and thwart efforts by indigenous groups and environmentalists to stop it, then finally UN-vetoed it in 2020 just before leaving office. 

So, first off, Teddy, if it's the KXL you are approving, whether it's just to support your burly buddy, or it's because you think it gets you cheaper gas from Canada, I've got news for you: that ain't the "oil" you're using in your truck unless you're filling up at a gas pump in China. Kick in the balls, eh? All these Trumpies thinking he doesn't support China...

Canada has been trying for years to build oil pipelines to get the oil from Canadian land, which is land Canadians pay taxes on; we all have contributed work to; our blood, sweat and tears nourish; and the resources thereof should be removed and distributed only with the approval of the Canadian citizens. Though they all claim it is, this is NOT a sentiment shared by our politicians, Conservative OR Liberal. This is best illustrated by Conservative Stephen I-Love-China-More-Than-Canada Harper's FIPA agreement that he signed knowingly in opposition to Canadians back in 2014. The most significant quote from his 9 years as PM: "We know this is really, really unpopular, but we're doing it anyway." 

That agreement has the current Liberal PM, Justin Trudeau on his toes trying to look like an environmentalist, while still desperately trying to get oil to China to hold up our end of the FIPA. The alternative, in Trudeau's defense, would be China suing for billions of our tax dollars. So THAT wouldn't be good either. What WOULD be good, and I continuously say it on this blog, is if Canada just stopped dealing with the Chinese (not to say kissing their human rights violating asses), but it seems our government will never learn. Witness this recent example. 

Energy East was a proposed pipeline going from the Alberta oilsands WAAAAY across Canada in an eastern direction. It would have been the longest in the world I think. "East" in that name was a euphemism for China. It failed. Northern Gateway was a nice sounding name for a more direct path to the ocean going west. It also failed. The latest is the Trans Mountain improvement project that uses and existing pipeline (going west) to get the bitumen to the water so it can be shipped to China. It's currently in the process of failing. Why does Canada seem so desperate to do this oil pipeline thing? Because of the above-mentioned deal described in this article I have posted on this blog before. And China IS becoming very comfortable using the lawsuit to claim what it would lawfully consider to be lost income due to the pipelines' failures.

So, Teddy, in a way, being pro pipeline, whether you know it or not, means you are okay with the Chinese suing Americans and Canadians for our tax dollars. 

Like most supporters of pipelines, I'm sure Ted Nugent would use the jobs and economy rebuttal to any argument I could offer him about the dangers of fossil fuels. Pipelines leak. Pipeline workers know it. The cartoon below is from a Trans Mountain Pipeline employee newsletter. 

You may have wondered at my quotation marks around the word "oil" earlier in this post. The Alberta oil sands, sometimes called "tar" sands, yield a gucky substance known as bitumen. It's more like grease at room temp and it's fucking near impossible to clean up when it spills. MUCH harder than crude oil or refined oil. The media, most of which is owned by the same folks who own the governments, just say "oil" to inaccurately refer to spillage. And they say things like, "Pipelines are the safest way to transport oil." Well they want you to think that that means it's safe. It doesn't. It only means it's safer than this:

That's the Lac-Megantic rail disaster. Ever hoid of it? Of course you haven't! It's not something our oil-dependent owners want us to know about. 

Instead you get this:

That's the Kalamazoo River bitumen spill. A pipeline leaked about 843,000 gallons of Alberta oilsands dilbit (diluted bitumen) into the Kalamazoo River. Didn't hear of that one either? Well, info is a bit hard to come by in this area. But since the oil sands are in Alberta, this might be interesting to anyone who thinks oil spills are an uncommon occurrence. It's a bit dated, but the average between '75 and '13 was two a day. I'd suggest that it only increased since then, but I don't have the data. You'll have to suffice with this. Just look at that map and you'll relate to that cartoon above. 

What's more, the fossil fuel industry no longer creates more jobs or boosts the economy more than green energy. It's a tired and inaccurate argument that politicians knowingly mislead people with in order to earn their kickbacks from fossil fuel businesses. It's shameful that North American politicians can't kick their addiction to fossil fuel MONEY, but it seems that even in the face of political adversity, renewable resource development is becoming a privately profitable and job-creating powerhouse while remaining almost totally independent of government. 

It will surprise absolutely no-one, I'm sure, that the cost for cleaning up the messes the fossil fuel industry makes is always subsidized and very often covered completely by taxpayer money. So when Trudeau comes out with a new carbon tax (that he calls something - ANYTHING but a carbon TAX) and immediately Canadians complain that it will raise the price of gas, well they're right, but not as right as they think they are. It's not the government directly raising the price of gas. It's the oil companies' knee-jerk reaction to raise the price of gas to more than offset the new carbon taxes. And to be honest, it's the Canadian citizens who are so browbeaten by taxes that they have become an accepted torture. We don't have to accept them. We don't have to buy the products big businesses keep raising the prices of. We don't have to accept governments who subsidize the fossil fuel industry either. It doesn't help to just gripe and still do what we're told by our owners. There are things we can do. Stop driving. I haven't bought a drop of gas in almost two decades. Drive less. Drive a smaller car. Drive a hybrid. It won't really make much of a difference, and it's really NOT our responsibility since private citizens make up a tiny fraction of the pollution in our countries. The majority is from, you guessed it, big business. And those big polluters are SUBSIDIZED by our governments, i.e. ENCOURAGED to pollute! But we don't have to take that shit. Here's a petition you can sign. 

So, Teddy, get yourself an electric truck, or at least a hybrid. You are proudly admitting to destroying your own land, water and air with your ignorant meme. 

Furthermore, Motor City Madman, you should know this if you truly deserve that nickname, a V8 engine at 2000 RPM's creates about 133 explosions per second in your truck. Maybe 40 per second while idling. These are explosions within the cylinders using spark and compressed, highly refined oil in the form of gasoline or diesel fuel. Your truck may occasionally leak oil, it happens. 

Here's an unexpected kind of explosion at a Mexican pipeline caused by the soaring price of gas, which has lead to gas theft becoming a booming resource in Mexico, pardon the pun. At least 137 people were killed in this explosion. And here's a leak from the Keystone Pipeline, which I'm assuming you're supporting with your meme, that is slightly larger than an oil leak from your truck would be. 383,000 gallons of oil. That'll do some damage!10X the amount of damage than first reported. TC, the company that now owns the KXL, is the not so cleverly concealed new identity of Trans Canada Pipelines. They changed that name to remove the "Canada" after the government of Canada bought the company. Remember, the government of Canada can't BUY anything. They don't have any money. That's Canadian tax money. I don't know about any other Canadians, but I didn't give my permission to buy that pipeline. That's nothing short of misappropriation of Canadian tax money. It could easily be construed as about a dozen other crimes such as theft, fraud, maybe even treason. And to further astound you, Mr. Madman, I'm sure that deal had to be approved by the Chinese government in lieu of an outright cash payment as a result of a lawsuit against the government of Canada for not delivering that oil Harper promised them in that FIPA agreement. The US has a similar agreement and has been sued. But, once again, you can't sue a government because governments don't have any money. China has sued every taxpayer in Canada and the US. China has sued me, and China has sued you, Nugey. Give that a long hard think.

So, Teddy, your stupid post actually supports the Chinese in the lawsuit of China vs. Ted Nugent. 

Look, I have friends and family who work directly or indirectly for the oil industry. I can't blame them for falsely or even genuinely supporting it and/or pipelines. I gotta be honest, I've seen and even considered lucrative offers from Saudi Arabia and other oil producing nations. Right now with Korea finally phasing out the good jobs here, those offers are looking more and more attractive. So I get it. But I'm pretty sure Ted Nugent hasn't had much if any involvement professionally with big oil. 

So, Teddy, you don't have THAT excuse that might get you a pass regarding your idiotic meme. 

I gotta think, and this applies to a LOT of Americans, and probably Canadians, Ted Nugent's love of pipelines just might be rooted in his support of a farcical political party and the financial gain (and conflict of interest) represented by their endorsement of the fossil fuel industry and pipelines. That and pure ignorance.

Oh and as promised, let's talk about refineries. The KXL will be piping diluted (and heated) bitumen to the US where it will be refined, then shipped to China. Those other pipelines mentioned would have sent the dilbit across parts of the naturally gorgeous country of Canada and all the way to China before being refined in Chinese refineries. So the purpose of all these pipelines from Alberta is to transport the oil in by far the most dangerous way across some beautiful land where it WILL be spilled and introduced into the land and waters in oil's most dangerous form. All because China and the US are two big bully countries who want to make more money than Canada off the Canadian oil by doing the refining outside of Canada, making it dangerous to the land and waters of the US and Canada, not to mention the oceans over which it travels to China in tankers. 

So, Teddy, THAT'S what you are supporting when you say you support pipelines. You'd be smarter if you believed in fairies and unicorns.

The Two Party Wrestling Federation

 Imagine if you will... that politics was a sport. And I'm talking about American/Canadian politics here. It's a sport with only two teams. Oh, sure, there ARE other teams, but they're pretty much perennial expansion teams. They don't ever compete, they have a much lower salary cap, there are fewer games in smaller stadia, blackouts are in effect across the country so most fans are forced to watch the same game every time between the top two teams. There is a great fan base and a lot of love for the fringe teams, but most folks know they'll never win, so they have their favourite team, which isn't one of the top two, and the team they vote for in the championship, which IS one of the top two. There were a couple seasons when the captain of a third team was traded to one of the top two teams. It wasn't expected for him to become the most popular player but he did! Why, he even became the captain of one of the top two teams! What happened the next two seasons was shameful! For the first season, he was stripped of the captaincy and just to punish the fans who were perceived as disloyal, his team purposely lost the championship game. The next season, even though the fans still favoured him for captain, the team chose someone else. They won the championship that year, but most agree they would have done even better with the captain the fans supported. He was given a good job as chief talent scout after he retired, but only as a kind of apology appointment. The fans will never know what a superstar he could have been.

What the fans DO know is that this is one pungent hangover-lamb vindaloo-diarrhea SHIT sports league, but... it's better than nothing/at least it's sports/so hwak haeng/toxic positivity/don't drag your negativity into this blog post! If you don't keep your blind faith in the league, you start to realize that both of the major teams are owned by the same people and those people really don't care who wins the championship every year, so long as the fans keep supporting the league and believing it's genuine sport, not WWF wrestling. 

Okay, analogy over. But why do I make this analogy? What is my topic for today? Just about the best illustration of how completely disingenuous politics and politicians can be. It's an example that would get you a lifetime ban from a sport like using steroids or fixing games to cover the spread you bet on. It's such a heinous example of political rhetoric that the people who secreted it can't possibly have any more respect for their participation in the politics of their country than a game of shinny at the local outdoor hockey rink or some pick-up hoops. After you hear it, you'll think of about a hundred other examples exactly the same. And those examples will not be confined to one or the other of the two parties either. And you may wonder why anybody would have as much interest in politics as they might have for the fake sport outlined above. It's a question I find myself asking almost every day. You know it's not real, you know your team can never really win, why do you keep buying tickets?

Okay, now I promise the analogy is over. Anyone ever heard of the Unitary Executive Theory? It's a theory of United States constitutional law that amounts to, "If the president does anything, it must be legal, because, why, he's the president!" (Incidentally if I were talking about VICE president, I would have typed "he's/she's" back there. But it'll happen...) And speaking of Vice, we're going to pause here. During the pause, please watch, or re-watch, the movie "Vice." I'll wait.

Let's all go to the looooobby, let's all go to the looooobby, let's all go to the looooobby to get ourselves a treat.

Dick Cheney may have been the greatest proponent of Unitary Executive Theory to ever kinda be, but still not be president. This was, as you will have noticed from watching the movie just now, Dick & Rummy's plan to take control of the U.S. way back in '76 during Ford's first term. Problem was, Ford lost to Carter. The Republican reaction was a familiar one: "This must be a mistake." "We need to re-count those votes." Eye roll. The team can do no wrong. Fight for the team right or wrong. 

At any rate, the movie is mainly about how Cheney got to practice some of Dubyuh's executive powers FOR HIM. It's scary enough that the president could have such absolute executive control of the most powerful country in the world, but when someone else could practice it in proxy due to a president's weak-mindedness, ummmm wouldn't this qualify as one of those things that need to be changed? We've talked about this before. Why are there so many of these things, really fucking important things, that are "not clearly defined" in the presidency of the United States? Here's an article with statements made by some Whitehouse workers at the time of the 9/11 crisis about how scary that really was. Jack Goldsmith called it a theological commitment to executive power.

Not quite sure why that has pink behind it, but it's a powerful statement. It makes the president like a god or even like GOD! As Bruce Fein commented, the executive powers that were used after 9/11 unilaterally by the president (Cheney) weren't even applied to Hitler, Hirohito, Mussolini, and Stalin. Surely Osama Bin Laden was nowhere near the threat they were!

And now we arrive at a familiar Trumpian impasse: why in the name of Fucky McFuck is all of this a THEORY??? Shouldn't something like the power to, oh I dunno, vaporize entire cities and destroy the earth, have legislation that is absolutely clear? Not theoretical? But as gobsmackingly unintelligible as it may sound, it doesn't. It has Article II, Section 2 of the American Constitution. Evidently, people interpret this in wildly different ways. 

One man having all that power! Surely that can't be good! But as Brad Berenson once observed, "There is only one thing more frightening than an American president who has such power in his sole command. And that is an American president who does not have that power."

I suppose he meant that if the nukes needed to be launched in a hurry, it would slow things down having to get multiple agreements, in writing, and from presumably members of both parties whose job it is to simply disagree with one another. Agreed, this wouldn't be the best way to have things. But surely there must be a better way! Put a think tank together, America! You wouldn't be just saving yourselves!

For the past 4 years, with the infantile Master Trump fully aware of and anxious to exercise his omnipotence he interpreted biasedly that he had been granted when he came down the escalator, spectacularly absurd methods were regularly employed to keep him in check. Here is an entertaining article on the various distractions, lies, tricks, stolen documents and tactics straight out of a child psychology book that needed to be employed to keep Trump from creating the disaster we all feared he would. 

He knew about the Unitary Executive Theory. He probably recorded it and pleasured himself to his voice reading it. And we come to our point (finally) during impeachment number one, it was invoked. If you were like me, and at the time of the first impeachment, you read William Barr's full 19-page article about why Trump should not be impeached, you basically read the Unitary Executive Theory. It will come as no surprise to anyone that this oily hided mouthpiece stated the exact opposite at another time.

Whether this made much difference or not to the mindlessly loyal GOPers I can't claim to know, but they were all harumphing and echoing the gist of Barr's defense: You can't impeach Trump because he's president. And he didn't get impeached.

Fast forward to impeachment number two. At the senate session in which the election was affirmed, you know, the one after the Capitol riot, two particular chuckleheads of note decided to use the platform to show their brainless solidarity through some superfluous and gag-inducing play acting. Here's an account that actually calls it that. TWICE. 

There they are, JF KKK and the Canadian Commando. But despite their grandstanding and time wasting, on Jan. 6 (or the 7th really), the election was confirmed. Shortly thereafter, on January 13, a second impeachment of Trump was passed. The opening arguments of the trial are set to begin on Feb. 9. But the GOP is raising a very interesting argument against them. I think possibly it was Rand Paul who was the brains behind this one:

I'm sure the two above, Rupaul, Bill Barr and probably even Dick Cheney are amongst the Pavlovian Repuglicans who are now harumphing and echoing the agreed upon slogan in regards to Trump's impeachment part deux, you guessed it, "You can't impeach Trump because he's no longer president. 

This is not government, this is mockery. They're probably sipping expensive scotch and smoking fine Cuban cigars laughing at how stupid the public is. 

Now, think back to when I said you can probably think of 100 more examples like this. I certainly can. This theater of the absurd has gone on long enough. It needs to end. If I didn't promise earlier to end my sport analogy, I'd say this league should be defunct. 

HOWEVER, every so often, political bad guys get beat out of office restoring public faith in elections, politics, politicians and the broken system of government we continue to support. These heroes usually start out great. Biden/Harris have done some great things out of the gate. So did Carter, so did Clinton, so did Obama, but eventually all have succumbed to the true powers that own everything and everyone: the three comma class. And inexplicably, voters always seem to end up at that mysterious place where they say to themselves, "Self, this party isn't working out. I need a change. The other party was shit last time and the chances are very good they'll be shit again. But I'll take that chance because I don't want to vote for a fringe party even though their platform is what I want. I just don't like their team name." 

And on and on goes the two-party political nightmare.