change for cannibis

So guess what the number one issues facing America is today (at least, according to the website of President-elect Barack Obama)?

That's right: the legalization of marijuana.

Not Wall Street, the economy, or education (although they did rank high on the list of important issues)...but pot. Specifically, the question for Obama that received the greatest number of votes went something like this:

"Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?"

In fact, when you look at the top twenty questions on the website, apparently drugs were on everyone's mind. This website broke it down, and discovered that "[two] of the top ten, and six of the top twenty questions addressed our government’s policies surrounding cannabis (recreational and medicinal) and the War on Drugs in general."

Good to know that America has her priorities straight.

opinions on the "new libs on the bloc"

Mark Steyn, Ezra Levant, and Andrew Coyne all have interesting thoughts on the matter.

canadian politics, or, political childishness 101

Remember that video I posted awhile ago?

Okay, it's more true than you might realize. And I have proof.

This is what happened last Wednesday. Basically, the Conservatives decided to get rid of this system wherein, during the post-election season, parties get paid $1.95 for every vote they received. Imagine the cries of pain from the oppositions parties. And here is pundit Andrew Coyne's response:

I don’t care what their motivations are: it’s the right thing to do. The public subsidy came in with the Chretien campaign finance reforms in 2003. But it was entirely contrary in spirit. ...Whether to contribute to a political party, and how much, and to whom, should be a private, personal matter — voluntary, individual decisions....By abolishing [the $1.95 “allowance”], the Tories are finishing the job Chretien started, of creating a truly citizen-based campaign finance system. Or not quite: even without this particular subsidy, the parties would still benefit from the hefty tax credit on political donations (the formal beneficiary is the donor, but in practice the incidence is shared), while candidates would still have their expenses partially reimbursed. But it’s certainly a big step in the right direction.

Ignore the howls of the opposition. It is entirely within their power to do as the Tories have done, and develop a large base of individual contributors....Ignore, too, the complaint that somehow this cripples the political process. Much of the subsidy we have been paying these people goes to the very things that are currently poisoning the political process: over-priced strategists and attack ads, push polls and focus groups. Who needs it?

Still not convinced? Two words: Bloc Québécois. Look at the numbers above. We, the taxpayers of Canada, are underwriting 86% of the expenses of a party whose sole raison d’etre is the destruction of the country. Let them work their treason on their own dime.

So then a few days passed, and Harper (the prime minister) revealed more of his party's economic plans (which the oppositions parties also didn't like) and by the weekend, we got word that the Liberals, the NDP , and the Bloc were planning on joining forces--becoming a brand spankin' new party (for 30 months only). Because together, they can form a majority government, overturning the minority Conservative government. Now the only thing to decide is who gets to lead this little coup. "The Coalition for Canada," they call it. "An exercise in nation building," they say.

I call it: the revenge of the losers. So the Conservatives drop funding to the political parties and this is how they respond? "We're kicking you out! Take that!"

Now who said Canadian politics was boring?

obama, snow, and the ironies therein

It was a long night in choir yesterday. In our three-hour practice, we ran through the entirety of Mozart's Vespers, as well as everything else we were practicing. Mr. Murray, our choir director, was kind enough to give us a few breaks throughout that time, which was time enough to get a drink of water and to rest our now-croaking vocal cords, if only for a moment. But, as they say, there is no rest for the wicked, for during one of these breaks, someone burst into the room and shouted, "Obama has won!!!" Two hours of full-out singing did not stop at least half the assembled choir from breaking out into exhuberant cheers. (I, of course, refrained) Within a few more minutes, we were all back in our seats and Mr. Murray again announced the news of the Presidential race. After another round of approving murmurs, our choir director named the next song to practice: the Triumphant Chorus from Verdi's Aida. With a few carefully selected word substitutions, the song could have been played after Obama claimed victory:

Glory to Egypt and to Isis who protects our sacred land

Let us raise festive hymns to the King who rules the Delta

Glory, glory to the King!

Intertwine the lotus with the laurel in the hair of the victors.

Like a veil, spread over the armies a shower of lovely flowers.

Daughters of Egypt, let us dance the mystic ring dances

Just as the stars in the sky dance around the sun.

Raise your eyes and give thanks to the gods for this victory;

Give thanks to the gods for this fortunate day.

Oh come, avenging warrior, come rejoice with us.

As the heroes pass, toss laurel branches and flowers.

Glory to Egypt!

And we sang it loudly, despite our dry and cracking voices.

But that wasn't the only musical irony of the night. Our final song was a cute little rendition of "Let It Snow!" And as I emerged from the college building, three hours after I first entered it, I saw the dreary Grande Prairie landscape covered in its first layer of snow.