Please note that my old buddy, Steve Hocevar, has become a blogmeister.
Steve is a comedian and magician and magician comedian and comic magician.
His name and new blog are now at the top of my links list to the right.
Check him out!
First, my son and I agreed that we were both voting Green. We agreed further that these were protest votes.
We were protesting, among other things, the fact that none of the four leaders was mensch enough to refuse the TV debate unless Ms. May was invited to join. That would have been the honorable thing to do, and any of those 4 gonovim (Hebrew for crooks) would have secured my vote by doing so.
Also we were protesting the "consortium" of TV execs who hold our democracy balls in their little hands and decide who gets to speak at a national debate.
This is a perfect microcosm of the real universe we occupy - business at the helm; democracy a Popsicle delusion.
So, Green Party, it was.
Then, last week I started complicating matters.
No, I thought.
I've got to help Harper get that majority.
I detest the demonetization of this boring, little man. Sure, he's an autocratic putz. Sure, he's no great coffee company. But he has been quietly managing the affairs of an unwieldy unmanageable country for several years now, so give the guy his mandate and let all the others shut up.
Then I realized that the Conservative candidate in my riding is married to someone I haven't had any time for in the past 40 years, so why would I vote for her? Everything is political and everything is personal.
Then I did about 17 fresh turns of thought.
I walk a lot and I'm not listening to tunes or yammering on my cell or texting. I'm just walking, so I get in a lot of mental wandering time.
So I started double and triple thinking and reversing and cutting back.
For a crazed moment, there I almost settled on the NDP, until I realized that it was David Eby, the NDP candidate in the Provincial bi-election next week, that I will be voting for a) because he's a good man and we could use him in the legislature, and b) because nothing could be funnier than having Premier Clark without a seat.
I don't know the Federal NDP candidate.
So, guess what?
I have come full circle.
Today, I am voting for Ms. Shaw, the Green party candidate in my riding.
I hope Ms. May trounces the hell out of that do-nothing fool, Gary Lunn in Saanich & the Gulf Islands.
At this point in time, almost any new voice will be a welcome change from the same old, same old.
Why are we such sticks-in-the-mud in this country? God forbid we should consider anything new or mildly different.
Notice that I have ranted for several minutes here and not said a word about a cert6ian other party that used to be big.
Soon, it will be very small and the geek who took it to the bottom of the hole will thankfully disappear from the front pages.
Finally, and on another note, I am voting to have Bernd Walter removed from office.
Walter is the head of the BC Review Board.
In recent weeks, it has been his pleasure to release into our communities several murderous lunatics, each of whom has killed people and is a crazy dangerous risk to us all.
Walter, in his light-headed liberal isms, has chosen to ignore good common sense and favor the dangerously crazy among us.
In one case, the public outrage was sufficient to have this stupidity reversed - the dangerous killer is back in custody. In the latest episode, the stabber stabbed again. Nice.
If we could vote on this man's employment, I would do so.
But of course, we cannot.
He is someone's cousin or lover or business partner or fourth at bridge.
I vote for him to leave his post at once, before someone else gets hurt.
David,
I have referred your blog entry to my panel of judges. We had a difference of opinion so we sent the matter to a parliamentary committee. They decided to have a royal commission to study the matter. The report is 1,200 pages per volume. Its 26 volumes. We have a group that has applied to study our findings. They will need a government grant. Wally Oppal has been appointed with Bob Rae to report back to the provinces.
Damn you Mr Berner.
See what you have caused.
13
The news today is standard fare - a hockey game, a wedding far, far away, America the Beautiful struggling with gun laws vs. medical marijuana laws.
But one item stands out.
Don Cayo, writing in the Sun, informs us that the tax bill for the average Canadian family is now more than 41% of earned income.
41%
The taxes come from every direction and from every manner - some unimaginable - of thing.
And why is this?
I'll tell you why.
Because even though governments have a responsible and useful and important role in our lives, nobody (other than Trudeau, of course) ever said governments should be the primary engine of national life.
I believe that 50% or more of all working Canadians are now employed by one level or another of government.
That's a lot of paper pushing, a lot of desks, cell phones, BlackBerrys, fax machines, memo pads, lunches, conferences, and bull.
The reason that 41% of our earned incomes are now devoured by government machinery is because the machine itself is so big and so unproductive.
If there is anything that can humanly be done by two guys with a shovel or a microchip, government will find a way to employ 14 to do the same job. After the discussion, of course.
And yet...
And yet.
Are we not hot in the midst of some national voting event called an election?
Have you heard one single candidate of any stripe whatsoever mention for a nano-second PRODUCTIVITY, say, or BLOATED BUREAUCRACIES?
Would anyone dare suggest that half the tit-sucking mandarins in government employ go out into the real world and create something useful and contributory to the general weal?
No.
Because the "real world" is what exists.
It is you and I who live in a fantasy.
Wanna see me and Iggy Pop on Sun TV today with very different views of "Insite?"
Check it out.
Just in case you were wondering on an Easter Sunday morning if the world really was completely demented...
In the post below (Sin teats no hay paraiso), you will see a segment from an actual TV show from Columbia.
The show is about women getting breast plants so that they can be the girlfriends of drug cartel bosses.
It is a scripted and acted (more or less) drama (more or less) that in its final episode attracted 63% of Columbia's TV audience.
Nice share.
What is even more illuminating is that this piece of art was only one cosmetic surgery away from making it to NBC.
Following are a few paragraphs from the Wikipedia entry on the subject.
Without Breasts There Is No Paradise was the working title of an NBC drama series produced by Universal Media Studios which was to be adapted from a 2006 Colombian telenovela called Sin Tetas No Hay Paraíso. However, with the departure of NBC Entertainment chairman Ben Silverman in 2009, it never came to air or even went beyond having a pilot filmed.
The show [1] was set to revolve around the adventures of a young prostitute, who seeks massive breast implants to attract a rich cocaine smuggler. The Colombian version's final episode scored a record 63 share of the country's viewers.[2] The story originated with investigative journalist Gustavo Bolivar's eponymous debut novel about child prostitution.
In April 2008, Ben Silverman, co-chairman of NBC, said that "We're continuing to develop it," but he hinted that an English-language version may not be produced.[3] "It's very likely, actually, to go on Telemundo," he said. "Our script wasn't quite ready." NBC has said little about this project since it first announced in mid-2007 and no pilot has been produced.[3] The network announced in June that the series remains in development for the 2009-2010 season - or beyond.[4] The Daily Mail reported in October, 2008 that the project is still in the works.[5] However with Silverman's departure from the network in June 2009 and the network completely distancing itself from most of the pilots brought in by SIlverman which never made it to series, the project is likely dead and unlikely to be revived by NBC.
Paraíso tells the story of 17-year-old Catalina, a gorgeous young girl who descends into a decadent world of easy money as a teen prostitute "pre-paid girl".[6] She comes from a poor single-parent family and her brother works as a hired killer for drug traffickers. The girl dreams of a life of luxury, but she is not bosomy enough to attract a wealthy pusher whom she can seduce into making her a pampered paramour.[7]
Sick of poverty, Catalina decides that plastic surgery will help her find a new life. During her pursuit, she is raped, gets an abortion and dives into the sex trade.[8] She sells her body to raise money for breast augmentation.[9] After four operations, she loses the will to live, tries to commit suicide, so instead she placed a hit on herself.[7]
Gustavo Bolivar's heroine is a "pre-paid girl," which means she sells her services around-the-clock for a set period, hoping to make extra money.[7] The screenwriter says Paraiso highlights an unflattering part of his country: teenagers in the Colombian narco-culture getting the breast implants.[8]
Bolívar says the story is based on real-life conditions facing child prostitutes in the town of Pereira. There he met two girls who were desperate for silicone breasts. One told him that she got her operation for free in exchange for sex. Unfortunately, the doctor used a pair of used implants, which led to allergic reactions and infection.[7]
IN SHORT...
MISERY AND DEGRADATION (ALWAYS POPULAR THEMES IN GOOD STORY-TELLING) AS ENTERTAINMENT FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY.
The moment you hear the word "Tribunal," you'd best saddle up the pony and head out of town fast.
Worse, if you hear the phrase, "Human Rights Tribunal."
Worst, "B.C. Human Rights Tribunal."
Get out the iron masks.
We are told that we live in a society that manages itself according to some agreed-upon laws.
Systems are in place. Hm...
But, what kind of feudal throw-back are tribunals?
Three folks appointed by someone to make subjective judgements about someone else - without regard for any written and agreed upon set of laws.
Judgements, in effect, by fashion.
And whose cousin got the cement contract, by the way?
I mean, who are these people who get these assignments?
Now, the story.
The story in today's Sun about Ujjal Dosanjh filing a complaint over the Khalsa School's endorsement of a Conservative candidate is a microcosm of the corruption and injustice that dominates public life in Canada today.
The school is a registered charity and it receives almost $8 Million a year from the BC government.
The founder of the school is Ripudaman Singh Malik (pictured herein), the man acquitted in the Air India bombing.
He may have been acquitted, but that was not a finding with which most people I know agree.
It is near impossible to work through the layers of evil that are woven into the background of this nightmare without being called a racist.
Dosanjh, who was viciously beaten many years ago in his long public opposition to Sikh terrorist groups, is to be applauded for standing up once again to yet another small perversion of Canada's political system, laws and culture.
I was wrong and Vancouver City Council was right.
Yesterday in this space I predicted that Vancouver would approve the Big New Casino caper.
They did not.
They rejected it unanimously, thus surprising everyone in town and delighting most of us.
This is a great triumph for good common sense, citizen participation and for the current Vancouver City Council.
For anyone who has followed this blog, you may have noticed that I almost never refer to City Council in any way whatsoever.
The reason for that has been that, until last night, I have thought of this current administration as basically silly and irrelevant and not worthy of attention.
Bike lanes, poultry and pigs in the back yard, daffodils on the roof. Please!
But this Vancouver City Council has not only redeemed itself with this decision, it has also guaranteed itself re-election come November.
Barring some major gaffe or scandal revealed, expect all seats to be filled by the same skirts and suits next time round.
The Big Casino in downtown Vancouver was a bad and odious idea. It came from people who have no real sense of what this city is.
It deserved to be rejected and we can only applaud the choice made last night at City Hall.
The money being given to casinos and forgiven by the provincial government are a criminal offense unto themselves.
This money comes under the curious title, "Facility Development Commissions."
Or FDCs.
Pete McMartin & Larry Pynn have written two excellent pieces in this morning's Sun about this handy little give-away.
The bottom line is this:
BC taxpayers are handing casino owners, builders and developers close to half a BILLION dollars to help these poor souls create gambling places.
Not one of you - hoping to open a shoe store or a dental practice - can ask the government for similar kick-backs.
For that is what they are - kick-backs.
You build ugly places where miserable foolish people can lose lots of money that we can collect and we will be so grateful to you that we will practically build these sheds for you.
And the ways that these shady operations claim FDC money are hysterical and mind-boggling - parties, poker dealing lessons, celebrity pianos...
Best of all is the quote from Michael Graydon (pictured above), President CEO (Chief Evading Officer) of the BC Lottery Corporation, who says it is is not his business what casinos do with FDCs.
What exactly is his business?
How does this guy sleep at night?
Some time today, Vancouver City Council will not doubt approve the massive new gambling joint downtown.
Which will make practically everyone who has been in government for the last two decades complicit in this massive criminal enterprise.
Congratulations are very much in order to the Union Gospel Mission for their new multi-purpose facility on East Hastings.
UGM has been quietly and honorably serving the DTES and the entire community for a great many years now.
They are one of those front-line social service agencies that do effective human and humane work with "the least among us."
They rarely make headlines or attract attention to themselves.
Today is a worthy exception.
Susan Heyes files Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court
Is justice only available to the rich and powerful?
I have just filed for leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada as a self represented litigant.
Contributions can be made to the Susan Heyes Legal Defence fund : Royal Bank – account # 07200 – 5076666
I have no means to pay further huge legal fees to take this case to the Supreme Court of Canada, but as a citizen and a small business owner, I can’t afford not to. This is an issue of national importance with the potential to impact any small business in Canada.
The ruling of the BC Appeals Court, if not overturned, would mean that any small business in Canada in the path of a mega-project could suffer severe financial hardship or bankruptcy, without any legal obligation to tell the truth or to provide restitution, on the part of those responsible.
In this case of the P3 model for the Canada Line, this project has even been provided with the powers and funding of every level of government, to profit at the expense of the small businesses. This is unjust and unfair.
I began this fight for justice and compensation six years ago. I have mortgaged my home twice to keep my business viable. $300,000 of the $600,000 award plus costs, was paid out in legal fees, leaving me with a fraction of my actual losses to invest back into my business.
The Canada Line consortium, with assets over $13 billion, expects Hazel & Co to repay the entire $600,000 award, including the already paid legal fees. However, the lawyers for Canada Line apparently suggested that they might be prepared to waive some or all of the recovery of all moneys paid to Susan Heyes Inc. if no Leave to Appeal Application to the Supreme Court of Canada was filed.
Faced with another massive legal bill, and considering this financial inducement, the incentive for stopping any further legal action is compelling. But so is my determination for justice to prevail, and for this issue of national importance to be fully heard, and rectified.
I welcome financial assistance to continue this
If the several years of catastrophic business losses caused by the secretive, non-compliant cut and cover construction of the Canada Line is not considered severe, unreasonable, intolerable - and merits compensation - what process, what length of time and what degree of harm
The Supreme Court of Canada will be asked to consider the balance of fairness in the shared burden of costs and the shared benefits, as they relate to all participants in this landmark case, and that leave is being brought forward by Susan Heyes as a self-represented litigant, at great expense.
Susan Heyes
HAZEL&CO
4280 Main Street
Vancouver, BC
V5V 3P9
604 687-0721 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 604 687-0721 end_of_the_skype_highlighting w
604 551-8852 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 604 551-8852 end_of_the_skype_highlighting c
