Conservative non sequiturs.

Last night I watched a fascinating ABC program which projected the seven most likely scenarios precipitating the end of human civilization. Of course, these were merely projections, but it was a sobering program which explored the perils we bring upon ourselves, as well as the natural ones which threaten to destroy us.

It would be easy to accuse ABC of fear mongering, a not-uncommon practice on the prime time news airwaves these days. But the producers took a methodical (if somewhat dramatic) approach, discussing the various paths of humanity, beset with hazards, and arranged them in ascending order of likelihood. Hazards included black holes, super volcanoes, nuclear winter, genetically engineered super-viruses and of course, the killer asteroid. What a comfort for right-wing icons like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity who, with such authority and scientific clout, proclaim that the number one potential extinction level event (E.L.E.) according to the majority of scientists the world around, is a hoax.

That’s right, the number one most likely event to kill off humanity is that scientific apparition, climate change (aka global warming). What a relief for these hobbyist climatologists to watch us foolish tree-huggers as we clamor to fix a problem that doesn’t even exist. Boy will our faces be red when those rising sea levels don’t wash away miles of shorelines; when the world won’t go through a drought; when billions of people don’t starve to death.

Of course I hesitate to point out to my conservative iconoclasts, the similarities between this situation and the pseudo-science that has been used to prop up the consumption of cigarettes. In the cigarette example, a small group of scientists (read: paid actors with degrees) banded together to proclaim, “I believe nicotine is not addictive.” Now, ignore the overwhelming possibility that these people were hired by large tobacco companies to blunt the rising awareness that cigarettes are addictive. What are the odds, really? Surely the giant corporations wouldn’t act in their own self-interest if it meant millions of people would die. We can trust the large corporations to stay out of science and lobbying, and that includes oil and coal companies. Sure they could pay exorbitant amounts of money to scientists to poison the well of scientific debate and fool society into thinking there is actually a question on climate change, versus the reality- but where would they get all that money? (I’m looking at you, Mr. windfall from rising gas prices).

Okay, so what if the majority of the global community believes that global warming is upon us. This is the same crackpot group of people who theorize about the so-called “holocaust“. We all know there are 11 million people out there hiding in Brazil somewhere, waiting to jump out of the bushes and shout out to Hilter, “gotcha!”

Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Hannity, the global community is sitting down to the table to discuss these pressing issues, which you regard as mere phantasms. You are leaders of men and respected figures in the community. Wake up and smell the science. Lead your people! The earth is not flat; lead cannot be turned into gold; you cannot drink from the same fountain for all eternity without the fountain running dry.

Blind support for a dead president

Like many other people this morning, I got up and read the following headline:

“President Bush Assassinated in new TV docudrama.” This article gives a rundown of this movie. It was the following comments I took issue with. Comments like:

This is absolutely ridiculous. Let's focus on reality people and the "real" what if's!

- Steve, New York, NY

Thought provoking sure, and just plain sick.

- Kelly, Philly, USA

This is a fascinating and thought provoking premise for a discussion on the war on terror. However, isn't it in pretty poor taste to present a film killing our president?

- Carter Up All Night, USA

This is absolutely absurd!! Another example of entertainment designed for maximum political propaganda near an election.

- Mark, Chicago, USA

I wish people could get over politics. The man will leave office in several years and will be gone. Just like those that hate Clinton people cannot rise above themselves.

- Jm, Boston, MA USA

This is outrageous! Someone should be afraid of life imitating art! I'm disgusted at the thought of it.

- Lisa Snyder, Richmond, IN

It is like an invitation for someone to come after our President.

- Russ, Calif

_____
Mostly, I just want to go through and fix the grammar, which is atrocious. And even though this ‘random sampling’ of comments is so obviously fair and balanced, I submitted the following comments of my own. Because they didn’t choose to publish it, I am publishing my comments now:

What is so sick about this movie? You have the president hoisted on such a high pedestal that he takes on the role of a demigod; a too-sacred institution that is above question or reproach (see: Britney Spears, circa 2001). Although this movie could be as ineffectual as some of the "what if" tales out there ('what if Hitler had been assassinated?' or 'what if JFK hadn't been…'), we could stand to learn something from this movie. Provided, of course, that it affords us an opportunity to actually question established beliefs and practices and—gasp—to actually learn about ourselves. Judging from comments like these, it seems we need a lot more of that.

Gay Pond?

My wife and I were recently arguing whether Judaism is both a race and a religion, or just a religion (she, along with many others, argue the latter). When Dara gets backed into a corner, she might dust this one out:

"Well, I'm just a retarted fish in a gay pond, so... lose, lose."

How can you top that?

Did I mention that I was the preeminent Proust scholar in the U.S.?

Of all the dysfunctional-family-goes-on-a-road-trip movies I’ve ever seen, “Little Miss Sunshine” is among the best. Actually, this little movie reaches further than its modest ambitions, and will certainly win the hearts of many who see it.

Although I was almost annoyed at the way my fellow theatre-goers were ready to love this movie before it even started,--laughing almost at the onset of the credits as though there had been a warm-up comic--if you’re anything like me, you’ll give in and laugh out loud. The story is too sad not to.

“Sunshine” is painted with the subtle, but artful, brush of directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris. Although this is an ensemble cast, the nucleus of the Hoover family is little Olive, played by Abigail Breslin (of “Signs” fame). Olive is perhaps the most normal of this pasted-together family, but she is not without her quirks and her charm. Often, the Hoover family rallies around Olive, usually to protect her from the Tony Robbins-esque polemics of her father. She is the Blind Melon “Bee Girl” reinterpreted, and so much cuter.

Offsetting this cuteness is the sweet-but-grumpy codger of a grandfather/junkie; the Nietzsche-loving mute brother Dwayne; the motivational-wannabe Dad; and the gay, suicidal, Proust-scholar, Uncle Frank, played with remarkable magnetism (for a suicidal man) by the always-remarkable Steve Carell. The family Hoover is guarded by sheepdog mom, Sheryl (also wonderfully performed by a restrained Toni Collette).

To describe the idiosyncrasies of the Hoovers is to betray the magic of the movie. Suffice it to say, each character is played to perfection by a superbly-cast movie. Herein lies the heart and soul of the story. The film has a point to make, and it does so without insisting. The thrust of the movie is woven delicately into the fabric of the film, through the hilarious story of the Hoovers.

Although the screenplay by Michael Arndt borrows a chapter or two from National Lampoon’s Family Vacation, it does so while injecting fresh humour and heartbreak, and scrubbing away nearly all trace of cliché. I loved this movie.


And for Larry, I thought I would point out: the music in this film was written by Mychael Danna. good choyce for a name, Mychael.

Let he who is without sin... or something of that nature.

The bizarre thing about modern partisanship is how often it is lamented on both sides. One would think that, if both sides hated fighting so much and wanted to make steps towards some kind of unity, then they would stop the damn fighting. Find common ground then, damn-it! Democrats could read that statement and think, “yeah, filthy Republicans: compromise!” Republicans could read that statement and think, “yeah, filthy Democrats: find common ground!”

The frustrating thing about the politics of division runs twofold:

1) Propaganda machines on both sides of the debate are effective in churning out new automatons each day who robotically tow the party line. The intelligent members of any community should be ashamed of any missed opportunity to question a party’s established beliefs, just because they mesh well, and are comfortable for said members. Throw away your party book, which produces eerily consistent ideologies between members on both sides. People have mocked me for my left-of-center approach to politics, and I end up laughing (or crying?) inside, because said people sound like they’re reading from a party book, instead of forming their own conclusions. (I have often said as much).

The second point requires a longer explanation.

2) The deteriorating presence of accountability in modern politics is a betrayal of the principles set forth by the principle architects of democracy. This relates to personal and national accountability. Instantly, people from opposing groups would read that sentence (hypothetically, if this blog had a readership over 1 person), and think, “yes, the other guy really needs to be accountable.” That kind of blame-shifting mentality prevents people on all levels from growing. The consequence of shining the light on oneself can only be positive.

I’m not talking about the politics of self-deprecation (an accusation that some of my friends would jokingly levy against Canada, I’m sure). I’m talking, instead, of asking the simple questions: what did I do wrong? Could I have done something to prevent this?

At risk of being excommunicated from the western world, allow me to reflect my theory on 9/11. The immediate response to 9/11 (besides hope against all odds, the unity of a community under attack and the like) was anger, revenge, retaliation. Rightfully so. Such a response is to be expected in the wake of that kind of horrific attack. (I am also fully aware that I’m writing this in the relative safety and comfort of my living room, never having experienced the horror on a fraction of the degree of a 9/11-scale atrocity, and no disrespect is intended.) But U.S. citizens who shone the light on America and asked, “what could we have done to prevent this?” are branded as unpatriotic, daring to impugn the infallibility of a nation under attack (worse than insulting a soldier for any reason). These kinds of questions are fair and important. A rational person would never ask, “did we deserve this?” No human deserves to be murdered, in any manner. Ever. But it is not a bad thing to try to learn from an event like 9/11. Punish the perpetrator, yes, but also learn.

An analogy of a father and son comes to mind, where the son is caught stealing and the father has to deal with the fallout. The father would rightfully punish the child, all the while asking himself, “could I have raised him better?” Thus, it would inform the father’s child-rearing skills in the future.

There is no harm in learning from history. There is no danger in questioning your government leadership. Accountability is a core value of democracy. There is nothing wrong with thinking, “hey, maybe we did something to piss people off and sent them flying into our buildings.” Justifiable action? No. But 19 hijackers didn’t just wake up one morning and decide to fly missiles into the U.S. for no reason. There was a reason they chose the U.S., but few people want to explore the foreign policy cocktail (which dates back to WWI) that inspired these psychopaths to committ said acts. Again, the analogy is crude, but spank the child and also analyze your parenting techniques.

Question Iraq. It doesn’t make you unpatriotic. Quite the contrary. This goes for the “other side,” which could be interpreted as leftists or, as I intended it, the Muslim world, both radical and moderate, alike. Question the ethic of killing innocents, as it relates to the Qu’ran; as it relates to morality. Question your government, question the iconic terrorist leader. Run that question through your head: “is this the right thing to do?”

I understand the moral compass varies in different cultures, and there are degrees of cultural conditioning you have to overcome, but that’s what this post is about. It is an expression of frustration at those who never admit blame or question their actions. It is also an exhortation to initiate these practices on a personal and a national/cultural level.

It’s easy to yell past each other, when all you’re thinking about is how wrong the other side is. Once we realize that the other side is populated by human beings whose motivation is sometimes not that different from our own, it becomes easier to bridge that gap. The more we picture German soldiers impaling babies on a bayonet (a propaganda device used by the allies in both World Wars), the less human “they” become, and all of a sudden, it doesn’t feel like murder to kill a bunch of “them”. I think we can all agree, we need to make connections before we can move towards lasting peace, both within the western world, and between the west and the middle east.

Liquid Dreams

Thankfully, Dara made it through the slush that was yesterday's air traffic, through two stop-overs and hours of waiting, to arrive in Toronto. I hope her visit with the family is a healing one for everyone involved.

Beware the Southern Californian Driver

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Megalomalia
Order: Carnivora


The Southern California Driver, belonging to the asshole family, is one of several creatures which exhibit abnormally aggressive driving behaviors. Weighing anywhere from 100 to 400 lbs, the Southern California Driver, or SCD, is technically an omnivore. SCDs are known to eat copious amounts of food, often while in transit. This can make the SCD dangerous and distracted. As much as two-thirds of a well-fed driver’s body-weight consists of dangerous self-importance, and the digestive process can take so long, that SCDs are often said to be full of shit. The Southern Californian Driver’s natural habitat is on the asphalt and concrete roads and highways, although they have been known to drift off into all manner of terra firma, including grass and even water (which would not be really ‘firma‘ I guess).

Physiology

Drivers are made up of many different shapes and sizes, and exhibit specialized functions. For example, a single driver can accelerate from 0 to 60 mph in as little as 6 seconds. Their skin is thin, while their fur coat can be quite heavy (although not always). It is commonly known that the SCD is one of very few mammals with opposable thumbs, but it is a lesser-known fact that drivers communicate almost exclusively with the use of their third finger (the exception being the occasional angry exchange through a rolled down window).

To reproduce, many adolescent drivers employ the back seat , while others display their plumage (anus hair) during a strange mating ritual which involves mooning. Furthermore, many Southern California Drivers will nest in more expensive cars to compensate for the fact that they’re not mating at all.

Behaviour

As previously mentioned, the SCD often exhibits dangerously erratic and aggressive behaviour, often for the sole purpose of arriving at a destination early, after which point the SCD often complains of boredom and makes an unscheduled trip to Starbucks. Although the driver is considered monogamous, he will trade paint with many different breeds in a reckless fashion.

Extinct Species

Sadly, though ostensibly through natural selection, the following species have become extinct:

The courteous driver
The non-speeder
The driver who stays in one lane
The driver who drives (and doesn’t read, eat, talk on the cell or control the iPod)

Tragically, these drivers have been replaced with their nefarious counterparts, namely:

The cut-off guy
The tailgate guy
The doesn’t-know-what-the-hell-is-going-on-around-him guy
The drives-up-and-passes-me-on-the-shoulder-and-then-calims-there’s-nothing-wrong-with-that-and-also-says-”I’m-going-to-f----you-up” chick.

As you can see, the Southern California Driver is a fascinating and tragic character. Beware the SCD; he can lull you into a sense of security and then kill you. It’s his nature.

Goodbye Uncle Laurence

Few good phone calls ever take place at 7:30 in the morning on a Sunday, and no good conversations ever start with the words, "I have some sad news to tell you." So it was today when my father-in-law informed me about the passing of Dara's dear Uncle Laurence. It is one of life's inevitabilities that the older you get, the fewer loved-ones there are around to love. But Dara and I aren't that old, and Laurence's passing feels like the beginning of a far-too-early sunset on a generation of people not ready for the twilight. Indeed, Laurence was only 55 years old; seemingly the picture of health. But whatever mysteries transpired to take Uncle Laurence from us, it is no mystery the quality of life he led, and the type of man he was--even to a distant nephew-in-law like me.

Although only officially my uncle-in-law, I felt a certain bond with Uncle Laurence over our mutual love of music, and instantly liked him and his family. As protective as families can be when a scruffy, bedraggled goy like me starts hanging around with the oldest of the grand kids, Laurence and his family saw past my earrings and bald head and immediately accepted me as family. I was the happy beneficiary of many fine meals, and was honoured to be a guest at several Passover Seders.

It was at these events where I learned what a connoisseur of fine food and jazz music Laurence was. He probably learned to cook his many exotic meals on his numerous treks across the globe. He beamed when he showed off his impressive CD collection, and would happily reminisce about a set at his favourite jazz club, or a Steely Dan show. Laurence loved life and it showed in his devotion to his family, his work, and his passion for the arts.

Rest in peace, Uncle Laurence. You will be missed.

Fondues and Fondon'ts

This evening, we went out with some friends to a place in San Juan Capistrano, called “La Fondue.” The backlash of overcrowding at our favourite new place, “The Melting Pot,” is getting people to search for alternatives to the Fondue fix. “La Fondue” had a gothic ambiance which is superior to that of “The Melting Pot,” and the prices were comparable, but I would say that “TMP” deserves its high traffic. Granted, “La Fondue,” is pretty new, and will likely improve over time. One obvious advantage was the availability, versus the sometimes week-long wait to get your melting pot on. Another interesting thing about “La Fondue” is their available meat selection, which includes such exotic dishes as Alligator, Ostrich, Buffalo and Wild Boar (is there such a thing as tame boar?) The important lesson is twofold: 1) Fondue is damn expensive. 2)We had fun with our friends Harrison and Laird.

In other news, Saturday Night Live sucks, and the past few bands they’ve showcased also suck. Arctic Monkeys are all hype, no delivery. Same with Fallout Boy. What a strange juxtaposition to watch these bands on Saturday Night Live, and then to check out Jellyfish on YouTube, toiling in obscurity, but clearly the more talented band (though, now defunct). And that’s all.