Why I Support Stephen Harper

Here are the facts, as they pertain to this entry:

- These are my personal opinions.
- I am not a political science student, nor do I have any extended knowledge about politics.
- I accept that news broadcasts are highly biased, and thus cannot be taken completely to heart.

People always ask me, "why do you support Stephen Harper and his Conservative party?" My answer is fairly simple, or at least it's simple to me. I understand that many Canadians believe Mr Harper to be the anti-christ. They believe his views align more closely with those of President Bush than is healthy for our country. They believe the Tories seek to restrain Canada's growth by imposing conservative values on the rest of the country. And finally, that the Tories have only the Western provinces' best interests in mind.

I support Mr Harper and his Tories for these reasons:

1) He promised to lower the GST by one percent immediately and by another percent in the near future. By God, we're now at 6% instead of at 7%. For those that don't know, GST was never intended to be a permanent thing. It was only supposed to be temporary, and its reduction inevitable. That the Tories actually did something about it, is impressive. The lowering of GST benefits all Canadians right away. Additionally, as an Albertan (who doesn't need to pay PST), the drop from 7% (in total) to 6% (again, in total) is fabulous.

2) He's getting rid of the costly and ineffective gun registry. The fact that this program is costing Canadians millions of dollars every year for very little return is reason enough to shut it down. We need a government that will recognize when an initiative is failing, cut the losses, and run. "Nip it in the bud" as they say. That the gun registry was supposed to help prevent incidents like the Dawson shooting is further proof that the system does not work.

3) He's pushing the opposition to explain themselves. Why should they oppose the tougher anti-crime legislation? Why would the opposition vote in favour of allowing arsonists, thieves and muggers to serve their sentences at home (under house arrest)? These kinds of people should be behind bars, where they belong.

4) The Conservatives have introduced the Clean Air Act. This piece of legislation has reasonable goals and objectives in mind. There will be consultations with the major players in the various industries which contribute most heavily to the green house gas emissions, and then goals will be set. The Clean Air Act has been coupled with the Energy Efficiency Act which will strive towards reducing wasted energy (in the form of heat).

5) Harper is pushing to put more police officers on the streets of Canada. I don't know about you, but I feel much safer knowing there are cops out on the streets watching us. They are there to serve and to protect. How can they protect the public if they're all sitting around in police stations doing paperwork? This is pursuant to the fact that street racing has become an even larger problem in recent years. Many deaths have resulted from street racing in Canada's major metropolitan cities, like Vancouver and Toronto. This rampant style of crime has to stop. We are all in danger if such things do not cease immediately.

6) Mr Harper has put Canada on the international stage with a more proactive role in peacekeeping missions and anti-terrorist activities. The Prime Minister has done nothing but support our troops in our military missions since he came into power. We have been embarrassed one too many times by failing Sea King helicopters that kill our own troops before even reaching the war zones. Investment in our military is important if we are to become less dependent on the United States for protection. Harper has also disallowed the press from creating media circuses out of the military funerals. By preventing them from using the footage to argue against the war, he has done our soldiers a great service. They voluntarily offer their lives to serve and protect us; all Canadians should be mindful of that. Yes, there will be casualties, that is the price of war. But we have been slow to realize this fact, that soldiers have in no way been coerced into doing things they shouldn't be doing. We don't employ conscription in Canada, and thus there is no argument in saying that soldiers are dying for a war they didn't want. They volunteered for Christ's sake! If they didn't want to go overseas to defend our country and the safety of our citizens, then they simply wouldn't go. Or better yet, they wouldn't sign up for service. The media has shamelessly used the deaths of our soldiers to wage a more subtle war against Mr Harper and his Conservative party. To turn the valiant sacrifices of our men and women fighting overseas into fodder for use against the Tories makes me sick. It really makes me sick.

7) Stephen Harper is the Prime Minister of Canada. It is his job to represent all Canadians and to do what is in their best interests. He cannot govern this country with the support of only the Western provinces. He simply cannot. It is not possible, when the largest concentration of Canadians lies in Ontario around the Greater Toronto Area. And therefore, it is illogical to think that he would do things which only increase his popularity in the West. If anything, he's done everything he could to improve things equally for all Canadians. He wants what's best for us, all of us.

And that is why I support Stephen Harper. I invite you to criticize and comment on these seven points. Bring it on.

Between Death and Decay

Went to see Body Worlds exhibit Saturday. It's quite a show. An anatomist by the name of Gunther von Hagens has created a show whereby he's taken real human bodies, plasticized them and then put them on display for all the world to see. Each body showcases the human form from the inside, which is to say, you see what lies beneath the skin.

It's created quite a stir, using real bodies in a live (pardon the pun) exhibition. Many of the "people" on display aren't in glass cases, so viewers are free to lean in and see every fiber in detail. You can see the tendons, the cartilage, the muscles, even the nerves. Some have hair in key places, like eyebrows and pubic hair. All have the genitals intact. Clearly this isn't a show for the immature....

The process for creating the figures is really something. Gunther von Hagens has perfected a technique that incorporates embalming techniques, fluid and fat removal, gas curing and plastics. He has even found a way to section a body such that the fat deposits can be solidified and put on display. To this end, the effects of obesity are made even more poignant.

With the advent of "plastination", von Hagens' process for creating these works of art, he has given people a new perspective on the human form. We are currently dependent on MRIs for clear cross-sectional images of human bodies. Plastination enables us to take any cross-section we want and make it available for observation. Each slice can be examined by eye, meaning students are no longer required to see the images on a screen. The level of detail that can be gleaned from this process is amazing. When shown a transverse cross-section of a chest cavity from a healthy individual next to the same cross-section of a smoker, the deterioration of the lungs is extremely visible. The applications to medicine from a living point of view are limited, as the subjects must be dead before any part of them can be plasticized. However, as a teaching tool, they are highly effective. I only wish I were a teacher now so that I could take a class through the exhibit to show them these things.

The whole-body plasticates (ie: whole people) are modeled after artistic influences and are showcased to specifically emphasize regions of the body. A skateboarder doing a one-handed stunt upside-down is used to emphasize the muscles of the buttocks. The "torch-bearer" displays the muscles in the armpits and upper body. A cyclist displays the muscles in the legs. And the "orthopedic man" shows us the various prosthetics used in bone & joint replacements. In addition to these, several "pieces" were shown where only the blood vessels have been plasticized, leaving only the outline of the form. Organs such as the liver and kidneys were clearly identifiable due to the large concentration of blood vessels in each.

Body Worlds is truly a unique exhibition of science and art, melded together to give viewers a different perspective on how their bodies work. The sheer directness of the exhibit forces the spectators to reexamine the ways in which they live, as they are exposed to new and sometimes frightening realities of medicine. A final example to illustrate this point is the smoker's lungs. We've all seen the photos of lungs tainted by tar and the various pollutants found in cigarettes. But to actually be inches away from a real set of smoker's lungs, displaying the total blackness of the epithelial layers and alveoli is truly something to behold. Toss in a clean and healthy set of lungs as a comparison, and the destruction becomes all too obvious. So if this show ever comes to your city, or you get a chance to go see it, go! It's worth it.

Next Up: Romulan Birds-of-Prey

Scientists at Duke University have successfully created a cloaking device. For those of you who aren't totally versed in the ways of science fiction, this is HUGE!! To be able to bend electromagnetic waves around an object such that detection becomes difficult to impossible is a massive step forward into developing military technology that would put the United States well ahead of the rest of the world.

What these researchers have done is created a metamaterial ("engineered mixtures of metal and circuit board materials") which is able to bend microwaves around a small object. Detection with microwaves requires instrumentation, but this will be key to developing cloaked fighter jets undetectable by radar (a significant improvement over the stealth technology currently employed by the Stealth Bomber). While a shadow still exists, the team is working on ways of improving the device to eliminate all shadows. The next step will be to develop the metamaterial for cloaking objects in visible light.

The potential for a discovery like this is massive. Already the team is looking at developing this technology for "protecting sensitive electronics from harmful radiation." The lead researcher has speculated that "one could imagine 'cloaking' acoustic waves so as to shield a region from vibration or seismic activity."

Granted the work done so far is not perfect, but it proves that it is within the realm of the possible. We know that work on a teleportation device is also in development, so humanity is slowly inching towards achieving all those not-so-crazy-anymore futuristic devices that we see on TV. Maybe one day we'll have phasers too.

"Set phasers for kill!"
- Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the Starship Enterprise

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15329396/

More Overheard in Calgary

New entry:
Chinese guy to Chinese girl in extreme FOB accent: Trans-fats means no fatty acids lah...

- University of Calgary

---

Jock #1: Y'know what'd be weird? If you started wearing girls' clothes...
Jock #2: Yeah, that would be weird.

- Mexx in Chinook Mall

---

Frat boy #1: Dude, you actually drank it?
Frat boy #2: Yeah, it was sick. All lumpy and shit.
Frat boy #1: And were you sick?
Frat boy #2: Fuck yeah, dumbass! Didn't they make you drink it?
Frat boy #1: Fuck no! I took the piss instead.

- Futureshop on Macleod Trail

It's Iraq, not I-rak.

Show of hands, who here is sick and tired of hearing about the war? I, for one, am annoyed on a daily basis by the reports of civilians accidentally getting themselves killed, terrorists being blown to pieces by their own devices, and soldiers being attacked like they're helpless little girls. I mean no disrespect, I think what the armed forces of Canada are doing is great, and I fully support the war on terrorism, but it's the media that has twisted it into a ratings frenzy and biased journalism.

A week or so ago, I was watching TV when an ad for an upcoming segment on Global National came up, to promote what they called, "Are we winning the war?" It's a title, meant to grab your attention and draw you in. Since I'm bombarded (pun intended) with titles, segments, and headlines like these three or four times a day (at least), I was very put off by the bluntness of that statement. Can we be winning a war on terrorism? Is that even possible? I would like to think so, but that makes for a very black-and-white answer. However, in reality, I don't think we're winning. In fact, I don't think it's even possible to "win" as they put it. How can we "win a war" when the enemy can be anybody? We would have to dictate the actions and behaviour of everyone on the planet to ensure that the war on terror is over. Granted, not every single human being on this planet is a terrorist, but to effectively "win the war," this is what would be necessary.

Getting back to my original point, the media has created a very biased form of journalism, which is a bit of a redundant statement since journalism is inherently biased. It seems to me that many of Canada's national journalism centres are very liberal in the way that they report the news. In most cases, this is fine, but when it comes to the war on terror, they are increasingly biased against the war. Daily we hear reports of soldiers dying, and then sound bites from the friends going, "they shouldn't have had to die for a war we don't want." Now is that fair? Last time I checked, Canada didn't employ conscription laws. There is no draft, participation in the armed forces of Canada is voluntary. So if these people are volunteering to be soldiers, does it not follow that they are volunteering their lives for the country? No one forced them to be soldiers in the first place, they chose that path. It bothers me that the media has been taking soldiers' choices and twisting them to serve a goal that doesn't necessarily align with that of the armed forces. It's no wonder Harper has disallowed the media from being a part of the arrivals (of the fallen soldiers) and funerals since most of the footage and coverage is negative.

My point here is this: people sign-up for the war. They're not forced into it, they enter by choice. The media has taken our view of our soldiers and made them seem like helpless little girls, unable to defend themselves. Our armed forces know what the hell they're doing. We need to have a little faith and trust that the military will do what is both necessary and what is right. These people are putting their lives on the line for us, the least we can do is not use them as fodder to be launched at politicians and policies we don't like.

Adults are mature human beings....or at least they're supposed to be...

Imagine you have a project for some people. Adults, to be more specific. They are all obligated to do a project and use the resulting system that you've created. So that they can make proper use of the system, they must be informed of the details and inner workings of the system. To accomplish this, you hold a training session. You give them instructions on what to do, and expect that they will pay attention and learn from you.

Now suppose a day later, one of the attendees of your training session comes to you and says, "I can't do this thing you showed us how to do yesterday." Why not, you ask this person. "I just can't make it work," they reply. I need you to be more specific, I tell them. "I can't, I wasn't paying attention when you covered that part," is the final answer.

What would your reaction to this scenario be? Would you gladly go and help them resolve a problem which really could have been avoided had they simply paid attention to you? Or would you send them off to figure it out on their own? Well, since you have been tasked with being the "go-to" person for this project, you are obligated to help them.

Fast forward to another meeting but being held by that same person who wasn't paying attention. This person now has a project that they are in charge of, and are giving you instructions on how to complete a task. So you attend the meeting, pay close attention because similar to what you taught them, it is a new system to you. This person also provides instructions on how to proceed with the task. The instructions are incomplete and lead you to errors and problems. This person has also infused the instructions with an inconceivable number of "whatever" 's, adding to the confusion (ex: "Oh, just enter stuff and whatever," or "Do whatever you want at this point," or "Whatever works for you"; I think you get the drift). You ask questions and attempt to clarify the situation so that the instructions are clearer. Their answer to you is, "Pay attention, because I might not have time to fix the instructions later."

Now what is your reaction? How would you treat this situation? Not only is this person now a total hypocrite for telling YOU to pay attention, but is incapable of running a project for which they have no idea of what they're doing. When you give instructions to people, do you:

a) Say "Well, whatever. Just enter stuff and see what happens," and rapidly breeze through the remainder the training session as though everyone is perfectly aware of what the fuck you're talking about...

OR

b) Go through each process step-by-step with clear and concise instructions, making sure to cover as many problematic aspects as possible?

This situation is what I faced today at the office. It blows my mind that there are people like this who actually think that:

a) "Whatever" is an acceptable answer to many questions
b) Couldn't teach a monkey how to eat a banana if their lives depended on it
c) Support staff will drop everything to come and help with preventable problems
d) Are in positions of power, and thus have responsibilities that give them opportunities to do all of the above.

Amazing, isn't it? I'm so happy I work with these morons that I could throw myself off a cliff.

And so it begins....

At 10:36am local time (9:36pm ET Sunday), North Korea conducted its first nuclear missile test. I'm not a poli-sci student, so I'm not going to elaborate. Just to mention that gold prices will likely rise over the next week until the risk of war abates.

You can read all about the launch here:

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/10/08/korea-atomic.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15190745/

The X-Prize

First proposed in 1995 at a conference on Space Development, the X-Prize was this: USD$10,000,000 to the first non-government agency to develop and launch a reusable manned spacecraft twice within two weeks. The prize was won on October 4th, 2004 by Tier One who developed the SpaceShipOne.

The foundation that started it all, The X-Prize Foundation, is focusing their attention on the world of genomics. A new prize of USD$5,000,000 to $20,000,000 will go to the team that can completely decode the genomes of 100 people in a matter of weeks.

This foundation, with this prize, has always had in mind the advancement of technology through economic incentives. Offering several million dollars to the team that wins is huge, and should happen more often. If you want to be really technical, then you might say it already does. In the form of grants, researchers are able to complete the work they hope will make them famous. Companies, foundations, and wealthy philanthropists are subject to hundreds of grant proposals, but only a limited number of proposals are granted.

It's good to see that someone with money is doing something positive with it, instead of say, buying islands. The incentive is so strong that this kind of work might actually get us further than Venter or the Human Genome Project ever dreamed of. Kudos to The X-Prize Foundation for endeavouring to advance scientific knowledge.

Foley's So Ggggrrrrooooosssssssss!!!!

There ain't much to say on this topic, but this: Mark Foley is ggggrrrrrooooooooooooosssssss!!!!

Oh, and a total hypocrite too. (For those that don't read the news: He pushed for protecting children's rights while sexually interacting with teenage -ie: 16 years old- male congressional pages.) It's like extreme homophobes, they tend to be the ones who are gay. Ironic that analogy is almost on-the-dot accurate....

Infernal-ly Departed

The Ring was a re-make of a Japanese horror movie. So was The Grudge. Granted, these were both Japanese horror flicks (which were supremely scary), but they are still re-makes. In english. Why can't Hollywood come up with its own concepts? Borrow from other cultures, sure, but don't outright copy other works.

Who can guess, from the title of this post, what the latest based-on-an-asian-film re-make is? If you guessed Martin Scorsese's The Departed, then you guessed right. Bonus question: What movie is it a re-make of? Answer: The Hong Kong thriller, Infernal Affairs.

The premise of both films is this, there's a mole in the police department, and a mole in the mafia/Triads. Who will find and remove the opposing mole first? A writer on MSNBC.com summed it up nicely in that when you remove a mole, blood is always involved.

Though I have not yet seen The Departed, I'm not holding out for it to be an amazing movie. At least not as amazing or as exciting as Infernal Affairs. As a complete and total CBC (Canadian Born Chinese), Infernal Affairs stands as one of my most favourite asian films. In addition to being the film that inspired my hair-style. Most people who see Martin Scorsese's version will not know that this is a re-make. I'm sure box office numbers will soar however, due mostly to the presence of Leo DiCaprio, Marky-Mark, Matt Damon and Jack Nicholson. But from what I saw in the trailer, it does not look terribly well acted nor well put-together. My only hope is that someone let's them in on the fact that a) this is a re-make, b) Infernal Affairs is much better, and c) this is not an original concept (I know 'a' and 'c' are redundant, but I wanted three points).

So, if you haven't seen Infernal Affairs yet, go see it before you go see The Departed. Or, do Hollywood a favour and ignore Scorsese's movie altogether.