JFK, MLK, RFK & What If....

 Ask not what could have been....Fore it could have been grand

What would the World have been like now if John F. Kennedy had been able to fulfill his full term as  President? How much different would the world have been today? Would his life have changed things for the better as so many believe? For that matter, what would have happened to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and even JFK’s brother Bobby? Would he have followed in his brother’s footsteps as he had intended to in 1968 and thrown his hat into the political arena attempting to become President as well? 

These three men made a difference but they could have done so much more....

On June 6^th, 1968, Robert Francis Kennedy was assassinated while on a Presidential Campaign stop in Los Angeles. He was the third important political figure to be assassinated in the mid to late 1960’s following the assassination of his brother John F. Kennedy on November 22^nd, 1963 and, just 2 months before RFK, Martin Luther King Jr. was murdered in cold blood by a single assassin. 

He wanted freedom but on his own terms....he was taken far too soon from us

All 3 of these men were civil rights leaders in their own way. JFK was the first Catholic US President and had seen America through the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis. He also oversaw the forced de-segregation of the first US college in the Deep South (Alabama, among the worst in terms of civil right violations) when he forced an all-white college to allow a black student admission by sending in the National Guard to protect him and 2 other black students. His beliefs were always questioned as was his decisions as President. His assassination was the beginning of a tectonic shift in the way politics and politicians conducted themselves as the controversy and conspiracy theories mounted over who killed him (without resolution) and why.

One incident alone was not the tipping point but once Martin Luther King was murdered, followed closely by Robert Kennedy, both of whom had taken the 5 years since the death of JFK to spur the civil rights movement forward, demanding equality and freedom for all peoples under law, things were beginning to change. Much too quickly it would appear for some people at that time.

Dr.  Martin Luther King Jr. had been an advocate of peaceful resistance to government actions against their protests for equality and freedom in the South and had been vilified by the all white media as well as many US congressman and State Governors, who feared that the same protests and demands of the Black community in Alabama would migrate to their States. In essence, Alabama was the frontline state where civil rights activists and racists alike had drawn a line in the sand and Martin Luther King was considered to be the most influential leader in the civil rights movement at the time. He was the General fighting the good fight peacefully on the front lines.

This battle for equality would prove to be the most important battle in US history with both Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy fighting against the establishment.  This put both men firmly in the cross hairs of many different factions that all supported the continuation of the status quo, wherein white men had all the power and everyone else was subjugated under their “rule”.

The argument could be made that their assassinations actually spurred on the civil rights movement faster than it would have asserted itself had the two men actually lived. I strongly disagree with this notion and, in fact, when you add in the survival of JFK as well, I firmly believe that the world we live in today would have been vastly different on a multitude of levels. Lets start with a simple premise and go with the concept of “What if…”

What if JFK had not been shot and killed in Dallas on November 22^nd, 1963?

I believe that it was clear in his 3 years as President that JFK was unafraid to make the big decision. He was, after all, the one who gave the go ahead for the Bay of Pigs fiasco. At the same time, he learned from that error in judgment and was able to successfully navigate the world through the Cuban Missile Crisis only a year later, averting what was surely going to be a nuclear war with the Soviet Union through an intelligent blockade of Russian ships to Cuba where the Soviets had been stockpiling long range nuclear missiles aimed at New York and Washington. The biggest error JFK made was not reigning in Bobby when it came to his crusade as Attorney General, against organized crime. Let’s say for this blog’s sake, that he was in fact able to control Bobby’s ambition and get him to tone down his vigilance against them. Not only do I believe that he wouldn’t have become a target to mobsters all over the country, but he would have also shown that special Presidential quality that supersedes everything, even family.

It is my belief that JFK would have easily won a 2^nd term in office in 1964, meaning that Lyndon Johnson and his war-mongering cohorts would not have been able to push the USA into a war in Vietnam to the same extent that we actually saw. While it is very probable that the US would have still been involved in some capacity in the region, given how the Bay of Pigs had gone, it is doubtful that JFK would have lept in, feet first, into another conflict halfway around the world simply at the behest of his military advisors, of whom he was already suspicious of to begin with.

The fact he never ws able to become President cost us so much in the long run...

So rather than sending thousands of drafted young men to their deaths (the average age of the men who fought in Vietnam was 19), JFK would have taken a more cautious approach and, given how he had used radical strategy to avoid nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis, who’s to say that the same type of outside-the-box thinking wouldn’t have resurfaced against the Vietnamese Government as well?

Going back to 1961, JFK was the one who forced integration in the Southern US College system when he used the National Guard to protect the first Black students to enroll it what had been previously an all white institution. Given how he handled that situation, it is logical to assume that the demands being made by people like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King would not have fallen on deaf ears all throughout the 1960’s. Segregation of the school system would have been the next major domestic issue JFK would have tackled, removing Martin Luther King from the line of fire in the sense that his demands would no longer have been termed to be so subversive to the culture of the time.

I believe that had JFK lived, he would have been the first sitting President to denounce segregation and call for full civil rights for all citizens, regardless of race.  It is my firm belief that given the way in which he governed in his short 3 years in office, JFK would have been a transcendent President who would have pushed the government into forcing them to acknowledge the rights and liberties of all of its citizens’ regardless of their race.

While this may have taken some of the revolutionary aspects of Dr. King’s life away (and most likely prevented his assassination in the process), Dr. King would have still been seen as a pioneer for his new role in helping States complete their integration process. I could easily see that once the dangers of his fight were taken away, Dr. King would have been freed up to focus on the important aspects of the civil rights fight. He would have become the first Black man to have the ear of a sitting President as I believe JFK would have found an important role for him to play in the transition from the past to the future of race relations in American history.

These two men should have been allowed to push their agendas through the White House

With the increased race relations and the smaller role of America in Vietnam under JFK, Bobby Kennedy’s role reduced (or restricted), I believe he would have chosen to leave JFK’s cabinet and ventured out into the private sector as a lawyer. That flirtation would have lasted all of about 8 years as it is more than likely that after his brother left office, Nixon would have won the next election and attempted to make up for lost time with regards to Vietnam.

The American people would have become disenfranchised with him very quickly and, after 4 years, in 1972, Bobby Kennedy would have entered into the race and won the Presidency back. Dr. King would have seen much of his hard work pushed aside under Nixon and returned to his roots and continued to mount pressure on the Government not to turn back the clock to the pre-JFK days. Dr. King’s influence would have been especially strong during the 4 years of Nixon’s uneventful Presidency.

Two great men who could have had an even larger role in our history

With Bobby as the new President-elect of 1972, the next 8 years start to look as if they could be great for the country on so many levels. Bobby always was more open to innovative ideas and willing to look at things from a different perspective, even more so then his Brother. In terms of civil liberties, he would ensure that the gains made under JFK would be expanded upon. Dr. King would have been able to once again revert back into the “peace-time general” he would have been under JFK’s full 8 year Presidency and continue to build upon his own personal legacy of peaceful change.

If all of these actions had been the way our history had played out, Dr. King would have made someone like Malcolm X pointless in the sense that Dr. King himself would have been able to secure the changes he and many others fought so hard to gain without having to resort to violence to get them. Groups like the Black Panthers wouldn’t have been necessary. The Nation of Islam and their grip on the Black community in the early 1960’s to mid 1970’s wouldn’t have been nearly as tight as it was. Violent protest and police crackdowns on innocent people wouldn’t have been the norm in many of the larger US Cities like Detroit, New York and particularly in the Bay Area.

Bobby was a man who didn't see colour when he looked at people

Bobby Kennedy would have been an even more influential and dynamic President then his brother because of the way he looked at things through a different lens. A father of 9, an attorney who knew more than just what the text books said about how to interpret law, he was a determined and focused man who once set to task, was like a pit-bull on a bone. His experience as a lawyer had taught him that there was always 3 sides to every story and so there were always 3 ways of doing things; the right-wing way, the left-wing way and the way in between where both sides make concessions in order to achieve a higher goal. In politics, the middle road is the one that always makes headway, something the current US Congress needs to remember as they stall and bicker with President Obama time and again just because they can.

It is absolutely frightening to think of the dominos that fell after the deaths of these 3 historic figures. The way the world would have evolved instead if even one of them, particularly JFK, had not been murdered, would have altered much of how we look at the world today and how we look back on the events of the recent American history.  If JFK had not been gunned down in cold blood, Dr. King and Bobby wouldn’t have either (in my estimation) as JFK’s Presidency would have paved the way for a much brighter future.

More emphasis would have been placed on technology and innovation as it was JFK himself who demanded of NASA that America be the first nation on earth to visit the Moon setting off a space race that the Americans ultimately won 6 years after his murder. He was a fair man politically and would have fought for Civil rights of all people of all races. He would have forced more schools to acquiesce to the Federal Government and de-segregate faster than Lyndon Johnson did when he took over as President. His actions would have forced states to recognize the equality of all its citizens sooner without the unnecessary strife and bloodshed that transpired from the early 1960’s up until the mid to late 1970’s (and still goes on in some small pockets of the Deep South).

 In a private moment, we can only imagine what might have been...

If Bobby had been able to become President in 1972, something tells me America would be in a much better position globally then they find themselves today. The oil shortage of the mid to late 1970’s would have created a new form of race as I firmly believe that Bobby would have had the foresight to try and diversify the energy resources and supplies of the US. I really believe that he would have had the wherewithal to start looking alternative energy sources or possibly cutting an energy pact with OPEC before they became the Oil Cartel they are today.

While there are some aspects of society today that these three men would not have been able to change alone just with their presence (like our materialistic society, the influence of corporations on government are just 2 such examples), I think it is quite clear that these men were taken from us at far too soon a time for the good of the world in general. These men are viewed through the lens of history are seen as 3 of the most influential men of the 20^th century. Had they lived instead of being murdered for their ideals, not only would the United States have been a much better place for it, but the world in general would have been in a much more secure and fundamentally sound place.

Who knows, with the cultural influences that these men had on our society in death, their influence in life may have been even greater. We may have even had the chance to have avoided ever seeing people like the Kardashians on TV as we could have had a much more intelligent use for the medium then that with which we are using it now.

One could only dream….

The Annoyance of Modern Job Hunting and More....

 Job hunting is never easy....

The modern job hunter is believed to have many more options when it comes to looking up job postings now then job hunters 10-20 years in the past. The internet has given the average job hunter access to positions all across the globe if they really want to apply for them but there are problems with that.

In the past, when looking for work, you were usually put up against people from your own geographical locations, which would greatly increase your chances of landing a decent, well paying job. Employers used to be limited to the area in which they were open for business and therefore their options were limited by the people in the area. Now, with so many more options available to them and so many more applicants able to apply for the same positions, the job market has become that much more difficult to navigate despite all the additional tools.

One of those tools, the one most commonly used by job hunters, is the job search website. Sites such as Monster, Workopolis  and Linkedin have become very popular over the years as they claim to be the go to place for job seekers all over North America. The problem with some of these sites is that to find the "job of your dreams" you have to pay for it. Some would argue that it isn't much of a difference then having to pay for a news paper to search their "Want" ads but I would disagree.

The average unemployed or under-employed person (basically someone who is over-qualified for the job they currently have) should not be put into a position where they have to buy their way into a new and better job. The job market should not be limited by your financial ability to pay a website to "hook you up" as it were, with an employer that is looking for the specific skill set that you possess.

I only mention this because after I did set myself up on Linkedin, I was sent a quick message advising that I could get "pushed to the top of the line" in my advanced job search if I pad for their enhanced services. What if every single person was paying for the service, how could everyone get pushed to the front of the line? Sounds like a scam to me.

One last thing about some of the job openings that are posted online. I find it absolutely ridiculous that many of these independent companies expect people to set up profiles with their websites and take a good 10 minutes just to apply for the possibility of getting an interview with them for a position. It's insulting and a waste of time. Half of the job postings that I find interesting I refuse to apply for just because they expect this from applicants. Do these HR managers have a fucking clue how much time it takes to apply to different jobs? Why on earth they would think that the average applicant has the time to do this is beyond me but it's retarded.

On to a few other things.

This weekends Wibmeldon Champs, In case you missed it....

Roger Federer won his 17th and Serena Williams won her 14th Grand Slam Final as each won the singles title in London at the all England Club, Wimbledon over the weekend. You didn't hear about it? Don't worry, it's tennis. Not many people focus on that sport anymore anyway. Even though Serena and her sister Venus were supposed to be the breakthrough many people felt the sport of Tennis needed to get more diversity into the sport, the two of them, much like Tiger Woods, have not had nearly the impact that many foresaw happening. Neither the Williams' nor Tiger have had the same impact that Jackie Robinson had on Baseball back in the midway point of the 20th century. Instead, many young urban black kids are focuses on Football and Basketball and nothing seems to be able to break the grip those 2 sports have on the Black community in North America.

The MLB All-Star game will play out tomorrow night. Only 1 Blue Jay will be there (Jose Bautista, who is tied for the league lead, again, with 27 homers so far this year). Which is wrong. At least 1 other player should have been there with him and that player is Edwin Encarnacion. He is having a career year  (In a contract year no less) and with his 23 Home Runs, 58 RBI's and .295 batting average, he should have been included in the Mid-summer Classic.

Both Easy E and Joey Bats Should be at the All-Star Game this year....

The fact that he is not there and some others with lesser statistics are begs the question of why they haven't expanded the All-Star Rosters so that obvious omissions (like this) don't occur. It would help if the team were chosen more on merit then based on position but that's not practical in Baseball's All-Star game. The only positive of Easy E not being on the team is that its one less bullet in the gun his agent will try to put to the head of Blue Jays Management after this season is over.

American hockey players go home all the time, Canadian? Not so much

So Zack Parise and Ryan Suter choose to "go home" and sign identical 13 year - $98 million contracts with the Minnesota wild, yet Ric Nash refuses to waive his no trade clause in his contract to include Toronto as one of the teams that he would be willing to be traded to and Steve Nash uses the Raptors offer to get some leverage in order to facilitate a sign and trade from Phoenix to the LA Lakers. Is it just me or are Canadians becoming soft when it comes to the sporting world? They are purposefully choosing to ignore their hometowns and opting to play elsewhere for big bucks.

 Using the Raptors to create more offers for yourself is kind of low in my view....

I know that it sounds harsh but I really do think that it has to be some kind of mentality thing with Canadian athletes who have grown up dealing with the relentless Toronto-based media. I would go so far as to say that Canadian athletes are soft because they are too chicken shit to deal with the pressures that come with playing for your home town team. Before Nash and Nash, there was Dany Heatley choosing to decline being traded to the Oilers. There was Jamaal Magloire chosing not to play for Canada in any off-season international basketball tournaments (when he was at his prime) Even Joey Votto and the fact he just signed a 12 year extension with the Reds when he was 1 year away from being a free agent that could have (and would have) commanded a boatload of money from Rogers to get him into a Blue Jays jersey seems to me to be a slap in the face to the Toronto sports scene and sports media in Canada in general.

Sorry bud but if you are too chicken to play in TO, then we don't want you here anyway

Canadian athletes seem to be willfully choosing to stay away from home opting instead to play away from the pressure of playing where they grew up. I really don't understand  this thought process. If you can use your home town to become a great athlete, why can't you find it in your "heart" to come home and try to make your home town team a winner? The Toronto media is partially to blame as they are turning into Piranha's when it comes to breaking news and (ultimately) being overly negative about just about everything but the athlete themselves are more to blame for fearing the media and using that as an excuse not to play in Toronto. You really are pathetic in my view.

 Am I crazy to be the only one who questions Phelps accomplishments?

Everyone is making a big deal about Micahel Phelps and his medals. While it's an impressive feat, no question, there is one thing that always makes me wonder. When the Cold War was ongoing, the Russians and Eastern Bloq countries were accused of using steroids and ultimately fessed up to it as the reason for much of their dominance in many Summer Sports. When Ben Johnson and Carl Lewis were battling in the late 1980, it was widely accepted that the majority of the field was running dirty (a fact that only the Americans and Carl Lewis deny to this day). We all know what happened to Ben Johnson in 1988 but nothing ever happened to ANY of the other "dirty" athletes, many of whom were American.

Now we have an Olympic swimmer who has 16 Olympic medals to his name, 14 of which are Gold, and no one has ever wondered aloud if he has used any kind of drug to help his performance other then the weed he was caught doing 3 years ago? Doesn't that make you wonder even a little? If he was from any other country in the world, the US media would be clamoring to discredit such an abnormality in the sporting world as being the result of pharmaceuticals. I'm not saying he IS dirty or cheating, I just wonder why it is that no one has ever even considered the possibility that he MAY have been using something from BALCO or HGH. I just find it odd.

John Travolta is trying to fend off the mounting evidence of his homosexuality (only a really gay man would not be able to stay straight for Kelly Preston) and another rumoured-to-be-gay member of Scientology, Tom Cruise, is in for the fight of his life as Katie Holmes has filed for Divorce in the State of New York and not California, intentionally simply because of the fact that she has a better chance to win sole custody of their daughter Suri in New York then in California. At the same time, Rupert Murdoch (owner of many media outlets and a weird person of his own doing) has been tweeting about how "strange and evil" the "Cult" of Scientology really seems to be. The house of cards that Scientology seems to have built on (the weird and wacky mind of creator and founder L.Ron Hubbard) seems to finally be imploding upon itself as two of its' most important and highest ranking members are having to deal with huge personal issues that may or may not bring their beliefs into question.

John, be a man and just come clean already....

Travolta has been having, according to the ever increasing reports, gay encounters for years and still more that he has attempted to have by offering money to men for sexual favours, that have been thwarted. I feel for the guy about what happened with his son Jet but enough is enough. Come clean already and admit it. You are just causing undue harm and stress to your wife over this issue. Just be honest about it already and get the media off your back.

 Katie probably figured after playing Jackie O in a movie, it would be best not to live her life as well...

In an interesting twist with regards to the Cruise-Holmes Divorce, because of the fact Katie has purposely chosen to use the New York State family court, Scientology will actually have to be defended legally. This is because in the state of New York, family court judges are much more inclined to grant full custody to one parent over the other if there is any question about the living conditions the child will be exposed to. This means that there is a possibility that Cruise will have to explain intimate details of Scientology in order for it not to be deemed a cult in the eyes of the court and therefore dangerous for Suri to be around as she grows up. It is very possible that Scientology as a whole could come crashing down if the New York State family court deems t a cult. Membership could fall sharply, their finances could crumble. Who knows but this divorce proceeding is going to be nasty and ugly and could change the very shape of Hollywood as we know it.

Maybe if it ends up that Scientology is deemed a cult, maybe then we will see a real shift away from the culture of greed that we see in most stars today. 

Let me know what you think of my latest blog. Feel free to post your thoughts.

Until next time....

The Problem with Ontario Roads is Uneducated Drivers

 Our roads are being driven by selfish, arrogant and bad drivers.....In case you didn't already know

I have had just about enough of the pathetic drivers I see on a daily basis on our roads. I have been putting off getting seriously into this topic but the more time goes by, the more ridiculousness I see on the roads and the more I feel the need to vent about just how dangerous our roads are becoming and my belief of why that is. Trust me, you won't necessarily see where I am coming from until the last paragraph.

First, let me start by saying that there are way too many luxury car drivers in the GTA. When you drive a luxury car, at least from what I have noticed, you suddenly develop the mentality that you have the right of way at all times, speed limits do not apply to you, you don't need to use your turn signals and, generally, you can do whatever you want on the road. I have seen more driving errors done by luxury car drivers then anyone else on the road (except for maybe mini-van/SUV drivers).

Don't know if I would trust GTA drivers enough to ride a bike (or even a horse) around town....

Maybe it's the ego that comes along with owning a Mercedes or a Lexus but there just seems to be this attitude for drivers of these cars in this area that they seem to think they are entitled to do and act as they wish on the roads and, seeing as how nothing ever seems to change with regards to this attitude other then it's continued growth among these drivers, I would hazard a guess that they have and continue to get away with their actions.

The main issue I have is that our Police force have been so concerned with raising fines for excessive speeding and, despite the proven fact that highway speeds are not the sole factor in road deaths (just look at the Autobaun in Germany), they are choosing to focus on young drivers of "suped" up lower end cars (like Civics, Neon's, Cavaliers and Lancers) instead of going after the higher end vehicles that can EASILY surpass the 200 Km\h mark. Instead of picking and choosing who they single out, our police force needs to start cracking down on luxury car owners. Hell, they can certainly afford the car so if they want to act like idiots on the road, then they should be able to pay the fines that go with that idiotic behaviour.

 Just another typical day for drivers in Toronto

Unfortunately, that's just one aspect of the problem, or, more directly, one segment of people on the road acting like morons. Changing gears a bit, I want to point out a few of the common things I have seen over and over again. So, in no particular order, here are some of the most infuriating things I continue to see over and over again on our roads (right after I list them, I will delve into my thoughts as to why they keep happening);

-A signal does not mean you have the right to jump into a lane. The rule is you signal to let the other motorists around you know your intention to change lanes, then do so WHEN SAFE. You don't just signal and move right into the lane without looking. Your signal does not automatically make the other drivers stop in their tracks to give you right of way over everyone else. YOU have only indicated you want to move, EVERYONE ELSE does NOT have to slow down or move over because you signalled.

-When make a right turn onto a busy street (like for example when you are exiting from a strip mall onto a street like Mavis Road), it is NOT the responsibility of the car already on Mavis to slow down to YOUR merging slow ass speed but rather YOUR responsibility to merge when safe and get your car up to the speed of traffic as soon as possible. If you fail to do so, expect to get a long ass horn hold from the car you forced to slow down to a snails pace (or, more appropriately, your pace) and some angry gestures or words from that same angry driver now forced to drive behind you. You DO NOT have the right to get angry at the motorist behind you swearing and honking their horn at you because YOU were the one that made the driving error. Just shut up, put your hand up to apologize and move on.

 The pic may say New Jersey on it but all three are pretty much the way things are in the GTA

-The highway seems to bring out some really arrogant morons that act out in so many ways but a few in particular that come to mind. The first is similar to the last point I just made. When merging onto a highway, it is not the responsibility of the cars already on the highway to slow down to let you in. The merging vehicle needs to speed up to the speed of traffic and then merge safely. I had an asshole get mad at me for not letting him slowly merge in front of me on the highway over the weekend, when there was NO ONE behind me. He was going slow, gave me the finger for not letting him in for at least 2 exits on the highway and seemed to honestly think he was in the right when it came to this situation. He was going 90 on the merging lane, I was going 110. Sorry moron, you were not about to cut me off when there was no one behind me.

The second point has to do with the new HOV lanes that are popping up on our highways. There are only certain areas where you can and can't get into and out of these lanes and yet every single time I am on a highway with these types of lanes, people swerve in and out of these lanes as if they are normal lanes. It gets so frustrating seeing people do this that I actually have a suggestion for the Ministry of Transportation; Put up those plastic lane markers every 5 feet along the HOV sections that you don't want people to traverse in order to force people to either stay in or get out of them at the proper places. Since they would be made of plastic, they would last long (unless they are hit by cars) and they would also cause enough damage to the cars of violators that they will think twice about trying to cross the lane markers illegally like they do now.

Now that I have gone over some of the things I have had the misfortune of seeing, let me get to why think they tend to continue to happen; plain and simple, it's arrogance. It all goes back to something I have mentioned repeatedly over the last few months about how we are raising our kids to think that they can do no wrong. The Soccer mom mentality. We are seeing the first real wave of these types of kids just now joining the workforce and/or dealing with people trying to say no to them (as in the student protests in Quebec).

 I really don't see bikes and cyclists gaining a real foot hold in the GTA any time soon

Not to say that I disagree with the protests in Quebec, I fully support them actually (especially when you think of the social and political ramifications of continuing to increase post-secondary education in this country), but the way everyone else is reacting in the Government around them reminds me of parents who are fed up with their OWN kids basically getting everything they want and instead, the Quebec government is simply acting like completely frustrated parents who, despite being the cause of the problem, have shifted the blame to the kids and refuse to acknowledge their own role in the situation.

That was a long winded way of saying that we are raising arrogant and self-centered kids who don't seem to understand when something is their own fault and can't accept responsibility for the mistakes they make, especially on our roads. But that doesn't explain the adults who were NOT raised that way developing such poor driving skills? Well, the easy way to explain that is to realize that people are copycats in nature. When we see something that works, we try to emulate it. Along the same lines, when we see people getting away with doing something that they shouldn't, the vast majority of us do the same thing until finally someone is caught and punished (and of course we all think that the person who will be caught will not be us).

 Now just imagine that kid has no insurance on top of that....

I could go into a couple of other personal reasons I believe effect the driving situation (way too many foreign born and trained drivers who have been allowed to "exchange" their foreign licenses for Ontario ones, Piss poor driver examiners who allow personal feelings to effect them in their evaluations both positively and negatively, insurance rates being ridiculously unfair thus making it actually a bad thing to put in a claim for something which then gives people the idea that not claiming something is better, resulting in sometimes unsafe vehicles on the roads) but each of those topics deserve way more attention then I have time to get into today.

One quick tangent before I wrap this blog up about auto insurance. Isn't it about time that either the  Provincial or Federal Government stepped up in the name of all Canadians and forced insurance companies to make the mandatory insurance coverage that we are all required to have by law affordable? Isn't it time that the government stepped up to the plate for Canadians and stopped the gauging that insurance companies are getting away with and using in order to pocket billions of dollars off of each and every one of us? Insurance companies are being allowed to rape each of us with their ridiculous and unfair charges based upon where we live, our sex, marital status (all things that everyone agrees are prejudicial and illegal in just about every other area of our lives yet used against us each and everyday by these multinational corporations) as well as how many traffic tickets we have (which should not matter nearly as much as it does) and how many times we have put in an insurance claim (which should instead count as the most important aspect of insurance claims, the actual number of accidents we have).

 These two need to stop playing Rock, Paper, Scissors and protect Canadian 

motorists from Big Insurance companies

Our governments sit back and  allow these corrupt companies to rob us blind and then when we need them, they throw a million and one reasons at us as to why we are not entitled to coverage we paid for. This is yet another reason why we have seen a recent increase in hit and run drivers. There are way more non-insured drivers out there then anyone realizes. I should know as I was one of them when I was younger. I drove my parents insured minivan for 5 years without coverage of my own in order to avoid paying the nearly $5000 they wanted to get out of me since I was among the last group of fully licensed 16 year olds in 1994. By not paying their insane fees, I saved my family $25000. I can assure you that I'm not the only one who has tried or is currently doing something along these lines. When you add the fact that being caught without insurance is a criminal offense, you start to understand why so many hit and runs are starting to occur more often.

Getting back on topic, suffice it to say that the way our roads are being used right now and the level of driver education on the road is down right frightening. We are seeing countless errors on our roads each and every day leading to many more accidents and taking us to the point where there are driver errors being committed each and every moment of the day. With the way our streets are being used and poorly watched over as well, it can be downright scary to drive in a place like downtown Toronto or even Mississauga. I would offer some suggestions on how to improve our roads but realistically, the state they are in right now is a direct by-product of how our society has shifted into a me-first, selfish, do whatever you want society that until the social aspects of our society change, our roads will continue to be a free for all.

Until that changes, we need to keep our eyes open, follow the rules of the road as best as we can and hope for the best. Or basically do your best to survive in the midst of the crap that is the general state of our roads today.

Good luck

Kings Crowned, Jays Uncertainty, Euro Round Up and More

All this whining about the hit that Steve Bernier (the idiot) threw on Rob Scuderi last night (that essentially sealed the deal for the Kings as they went up 3 zip on that same 5 minute powerplay) needs to be put to rest. Yes it was THE turning point in the 6th game of the Finals but you can't just stop playing the way that the Devils seemed to just roll over after that call, giving up 3 power play goals in 3 minutes.

The Kings were Crowned Champs Last night....LA has never seen such a polite party crowd before

No Riots in LA after winning a Championship? Even the Cops are stunned 

You have to realize that this series was over when the Kings went up 3-0. Sure, the Devils seemed to have fought back and were (in their minds) about to pull off a great comeback but even when they did "win" their two games, either of those results could have gone the other way (just like the first 2 games having gone to OT could have been split or gone in favour of the Devils). They didn't however and all those 2 losses did was galvanize a team even moreso then they had been. And really, their loss in Game 4 was more about nervousness and jitters then anything the Devils did overly well and Game 5 went to the Devils because of a lucky bounce off of Voyonov's shoulder. So even in "getting back into the series" the Devils were not outplaying the Kings at any point. It was just a matter of time and the right team won. That's all that matters.

The Jays are at the 1/3 mark of the season and are still hanging around in the incredibly tight AL East. At 31-30, they are only 4.5 games behind the division leader (but only 2 games up on last place Boston) so they have some work to do if they want to finally break that 19 year Playoff drought. It won;t be easy and now, with the release of Vladimir Guerrero (who tried to force his way up to the team when they felt he wasn't ready) and the loss of Brandon Morrow to an Oblique strain, that job could be that much more difficult.

If he is out for an extended period of time, then the Jays need to make a move....NOW!

Morrow was having an all-star caliber season, having reeled of 7 wins in his last 8 starts and a sub 2.50 ERA before he injured himself last night. His loss could be the catalyst for a trade which would possibly give the Jays a much need boost to make that leap and push themselves over the hump. The 2 big arms available right now (at least in the rumour mill) are both Chicago Cubs; Matt Garza and Ryan Dempster. Just to throw some fuel on the fire, here is my prediction on this. If Morrow is gone for 6-8 weeks, look for the Jays to push hard for a trade for both of these starters and here is what the package SHOULD include;

To the Cubs:
-1st Baseman Adam Lind
-Outfielder Travis Snyder
-Starting pitcher Henderson Alvarez
-Relief Pitcher Joel Correno
-Relief pitcher Francisco Cordero

To the Jays;
-Starting Pitcher Matt Garza
-Starting Pitcher Ryan Dempster

These 2 would look great in Blue Jays Jerseys....

If you were the Cubs, who are in DESPERATE need to revamp their team and getting younger as quickly as possible (both in the field and on the mound with Correno and Alvarez), wouldn't you do this? The Jays would get 2 quality starters directly into your starting rotation which would give them a REAL shot at securing themselves a Wild Card spot this year and some veteran savy to help Romero calm his ass down (he is just losing it WAY too often) as well as Hutchison and Drabek. Their starting rotation would be among the most solid in the league (once Morrow returns of course) but by adding these two veterans now, they would have a solid chance to stay in the hunt. Could we see some meaningful games in September?

There have been some great games so far in Euro 2012, including today's match between Russia and co-host Poland. The fan violence before the game was just retarded. People will take any opportunity they see fit to try and cause shit whether for a real reason or for perceived slights from years gone by but it didn't detract from the game, which was one of the best of the tournament to this point.

I have an issue with some of the ridiculous questions being asked of the players by the media during the tournament so far. Portuguese players were being asked why they didn't stick around after they lost to sign autographs, specifically Ronaldo (because that's the first thing players want to do after they lose, hang around the pitch after losing and sign autographs!?!?! ) and now Italian striker Antonio Cassano is "being criticized" over comments he made to an Italian reporter on Italian TV about not thinking there are any "queer" players (he used an Italian word for queer) in the tournament and he hopes there aren't any on the national team.

Why are soccer players being asked such stupid questions during an international tournament? It's bad enough when players are asked the standard questions about the game and their replies usually consist of the typical cliches we always hear about giving 100%, blah blah blah, but why would you venture into an area like that which has absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever? Now he and his teammates will have to deal with this contrived controversy on top of the pressure of trying to win their next game. All to sell more newspapers, get more ratings back home, this idiot reporter may have just ruined his national teams' chances of moving on.

 Love him or hate him, we don't pay to watch him give an opinion....

That is just the start of it. This shouldn't be a controversy at all, at least not to me. If you have an opinion, and someone asks you for it, what's wrong with expressing it? Cassano wasn't bashing anyone. He wasn't saying he agreed or disagreed with anything about being "Queer" as he put it. He simply said that it's their business and that was it. There is nothing wrong with telling people what you think. The reporter asked him his opinion and he expressed it. Athletes are not paid to use their brains and give out political opinions, they are in the positions they are in because of their physical prowess. You shouldn't be asking an athlete a political question in the height of their competition. That's like asking a surgeon in the middle of surgery if he can tell you about the political issues going on in Europe and see what kind of response you would get.

I know that was a bit of stretch but you see my point. Athletes should stick to their sport and the journalists who cover those sports should stick to questions that are appropriate to that sport in which they play/excel. Period. End of point....

Dallas returns to the air tomorrow night and from the few TV spots I have seen on it so far, it looks like it picks up almost as it had never left. All the major players are back including JR Ewing (Larry Hagman), Bobby Ewing (Patrick Duffy) and Sue Ellen (is that her name?). Now it will be more about their kids and grand kids and how they interact but the central theme of Oil tycoons and the relationship problems they have to deal with will be the same as the original series. It will be fun to see how this series plays out and whether it will be like the redux of Melrose Place (which bombed) or 90210 (which survived for at least 2+ seasons) or something entirely different. Only time will tell.

Spartacus certainly has a way with the ladies...Most tend to die after being with him

They have announced that this upcoming season of Spartacus will be the final season and that truly is a huge disappointment for me. It will return to air in January of 2013 on the Movie Network and according to creator and executive producer, Steven S. DeKnight, Spartacus: War of the Damned will be the "Epic Conclusion" of the Spartacus story. Personally, I think they really could have drawn it out over at least another 2 or even 3 seasons, which would have been great to see new characters being developed, older ones being allowed a chance to grow into more then what they have been so far, maybe see Crixus and Naevia have a family, possibly see how Ilithyia survived (if she did, I think she did) and her recovery, possibly even see if Spartacus himself will now try to find a woman to move on with since his wife is dead (and avenged) and his play toy or rebound sex-buddy (Mira) is also now dead and avenged as well.

<<SPOILER ALERT: Game of Thrones: Season 2>>

The 2nd season of Game of Thrones concluded a couple of weeks ago and the last 2 episodes were possibly the best 2 of the series so far. The battle episode in the 2nd to last episode of the year was spectacular in how it played out. Tyrion Lannister (played by Peter Dinklage) is the heart of the show and has turned himself into a true leading man. He has had a masterful season displaying not only his ruthlessness and cunning in dealing with all the pressure of being the "Acting" Hand of the King but also his heart and compassion in how he has clearly fallen in love with Shae, placing her in mortal danger if she were to ever be discovered.

 His character has had the biggest leap in terms of importance in Season 2

There have been plenty of plot lines developing but 2 of the best have been Jon Snow and his transformation from shy member of the "Watch", referred to by the people north of the gate as "The Crows" into their somewhat defacto leader and now (possible) defector and how Robb Stark , now the "King of the North" has grown into the role left to him by his father and taken it to new heights. As we start looking ahead to Season 3, I wonder (having not read the books) where this story will go next.

When last we left off, the "Wildlings" seemed to have their army marching towards the gate and yet another battle about to begin, Stannis Baratheon has had a crushing defeat and is home licking his wounds, Theon Greyjoy (who had taken Winterfell, home of the Stark family) has been given up by his own people to Robb Stark and will most likely be executed for his actions (including burning Winterfell to the ground) and Daenerys Targaryen  taking over control of her fortune by getting back her dragons and killing the kidnappers. Season 3 promises to be even more compelling as there are so many different ways that the story can go.

Last but not least, I feel the need to throw a few disparaging words towards TFC and their inept management team. They fired/let go/relieved their coach of his duties a few days ago when Aron Winter was replaced by Paul Mariner as Head coach of the team. It wasn't a big shock given the fact that they are now 1-9 on the season, setting records along the way for longest losing streak to start a year and longest goalless streak to start a season. The team has been around for 6 seasons and this is now their 7th coach in that same time. Truly pathetic. Yet somehow, the man who has made every single one of these changes, Tom Anselmi, is still (STILL!!!) in charge of making these decisions.

WTF does he have to do wrong to get relieved of HIS duties?!?! I mean could you imagine getting 7 chances in 6 years to pick someone for a job? I think after the 2nd or 3rd person is replaced, your bosses would have a sit down conversation with you and ask you what the fuck is going on, wouldn't they? Is everyone asleep at the wheel at MLSE right now? Only the Raptors seem to be heading in the right re-building direction. The Leafs are all over the place and can't seem to figure out what they want to try and attempt to go out and get (They should go get a goalie, a top forward, and then trade Luke Schenn, Mike Komisarek and your 5th pick and whatever else the Oilers want, for their #1 pick), the Marlies lost an OT Playoff game in the Calder Cup Final on an officials blatant Error and then there is the mess that is Toronto FC.

 In happier times, Aron Winter is now just a footnote for a franchise in disarray

If they DARE to attempt to raise ticket prices again, I am OUT as a season ticket holder. In fact, if they don't offer a public apology to the city as well as offering to LOWER season ticket prices for the next 2 seasons, I may walk. I haven't gone to a game in over a year and have found it harder and harder to sell my tickets this season since the team has been putrid. The "FIRE ANSELMI" chants should be heard around the stadium any time now, the same BMO field that USED to be sold out to each and every game. TFC is NOT the Leafs. You can't expect people to keep coming to watch a crappy team year after year. Someone needs to tell the MLSE board about that before all interest in the team is gone.

I've had a busy few weeks with very little blogging getting done but that will change as I have a few issues I will be addressing in the coming week.

Stay tuned.

The Reasons Why Our World is Spiralling Out of Control

Forgive me if I will sound downright pissed off throughout this post but after a weekend of reading several articles where schools now are more concerned with the weight of the kids in their schools and trying to play the role of an active parents instead of focusing on education and having classrooms filled with kids that actually want to be there (instead of causing chaos for their teachers day in and day out) and reading about how the Government of Quebec has opted to try and legislate away the fundamental human right of freedom of assembly because they can't get their way with regards to imposing higher tuition fees without (SHOCKER) students opposing the idea and protesting it for almost 14 weeks now, but our society is a mess and getting worse every day for an abundance of reasons, which I will delve into.

Where to begin....hmmmm. Well lets start with something simple like our white hot real estate market. When I say white hot, I mean we are seeing absolute dumps (as in homes that are just horrid, need work, LOADS of work, and have been poorly maintained) having upwards of 10 different offers for them because of where they are situated; Mississauga, Oakville, Burlington and Toronto. These 4 major markets are seeing homes sell for hundreds of thousands above their original asking price simply because of where they are located. Yes, in the real estate business the 3 most important things are location, location, location. I get it. But when some homes are selling for as much as $1 MILLION above asking (!?!?!?!), then there are problems with our real estate market. It is the same problem that we have in many other areas of our society: Greed.

I want to touch on our schools and this ridiculous article I read in the Globe and Mail about how some school are now including a BMI (Body Mass Index) rating and/or the childs' weight along with their report card. I would like to know where they (the schools and school boards I mean) found the right and rationale to start doing this I would love to know because I am not sure how this fall into their job description. Teachers are supposed to educate and I guess you could make the argument that they are trying to instill healthy eating habits and whatnot but by sending home a report card telling parents that their kids are to fat for their own health just seems like such a cop out by the school.

There are a bunch of societal causes for kids being overweight. Lets go over a few. First of all, the parents of many of our kids today are being underpaid by greedy corporations that would rather cut staff and pay their money hungry CEO's millions in bonuses then to actually pay their front line staff a fair salary that actually increases with the cost of living. 30 years ago, although it was difficult to do, you could still have a 1 working parent family (while the other parents stayed home to help raise the child (or children). They could own a home, a car (maybe 2) have a dog and have 2 maybe 3 kids as well. That's simply impossible today with the cost of everything having skyrocketed since the early 1980's.

Because parents today are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet, they are forced to make tough choices about many things. Now, you see both parents forced to work (just to pay the mortgage). In many cases, this means that the parents are around nearly as much as they should be to do things such as take their kids out for a daily walk or out into the yard to play with them. Even if they do have the time, in many cases they don't have the energy.

When it comes to groceries, in many cases, parents are opting to buy in bulk or the cheapest available because of their budgets. Guess what that means? More fatty foods higher in calories and cholesterol and less time consuming to make. Cheap and fast is what they want because the companies that they slave away for are forcing them to work harder, demanding more out of them all for the same pay. Our parents of today are overworked and underpaid while being overstressed and under appreciated.

Which takes me to yet another of the reasons our society is deteriorating as fast as it has been over the last 15 to 30 years: Corporate Greed. The turning point that everyone seems to point to is the 1986 movie "Wall Street" and it's main villain, Gordon Gekko. His now infamous quote, as he gave a speech to a graduating class of Business students was "Greed is Good". That seemed to sink in to not only the fictional students in the movie but to an entire generation of business leaders who have pounced on that concept and embraced it enthusiastically. Just look at some of the gawdy bonuses that have been paid out to CEO's (even to those that were running companies into the ground) and you will see what I am talking about.

Yes, CEO's should be paid more for keeping a company making money (I guess) and even more if they increase the bottom line but when you are paying your front line staff peanuts and they are the ones that directly contribute to your bonus being so large, the least you could do as a good CEO is cut your bonus down to a more manageable and fair number (do you really need $23 million as a bonus? Even half of that would be sufficient to reward your "work") and divide the excess among your top performers as an added bonus. An extra $5000 for a frontline staff member means a hell of a lot more then it would to a CEO.

Here's an example of what I mean. The CEO of RBC (when I used to work there) made a bonus of about $11 million one year. Did he really need it to be so much? Probably not. Let's say he decided instead to accept only a $2 million bonus. Lets take the other $9 million and see what we could do with that. Remember that this is a bank that makes about $1 Billion per fiscal quarter (every 3 months) and has about 52000 employees in total. Frontline staff make up about 65% of that staff so that's about 33800 employees. Not everyone is a top performer obviously but lets give an estimate that maybe 25% of those 33800 are top performers (what used to be 94% of target and above). That would be about 8450 staff members. Dividing that $9 million among those 8450 staff members as a bonus would give each of them an additional $1065. Not too bad for someone who is generally earning around that much every 2 weeks, on top of their yearly bonus as well.

Lets go a little further and instead of rewarding people with 94% and above, lets only reward those who were at 125% and above. Of those 8450 people, you are looking at probably about 33% of them who would be above that percentile, or 2789 employees. The Top of the Top, the Cream of the Crop as it were. People who really busted their asses all year long in order to ensure that someone like Gord Nixon got his bonus (as well as their own). If you were to then narrow that field even further like this then you would have 2789 families each getting one member being paid an additional bonus of $3227.

Now you tell me, after breaking it don like that, who needs that $9 million more, 2789 staff members of his own company that are barely making $30000 a year as front line staff, working overnight hours, extended hours, being shat upon by managers to do more with less, being told now that their eating habits and the groceries they buy for their families are making their kids fat, having more and more stress placed upon them from all possible corners or someone like CEO Gord Nixon of RBC who does nothing more then go globe trotting on RBC travel expenses, gives speeches about how great RBC is and about banking in general while all these lower staff have to do more with less. He gets huge bonuses he hardly earns while his frontline call center and branch staff have to fight to earn every penny they do on a daily basis. That is corporate greed at it's finest. Remember that he has been earning those bonuses for about a decade now. Should really tell you something.

Having been in the financial field for over a decade now, I totally understand how some people feel about bankers and banking. Just remember that its not the teller or the call center staff member that is making the big bucks. The person you speak to is not someone that has any power whatsoever to change things at a bank. The best way to create change is to do something I used to think was think was a waste of time: Protest, demonstrate, use the power of the people to enact changes.

Forcing the Government to use their power for more then just forcing people back to work with anti-striking legislation is the best way to get things done. Just look at the 14 weeks of student demonstrations going on in Quebec. They have gone a bit too violent mind you but the fact that those pansies in the Quebec Legislature opted instead of negotiating to attempt to make public assemblies illegal tells you all you need to know about how stupid some government officials can be. They are so hard headed with their ideology that after enacting this law, they have drawn wide ranging criticism from lawyers, other politicians and even the UN and Amnesty International. Kind of scary how the power of the people has single handedly embarrassed the hell out of the Government of the Province of Quebec, yet they refuse to back down. I don't see them surviving the next election with the way they have handled themselves with this situation.

But again, this is a fight about money and greed and how corporations, in this case the Quebec Government, is trying to making education more expensive at a time when the only thing that gives the poor an opportunity to climb out of their economic situation is higher education. In the last 15 years, tuition hikes have been the norm in Ontario. I remember when it was about $3500 for a full course load at U of T, Mississauga campus in 1997. Fast forward to this September and I saw some students coming in to pay tuition amounts of twice that amount. The students of Quebec are fighting to keep their tuition the lowest in the country because, having seen what they saw in Ontario and in London, England (which had massive tuition hikes just 2 years ago and massive protests to go along with it).

We shouldn't be chastising the students for protesting what many today would view as modest tuition hikes.What we should be doing is applauding them for trying to stop Quebec from following down the slippery slope that this Province has already traveled along and sees itself at now where higher learning is slowly becoming only available to the rich or those of us who are willing to go into severe debt just at the possibility of a better job down the road. Just ask all those currently out of work, recently graduated teachers how they feel about being severely in debt without a job in their field of choice.

It is time we started to make our voices matter in our society. It is time we began to make a difference in our society and stop allowing big corporations to do and say and get away with whatever the hell they want.The problem is that we are disjointed. We are selfish and can't seem to see anything that matters to anyone other then ourselves. Even this student protest in Quebec, which should be seen by many in that province as a wake up call to fight against government fee hikes, is being seen by many (mind you the "people" are being represented in random polls conducted on the corporate buck) as having dragged on too long and people want them to just shut up already and go away.

We are not united enough as a people to do anything about what is going on around us and that is why the Western world is struggling. We have splintered into special interest groups based on race, religion, sex and sexual orientation to the point where we can't even agree long enough to vote in a strong Majority government (that fact Prime Minister Harper was able to achieve one last year was more about the failure of the Liberals and their pathetic leadership then it was about a powerful message resonating with the bulk of voters as can be seen by the sheer number of people that still don't trust Harper and his politics).

The best way to describe our current situation is to think about the best way to defeat an enemy in war. The best way to do is to first divide then conquer. Well, we are about as divided as we could possibly be right now, all that's lacking is a conqueror. We won't have a single conqueror come upon us and take us over. Instead we are slowly being forced into indentured servitude by the greed of corporations and their leaders. They have been following the mantra of "Gekko" to a tee and are now upon the precipice of destroying the middle class completely just to meet their unmentionable goal: Of attaining more. More of everything. Just as long as its more. Selfishness dominates the day now and there isn't a whole heck of a lot we can do about it.

Why Men & Masculinity Are a Dying Species...

Sometimes things happen in your day that make you just wonder what the F*^K is going on. I've had a few of those moments lately but the thing is they seem to be happening more and more lately and, after what happened today, I am convinced that the role of men in the world is pretty much being obliterated right before our eyes. Or at least it has been slowly destroyed over the last 40 years.

It's been a long time coming, mind you, as some people would have you believe that its better to have no real defined roles for men and women because then you are classifying what one sex can and can't do. I can see that as well as I can see how having rigid roles for men and women is also wrong and has led to sexist attitudes among many different cultures over the years. The problem is that over the last 30-40 years, while women have been rightfully gaining a larger role in many areas of the North American workforce, men are being subjugated and pushed aside, trivialized and marginalized while they lose their livelihoods, their careers, their "manhood" and their self-esteem, all so that women can feel better about themselves and gain more in more in the workforce.

I may well be generalizing but take a minute and see if this makes sense.

How many commercials do we watch on a nightly basis on TV. Lets say at least 5 every commercial break and maybe 4 or 5 breaks per hour. So during a 1 hour network program show like NCIS or CSI, each of us watches somewhere in the range of 20 commercials per hour. Now think about how many of those commercials are either Rogers or Leon's. Now think about the new Leon's ads where the women mocks her husband. What about the Rogers commercials where the young guys are morons, mocked by their female friends. Or the new Rogers commercials where the husband is made to look like a fool while the wife is made to look much smarter.

How about in general how men are made to look like fools in just about every commercial, not just the specific ones I just mentioned. Think about how often men are made to look like idiots in commercials and how often women are made to look like fools. I honestly can't even remember the last time I saw a commercial where a man had the upper hand on a woman (in any sense).

Maybe ad execs are just trying to tap into the new found wealth young working women have in our time or maybe its more then that. Women now are in many more areas of power when it comes to TV, advertising, banking, you name it, that maybe these ads are being made by women, for women specifically, like an inside joke that only women get. Can you imagine if there were ads that did the reverse? There would be an outcry about how Company ABC that paid for the ad and approved it is sexist and should be boycotted for such prejudiced ads. Just look at how the Augusta National Golf Course has been vilified over the years because they, a private members-only golf club, refuses to have a female club member.

Its a PRIVATE CLUB, not a public one, but because it hosts one of the 4 Major Golf  Tournaments and generates a crap load of money, Women's groups have been up and arms demanding the club change their policy. My response if I was running that club would be that when the Girl Guides start accepting boys and when ALL clubs are (gyms, public golf courses and any other private member club across the country) starts to accept members of both sexes, so will Augusta. A Private club still has the right to choose their members, regardless of whether the National Organization of Women likes it or now.

Back to my main point however. Sure, stats will still tell you that women are not making as many gains as they once were in certain, specific fields but there are some areas where women are not only making significant strides but have already done so to the point where they far outnumber men in both the classroom and the workplace. In schools, girls are doing far better then boys when it comes to math and science, fields that used to be dominated by boys. In the workplace, there have always been certain fields where women will far outnumber men and they continue to do so. Fields such as nursing, social workers, and elementary school teaching positions will always be filled more by women then men. That's just a given, for whatever reason.

Just from my own banking experience, I would say that nearly 80-85% of my co-workers in nearly 10 years of working for banks have been women (if not more). While the majority (if not all) bank CEO's may all be men in the big banks, the majority of their managers (both at the branch level and call centers as well) are now women. The majority of personal bankers now are women. The majority of call center staff are women. The majority of Tellers are women. Our banking system is now almost entirely made up of women. Which is probably why many of the decisions I see on a daily basis drive me bat shit.

Going a step further, lets look at a profession where women are the majority of the staff and see what is going on there: Teaching. Many of the children that are coming through our schools nowadays are confused about the roles of men and women because of all the mixed messages they are seeing all over their world whether its at home with the no longer nuclear family dynamics, blended families, divorced parents, gay parents. Television, the new generations' babysitters, and its mixed messages aren't any better. So when a child comes to school, confused and unsure of what their role is, they are hoping to find some kind of direction to help them. Instead they are being told that it's OK to be confused.

Instead they are being told that aggression, for all intents and purposes the exact definition of masculinity for centuries, is wrong. They are getting suspended for fighting each other (I was a kid and I had my fair share of fights in grade school and it didn't negatively effect me) when in the old days all that would happen if there was a school yard fight was a stern talking to and maybe a discussion with the Principal of the school. Any kind of teasing (which happens in school) is now being classified as bullying and therefore is a huge no-no (bullying and teasing are not the same thing but are being lumped together in some cases). Kids are no longer being taught to stand up for themselves, instead being asked to go running to a teacher and become tattle tales any time something goes wrong. We are teaching our kids that they don't have to actually solve their own problems, that they need to turn to someone else to do it.

All of this harkens back to my old theory that we are adopting a soccer-mom mentality throughout our society that is eliminating masculinity as a whole. Feminism and many of its most ardent followers, unilaterally rendered chivalry passe (much to the dismay of many a woman now that would love to be "swept off their feet" romantically by a "real" man and are now reading the "Shades of Grey" series almost as fast as tweens were reading the "Twilight" series) for how men were "doing things" for women. While I can understand not being rendered useless by your partner (hence the use of the word partner) there is nothing wrong with chivalry as long as there is equality between the man and woman involved. The problem is that soccer mom mentality is turning our kids into shells of people, one dimensional dullards who can't cope with anything, only know what they want and don't care about anyone else other then themselves. As much as Feminism helped woman gain their equal rights, it has also changed the lives of men and the way our children are raised and not all for the better.

Now, there certainly were things that needed to change about men over the years but at this point, the pendulum has swung well past half and now men are taking the brunt of every joke. We are being ridiculed for being "old fashioned" if we try to put any kind of restraint on our teenage daughters. Hell, we aren't even really needed to have kids or even sex for that matter anymore, not with artificial insemination and strap-ons/vibrators so common place. With the role of men dissipating so vastly over the last 20 years, its a small wonder we are having more and more boys in our schools having social problems. They are being over-analyzed by doctors (who are more concerned with the number of pills they prescribe then actually helping the kids they see, but that's a different blog) and are carrying over the confusion they feel at home into the classroom, their lack of true direction in their own lives.

I read a statistic on cnn.com that within 50 years, given all the environmental pollutants around, the male human species could get to the point where baby boys being born (on a world wide basis) could drop to 1 in every 20 births. With the way things are heading right now with all the gender confusion that exists in our society, it wouldn't matter if it was 1 male birth in every 5, the role of men in society is no longer a major concern. Men have been pushed aside as the role of women has grown over the last 30 years (which was expected to a certain extent but, as I mentioned earlier, has gone too far in some cases). 

Some of the things that happen on a daily basis around me are infuriating but can change. Sadly, this seems to be one area where changing to a more equitable situation would require changing so many areas (even if it is only in small ways) that it will never happen because someone will pop up and say its sexist to even mention things like the ones I have. 

The truth hurts sometimes but all I am telling you is the way I see it....

The Truth About Human Nature On Display

It pains me when I hear about some of the stupid things that we as people do to one another, or at least it used to. After a certain amount of time passes and more of the ridiculous and idiotic things we do to each other comes to light, the more it starts to dawn on me that maybe these aren't one of situations but rather the true representation of our human nature. Maybe, just maybe, we are all inherently bad with touches of good instead of the other way around like people try to persuade us we are.

It should have never taken so long to help the people of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina

I never used to think that this was even a remote possibility but it becomes more and more of a distinct possibility with each news broadcast I see, with each documentary I watch on HBO about Hurricane Katrina and how slow the US Government was to help out its own people (preferring instead to spend Billions waging war on people thousands of miles away), or about 3 innocent boys convicted of murders they did not commit in Arkansas and incarcerated for nearly 20 years because of it (only released because of the judge that convicted them leaving his position and their signing off on a type of plea deal that basically makes it seem as if they did commit the crimes in order to be released with time served instead of having to die for something they didn't do).

If not for the evil of hatred, these 2 men would have changed the world decades ago....

Then there was the documentary about the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, a man who was going to change the world in even more profound ways than the ways that we all believed his brother was going to do before his own untimely assassination in November of 1963. It seems as if we are living in a time when every so often a shining beacon of light comes into the world that could bring about fundamental change, and just as quickly as it appears, that same beacon is either dimmed by scandal or political gridlock or it is extinguished completely. Look at US President Barrack Obama, who came blasting into power on a platform of changing the system, only to be completely stymied by the older white republican base that would prefer to wage war on everyone and make billions off of their deaths while keeping most Americans scared to death, then to actually allow the winds of change to blow through their country and make the world a better place.


I have kind of started developing this thought process because of that dumb radio commercial I have been hearing from Lisa Loeb, that former singer from the early 1990's who has done nothing with her life ever since (or at least nothing of note other then live it). Not sure if you have heard it but its basically just her talking about her doing something to prove that human nature is actually good by holding the door for someone. How that show that people are "inherently good" (as she puts it), I have no idea. That, to me is more about being polite. Being polite does not necessarily make you good. The commercial makes no sense.

 This is the way some people think we can "save the world"

The only thing it does is make me think of the exact opposite. Just read the news one day a week and you will read about all kinds of disgusting things we do to each other. From the Tori Stafford murder trial to the way we treat the environment to the way RIM is being destroyed by greedy investors who have been purposely short trading their stock (basically betting that RIM stock would go lower and lower and making shitloads of cash in the process) destroying a Canadian Company that was the innovator of so many cell phone innovations we now take for granted.

A good man and his company shall be destroyed by the pettiness and greed of others.....

There are the human rights violations in China, Tibet and Taipei. The Syrian and Middle East conflicts which are still raging, the austerity measure in Europe where the average worker is bearing the brunt of government cuts yet not a single Government minister has seen even the slightest cut in his or her pension/salary/perks in countries like Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece. We are seeing massive student protests continuing now for over 12 weeks in Quebec over proposed massive tuition increases which are being forced upon them by an unforgiving provincial government. This is just the basic news too. Is it any wonder why I try not to watch "Reality" TV and focus on Sports instead?

 When will Eurozone politicians stop picking on the pensions and wages of the everyday worker 

and focus on their own salaries and pensions? Never, that's when...

It has gotten to the point where something good actually happening is such a rarity you hardly see on the news that you can go weeks between top headline stories that are actually good news stories. Almost every single major headline is either a scandal or a death, robbery, murder or rape. The news has gotten so graphic that I find it appalling that they don't have that viewer discretion is advised thing pop up before each and every story, instead it pops up after every commercial break for family guy. What the F&%K?!?!?!


Suffice it to say that my opinion of human nature has taken a major hit over the years. It is very rare to find some good news in the world today and when you do, it's usually a "miraculous" occurrence or something along the lines of being of a divine nature. Unfortunately, some of that "evil" human nature creeps into the sporting world as can be seen right after the Washington Capitals upset the Boston Bruins in overtime of Game #7. Joel Ward, a black Canadian, scored the winner setting of a torrent of hate being spewed against him on both Twitter and other websites online. The only thing those disgusting posts proved to me was just that the amount of respect I have for some people may be a little too high. There is no need in the sporting world (or really ever) to spew that kind of hate at someone over something that happened in a sporting event. It's so useless.

 What should have been the best night of his life, quickly turned into a vile, heinous

night when the true nature of Twitter and the internet reared its ugly head

It's gotten so bad that we are now at a point where our everyday heroes are being so grossly over looked and forgotten, in some cases even being shown to be corrupt on so many levels like the way movies portray our heroic police officers. Our firefighters are marginalized and made to work part-time hours, our teachers are being forced to deal with politicians that would sooner cut the salaries of people who help shape our future then take a hard look in the mirror and realize how vastly over paid they themselves are.

We are now forced to turn to our more modern literature to see versions of ourselves that we wish would be on display in our everyday lives. Our comic book heroes are coming to life in film to show us what "humanity can become". Just in the last few years we have seen a TV series based on Superman come to a conclusion after 10 years on the air, movies based on Spiderman, the X-Men, Green Lantern, Wolverine, Batman, Iron Man, Thor, the Hulk and Captain America and their merger film, the Avengers (out this Friday in theatres everywhere).

 We have to look to fictional heroes because of how we marginalize the everyday heroes all around us

We look upon these "Super Heroes" as what we hope to be, as examples of the best aspects of humanity; courage, valour, honour and loyalty. All of the most noble nature that on so many occasions are sorely lacking in the reality we call life. All traits that are so hardly ever found around us that we have to glorify the literary versions of them and make them come to life to give future generations examples of what we can be, but sadly, have very little chance of ever becoming.

We have the ability to be good and bad, to be able to commit to being great or being and acting in an evil manner and yet the majority of people choose the lesser of the two. Why? Because it is easier to do. Because being good is too difficult or boring for some to want to be. One of the lines from one of the Super Hero movies I mentioned earlier mentions how with great power comes great responsibility. It is within each of us to have the ability to achieve great things. The fact that for the great multitude of people we don't is yet another example of how people choose the easier path, the one with less resistance. The one that puts on display all the bad aspects of our human nature that we see all around us on each and every day.

 The whole world needs an "Uncle Ben" moment right about now....

Some times I wish I was living in a comic book-type of fictional world. At least in those stories, the good guy and the good aspects of our human nature (eventually) win out over the evil ones. It doesn't appear that that will be the case in this world any time soon....