"Buy American" rule has Canadians Hatin' on Obama

Reading the hundreds of comments about the "Buy American” rule on CBC.ca, it seems many Canadians are placing all blame on Barack Obama - and on those whose political values lean more to the left.

A few commentators even felt the need to say things along the lines of: Haha! I told you! Barack Obama is just like Bush! All you lefties got fooled!

I have 3 responses to those comments:

1) It’s been less than two weeks since the man was elected; Bush had eight years.

2) There’s no need to label all lefties as suckers for believing in and wanting change after the last eight years. Can you really blame them?

3) Even if the US protectionism bill goes through, it’s less likely Canada will be significantly affected since

• we share a pretty big border with the US
• we supply most of their petroleum oil and natural gas – among other things
• as Industry Minister Tony Clement stated, the US would be in violation of its treaty obligations
• people and businesses in the US would be in more trouble than they already are

I can’t lie though. It is worrying that such a bill might get passed, and that the Canadian government might have to bully our way out of that jam with a "Buy Canadian" bill. Not that buying Canadian is a bad idea; it just seems like it would only be done out of spite.

The upside to this fiasco is that Obama hasn’t signed anything yet. But until and if he does, he’ll be hearing a lot of complaints from more than just his right-wing critics.

Danger: Buy This or Else!

Geez, advertisements must have low self-esteem. Yeah, ads aren’t people, but think about it: They pump themselves up by making us – the viewers/readers/listeners/consumers – feel bad about ourselves, constantly reiterating the plain and simple truth that we suck.

We’re ugly, fat, our homes aren’t clean enough, we aren’t eating enough McDonald’s, we’re not spending enough time with our family, our boobs aren’t big enough, we don’t have the newest…whatever.

Low self-esteem is the advertising business. How else are we going to buy things we don’t need unless that “need” is created?

OMG! Not blackheads! No, I can’t live another second with that regular face wash! I need the fancy one made with Sodium Methyl Cocoyl Taurate, Titanium Dioxide, Trideceth-9, PEG-5 Ethylhexanoate, Xanthan Gum, and a whole lot of other ingredients I’ve never heard of and can’t pronounce. You know, the one Jennifer Love Hewitt uses so I can be hot like her!

Speaking of hot people and skin cleanliness, I recently saw a commercial for a product called Acne Pro (which is pretty much the same as Pro-Active but for half the price and sans celebrity endorsements).

It opened up with two 20-ish women looking at a picture of a young guy with acne. They basically just call him “gross,” and say they would never date someone who looked like that.

An equally mean commercial for Axe hair care products demonstrates similar bullying tactics. In the commercial, a bunch of modelesque guys put on semi-ridiculous wigs and try to pick up girls, all of whom refuse.

The commercial ends with: “If guys like this can’t get girls because of their hair, what chance do you have?” Watch it if you haven’t seen it yet.



The sad thing is, even if these were the meanest commercials out there, commercials that are obviously just trying to make people feel bad about themselves so the multi-million dollar companies can sell their “miracle” product, people are superficial.

As much as I despise these commercials, it’s clear – at least to me – that we have become the advertisers, putting down others so we can sell ourselves that much better. Is this the long-term effect of advertising, or are we just naturally vain?

Coffee + TV = Ghosts, Scientists say

I recently came across two articles that caught my attention. Why, you may ask? Both mentioned the words “scientists” and “ghosts” in the same headline. But, before you get too excited, they didn’t say, “Scientists Prove Ghosts Exist.”

One article from Cold Spot: Paranormal Research and Investigation Unit, and the other from UK’s Glasgow Daily Record, suggest that when people see ghosts they aren’t actually seeing anything – although for two different reasons.

The Glasgow Daily Record reported that coffee drinkers (ie. those who drink more than SEVEN cups of instant coffee a day) are more likely to hallucinate and hear non-existent voices.

On the other hand, the Cold Spot article disclosed a study conducted by University College London, which suggests that when people see ghosts they’re simply “filling in the blanks” with their imagination.

I don’t doubt that either explanation is possible, but I don’t know anyone who drinks seven cups of coffee a day. And it just doesn’t seem logical that more than one person could experience the same phenomena at different times if they were using their own imagination. Plus, as I mentioned in my last post, there’s more to any experience than just what is seen.

If ghosts are a figment of the imagination, or the result of caffeine overdose, how have ghost stories and the belief in their existence lasted for centuries even without concrete, scientific proof? Even before coffee and scary movies existed?

The only answer I can think of is that ghosts do exist. After all, there’s no proof that they don’t.


(Image: Sci Fi UK)

Ghost Hunter's Tool Kit

For most people, seeing is believing. But if you ask me, it’s hard to be “rational” about odd banging coming from empty rooms, scratching sounds on the bedroom window, inexplicably moved furniture, or that feeling of someone standing behind you even when there’s no one else in sight.

To be honest, I’ve never actually seen a ghost. I’ve been to so-called truly haunted places – Centre Island’s lighthouse, Fort Erie’s fort, Fort Erie’s Doll Museum – and nothing, nada, zilch.

By “nothing, nada, zilch,” what I really mean is I didn't see anything. I do remember feeling really creeped out, but in all fairness, it could have just been the dolls. (C’mon, you have to admit dolls are scary!)

The point is, if you’re planning to do your own ghost-hunt, there are a few things you can bring besides your eyeballs:

1) A flashlight – Assuming you go at night, you’ll want to see where you’re going

2) A compass – Often when a compass is acting wonky, it means there are certain electromagnetic impulses interfering with it; these impulses are sometimes attributed to ghostly activity.

3) A camera – Images of floating orbs and even silhouettes can be captured by a camera even though you may not see them with your own eyes. Plus, it’s nice to have some form of proof if you actually do see something a little odd.

4) Extra batteries – According to pretty much every ghost-hunting show out there, ghosts gain energy from electricity. Don’t be surprised if your batteries die faster than usual.

5) A friend – Possibly the most important tool, they’ll help keep you calm and provide another witness should something happen…

Unfortunately, it’s always possible that the ghost footage you see on paranormal investigation shows and the internet is fake. This video is one of the better ones I’ve found. Fake or not, it sure gave me a scare.

(Best to watch at night.)

10 Places to Scare Yourself

Have I ever been to a cemetery at night? Once.
Would I ever go alone? Hmm...probably not.

Whether you’re a skeptic or a firm believer in the spirit world, a clichéd cemetery is just one place where you can test its existence – and your own bravery.

From the hours of Creepy Canada, Rescue Mediums, Most Haunted, and all those other ghost-hunting shows I’ve watched (with the lights on of course), I’ve come up with a top 10 list of potentially haunted places - or at least where creepy stuff tends to happen.

10. Cemeteries (duh)
9. Ships/Docks
8. Hotels
7. Castles/Forts
6. Churches
5. Schools
4. Country Roads
3. Jails/Prisons
2. The Woods
1. Houses

Visit The Shadowlands if you want to search the most haunted places in Canada. But keep in mind, it may involve a lot of scrolling down to find the city you're looking for.

Investigate if you dare...


(Image: Grihan.com)

Just to be Fair: Rathergate

Since I’ve been giving FOX so much flak for its right-wing biases, racial stereotyping, fear-mongering, cluelessness about the definition of “fair” and “balanced,” and its unwavering support for the Bush Administration (to name a few), it’s only fair to mention that FOX isn’t the only network guilty of spinning the news – and in some cases, ignoring it completely.

While researching editorial cartoons for a school project – My topic was conspiracies. Go figure – I came upon something especially disturbing regarding CBS.

In 2007 CBS made headlines of its own after the network released long-time Evening News anchor Dan Rather, which prompted him to fire back with a $70 million lawsuit.

But he didn’t stop there.

For one, Rather accused CBS of purposely sitting on the Abu Ghraib story, the evidence for which had been discovered months before the images were released in April 2004.

As an even larger blow, Rather claims this - as well as many other skewed reporting - was done simply to placate the Bush Administration.

And it was only when a journalist at the New Yorker was about to scoop the story that CBS reacted and reluctantly unveiled the horrible truth about the US Military’s actions at Abu Ghraib.

Above is a cartoon (GoalsForAmericans.org) based off an actual photograph of the kind of torture being administered at Abu Ghraib. A prisoner was connected to a series of wires and told to stand on a box; he was told that if he fell off he would be electrocuted. As you can see from this image, the victim is Liberty.


Read Bill Van Auken's article if you want to know more details of Rather’s accusations.


(Trial still pending.)

Nas-ty Message to FOX

“Subtle” doesn’t quite describe rapper Nas’s support for Barack Obama, or his views on FOX News’ treatment of the President (not to mention African Americans in general).

After FOX News’ referred to the First Lady as “Obama’s baby mama,” and made other hideous remarks about the couple, rapper Nas said what everyone with an ounce of sense is already thinking:

“Fox poisons the country with racist propaganda and tries to call it news.” (USA Today.)

While FOX normally labels him as another violent gangster rapper, it inspired the lyrics and video for his song, “Sly Fox.”

Here’s just a sample of what it’s all about:

They say I'm all about murder-murder and kill-kill
But what about Grindhouse and Kill Bill?
What about Cheney and Halliburton?
The backdoor deals
On oil fields
How's Nas the most violent person?
…Only Fox that I love is the red one
Only black man that Fox loves is in jail or a dead one

Make sure you watch/listen until the end, when the music fades and you’re left with a FOX News clip. The interviewee’s words are the last ones you hear, but they resonate even after the video’s over:

“He’s not the worst rapper around, but some of his lyrics are very violent and they really do have a point here.”

Beautiful!