Ducks squeeze out another win of 3-2 from Canucks

Could it be? can it be? oh tell me that it has happened! oh yeah baby! Ducks are back and kicking. Latest game, 3-2 for the Ducks against the Canucks. Game 4 to be won by the Ducks on May 1st in Vancouver.

Ducks all the way man! Stanley Cup final prediction (as by me and two other people that I know) will be Buffalo and Ducks, duking it out in the final game but we all know who will win....the Ducks!

Ducks lose 1-2, but will be back

If my Mighty Ducks are gonna lose, they are gonna make the Canucks fight the win out of them. 2 overtimes making it period 5 of the game, and the Canucks get one goal on the Ducks making it 2-1 Canucks. Sunday April 29th they will square off again, and I know my Ducks will be flying in perfect formation to take the Canucks down with a vengence.

women's town

How is this for a chuckle. I came across this little bit of news and, of course as it always happens with my twisted little mind, I started to consider little things that might happen there that would cause me to go 'huh???'. First of all:

Problem: married man is approached by woman on the street, he is ordered to have sex with her...does he comply and get punished from his wife, or does he deny and get punished from the lady???hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....I mean, the motto is that 'women are never wrong' so when the woman comes up to the married man and demands sex, well she is not wrong to be making this request, and 'men can never refuse a womans request', so technically for him to say no he is breaking the law. Of course, the man is just going to have to take the lesser of the two evils when it comes to punishment involved. He sleeps with the woman = divorce, loss of half his worldly possessions and possibly child/spousal support til he dies, or the woman remarries (if the laws there are like the laws here in Canada). If he doesn't sleep with the woman, dishes or having pain in his knees. Though, we all know the two sayings that 'power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely' as well as 'hell hath no fury than that of a woman scorned'. So we have a location where women, who might not have had dominance in the gender issue ever, are now in complete control AND they women have great memories for the men that have done bad things to them and they have this thing about finding someone that reminds them of that person and then taking revenge.

Though, personally speaking as a married man and having seen so many of my friends married and in relatoinships with women, having a town like this is like looking to find a day declared as 'kids day' as opposed to 'mothers day' or 'fathers day' cause lets face it, every day is kids day. I mean, men say that they are in charge, men may dream that they run the show and make the choices, but lets face it people, women hold the reigns no matter what. I mean, behind every great man in history there is a woman behind him, pushing and nagging him every inch of the way. Women may not do the actually talking in the decision like saying "we are buying this house" but they have their 'influence' that in the end makes the final decision. A litle giggle here, a little encouragement there, perhaps a little pout or gesture...or in the cases where the nice approach doesnt work, the 'look', perhaps the 'folding of the arms' or, in extreme dire cases, the 'tapping of the foot'. Think this is just a place where women dont have to be subtle or indirect in their control but can actually come right out and say it.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/070426/odds/odd_china_womentown_odd_dc

Women's town" to put men in their place
Thu Apr 26, 9:04 AM

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese tourism authorities are seeking investment to build a novel concept attraction -- the world's first "women's town," where men get punished for disobedience, an official said Thursday.

The 2.3-square-km Longshuihu village in the Shuangqiao district of Chongqing municipality, also known as "women's town," was based on the local traditional concept of "women rule and men obey," a tourism official told Reuters.

"Traditional women dominate and men have to be obedient in the areas of Sichuan province and Chongqing, and now we are using it as an idea to attract tourists and boost tourism," the official, surname Li, said by telephone.

The tourism bureau planned to invest between 200 million yuan ($26 million) and 300 million yuan in infrastructure, roads and buildings, Li said.

"We welcome investors from overseas and nationwide to invest in our project," he added.
The motto of the new town would be "women never make mistakes, and men can never refuse women's requests," Chinese media have reported.

When tour groups enter the town, female tourists would play the dominant role when shopping or choosing a place to stay, and a disobedient man would be punished by "kneeling on an uneven board" or washing dishes in restaurant, media reports said.

The project, begun in the end of 2005, was expected to take three to five years to finish.

Ducks are back

yes, that's right ladies and gentlemen. Duck watch is back! Granted I normally wait til closer to the actual finals of the cup, but noticed that they were playing so thought I would follow them further from the end and see how they turn out.

Canucks and Ducks, 1-5 in the final on April 25th! next game day, April 27th...here is hoping for a quick sweep of this leg of the race so that they can take one step closer to the cup of Lord Stanley.

hell hath no fury than that of a woman scorned

I guess this marriage just really wouldn't work out huh? think there might be to much...well, trust issues would be my guess. Two things that I found rather interesting about this case. He told her his true identity to come clean before getting married, she googled him and found out he was wanted but it wasnt until they had a domestic dispute that she called him in and reported who he really was. Guess it just goes to show that 'hell hath no furry then that of a woman scorned'. If you are going to tell the woman you love a really really big and important secret about yourself, I guess it only stands to reason that you either: a) do everything that she wants to make sure she keeps that secret to herself or b) find out a really big secret on her so that if she tattles on you, you can tattle on her. Man, what an idiot. I mean, going into that sort of thing and telling the truth and not having anything to hold against her is like going into a car dealership and just opening your bank book to a million dollar bank account and saying "please dont try to rip me off. I just need something to get around in".

Though, I have been hearing about this case (along with more on the Virginia Tech Masacre) on the NewsNet program, that according to the police on the Canadian side that after she called the police and told them that he was living with her she called back later and was saying things like "It probably isnt him..didnt konw what I was talking about...dont worry or dont send someone", so they know that there was some hesitation. Though if you read the America's Most Wanted briefing on the whole case, they make it sound like he told her his name, she googled him and then instantly called the police and waited for their arrival with no hesitation whatsoever. Funny how all the news reporters seem to have their own interpretation of the situtation. Makes you realize that there really is 4 types of truth. There is the 'he said', 'she said', 'the truth' and 'what the news people report'.

But, yeah, another case of trust gone amiss.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070423/american_fugitive_070423/20070423?hub=Canada

Fugitive turned in by fiancee faces deportation
Updated Mon. Apr. 23 2007 9:10 AM ET
CTV.ca News Staff

One of America's "most wanted" fugitives faces deportation from Canada this week after his new fiancee turned him in to police.

Mikhail Drachev, 24, was arrested in Toronto on Friday after his fiancee tipped off police about his identity. He had been living as a fugitive on a murder warrant for more than five years.
"It looks like she's been living with him for at least five years. They first met in Ottawa. They lived in Ottawa for a short time before moving to Toronto," Toronto police Staff Sgt. Paul MacIntyre told CTV's Canada AM on Monday.

Phoenix Detective Stacie Derge said Drachev had been living in Toronto under an alias, and decided a couple of weeks ago to reveal his identity before proposing.

"They were living in a common-law relationship since probably 2001, 2002. And just last week, he came clean, if you will, with his true identity to her," MacIntyre said.

Drachev's fiancee looked up his name online and found his profile on the "America's Most Wanted" website. (http://www.amw.com/fugitives/brief.cfm?id=25518)

But Derge says she didn't tell police about Drachev until Friday, after the couple had some sort of domestic dispute.

"She walked into one of our Toronto police stations out in the city's west end, and she told the officers there that she believed that was living with somebody who was profiled on "America's Most Wanted" TV show," MacIntyre said.

Drachev is charged in the brutal murder of a police informant in Phoenix, Arizona.
Konstantin Simberg, 21, was beaten, stabbed and set on fire before he died in December, 2001.
When Simberg was attacked, he was on the phone with a Phoenix police detective.

Police allege Simberg and four others were hired by a pharmacy manager and his friend to steal 6,000 vials of the human-growth hormone Saizen, worth about US$1 million wholesale and an estimated $3 million on the black market.

Two men have already been convicted in the killing.

Testimony during the trial of one of the men convicted in the slaying revealed Simberg may not have been killed for turning on his accomplices in the heist.

Rather, testimony suggested Simberg was killed after a car-loan deal went bad.

Toronto police worked in partnership with the Canadian Border Services Agency to obtain an arrest warrant.

When police arrived at Drachev's Toronto area high-rise apartment, he had barricaded the door with furniture.

"As we pushed our way in, he was pushing himself back against the door. We eventually made our way into the apartment, he was arrested," MacIntyre said.

Drachev now faces deportation back to Arizona.

"He will be going for an immigration hearing within the next 48 hours and we will be looking at deportation proceedings to return him to the States," MacIntyre said.

This is a survey that CTV did. I wonder what the accusations that people would turn their loved ones in for? obviously this ladies was murder....but would she have turned him in for drug trafiking, or perhaps would she have turned him in knowing that he was wanted for a crime that would get him the death penality?

Would you turn in a loved one if they were wanted by police?
Yes 2818 votes (29 %)
No 1096 votes (11 %)
Depends on the accusations 5919 votes (60 %)

Total Votes: 9833

from Bush to Lee, things that make me giggle

Yes, yes, I know I said I wouldn't talk about other countries if I read something that made me scratch my head, especially when it is something to do with the leaders and internal workings of the countries. But, come on, there are some things that are said or done that you just have to point out and go "WTF was he thinking?" One great example from the USA was when George 'dooble yuh' Bush asked a reporter "so, you going to ask that question to me with your sun glasses on?" before realizing that the reporter was actually legally blind and then tried to back pedal his way out of that little thing. The other example is this recent one by MM Lee of Singapore who has said that "Singapore has to be as cosmopolitan as other world class cities like New York and London, for its own survival and success."

Ok, now for those that think that cosmopolitan is a magazine (which, wasnt it just recently taken off the banned publication list in Singapore? or was that Woman's World or Vogue?) or a drink served in bars in New York to the characters on Sex In The City, the word actually means:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cosmopolitan
cos·mo·pol·i·tan –adjective
1. free from local, provincial, or national ideas, prejudices, or attachments; at home all over the world.
2. of or characteristic of a cosmopolite.
3. belonging to all the world; not limited to just one part of the world.
4. Botany, Zoology. widely distributed over the globe. –noun
5. a person who is free from local, provincial, or national bias or attachment; citizen of the world; cosmopolite.

Ok, the 4th definition aside cause that is a horse of a different color completely (I mean, what is the sense of having a definition that uses the word in its definition? that is like having "Tall - of relating to tallness"..thanks for clearing that one up for me buddy). Cosmopolitan by my reading of that definition means to be open to new ideas, new trends, accept those around you as being different and still treat them as human beings and with the respect and dignity that you would treat every living thing on the planet in a harmonious world.

So, exactly how is Singapore going to be a cosmopolitan place that will attract all these new 'megabytes' and talents? I mean, homosexuality for the longest time is illegal (though now MM Lee might actually be insinuating that if homosexuality is a genetic thing then it cant be deemed illegal since it is a biological make up...but if it is a nurtured choice then it can be deemed illegal? guess that means, using that argument, since psychopathy might be a genetic problem, then these individuals really can not be held accountable for their actions and shouldn't be executed???), movies are censored and banned if they speak of subjects that are not to the liking of the ruling political party (which seems to be mainly any films that have the theme of political opponents viewed in a respectable light or have the political opponents actually talking about how the main political party has thrown them out of Singapore...of course, all under the guise of 'not in the public interest'), even political organziations are denied enter into the country to talk to the public on behalf of the very small opposition parties. Is MM Lee trying to say "we have to be open to new ideas, new thoughts and new talents from all over the world where we can feel free to roam around the world and mix and mingle. However, just dont feel too free and do as we do, not as we say" Talk about a little bit of mixed messages there huh? Like when a married man asks his wife if it is alright for him to go out to see the strippers with a few of his male buddies. He gets a 'sure...go..have fun', but he knows that when he gets home the couch will be made out for him to sleep on and a cold shoulder will ensue for at least a few weeks.

Now, I realize that there is no real level of 'cosmopolitan' that you can appreciate. I mean, Canada is sort of cosmo in that we have laws that make it free for people to worship whatever they want and we even allow for same sex marriages, but there are some people in the country that are not quick to accept many changes. Little Mosque On The Prairie (while not a documentary but a show) does show a few people that do exist in Canada and their intolerance to other religions (including the Muslim intolerance to the western way of life and ideals).

I find this just so funny to hear. Singapore has to be accepting and accept the world quirks and quarks, Singapore just doesnt have to tolerate it or bring it into their little dot on the world map. About as funny as Bush degrading a blind reporter on national television if you ask me.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/271837/1/.html

Singapore must remain cosmopolitan to survive: MM Lee
By Dominique Loh, Channel NewsAsia
Posted: 22 April 2007 1844 hrs

SINGAPORE: Singapore has to be as cosmopolitan as other world class cities like New York and London, for its own survival and success. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew told a gathering of Young PAP members, Singapore society will continue to synthesise, as more immigrants and foreigners settle in the Republic.

During the dialogue, Mr Lee also defended the government's position on increasing the salary of ministers.

It was standing room only - but some did not mind being on their feet for more than two hours, just to hear what Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew had to say. Questions centred on Singapore's future as a society in a globalised world. With more foreigners calling Singapore home, what is the impact on politics, community and culture? Mr Lee said Singapore is part of a globalised world and the country is exposed to and inter-connected to other cities. And Singaporeans have to take advantage of that world stage.

"If we are dynamic, we will attract talent, we will grow because we have more talent. When I say talent, it means people who add to the dynamism of that society. Singaporeans, if I can chose an analogy, we are the hard disk of a computer, the foreign talent are the megabytes you add to your storage capacity. So your computer never hangs because you got enormous storage capacity," said Mr Lee.

But Mr Lee said Singapore can also lose its top talent to other countries, and finding good leaders among the best to stay here is another challenge for the government. On the recent debate about the ministerial pay increases, Mr Lee was asked of there should be more scrutiny on the ministers themselves, like how private sector CEOs are accountable to their shareholders. In response, Mr Lee said an MP is closely watched the moment he's elected into office. And he had no qualms about paying ministers a good salary to look after a multi-billion dollar economy.

But more importantly, a bad minister mismanaging Singapore will ruin the lives of four million people. "If you have a dud minister he cannot hold his ground, you know in Singapore, you've got to meet your constituents, you've got to meet the press, you are in Parliament right? You are not just making a speech at a mass rally …and for this generation, if you don't pay them adequately and their families suffer, they will not stay in the job long. They will be forced to pack up and go back to their private life. And you've lost experience and expertise, it's as simple as that," said Mr Lee.

It was also mentioned that Singapore's formula for success has also been well documented by international scholars like Richard Vietor, who praised Singapore as "the best example of government that works."

On censorship Mr Lee said he is not able to predict where the boundaries will be in the years ahead, because of a changing world that is open to all influences. He cited the debate on Crazy Horse as an example, and said there were strong objections from cabinet ministers. But Mr Lee argued Singaporeans are well-travelled and would be exposed to such cabaret shows in other countries.

He said Singapore should be part of a new world, but if it disallowed Crazy Horse, Singapore would be left behind and become a quaint, quixotic, esoteric appendage of the world.

On the taboo subject of homosexuality, he said Singapore needs a practical and pragmatic approach and adjust without upsetting segments of society and their sense of propriety of what is right and wrong.

One example of this forward thinking government Mr Lee said is how it has studied the impact of global warming. To counter the rising sea level from melting polar ice caps, Singapore has approached the Dutch and is learning about building dykes here in the warmer climate of South East Asia.

The dialogue, held in celebration of the 21st anniversary of the Young PAP, attracted about 400 members. It is believed to be the organisation's first official event with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew as the main speaker. And to help relate to the younger generation, the event was held at a trendy club at the St James Power Station. - CNA/yy

guns, rights, militia and other problems related

In the recent week since the Virgina Tech masacre, the anniversary of the Columbine school shooting and the NASA murder/suicide, I have heard and read a few comments on what can and can not be done. These range from both extremes of take away all guns to give everyone guns. Here are some of the more interesting mentions that I have heard that I had to think about as strange.

NewsNet had an interview with one survivor of the Columbine School Shooting. Apparently this individual was shot something like 6 times or so and was so close to deaths door that when he got to the emergency room at the hospital he claims that they called down to the morgue and told them to get a place set up for him cause he was on his way very soon. After that was said the lady doing the interview actually asked the question, or maybe it was a statement but the guy thought it was a question and needed to answer it, "and you did not die?". To which the answer from the guy was "yes, I did not die". Nice to know that a walking dead zombie was not in the interview room. They then talked about the shooting and she asked him "do you think that if the students had guns at the school then perhaps many lives could have been saved and they could have defended themselves?" His answer was "I dont think that would be a good idea because when the police arrived on the scene, how can they tell who is the gunman and who are students defending themselves?" Yeah, I am thinking that if there are 25 students opening fire on one student that is hiding behind a barricade and who is returning fire, I am going with the one student being the lone gunman and the 25 students being the defenders. If there are only two students shooting at each other it might be a little more difficult, however not impossible. Easy solution? announce to the students to cease fire, lay down their weapons and lay down on the floor. No getting up, no walking away, no coming out from their defensive positions, simply drop the guns, hit the floor and sprawl. State this command about 3 times and then on the 4th time give the added bonus of "OR ELSE". Anyone caught firing rounds after the OR ELSE is considered and enemy and you shoot to wound. Take out a leg, an arm, anything non-vital and then go in and sort out the mess. If one student drops his weapon and the other keeps firing after a few warnings are given, then regardless of how the person came in to the school (defender/offender) they are now graduated to an offender and the police can assume malicious intent.

I have to laugh at the solution of 'give everyone guns' because I remember the song "Let There Be Guns" by The Arrogant Worms where they actually say:

There'd be no more crime, 'cause everybody'd have a gun!
woudn't it be great if everybody had a gun
Nobody'd ever get shot, 'cause everybody'd have a gun! (Makes sense!)
woudn't it be great if everybody had a gun

Funny thing is, this song is made in jest and funny humour, people that are saying that students lives could have been saved if they were all packing heat are made seriously. I find it strange how people want to turn the new age back into the old wild west. People walking around carrying rifles, shot guns and six shooters at their side 'just in case'. Mind you, back then it was 'just in case' of rattle snakes, wolves, coyotes whereas now the 'just in case' is terrorists, disgruntled employees, suicidal people who want to take a few people with them possibly so that they can be remembered for their horrible acts. Similiar deadly vermin, different forms and times.

However, there is the other side of the coin where people are saying that if there were no guns, this wouldnt have happened. If it wasnt so easy for the people to get their hands on weapons they wouldnt be able to stroll into schools and kill innocent children. For some reason when I heard that I got a flash back of a Family Guy episode. Somehow there was a huge tragedy and the Griffins create a new city and all their friends become high members of the counsel where Peter is the head leader. However, there is a controversy on weapons and if they should have them (townsfolk say no more guns/weapons since they caused the problem, Peter wants them) and the Griffins are driven out of town. The townsfolk then take all the guns and burn them in a big pile. As they are watching the guns being destroyed, the people are attacked by a band of mutated Stewie heads that have octopi bodies. As the people are being killed, screaming out for defence and all, one guy turns to another and says "remember you asked me the definition of irony the other day and I couldnt give you an example..well, here you go" at which point he is jumped upon by a mutated Stewie head and killed. I wonder if the people wanting to get rid of all weapons would keep the same position if they read in the papers that a house was broken into by two men with steel baseball bats and the father was murdered outright and the 13 year old daughter and mother were beaten to death after being raped, but this could have been prevented if the father (an accountant who was no brawn match for the men, even if they had no baseball bats) had a small fire arm in the house to defend his house and family.

Then there are those that bring up their right to 'bare arms' as stated in the American Bill of Rights (http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) However, I have read their right a couple of times and have realized that it is sort of open to interpretation and not really set down. For instance, it reads:

Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now, you can read it one way and say that this right is talking about a well regulated Militia and not the common citizen on the street. What is a Militia?

mi·li·tia –noun
1. a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies.
2. a body of citizen soldiers as distinguished from professional soldiers.
3. all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service.
4. a body of citizens organized in a paramilitary group and typically regarding themselves as defenders of individual rights against the presumed interference of the federal government.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/militia

Now, by reading both the Bill of Rights and the definition of Militia, I think it is possible to read it in two different fashions. You can take it the one way that all people are fundamentally allowed arms as given by the rights and freedoms, but you can also take it in a way to read that only those that are ready to defend the country of enemies (both foreign and domestic) should have guns. Could it be that the main thing in all the definitions that stands out is the simple word of 'soldier', distinguished apart from professional soldiers, but still in the end soldiers. What do soldiers do with guns and weapons? they respect the weapon and they respect life. So, in that standard, only those people responsible and mature enough to own and respect a fire arm can be considered a militia member and therefore only they can carry arms. Though mind you the 3rd definition states that all able bodied men considered by law eligible for military service can be considered a militia, in which case, any male over the ages of 21 can own arms. So, in this case, it is not a case of maturity, respect and honour but of chronological age and that is it. So to look at the last part of the right to bare arms and say "see, it says that I have a right to keep and bare arms" without reading the first part of 'militia/soldier necessary to the freedom of the state' is only taking the fun part of the right and not the responsibility part of that right. To have a fire arm to defend yourself, your land, your family against enemies of the state trying to take away your way of life is one thing. To have a firearm because you want to go and 'teach that bully from 12th grade a lesson' is something totally different. So I guess in a fashion, both sides of the argument are correct. Since those that want to keep and bear arms are probably the weekend warrior/militia people that are respecting guns for what they are and for their use in defence of the American way of life. Those that don't want guns are those that don't want to be part of the militia. Those that have the arms and use them to do bad things (like the school shootings) are not grouped in the militia category and therefore the militia category should not be punished.

In the end, there is no 2+2=4 answer to this equation. There is no agreed set of facts that we can sit down, agree on and then come up with a solid answer that is logical and correct. Were we can all agree that shooting unarmed students in a school is cowardly and wrong, we can not agree as to a possibly solution to this problem. How can you teach respect for a fire arm if we can not have a fire arm, how can you have a fire arm and not be taught respect for that fire arm? This is a problem that will go round and round til the cows come home. All I know is that in the immortal words of the Arrogant Worms "...we get sunburned when we exercise our right to bear our arms..we are proud to be Canadian."

what a way to waste some time...

What do you get when you take 3 guys with way too much free time on their hands, a television station designed with the sole purpose of bringing mindless male entertainment to the male gender of the world AND a gender of mindless men willing to watch said entertainment? the answer, my friend, is simple. You get the Wild World Of Spike. Now, before all the women go "sheesh, talk about your stereotypical male shows...sheesh, what about us?" You gals have The Women Network, we have Spike. I dont think a staight man alive will voluntarily watch that women network (especially The View) voluntarily and for all the ladies out there that say "my husband/boyfriend watches it all the time, even when I am not around, he is only doing so to spout some form of sensitive stuff to make himself appear more romantic than your ex-boyfriend that you dumped cause he was probably watching too much Spike.

So what is the Wild World of Spike? I describe it 'a completely mindless waste of time but good for a few shits and giggles'. How does the network describ WWS? Each week our hosts gather to watch clips of the wildest sporting events and competitions in the world. They make comments, crack jokes, and generally have a blast goofing on what other cultures call sport. After watching the clips, the guys challenge each other to recreate their favorites, creating hilarious sports we've never seen before.

http://www.spiketv.com/index.html#shows/ss/t=ss/scid=10108/sid=10106

I had to laugh at the part where they actually watch hockey clips and then decide to try that. Their comment? "lets do this..and we can beat up the Canadians!" So they bring in 5 guys and label them "team Canada" who are obviously Canadian because they can skate, and then the three of them are 'Team USA' who are obviously Americans because they cant skate. They get pointers on how to fight on the ice and then go through some fights which, honestly speaking, is more like play fighting than anything else. In the end, it is a funny thing to watch. Oh, and if for nothing else, go for the female arm wrestler and female sumo wrestling match. Nothing like watching three cocky egotistically funny men getting their ass thrown around by women.

All are equal in medical eyes...Canadian Style

There are always two sides to an argument, and I find myself on both sides of this argument in the moments that I am in right now. The Canadian medical care system, ahhhh, to wonder about it. I have just recently found myself with a minor injury, well minor since that it is not classed as an 'emergency' or 'serious' injury that jumps me to the front of the line of those in need, but only causes great pain and discomfort when working. This injury of mine is a minor hernia. Now, in an office environment, a hernia really wouldn't cause that much problem since you sit around and as long as you dont have to lift heavy boxes of paper to the xerox or move heavy potted plants for female co-workers that are trying to 'spruce up the office', then you are pretty much alright. However, working in a kitchen environment where you are on your feet 12 hours a day and where 'light duty' basically means you lift the 40lbs bag of potatoes and leave the 50lbs bag for the next guy, a hernia really doesn't help the day go by nicer.



I find myself on the receiving end now of getting treatment and a diagnosis for this injury. Granted, I have been diagnosed by a glorified EMT (camp medic), by a general family doctor physician and by a third year surgeon medical student because the real surgeon was called away to emergency surgeon on my time and date of the appointment and I had to be rescheduled for two weeks later (after having waited for 3 and a half weeks for this appointment). All these medical minds have agreed "yep, you got a hernia" though only the surgeon student could really give me a more precise diagnosis while the other two seemed to be reading from a medical dictionary on my symptoms and all.

So now I find myself waiting to hear from a doctor/surgeon on how I am going to get this fixed and cleared up to get back to work. Currently I am at work, on light duties, but like I said 'light duty and kitchen work' above, that really doesnt say much. So I sit back and question the effectiveness of the whole medical care system. I mean, if this was a 'pay for the play' kind of doctor, I could really just walk into a doctor's office and if he didnt want to see me, or operate in a reasonable amount of time, then he really didnt want my business and I would just go to the next doctor available. I would probably end up then going to the one that would charge the most since they are obviously the most skilled since they charge the most and if their cost was so high then the normal folk couldnt afford him and he would be open for business. I would then have been looked at, sliced and diced and back to work within 5 week times, rather than the nearly 2 months to date and still waiting to get looked at by the surgeon to get past the preliminary diagnosis. I figure I have at least another 5-6 weeks for an operating date, and then 5-6 weeks for healing and recovery, leading me to a good 5 months of having this little 'ailment' and getting it looked at and done with.

Now I start to bitch and complain about the system. Why do I have wait all this time for a doctor to look at me, give me a cure and fix me so that I can get back to work and make a living? Why does Canada have such a huge shortage of doctors and medical professionals? why do we pay our doctors/nurses so little, forcing them to look to other countries for enough money to pay for their debts like medical school and upgrading of their skills? shouldn't we say "these doctors are important to our life style of health and wellness, and therefore to keep these best people would should pay them huge sums of money or else they will just go to other countries or other facilities"? we need them, so we should pay them hugely. I figure if the Canadian Gov't paid the doctors enough, then they wouldnt leave, and I wouldnt be sitting here with pain and agony because I dont want to scum off the system of medical disability or workers compensation but actually want to do an honest days work for an honest days pay.

But then I sit back and do the mental calculations and all. Currently, coming from the Northwest Territories, my medical bills for this, and other medical treatment, has been zero dollars. I only pay for the drugs that are prescribed to me, and even then I get them at a reduced rate because of my companies health plan, and I can even look at reducing that even more by going to private insurance companies and getting a drug plan through them. I guess I am ahead of the game since I really am paying nothing to the medical system, except through my taxes to the gov't, and in the end I am getting loads of benefits. I mean, if I was charged for going to the medic, then that would have been $35. Of course, going to the general physician would have been more expensive considering they did more schooling and are doctors instead of medics, so that would probably have been another $60 for a 10 minute visit. Then a referal to a surgeon (more specialized and schooled=more money involved), possibly a $120 visit for the 20 minute visit and the booking for surgery. So, that would mean $215 would have been spent by me alone just to get to where I am now. That has nothing to consider what it would cost for the actual surgery to happen of a day in the hospital for the slice and dice with a full knock out (I figure no man on the face of this earth has any desire to actually be awake while another man is not more than 3 inches from his manhood with a very very sharp cutting instrument) will run me in the future. Even if I was to give a generous estimate of $5,000 for the whole operation to happen, that would lead me to a total of $5,215, not counting the prescription antibiotics and pain killers for the recovery to happen. All this for free since I am from the North. Had I been covered under Alberta health care, then that would be different, since I would be paying $44/month in health insurance coverage. Now, at that rate, I would have to have paid into the system for 118.5 months to have reached that amount of money. Nearly a full 10 years of my life would have to have been paid $44/month for me to total how much this one operation would cost me. That doesnt take into consideration the fact that in those 10 years of paying for this one operation, I could go to the doctors as many times as I wanted to for check ups, concerns about bowel movements or even the sniffles. I could be the hospitals biggest GOMER (Get Out Of My Emergency Room) and I would still be paying into the system. Of course, after all this time, I could have my children born at the hospital for free, I could have any injury stitched and sewn up for free, I could even have my children covered for their mumps, measles, chicken pox and the countless amounts of items shoved up their nose, ears or swallowed (as all kids do). All this for only $44/month. Hmmmm, talk about a good deal huh? no wonder people from all over the world whose countries does not have a health care system want to come to Canada and gain citizenship so that they can bring their dying and sick relatives over to take advantage of the system.

Only down side to this wonderful 'all are created equal' system, is that with the shortage of doctors and medical professionals, their work load increases and wait time increases. So on one hand I am getting a great bargain for the money I am spending, but on the downside my wait time is increased hugely. Though, personally, if it all comes down to it, I would much rather be around a doctor/medical professional that is paid adequately than one that is paid highly to keep them on the staff. Why? simply put, I dont want a mercenary doctor who sees me only as a pay cheque than a patient looking at me. I mean, if a doctor sees you as a patient then they will try their hardest to keep you alive and well because it is in their best interest to keep all people alive. If they lose a patient, it hurts them greatly and they will feel guilt. However, if a mercenary doctor who sees you as a pay cheque loses you, the one thing on their mind might be "will I get paid for this?". While both will fight to keep you alive, I would much rather have one passionate about my health making the effort to pull me back from deaths door, than the one that sees me as his next Ferrari payment, or summer home deposit. Also, if a doctor is in the medical field for his own personal feelings, then that doctor might be more willing to go that extra mile, to help out all the rich and poor alike, to stay healthy, alive and well. Whereas a doctor that is only in it for the money (since they could basically be wooed away by other companies and corporations for the extra pay) will only be interested in curing and helping the rich, whereas the poor are of no consequence since they cant afford the doctors price.

Oh well, on the whole, guess I am pretty well off and should stop grumbling huh? I got what I want, adequately paid doctors who are probably working here in Canada because they love Canada and love to make sick people, regardless of the sicks financial height, well again.

addiction relapse

I thought I was doing good. I had fought my addiction of nearly 15 years and thought I was winning. I thought I took that addiction and cast it far into the depths of hades where the monkey on my back had been spawned. But, alas, I must confess to being weak willed. Yes, I am a movie-holic. I can't help it. I love movies, I have to watch movies. It doesnt matter if it is movies of substance, movies of merit or just brain dead movies that I walk away ashamed of having gone to see. Yes, I have seen my share of Fast and The Furious, Bruce Almighty, and Dumb and Dumbers in my life that have me walking away shaking my head. Like a drug addict that gets a bad bag of crack and goes through a bad trip, that is how I feel when coming out of those movies. It gets my addiction down, but still I crave that one great 'trip'.

So the movies that I saw in the last two days were Grindhouse, Disturbia, Pathfinder (Legend of the Ghost Warrior) and Shooter. Grindhouse was amazingly good. Ever have that one kid in high school that knew he was a dork, a geek or a spazz? he knew he would never really aspire to the greatness of jockhood or coolness so he excelled at geekness. Then, somehow, in his quest for geekness he made himself cool and a school landmark because of his pride in geekdom? that is what Grindhouse is like. It went back to the good old days of b-rated grindhouse movies of excessive gore, excessive sex and excessive lack of plot and story line. Even the characters were perfect in that there was no attempt to give the characters depth or even a soul. They were basically played as cardboard cut out characters, and yet in their lack of being a 'someone' and just being 'there' they managed to be characters of substance. I totally loved this movie. Laughed my way through the whole film. The mix of mindless violence, blood, guts and gore with the corny one liners and site gags made for a great movement of emotions in the film. Even the makers use of aging the film, adding little scratches and blips, along with a missing reel or two and actually having the film stall 1/4 of the way through and seeing the film melt on the screen like what would have happened in the 60's drive in movie reels was absolute genius. Even though I wasn't alive or there to watch a drive in movie in the 60's/70's (or at least that I remember in the later 70's), watching this movie gave me a feeling of going back in time to a simpler time of peace and tranquility as I watched chemically contaminated zombies being hacked apart by a helicopter blade. Yes, I do give this film two thumbs up, not because it will win academy awards or because it was a piece of acting/cinematic genius, but simply because it was a good movie to watch and a very enjoyable one at that.

Shooter, on the other hand, wasn't as prosperous. This is one where the actors are trying to make it something more than it really was, which is just another Fugitive knock off. Let me know if you have heard this one before, a patriotic honest man is set up to take the fall for a higher organization and he fights back. Yeah, haven't had THAT story line ever happen huh? Granted, stories and movies are all the same, the plots really dont change that much it is just the way that they are told, but this movie really took all the same cliches of movies and put them together. Soldier in battle becomes a recluse because best friend killed in battle, meets up with widow of friend later and falls for her. Makes me want to join the army and make friends with really hot looking wives so that if they get shot and die in battle I can come back home and meet up with her 2 years later and we can hook up and date/marry, or at least have wild hot sex. As much as I would have liked to get into the whole movie, the cover ups, the intrigue and all was basic and not that complex. But, who knows, maybe I am slightly biased as I never have been a Mark Walhberg fan. All I know is that I went in hearing how great this movie was from friends, and I came out slightly disappointed.

However, not as disappointed as I was with Pathfinder. I saw the trailers, thought it looked good though slightly over done and all in plot line. Little boy grows up in a strange land raised by strangers though they love him like a son and then they get attacked and he must choose between the people that raised him like a son but he is not one of them, and the people whom he is one of by blood but treated him like dirt. The problem that I had with the film was a personal thing, though I can see what the director was hoping to make with the way that the filming was done. I found that it was hard to follow the action and all because it was so dark and dreary. Seems the land that the vikings wanted to settle was perpetually clouded in fog and dreary weather. Everytime that there was a battle, the shots were done in MTV 3 second format where you never really get to see an action completely done but only see quick blips of the action. A warrior draws his sword and all you see is the sword come out for 1 second from the sheath, the sword over head for a second, then it decends for a second, quick shot of the forest as blood flies through the air, then a scream, body falls somewhere. Unless the kill shot was particularly distressing (like the top of the head is cleaved revealing the brain, or the head is completely severed from the body) in which case the action slowed down so you can see the head fall slowly to the ground, the blood spurt and then a look at the horrified expression on the fallen head in death. I gave up half way through the film trying to follow the action during the battle scenes but only waited for the last second and then did a quick count of who was still standing and then assumed that those I didn't see died somehow. The only thing that my mind couldn't really grasp was the warriors expertise with the sword. He is found as a boy of about 7 or 8 (at least by my guessing estimation of his age) on the wreckage of a ship with no survivors of the vikings and is taken in by the indians of the land. Now, they are still in the stone workings of spears/arrow heads and sticks and he seems to be the only one walking around with a complete iron sword. Now, having been raised in the viking warrior tradition, I can say that he learned how to care for the sword and sharpen it since that is the basic skill taught to kids when it comes to blades. However, he weilds the sword almost like a master, sometimes going up against the viking warriors themselves and besting them in swordsmanship. How does a 7 year old, living amongst people that don't have or use iron swords, learn swordsmanship in 15 years time to such a level to best viking warriors who have been raised in battle themselves? Unless this is the movie makers way of saying that the vikings were bullies, picking on the inferiorly skilled races for so long that they really werent that skilled but more like mindless brawlers coming to a knife fight carrying guns. So while this movie has its grounding in the usual 'finding yourself amongst those around you' and 'standing up to the bully when they come knocking', it really was too hard to follow visually to make it a good movie. Was almost like reading the Coles notes (quick 30 second spurts for each 10 minute part of the play) for Macbeth instead of reading the whole play.

Then there was Disturbia. Now, I had to admit that I was really detached from this film because of the poor quality of movie projectionist skill. Every time that the reel switched to a new reel the film would jump down so that the lower half of the film showed at the top of the screen and the persons face was at the bottom. So, their lower body was always above their head. Can't really get into the illusion of the movie and the mystery when that sort of thing happens. Then when people went and complained, they managed to fix the problem somewhat, but didn't fully succeed since they put it still a little too far down so that we could see the boom mics above the actors. Sometimes it was just the furry mic, sometimes a long skinny one, sometimes a regular bulbous head mic, and sometimes it was the whole mic and arm in the shot. You try getting into a suspence movie when you are watching the actors creep down a hallway with the killer in the shadows and you can see the mic following the person slowly. Really takes away the whole illusion and all of the film. Though, for the film itself, I think that Hitchcock really did it better with his Rear Window than this movie. Whereas Rear Window was nominated for 4 Academy Awards in 1995, I doubt Disturbia will be awarded anything other than possibly 'young bubble head teens award' where artistic merit or depth doesn't come into count, but more how cute the actors butt is in certain shots.

I guess, out of 4 relapses, I had one good trip and three bad ones. But, that doesn't mean I am cured. I, unfortuneatly, continue to be my movie addicted self.

Stella Artois as a measure of IQ

While at the movies the past couple of days, I had the pleasure of having a similiar happening happen twice, and I wonder if this is a sign of some of the thickness of the younger generation ahead. Before all the movies that I have watched, the theatres showed this ad for Stella Artois beer:



Now, twice that it was shown, two different people, at two different times, had a similiar reaction to it that got me thinking about the kids these days and their watching and processing ability of information. After the commercial the first time, the person (male, in the range of 17) turned to his friends and went "Ahhhh, I get it now...." to which there was a general murmuring of questions that were answered with "shhhh, tell you later" and then the movie started and I really didnt give it any thought. The next time, the commercial showed and then at the end, a female (aged 15/16ish) turned to her movie companion with the statement "I don't get it...do you get it" to which there was silence. Now, granted in that case it could be a case of the 2nd girl got it and she was giving the look of "are you freaking serious??????" in the dark theatre that I could not see.

Please, please, please tell me that every else out there that watches this commercial 'gets it'. I hate to think that all the countries of the world have the next generation of their country like this. Makes me think of the movie 'Idiocracy' that I just recently watched with much disgust.

Cowardly Lioness

I didn't catch this article when it first came out, but after hearing about some people complain about Kristen's actions I had to look it up. I must say that I was mortified and disgusted by her actions as well. I can only say that in her defence that during a stressful and frightening time of possible death that people do horrible things in the name of self preservation. When I took a swimming rescue course in high school, the one thing that the instructor made perfectly clear to us is 'when approaching a drowning victim, stop way out of arms reach and talk to them to calm them down and do not approach until they stop thrashing'. Now, when I first heard this I made the usual "yeah that makes sense. Wait for the person to drown and then save them. Kind of like waiting for a house to burn down in a fire and THEN walk in with a bucket of water and throw it on the ashes". Then it was explained that people when drowning and facing life and death, people won't act like they do in the movies (thrash their arms and then calmly lay back when someone grabs them) but instead will panic and grab the first boyant thing that is close to them and cling for dear life. This usually ends with the person out there to rescue them to be held underwater til they drown and then the drowning person paddles to shore on the now dead rescuers lifeless body. Sounds horrible doesnt it? but, when faced with life or death, that is what happens. You struggle for self preservation.

At first glance when I read this article about her actions I was horrified that this girl could have done such a despicable thing to another human being. But then again, one has to realize that people react in different situations. You and a friend go into a fun house, you see the things and laugh at them cause they are cheesy, while your friend isnt either as observant or as brave as you and panics. In this situation, since there was no life or death, you laugh at your friend, make fun of how they clung to you, pushed you, rushed through the fun house or did many other acts of cowardice while you watched. Problem with this sinking ship is that Kristen acted out of a form of cowardise at the moment. She saw a threat, saw an escape, took the escape using brutal force and then self preserved her life and her friend with a life jacket. Strange how we could put this sort of action in a controlled environment and video tape her reaction and laugh at her response if it was on Survivor, Big Brother, Fear Factor or Amazing Race...but put them in a real life situation and her actions are not acceptable.

All I can say, is that I hope that either the Greek authorities, or the individuals that she assaulted, press charges in their country and she gets some form of punishment for her actions. Because if she had said "I don't remember what happened, I just grabbed a life jacket and ran. I didn't know it was in someone elses hands" then that would show she wasn't in her frame of mind of her actions and should be given some slack in her accountability. However, she says she talked to the man, when he refused, she balled up her first and hit him, took his jacket and then went looking for another man and did the same thing. Obviously she was in her mind enough to recognize her actions and she could have stopped 'balling up her fist'.

Either which way, her actions were dispicable and a definite cowardly way to react. If I was her grandparents, after reading this article and hearing her actions, I would definitly ban her from coming on a cruise with any of the family members. Not out of shame but out of self preservation. Cause if the ship the whole family is going down, then Kristen might just slug out grandma or grandpa cause she is young and only 16 with her whole life ahead of her and grandma and grandpa are in their 70+ and obviously have little left in their life.


Teen recounts ship sinking
By Ajay Bhardwaj, SUN MEDIA

Kristen Strilchuk vows she'll go on another cruise this summer even as she relived a harrowing four-hour rescue from a Greek vessel that sank off the coast of a Mediterranean island last week.

"It's a one-time thing," said the 16-year-old. "I enjoy travelling and I'm not going to let one thing stop me from doing what I love."

The Grade 10 Tofield high school student was one of 21 Alberta students, five chaperones and 1,900 others rescued from the sinking Sea Diamond.

"A door came flying off and it was coming for me," recalled Strilchuk.

Toilet paper and other debris went rolling by as she climbed the stairs to the upper deck moments after she and her friends heard a loud sound like the boat had scraped the ocean floor. When they reached an upper floor, Strilchuk said she found patrons calmly eating a meal.
"Nobody believed us," she said.

A few decks away, David Friedenberg and two friends were in their cabin when the ship began "tilting worse than it usually did," he said.

A crew member raced through the corridor and ordered everyone to grab a life jacket.
Friedenberg, a Grade 11 student at Tofield high, grabbed his life jacket and raced with friends to the eighth deck, he said. He left everything else behind.

"It was scary at that point," he said. Once on the top deck, crew members were screaming, cellphones were ringing and nobody seemed to know what was going on, said Strilchuk.
"It was really unorganized," she said.

Strilchuk and her friends had no lifejackets and saw a man clutching a lifejacket. She pleaded with him to hand it over.

"He was holding it and he was 40 years old and we were kids," she said, describing how she made a fist and walloped him in the face and took the lifejacket for a friend.

Moments later the feisty teen smoked another man and took his lifejacket for herself.

Strilchuk said she was thinking of her family, how much see missed them and how badly she wanted to see them.

An announcement told passengers to go to one side of the ship to balance the weight of the listing boat.

There, Strilchuk and her friends found Friedenberg and other friends, she said.

In broken English, a crew member tried to explain to passengers that when they jumped from the ship, they were to keep their legs together and hold their lifejackets down, said Friedenberg.
Finally the group was walked through the restaurant where broken plates and glasses lay all around. They had to hold on to railings because the ship was tilting so badly, said Strilchuk.
The students then got into lifeboats. Once they reached shore, they called family to let them know they were all right.

The students arrived at Edmonton International Airport yesterday morning.

Undaunted by her Greek cruise experience, Strilchuk says she'll go on a July cruise for her grandparents' 50th anniversary.

voting in Canada just getting tougher

Veiled Muslim women may face new law
By JORGE BARRERA, NATIONAL BUREAU

Veiled Muslim women might be forced to show their faces at the voting booth if a government bill quietly making its way through the Senate becomes law, says new chief federal electoral officer Marc Mayrand.

Bill C-31 would require voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polling booth during federal elections. It has passed through the House of Commons and is currently being studied by a Senate committee.

Mayrand said the bill, if passed, would plop the controversial issue of the veil, which created a stir during the recent Quebec election, on the lap of Elections Canada. (CTV news coverage of this http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070323/elections_muslim_070323/20070323/)


'HAVE TO REVIEW SITUATION'

"If it passes, it will have to be addressed," said Mayrand, in an interview with Sun Media. "We have to review the situation."

The bill also allows for alternative identification authorized by Elections Canada. Those without identification can have someone else registered in the same polling division vouch for them by swearing an oath.

The Muslim Canadian Congress sees no problem with the bill.

"We believe that no one who covers their face should be allowed to vote," said Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress.

Fatah said Muslim groups causing a stir over the issue want to increase hostilities between the Muslim community and the rest of Canada.

NDP OPPOSES LEGISLATION

The NDP has opposed the legislation, dubbing it "a Big Brother bill" because it promises to hand personal information over to political parties and electoral candidates.

Public outrage forced Quebec's electoral officer to reverse a decision that allowed Muslim women to keep the niqab on at the voting booth.

Mayrand said Blanchet faced an "exceptional situation" that could have spun "out of control."
Voters are currently not required to show photo ID during federal elections.

Under the bill, Elections Canada would be required to create lifetime identifying numbers for the country's more than 22 million voters. Birthdates would also be included on permanent voters lists, be updated yearly and be available to political parties and candidates.

*****

Isn't this a moot point when it comes to votes? I mean, last I heard about the Canadian voting system, no one really shows up to vote these days. I mean, if you are going to throw a party and you buy the chips and dip but everyone from your school doesn't show up, do you really want to start making it harder and harder for kids from another school to come in and party? It isn't like we are going to get a really horrible and undemocratic political party into the system. The great thing about the Canadian political system is that you don't vote for a guy, you vote for the party. About the only party that could possibly cause damage to the whole country and drop us into unemployment and all is the Green party. I say as long as the voter is not armed or hanging around the voting place with hand guns or weapons saying "yeah, might be a good idea for you to vote for this party", then let them come dressed as Darth Vader or Mickey Mouse for all I care. As long as you have your election paper with your name and address on it and bring it to the polls, come as you are.

where the pot heads go to dance...

While doing a random look around the net cause, hey let's face it, not like I have a life or anything, I came across this rather interesting dating web site (https://www.potheadsingles.com). A website dedicated to people that can actually write in their ad "I smoke pot" and the other person wont take an automatic 'burn out loser' attitude and walk away. This is a place where people that enjoy a bit of the herbage can meet like minded individuals for hanging out and talking. Also, kind of dangerous considering that a police officer that really wants to make some busts on drugs, can get on, pretend to be a person looking for some drug induced love, show up at parties and make huge busts. But, then again, with all the paper work invovled in some countries for registering and charging a person for smoking a joint and the slap on the wrist punishments that some of these countries have for said offences, would an officer go through all that trouble just to grab someone who happens to have a joint in their house on the odd time without hurting anyone?

I think either this site is relatively new OR it is a case where only the really stupid and burnt out pot smokers would put an ad up (for the reason mentioned above). I did a search by country for women and men, aged between 18 and 100, all ads for a few select countries, and these are the results:

FEMALES
Canada - 186
USA - 664
Australia - 6
New Zealand - 4
United Kingdom - 9
Singapore and other asian countries - 0

MALES
Canada - 34
USA - 129
Australia - 0
New Zealand - 0
United Kingdom - 3
Singapore and other asian countries - 0

What I found particularly surprising is the difference in male to females. I would have expected more males to be on this site looking for a date than females considering usually when people are talking it is stoned men and a few females. Like when you see them in the park, in their tight little circles, looking all innocent but you can smell the weed a mile away. I am so used to seeing about 6-7 guys all surrounding 2-3 females, not in a threatening 'smoke this and get mellow so we can take advantage of you' way, but in a friendly 'join our group and be one of us' kind of way. So I was particularly surprised to see that in all countries females are more than males. Shall I take a shot at gender intelligence for the above mentioned reason at the beginning of my post??? nah, let the reader make up their own minds on that one. Perhaps maybe it is the other way and say that maybe the smart women do their habits out of the public eye, whereas think skulled men are stupid (defiant and brave) enough to do an illegal act out in the open?

Though one thing that really did not surprise me was the total lack of use of this website by Asian countries, especially Singapore. I wonder if it is just because these countries dont know that this wonderful website exists. Though I am leaning towards the whole idea that they dont know about it because the numbers indicate a strong USA use, average Canadian use and the farther from USA, the lesser the numbers.

So, I wonder, free dating site helping those with special hobbies attract each other OR cunning police predator trap out to catch the slower of the prey? You be the judge...

Sitara Hewitt..lady of many talents

Wow, I just made this connection. I am sure that many people out there have already made this connection, but for me it comes a little slower. For some reason I cant grasp the double naming of a character and actor in shows. For instance, Pierce Brosnan is never Brosnan. When people ask me who I think was the best Bond ever I have to reply "in the past it was always Dr. Jones but recently I have changed that to Remington Steele". Of course when I get the "WTF?!?!?" look on the faces of the people I have to go back and really think and say "sorry, Connery was good in the past, but Brosnan is a better Bond now I think".

Same thing happened with these two shows of Your Bet Your Ass and Little Mosque On The Prairie. All I can say is WOW does that Sitara clean up nice, and by 'clean up nice' I mean get really hot when you throw her in short shorts or short skits and tight fitting t-shirts with sexual comments on them. I mean, take a look at these clips from the shows with her.

YOU BET YOUR ASS



LITTLE MOSQUE ON THE PRAIRIE 5:00 to 4:00



Guess I am just a typical perverted male horndog but who would have thought such a gorgeous gal was wrapped up in those sheets on LMOTP. But at least it shows that the girl has range and can play two polar opposite roles convincingly. She can play a devote muslim woman in one and a slutty North American woman in another. That is like being able to go up and sing an opera Aria perfectly and then grab a microphone and do a south central rap that would put Eminem to shame.

to lie, or not to lie, that is the question...

As a man, did you ever have that dreaded question of "do these pants make me look fat?" or what about "oh, do you want to go and see the new chick flick that has been released?" Now, the real answer is going to be somewhere in the lines of "trust me honey, it is not the pants" or "chick flick? nah, how about we go to a movie that is actually interesting". However, we all know that the answers you should come back with are in the lines of "of course not honey, you look gorgeous in those pants" and "chick flick? oh man, I never thought you would ask, lets go tonight!". However, women constantly ask us to be honest. Interesting, isnt it?

While talking to my friends, we all seemed to share a rather interesting thought and, as what always happens when guys get together and bang their heads together hard enough, we developed a rather interesting idea. It seems that when asked of their girlfriends/SO/wives, the common thing mentioned is that in a relationship women always want honesty and sincerity. When I did a quick look with online articles later, I found a few mentions of this fact like in the one article on www.askmen.com that read "Sincerity and honesty ranked high and were the most requested character traits desired in men. "I don't want anymore bull from men. No more 'it's not you it's me' crap. I want the truth. I want the guy to be open and honest about his feelings with me," explained Sarah" (http://ca.askmen.com/dating/heidi/18_dating_girl.html) Granted, she did say that she wants honesty and sincerity when it came to the mans feelings towards her, which kind of leads it open to suggest that she wants lies and half truths when dealing with thoughts about her fashion sense, friends, family and other ego slamming items in her life. However, when it all comes down to it, I seem to see a rather interesting trend that suggests that women want men to be truthful and honest in the relationship.

Funny how when it comes to cosmetic surgery and make up fashion, women seem to be the leader in using these items and medical advances. Interesting how in Canada, "85.41% of all cosmetic procedures are performed on women in Canada, 42% of whom reside in Ontario." (http://www.plasticsurgerystatistics.com/number_performed_canada.html) For more statistics on this you can go to http://www.plasticsurgerystatistics.com/quick_facts_03.html. Funny how women appear to suggest that they want honesty in a relationship and for men to be sincere and show our true selves, but when it comes to themselves, women will go to extreme lengths to hide their true forms and faces. Have you ever walked around a drug store or seen beauty salon products in spas and such? I mean, I walk into my local drug store and I can see maybe 2 aisles (if you put them all together) of masculine products (pit stick, toothpaste, shaving cream, after shave and such). Then there is the usual aisle for female necessities (pads, tampons, female cleansers) that really I will admit are needed by women for their biological needs as opposed to cosmetic needs. That leaves about 3-4 aisles of completely cosmetic items like shampoo, gel, conditions and the one complete section devoted completely to make up and all the tiny nazi torture device items (tweezers, pluckers, curlers, files, clippers) that women have in the bathroom.

Even looking at a married couples medicine cabinet will give away this uneven playing field of products. A couples medicine cabinet might have 1/4 dedicated to medicine, 1/8 dedicated to mans needs (basically a can of shaving cream, aftershave and toothpaste) and the rest of the cabinet is filled with make up and other devices. Look at a house that is being occupied by an all male population as compared to an all female population. I have stayed at friends dorm rooms that were all guys and you would have probably 3 bottles of shampoo, 3 conditioners, 4 toothbrushes and 2-3 tubes of toothpaste (there is always the one moocher who is going to buy his supplies 'tomorrow..honestly guys' and 'borrows' some of the items til he can). There might be a can or two of shaving cream and a few razors but that is pretty much it. You go to shower in an all woman bathroom and you cant find a single space free surrounding the tube cause they are filled with bottles and bath products because the hanging device to organize these items is filled with other items as well. I mean, it is a relative smorgasborg of products that all women 'have to have'.

So why is it that when it comes to relationships men are expected to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, when women are constantly lying to their man about who they really are? After the liposuction, lip collogen, make up, clothes, hair products and all are applied, what are we really dating? a true woman or the image of that woman that they want to project? Then what happens when they stop lying to the guys and stop putting on all that make up or going for the liposuction and other medical advances, who are the men left with?

So, why do women do this? perhaps it is for the same reason that men lie in a relationship. Men lie to make themselves more appealing to the ideal image that women want, or society has created for men to be. You have all seen the men that women lust after in the movies. Romantic, suave and sophisticated knights in shining armour. Either they are caring, sweet, sensitive and career minded go getters that know what to say, how to say it and make the world revolve around the woman. We all have our own little fantasies of what the person we are settling down with is going to be like, and we might unknowingly condition the other person to be that way. So, men try to lie in a relationship to make ourselves more like those movie/book heros of sophistication and knowing what to say and how to say things perfectly. So we will lie when we are asked if you look fat in those pants because we are diplomatically charming, we will say we want to see that chick flick because that shows that we are sensitive and caring. Just as when it comes to women, women will put on their make up, do the medical alterations and change their outer bodies completely to fill in the roll of perfect female that they think men want.

Dont get me wrong, I am all for body hygene and upkeep. Shower or bathe, clip your nails, comb your hair and keep healthy. I find nothing more attractive then seeing my wife dress up or wear her hair the way I like to please me. I just dont like it when women seem to fall back on the 'men are all liars, women hardly lie'. That, to me, is like a smoker saying "damn, I hate those filthy litter bugs" as the flick a cigarette butt out the window of a moving car onto the street. We all lie in a relationship, we just lie in different fashions. Men might lie to improve their inner image to women to make them more appealing as mates, whereas women lie about their outer appearance to attract mates. In the end, regardless of inner or outer, we are all lying and deceiving others around us.

Why this man doesnt ask for directions

Ok, maybe it is just me, but here is why I dont ask for directions. It seems the whenever I go into a gas station/convenience store and ask for directions, or ask for directions in any fashion, I always get the most detailed directions for going 5 blocks, but for anything over that it sort of gets glazed over.

I asked for directions once how to get to a bar from a gas station and the girl proceeded to give me the most indepth directions that you would ever need. I mean, she didnt just say "go left on this street, down two blocks and hang a right and it is on your left". I got "take this road out to that exit from this parking lot, hang a left and get into your first lane. Drive for roughly 2-3 minutes and you will pass two lights, a school cross zone and there will be NAMED mall on your right and the Esso gas on the left. Go...." and on and on and on. Not just from one girl, it seems every time I ask for something within that distance, those are the directions I get.

Then when you ask for directions to another city or something that takes more than just 1 minute to drive to, the directions get so vague and all that it is aggravating. I asked for directions from one city to another and I get "go out here, hang right, go straight to highway and go straight". Makes it sound easy doesnt it? yeah, until you get to the point where after you turn right and you go straight you pass by about 5 turns and the highway that you want goes either right or left, and if you have guessed right on that, there are usually other turns or you have to turn left or right before the highway that the person forgets. It always happens. Then when you ask for clarification, or you repeat the instructions back and ask questions like "ok, go straight to the highway, is that a left or right at the highway?" you get a blank stare, followed by a sigh and then they repeat the same vague directions again and again until you finally nod and walk out the door.

So, now when I have to go anywhere, I buy a map of the location and go with it. This would also explain why I have a wide assortment of maps of not only my area but also the province to the left and right of me. I have maps of nearly every city I have driven in as well. So, is it just me or is this why men dont ask for directions as well? is it because the stupid answers that you get or is it because, being a man, having to ask for assistance diminishes the male ego of dominance and superiority?