The real reasons...

In the prelude to the US election, it seems everyone has been lopsidedly focused on the war in Iraq, terrorism, and the recession at home. But there are many other domestic and foreign issues that constantly pass under the radar. Almost all of them are derived from a single common thread: Bush's personal religious agenda, that of the religious right, and to a large extent that of the Vatican. The administration has consistently damaged American scientific institutions and their relationships with governing bodies. They seem to believe that the science itself is of no value, that the truth-content is irrelevant. A scientist is only someone who can endorse the Bush agenda, or be fired. The motivation for this kind of insanity is undoubtedly religious, and is rooted in Bush's deeply held sense of religious supremacy. He knows things the scientists don't. He talks to God. What good is a scientific opinion when you've got God on the line? On of the most offensive instances of this religious policy-making is in Bush's attitude toward the WHO, the UN population fund, and other organizations which support condom distribution to fight AIDS in Africa. From boston.com:

The Bush administration announced yesterday that it is withholding the United States' contribution to the UN Population Fund for the third straight year, once again accusing the family-planning organization of supporting coercive abortion in China. The decision to withhold $34 million -- about 10 percent of the fund's total budget -- from the world's largest international source of funding for family planning came on the last day of the International AIDS Conference in Bangkok, where US officials emphasized abstinence as an important way to combat AIDS. [snip] One of the first acts of Bush's presidency was reinstating the ''Mexico City Policy," which prohibits federal funding for overseas groups that support abortion. Initially, the Bush administration showed support for the Population Fund. During his confirmation hearing, Powell praised the fund's ''invaluable work" and released $25 million for the fund in 2001, according to Sarah Craven, the fund's Washington representative. In 2002, Congress increased the figure to $34 million. But the administration opted to hold up the funds after Bush received a letter in February 2002 urging him to do so from three Republican leaders in Congress. Richard Armey of Texas, who was House majority leader at the time; Tom DeLay of Texas, who was majority whip; and Dennis J. Hastert of Illinois, speaker of the House, wrote that the fund essentially ''participates in the management" of China's coercive family-planning programs. In 2002, Powell dispatched a team to China to look into the allegations. It reported finding ''no evidence that the UNFPA has knowingly supported or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization."

Meanwhile, according to the Washington Post:

Since the last AIDS conference in Barcelona in 2002, the number of people being treated for the disease has doubled in the developing world to 440,000. At the same time, 6 million people died from the virus and 10 million more became infected, WHO figures show. [snip] In 2002 President Bush introduced a $15 billion AIDS-fighting plan, mainly directed toward 14 countries in Africa and the Caribbean, plus Vietnam. Critics say the United States should instead give much of that money to the U.N.-sponsored Global Fund, which reaches 128 countries. The U.S. money comes with strings attached -- one-third of that earmarked for prevention goes to abstinence-first programs [read: religious/obstructionist]. Also, the money can only buy branded drugs made by companies in rich countries, shutting out cheaper generic medicines from countries such as India, Brazil and Thailand. Global Fund money can go toward generics.

I wonder how much of that money is going to Catholic organizations operating in Africa, where at least one diocese was distributing information claiming that "condoms cause AIDS." Are they really pro-abstinence or are they anti-condom? Anyway, back to my main point: it doesn't really matter whether Iraq has/had WMDs, or how many terrorists there are, or that the economy is in a slump. We need to pause and look at everything else. Then it may turn out that war with Iraq (under false pretenses) really is the most redeeming item on Bush's resume.

Silver lining

There may be a silver lining for the possibly pending charges against Moore. Some more astute Canadians are urging charges be filed so that they can raise a challenge to the law. This is from the Globe and Mail:

Section 331 of the Canada Elections Act, part of a revamping of the act in 2000, prohibits "foreigners" from inducing electors to vote for or to refrain from voting for a particular candidate. This untested section says that non-residents or non-citizens who "willfully" make such comments during an election campaign could face a $2,000 fine or six months in jail. More than 1,600 people have signed Mr. Nejatian's petition to ask Elections Canada to prosecute, and the student is receiving support from an unlikely corner. "Personally, I think Michael Moore has every right to say whatever he wants about the Canadian election," said Gerry Nicholls, vice-president of the National Citizens' Coalition, which has been fighting what he calls Canadian election "gag laws" for years. But he wants charges laid so there can be a challenge to the law. Elections Canada isn't commenting on the yet-to-be-filed complaint. But one constitutional law professor called Section 331 a "joke" and unconstitutional because it unreasonably limits freedom of expression under the Charter of Rights. Quite so. It is a bad law. And Mr. Moore may be just the person to challenge it. Election campaign rules shouldn't give governments the right to dictate what voters can hear or what they can tune out.

Followup on charging Moore.

It appears that Canada is seriously considering filing charges against Michael Moore for political statements that he made during a June visit. Is this country so fucking weak-brained that they can't handle a little public commentary from an outsider? Apparently the answer is "yes":

Elections Canada is mulling over plans to charge Fahrenheit 9/11 filmmaker Michael Moore for a direct violation of Canadian electoral law. However, Canadafreepress.com is reported to have learned through sources that the charges will be filed by the end of the week.

So many times I've heard Canadians complain that Americans know nothing of their politics. I've been asked my opinion about candidates many times during the buildup to their recent election. They have a TV show which mocks American ignorance of Canadian politics. But look at it this way: if Americans become informed about Canadian politics, they will likely form opinions. Being Americans, they will likely voice those opinions in a very loud and public way. Once they do that, Canada calls it a fucking crime and could put you in jail for up to six months! By informing me of Canadian politics and asking my opinion, are my "friends" trying to entrap me in the commission of a crime!? Probably not. But I still think Canada, as a nation, is a two-faced ass head.

The weather?

I am beginning to believe that the Alberta weather services do not actually have instruments, and perhaps not even windows. I have been wondering since I moved to Edmonton how weather.ca and weather.com can consistently report completely different current conditions for the same small city. Both of them are currently reporting that it is 80-84 degrees and partly or mostly cloudy. There hasn't been a cloud in the sky all day, and it has to be at least 90 out there. I have experienced 85-90 degree weather within the past month and I can guarantee that this is hotter. This is no different from last February, when one site reported a temperature of -30(C) while the other reported -53(C). Judging by the way they operate, I can authoritatively claim it was -70(C) that day. Even in Vermont they were saying it was -100(F), and we had to be colder than Vermont. During a big hail storm last week, more than a hundred million dollars damage was done in the city. The hail fell strong enough in parts of the city to destroy cars. The roof of the West Edmonton Mall was cracked open and the interior of the mall flooded. Then sewage backed up in the mall and all over the west end of the city. Dozens of cars were drowned. Bridges became structurally unsound. There were at least four tornadoes in the north Alberta region during the storm. Meanwhile, the weather service reported conditions as "partly cloudy." Apparently the tornado warning was issued in one town about two hours after the tornado had already ripped up main street.

Most desirable figures.

After taking careful measurements, I have determined that I have the optimal male waist-to-hips circumference ratio, 0.9. I am therefore sexy. For females, the optimal ratio is 0.6, according to this study carried out by Jennifer Connoly and Dr Virginia Slaughter of Queensland University.