Venezuela’s colour-coded revolution

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:53 AM - 0 Comments

Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez has started to implement his four-part colour-coded “Revolutionary Reading Plan.” Announced in May, the goal of the project is “the democratization of books and reading, with a new conception of reading as a collective act under the fundamental values and principles of revolutionary socialism.” To this end, the government is encouraging the formation of Revolutionary Reading Squadrons: state-sponsored book clubs, formed in schools, unions, libraries or neighborhood centers, led by a designated Promoter of the Revolutionary Reading Plan, and following a set list of 100 books the government has drawn up. The books are chosen for their ability to, among other things, “strengthen our Latin American and anti-imperialist identity” and “develop a new ethics based on socialist education and culture.” In all four phases, meetings will be led by a “group leader” who will direct analysis and discussion of the book. They are instructed to follow a specific sequence of reading selections, initially enticing readers with literature, and then progressing through to books with an overt ideological agenda. In all there are four phases to the curriculum: In the first, dubbed Red Squadrons, readers are introduced to books like the letters exchanged between revolutionary leader Simón Bolívar and his lover Manuela Sáenz—the idea being that readers will be able to readily identify and empathize with Bolivar, not for his politics, but his humanity. In the first phase, at least, leaders are to encourage reading aloud. In the second phase, readers move up to the “Green Squadron” where they will work on “deconstructing the capitalist worldview through reading and discussion of texts about our true symbols.” Third comes the Orange Squadron, which focuses on “consolidating the reader as an individual and collective subject of the socialist and revolutionary project.” Fourth and last are the Black Squadrons, which are devoted to “sharing textual tools for cultural resistance against the ideological cultural attacks of the imperialists.” All groups will also be required to conduct a critical reading of the country’s newspapers, “to discover the strategies and psychological operations the bourgeois media uses against our revolutionary progress and our commander.” The books chosen for the program include some classic (if fiery) literary works like Doña Bárbara by Rómulo Gallegos and poetry by César Vallejo, Rubén Darío and José Martí, writings by revolutionary figures Simón Bolívar, Che Guevara, and Fidel Castro, as well as a number of contemporary and openly ideological texts by Chávez or members of his administration.

Publishing Perspectives

Superheroes in court

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:50 AM - 0 Comments

Some of the biggest names in comic book history, from Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk to the X-Men and Fantastic Four, have found themselves locked in a new battle over who owns their copyright. The superheroes have been invoked by the heirs of the comic-strip artist Jack Kirby, who died in 1994 after being involved in the creation of dozens of popular characters. Kirby’s four children have lodged 45 notices of termination of copyright by which they would acquire their father’s share when it comes up. Under America’s complicated copyright laws, the rights for the Fantastic Four, for example, would come up in 2017, the Hulk in 2018 and X-Men in 2019. If the children win their claims, they will then hold their portion of the rights for the following 39 years before the characters become open public property. Victory in the claims would give the children rights to a share of the profits from any film or other spin-off made from the characters, and they could even sell the rights themselves, independently of Marvel or any of the big studios. The new claims have implications for a large number of media companies, including Sony Pictures, which owns film rights to Spider-Man, Universal, which has distribution rights to Hulk films, and 20th Century Fox, which owns film rights to the Fantastic Four and X-Men. The company that stands to lose most is Disney, which has just agreed to buy Marvel for $4bn (£2.5bn). Disney has said that it entered into the deal in full knowledge of the Kirby claim. As the legal case progresses, interested parties will have to decide to what degree Kirby was responsible for the creation of the Marvel characters. Kirby worked closely with Marvel’s editor-in-chief, Stan Lee, and together they also devised Mighty Thor, Iron Man and the Avengers.

Guardian

UPDATED: Whatever you do, don't look around the corner! – Not liveblogging Jim Prentice at the UN climate change conference

By kadyomalley - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:49 AM - 34 Comments

Huh. Well, that was odd.

ITQ was all ready to liveblog Jim Prentice’s conference call from New York City to discuss ” his participation at the United Nations Secretary General Leaders Summit on climate change.” But when she called in to register — less than five minutes before the call was scheduled to get underway — the apologetic, if slightly frazzled-sounding voice on the other end of the phone informed her that it had just –like seconds before — been cancelled without explanation.

Now, to be fair, the call might have been called off due to some sort of last minute timing conflict — maybe the minister is running late, or perhaps he wasn’t able to get to a phone since he was so busy explaining to everyone in earshot that Canada will have “bold and forward-looking climate change policies with respect to all sources of carbon emissions” by the end of the year.  Still, it’s hard to see it as a terribly auspicious omen as far as the prime minister’s dinner plans this evening.

UPDATE: Found him — or, at least, where he may, in theory, be later today. According to the official programme, this afternoon, Canada will take part in a roundtable co-chaired by Mongolia and the European Commission.

Also, you guys? I don’t want to needlessly alarm anyone, but a quick poke around the summit website reveals that Canada isn’t exactly taking on what you might call a major role at this event.

Not only is the prime minister not scheduled to speak at the conference itself, but he hasn’t even provided a video statement instead (insert Stephane Dion cameraman joke here). Instead, he’s apparently heading off for a meet ‘n’ greet with Mayor Bloomberg before the post-summit leaders’ dinner, where he once again won’t be speaking.

Which seems a little unlike him — I mean, ordinarily, this is a guy who relishes the opportunity to look all statesmanly on the world stage. Canada’s still back, right? Then again, this is one venue where the “stay the course” mantra that his government has adopted as its motto wouldn’t exactly fit with the overall theme.

Anyway, ITQ will keep you posted on further events — or non-events — as they happen. Or don’t happen. Man, this would be so much easier if she was in New York.

Canadian baby boom?

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:24 AM - 5 Comments

Numbers released today by Statistics Canada reveal the national birth rate to be increasing, up 3.6 per cent in 2007 over 2006. Of the 367,864 babies born in 2007, more than half (57 per cent) were born to mothers over 30. The number of births was the highest since 1995 and the fifth consecutive annual increase. Statistics reveal the birth rate rose in all age groups, particularly among mothers aged 30 to 34, and in every province and territory, except Prince Edward Island and Yukon. Among the provinces, Saskatchewan women had the highest fertility rate at 2.03 children per woman, while Newfoundland and Labrador had the lowest fertility rate at 1.46 children per woman. “This upward trend is not unique to Canada,” the agency said in a news release. “In recent years, other countries with low fertility rates—such as Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom and Australia—also experienced an increase in their total fertility rate.”

Canada.com

To get more women into Parliament, we've got to get rid of some of the women in Parliament

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:03 AM - 51 Comments

With all the usual caveats whenever anonymous Liberals are involved, a novel theory is attributed to Denis Coderre here.

Coderre has pressured some long-serving MPs with safe seats to resign, according to a number of Liberal sources. They told CBC News the party wants those seats for star female candidates as part of its renewal process. The sources said former party leader Stéphane Dion, along with Bernard Patry, Raymonde Folco, and Lise Zarac, have all been asked to step aside.

Two of those MPs are publicly downplaying the suggestion. Patry said he did speak to Coderre about his future candidacy, but when asked by CBC News if he felt pressured to resign, he said, “Not really.” ”He asked me if I thought I would run again and I told him yes,” Patry said.

In an interview, Folco said she had heard rumours that she was going to be asked to resign, so she made an appointment to meet with the leader. ”I said, ‘I want to stay’ and he said, ‘It’s true, I want renewal, but you will stay in the party and be the candidate for Laval-Les Îles.’”

Speaking of renewal, Lise Zarac was first elected all of eleven and a half months ago. Change moves swiftly these days.

The big gamble

By John Geddes - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 11:00 AM - 34 Comments

By the unofficial rules of Tory campaign etiquette, as set down in recent elections, it should have been a disaster. Caught in an amateur video clip, apparently believing he was speaking only to loyalists behind closed doors in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., a grimly determined Stephen Harper exhorted campaign troops to go out and win him a majority. The Prime Minister seemed to be ignoring lessons he learned the hard way­—about avoiding the M-word, lest he sound power-hungry and scare off swing voters.

In the 2004 campaign, his remark that Conservatives were “edging closer” to majority was enough to drive skittish centrists back into the arms of the Liberals. In 2006, he tried to reassure voters fearful a Tory majority would be a hard-right regime by saying that Liberal-appointed civil servants and judges would hold him in check. By 2008, he was taking a more direct approach: no sooner had he called the election than he predicted a tight race resulting in a nice, safe minority. Continue…

And for their next trick, they'll make the prime minister disappear

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 10:59 AM - 20 Comments

Just one day after Canadian Press reported on the millions of dollars being spent to promote the Conservative economic action plan, more than two dozen photos of Stephen Harper have apparently vanished from the EAP website—but at the moment, nobody in government seems to be willing to own up to pulling the pics. When initially contacted by CP over the weekend, Privy Council Office spokeswoman Myriam Massabki had defended the Harper-heavy imagery, telling Bruce Cheadle that the PM was “the chief spokesperson … for the plan.” Last night, in a response that CP characterized as a “single talking point that can in no way be reconciled with the altered appearance of the site,” Massabki denied that any pictures had been removed.

Canadian Press

Harper: Canada will be out of Afghanistan in 2011

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 10:51 AM - 1 Comment

Amidst calls from NATO’s commander for more resources, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised on Monday that Canada will withdraw from Afghanistan in 2011. “I was very clear in my meetings in the United States last week that that remains Canada’s plan,” Harper explained. The PM also discussed the need for Afghan forces to take control of their own security: “I think in this time frame we’ve just got to see some results from the Afghan government on the ground.” That pledge came just one day after a report by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who commands U.S. and NATO forces, was published by the Washington Post. The 66-page report stresses the need for a new Afghan strategy, in addition to improved resources. “Resources will not win this war,” McChrystal said. “But under-resourcing could lose it.” Without those changes, the General added, NATO “risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible. Still, Harper is committed to relieving the more than 2,800 Canadians currently serving under NATO in Afghanistan. In preparation, he says, more Canadian resources will be shifted away from security–and moved into development and humanitarian aid.

CBC

Rumsfeld's "Wika Wakka" problem

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 10:49 AM - 7 Comments

Among the revelations in Bush speechwriter Matt Latimer’s tell-all book is that Donald Rumsfeld, the man Latimer originally worked for, knew too much and not enough about Wikipedia. Rumsfeld referred to the popular online encyclopedia as “Wika Wakka,” and he wanted to re-edit his own entry to remove unflattering or inaccurate information about him. His staffers had to talk him out of contributing to the site. However, Rumsfeld continued to take a personal interest in all things Internet-related, reading the Drudge Report every day and watching YouTube clips where people made fun of him. So remember: when you criticize Donald Rumsfeld online, he’s probably reading or watching it.

Huffington Post

Giant squid discovered in Gulf of Mexico

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 10:48 AM - 0 Comments

Not since 1954, when a giant squid was found floating dead near the Mississippi delta, has one of the rare creatures been seen in the Gulf of Mexico—yet U.S. scientists are reporting they accidentally netted a 19.5 foot (5.9 metre) giant squid off the coast of Louisiana, Reuters reports. It just goes to show how little is known about creatures who live in Gulf. Weighing 103 pounds, the rare species was caught July 30 in a trawl net over 1,500 feet underwater. It didn’t survive the trip to the surface, but was preserved and sent to the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History for research. The scientists who discovered it were taking part in a two-year study on the diet of sperm whales. “As the trawl net rose out of the water, I could see that we had something big in there … really big,” chief researcher Anthony Martinez, a marine mammal scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said in a statement. Giant squid can reach up to 40 feet long, and are usually found in deep water off Spain or New Zealand; this marks the first time one’s been captured during scientific research off the Gulf of Mexico, although the remains of giant squid have been found in stomachs of other creatures in the Gulf, so scientists knew they were there.

Reuters

Smoke 'em if you can get 'em (and you can)

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 10:44 AM - 1 Comment

Le Journal de Montréal sends two youngish-looking teens to two Montreal-area Indian reserves to buy cigarettes from several ‘smoke houses.’ In all but one case, these establishments sold contraband cigarettes, which dot both the Kahnawake and Kanasatake reserves, to the two teens, the oldest of which was 17. “I never thought it would be so easy” to get smokes, said one of the teens hired by Le Journal.

Canoe.com

Our long national bagel nightmare is finally over

By Scott Feschuk - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 9:21 AM - 34 Comments

You know how taking out a bagel and spreading cream cheese on it can be a frustrating and onerous chore? Me neither. But apparently it is because commercials are everywhere now for Kraft Bagel-fuls – a bagel-type substance that come wrapped around a wad of cream cheese and is available in your grocer’s freezer. Half the taste and four million times the chemicals! (I’m kidding, Kraft Foods: I’m sure the fact that a Bagel-ful looks exactly like a Twinkie has no bearing on its nutritional content.)

On one hand, there’s the organics movement, the 100-mile diet, slow dining, grass-fed cattle, flying to Indonesia to offer soothing massage to the impoverished workers who harvest your coffee beans and all that. On the other hand, there’s the food that most people actually eat. In a miraculous age in which science has made it possible for us to consume our Special K in liquid form, Kraft Bagel-fuls offer value in three keys areas:

Relief – Recent statistics indicate that applying cream cheese to a bagel is causing 70 per cent of North Americans to get winded. Another 12 per cent keep trying to spread the bagel onto the cream cheese.

Productivity – With the four seconds they save Continue…

How I Met Your Carter

By Jaime Weinman - Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 12:52 AM - 0 Comments

The new season of How I Met Your Mother started tonight, so you might want to check out Hitfix’s interview with co-creator Carter Bays. He talks mostly about the themes of last season — mostly, putting Ted through a lot of bad stuff, dropping obviously false hints about who The Mother might be, and hiding two pregnancies in very awkward ways — but does mention a few things planned for this season, particularly one thing that became apparent in the season premiere: Ted is going to be more well-adjusted and happy than last year. Whether this is considered pleasing, or just an excuse for him to be an even more annoying person than he usually is (he sometimes turns human in episodes where he is made to suffer, particularly the memorable “Shelter Island”), is for the viewer to decide.

Also, Myles has his take on The Big Bang Theory season premiere and what he sees as the cruel treatment of Sheldon by his supposed friends. While the show has its unaddressed weaknesses, I’m not sure I agree that that’s one of them. It’s true that with the possible exception of Penny, most of the characters aren’t nice to Sheldon. It’s also true that he’s such an obnoxious lunatic, by real-world standards, that anything they do or say to him is (again, by real-world standards) sort of justified. If the other characters treated his behaviour as cute or even tolerable, we would be in danger of a “Jerkass Homer” situation: the character who acts like a jerk and is never punished for it. We’re freed up to love a character like that only because other people acknowledge how horrible he would be to live with, so we don’t have to, and can instead focus on his good qualities (plus the charm of the very traits that would make us hate him in real life). Otherwise we find ourselves wondering why the characters don’t acknowledge the truth about this person’s behaviour, and before you know it, we’re Frank Grimes, screaming at the television set and asking why no one on the show seems to notice that this person is nuts. What I suppose I’m saying is that the audience would not like this character if the other characters didn’t — sometimes — fulfil the basic and important role of being annoyed by him. For every Dennis the Menace there must be a Mr. Wilson.

Am I The Only One That Gets It?

By Jaime Weinman - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 11:56 PM - 13 Comments

You may have seen this Kids In the Hall clip making the rounds recently, because Dave Foley, sitting in a studio in Canada in the ’90s, bears an eerie resemblance to a number of television pundits who existed only in embryonic (or radio) form at the time. He even ends the sketch by emphasizing the word “FOX!” But what it really shows is not that the Kids anticipated the future, but that they were satirizing the state of TV punditry at the time. Maybe things haven’t changed so much after all.

I get the feeling that part of the Kids’ inspiration for that sketch was this Monty Python bit, but the Kids’ version is better; with the obvious exception of Gilliam (who didn’t perform that much), the Pythons were always at their weakest when playing Americans. (Whenever any of them did an American accent, their regular style sort of fell away and they wound up doing the corniest, most obvious routines about war-mongering generals and film producers with lots of yes-men, the kind of sketches you’d see on any U.S. variety show.)

The PQ=GOP for French people

By Martin Patriquin - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 6:51 PM - 31 Comments

Whoah. I smells me another mini-psychodrama a-brewin’.

Andrew Sullivan, noted  gay Roman Catholic Libertarian blogger, had a zinger on his site today. While discussing how the Republican fringe (and, by extension, the Republican Party) is much louder than it is important, he said the following: “A reader recently made a very interesting reference. He said he believed that the GOP was morphing into the American equivalent of the Parti Quebecois. It is essentially a regional party now–representing the South in the national discourse. And its rhetoric seems divorced from any desire to actually hold responsible public office. So Republicans, like the Quebecers, tend to use politics as a means for disruption or protest or threat or veto.”

I won’t say much on this–far be it from me to stand in the way of a good péquiste-GOP-gay Roman Catholic Libertarian flame war. However, I’d argue that the PQ has always been a regional party–one with aspirations to be otherwise, of course, but a regional party all the same. Perhaps a better comparison would be the Bloc Québécois, in that it’s a federal party that represents a regionally based electorate. The Bloc, unlike the PQ, really and honestly has no desire to actually hold public office (though it’ll do so in a pinch.) And Duceppe et al. also know a thing or seven about disruption, protest, threats and (de facto) vetoes.

The Cold, Cold Emmys

By Jaime Weinman - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 5:20 PM - 6 Comments

Well, there isn’t a lot to say about them, since they mostly gave the awards to the same people as last year. I keep thinking that the Emmys’ preference for Mad Men and especially 30 Rock signifies a certain preference for hard-hearted coldness on the part of the Emmy voters. For some, Mad Men is easier to admire than to love, and encourages a certain amount of audience distance from the subject, characters and time period (though there’s a very valid counter-argument that the distancing effects don’t actually preclude emotional involvement, they just make us look at the issues in a more clear-eyed way). And 30 Rock is sort of a technocratic comedy, where the joke writing is on a high level, but almost every character is a cartoonish lunatic. The closest thing the show has to a human being is Jack, who — and I’m sorry for repeating myself — has become the show’s straight man and voice of sanity as Liz has become a complete psycho. Its lack of mainstream success is no more surprising than that of Arrested Development, another extremely well-crafted comedy that didn’t have a lot of characters who bore much resemblance to human beings.

I think Mad Men deserved its repeat win, 30 Rock, not so much (its inability to grow, and the fact that it’s let certain holes get bigger like the almost complete wasting of several characters/actors, suggests to me that it’s an entertaining show that peaked in its second year, and isn’t really going to get anywhere near being a great show). But taken together, we can get a sense that Emmy voters, and therefore the majority of TV industry people, don’t worry too much about the emotional temperature of a show; for a show to have a reputation for coldness or lack of charm is not a problem at the Emmys. You could say that dramas have had this going on for some years now, in that the Emmys love showy displays of pure technique like The West Wing, and rarely give the Best Drama award to a show about regular everyday human beings. In fact, by that standard, Mad Men may be more down-to-earth and relatable than most of the other recent winners. But the Emmys used to have a strong bias toward comedies with an element of charm or sentiment, which is one explanation of why Seinfeld and Arrested Development only managed one win each. (And both pulled off their wins before the characters became complete monsters.) Now 30 Rock seems destined to win every year. I don’t know if this is a sign that Emmy voters have now equalized their standards for comedy and drama, or if Emmy voters hate people more than they did a few years back.

Technicalities

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 4:35 PM - 18 Comments

Stephen Harper, Nov. 23, 2008. Canada faces the prospect of falling into a “technical recession” and Ottawa might have to take unprecedented actions to stimulate the faltering economy, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Sunday. ”The most recent private sector forecasts suggest the strong possibility of a technical recession the end of this year, the beginning of next,” Harper told a news conference at the conclusion of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in Peru. ”Yes, I am surprised at this. I’m also further surprised, more importantly, by deflationary pressure that we’re seeing around the world. This is a worrying development, one of the reasons why it may well be necessary to take unprecedented fiscal stimulus.”

Stephen Harper, Sept. 21, 2009. The recession in Canada is only over in a technical sense because the recovery is extremely fragile and there are still problems in the job market, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Monday. ”We’ve got (Federal Reserve) Chairman (Ben) Bernanke and others saying the recession is over but I think that’s only in a technical sense,” Mr. Harper told a televised news conference in Guelph, Ont. ”As long as we continue to have challenges in the labor market that affect Canadian families on the ground, then I don’t think we can truly say the recession is over. So I think the recovery, while it exists, is extremely fragile.”

Ignatieff's HST stance unmurkified? ITQ wouldn't go that far, but it's a start.

By kadyomalley - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM - 66 Comments

Well, in marked contrast to his reaction to being questioned about his HST stance last week, Michael Ignatieff at least now seems willing to admit that he has, in fact, taken a position on the harmonization plan, and even clarifies — albeit in rather vague terms — how his position differs from that of the current Conservative government.

He also confirms that, as “a party of government”, it would be irresponsible of the Liberals to say that they’d “rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated between a federal … and a provincial government.” That doesn’t, however, mean that, as prime minister, he wouldn’t sit down with those provincial governments to discuss any “problems in the application” of the existing agreement in order to make it “fairer and more equitable for Canadians.”

On the other hand, he still didn’t have an explanation for the Three’s Company-calibre communication meltdown that apparently occurred between OLO and Queen’s Park over where, exactly, his party stood on the HST deal with Ontario, although in his defence, nobody asked him for one.

Anyway, here’s a quick and dirty transcript — and note that the first question is from none other than Colleague Rich Madan of CityTV: 

Question: Last week the premier said he would ask you to clarify your position on the harmonized sales tax. I’m wondering, we have you here in Toronto today — could you clarify whether you support or don’t support the introduction of an HST in Ontario and British Columbia?

Michael Ignatieff: Look, the HST harmonized sales taxing arrangement was initiated by the Harper government. They have sought the cooperation of two provinces. There are a couple of problems. The first problem is, there is no national plan. So Mr. Harper as usual is playing one province against the other. The BC plan looks this way. The Ontario plan is different. We would have done that differently. We think this is one country. And if you’re going to do harmonized sales tax, you ought to have a national plan that has consistent national sense, so that’s the first problem.

The second problem is that if this is a deal done by the Harper government and the McGuinty government and the Campbell government and we come into office, we’re a party of government. We’re serious, professional people. We are not going to rip up an agreement that has been duly negotiated in — between a federal government and a provincial government but — and this would be my third and final remark — in those cases where there is still unfairness, there is still problems in its application, we would listen carefully to the provincial government’s concern, and see what we could do to make it fairer and more equitable for the Canadians and the provinces concerned.

Question: I’m going to ask a follow-up to Mr. Madan’s question. We know what you were saying what would you do but where do you personally stand on this agreement between Prime Minister Harper and the governments of British Columbia and Ontario? Where do you stand on this issue?

Michael Ignatieff: My view of this is — look, Mr. Harper decided to push sales tax harmonization in the middle of a recession. He got two provinces to agree. The right way to do this is to get a national plan with a harmonized sales tax proposal that makes sense for all the provinces. Instead, he’s playing one province against the other. That’s problem number one.

Problem number 2 is, were we in government and this sales tax is in place and the harmonization has occurred, it’s just not responsible for a party of government to say, well, we’ll tear it up and go back to ground zero. What we can do and what we can say to Ontarians and British Columbians is if there is unfairness, if there are problems, if there are things that are really hurting the local economy, of course we’re going to sit down with the province and say, can we correct this? Can we help? Can we make this fairer for Canadians. That, I’m prepared to do.

Outremont: In the finest tradition of the Liberal Party

By Paul Wells - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 3:38 PM - 77 Comments

It’s good to see Denis Coderre and Martin Cauchon getting along again in Outremont. I greatly fear I may have contributed, long ago, to all of this; right after the 2000 election I interviewed both men for the National Post on their thinly-veiled ambition to replace Jean Chrétien’s replacement and become the next-next Liberal leader. I forget which one bent my ear complaining that the other was in better focus in the photo we ran. They’ve long had a hate-hate relationship, those guys. Continue…

Former RBC trader calls foul

By macleans.ca - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 3:33 PM - 0 Comments

In 2007 Lindy Boville, a trader in Toronto, was recruited by RBC Capital (a division of Royal Bank of Canada) to join its office in New York. During that time she says she became one of the firm’s top traders, generating up to US$8 million in commissions. She also generated an on-again, off-again relationship with James Nicholson, a hedge fund manager who, in April, was indicted for running a Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors of US$150 million. RBC fired Boville in March, but now she’s struck back with a lawsuit that alleges the bank used her relationship with Nicholson as a pretext to push her out of the way and hand her accounts to her male colleagues. Boville claims that during her time at RBC she was constantly subjected to sexually charged comments. She says one co-worker asked “Did that dress shrink at the dry cleaners?” while another used the word “sensy” in an e-mail instead of “sexy” so that the bank’s monitoring system wouldn’t red flag his language. The bank says it fired her because she showed poor judgment in helping Nicholson raise money for his hedge fund, and not because of her her affair with him. Boville counters she never did any work for Nicholson in the first place, but her male co-workers did, and they’re all still employed.

Reuters

Government as record label

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 2:54 PM - 26 Comments

Heritage Minister James Moore explains his government’s approach to funding pop music.

Moore said yesterday the Conservatives’ philosophical inclination is toward funding artists with commercial promise, a view Prime Minister Stephen Harper has espoused. “But not entirely,” Moore added.

“It’s not my view that in order for art to have merit and value to society, it has to be commercially viable,” Moore said. “I’m not at all castigating independent artists and what their hopes are for their creations. … It’s about funding things that are of a higher priority for government and for the industry.”

Why the Russians want health-care reform in the U.S.

By macleans.ca - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 2:23 PM - 24 Comments

By scrapping the American missile defense system, Barack Obama has effectively “handed the Russians their biggest win since the collapse of the Iron Curtain,” Mark Steyn fumes. The reason is simple: In order to shield themselves from a nuclear Iran, Eastern European countries will start looking to an imperial-minded Moscow rather than the U.S. for protection, bolstering Russia’s influence on the region. And will only get worse on the foreign policy front if Obama succeeds in implementing his domestic agenda. “For Britain and other great powers,” Steyn writes, “the decision to build a hugely expensive welfare state at home entailed inevitably a long retreat from responsibilities abroad, with a thousand small betrayals of peripheral allies along the way.”

Orange County Register

Why Beck and Limbaugh are bad for the Republicans

By John Parisella - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 2:07 PM - 48 Comments

The current debate over whether Barack Obama’s opponents are motivated by his policy or his race dominated the Sunday news shows, with a general consensus emerging that policy was the main factor. It was nonetheless conceded that racism was a disturbing presence in many of the protest events. Sadly, no Republican spokesperson on the shows said anything to condemn the organizers that allowed and may have encouraged the ugly manifestations of racism.

Many of the recent protests reminded me of rallies last fall at which Sarah Palin would talk about “taking back our America” and accuse Obama of “palling around with terrorists.” The fact that media types like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh engage in overt race-baiting on a daily basis only adds to the perception that the GOP is out of sync with its basic principles and values. It seems no Republican luminary would dare question Beck or Limbaugh for fear of facing primary challenges down the road, which is somewhat ironic when you consider that neither of the two is an actual member of the GOP. After all, opposing a liberal administration is good for ratings.

Continue…

Number of dementia sufferers could double every 20 years

By macleans.ca - Monday, September 21, 2009 at 2:02 PM - 1 Comment

Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias will afflict 35.6 million people in 2010, about 10 percent more than previously estimated because of a higher number of cases in developing countries than doctors realized, researchers at Alzheimer’s Disease International claim in a new report. The number of dementia sufferers may almost double every 20 years to 115.4 million in 2050, the report claims. The disease and other dementias now cost an estimated $315 billion a year internationally, and the additional, unexpected cases could lead to a heath care crisis says Alzheimer’s Association Chief Executive Officer Harry Johns, who claims it has been difficult to get attention from global health organizations because they often focus on reducing deaths rather than on treating disability. “We’ll be spending the equivalent of the stimulus package every two years if we don’t address this,” Johns said.

Bloomberg.com