Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Apparently the role of government is to prevent elections. Maybe I am reading the situation wrong, but Harper is saying that the attack ads the Tories are running did Canadians a favour. I still don’t understand how it is a problem for someone to spend 30 years outside of Canada and then return. Especially since those 30 would have meant he had built up a large circle of friends and set down some roots. Obviously he has some kind of connection which Canada and so he wants to help make/keep it a great nation.

Harper also says that Ignatief will have to account for his time and words spoken about Canada. Why doesn’t harper have to do the same? What about the speeches he has given while the Reform was still kicking around? Harper’s modus operandi seems to be that he just wants people to look at Canada they way they look at the US.

We’ve just become increasingly irrelevant to a country [ the U.S.] that has a lot of priorities. (CBC Newsworld, July 11, 2003)

Criticizing someone for living outside of Canada for an extended period does not seem like a good way to increase relevance among other nations.

Saying nothing about my opinions about abortion … here is what confounds me about Tiller’s murder. He was in a church, performing duties as an usher, when he was killed by a, presumably, right-wing Christian fundamentalist. Besides the obvious cognitive dissonance required to perform such a violent and barbaric act (i.e. using murder to stop murder), there is another problem. Christians look at the church, I think rightfully so, as a sanctuary and they use it as such. Not only on Sundays but also when people are likely to be deported.

Tiller, no matter what you think about his career or his perspective on life, was in a supposedly safe place. A sanctuary even. And someone else violated that sacred place.

The second thing confuses me greatly is the idea that killing someone ever solves anything. From the small scale (killing an abortion doctor) to the large scale (war).

I have my own perspective on abortion and it is my own. I do not wish to, at this time, discuss it. I only want to know how killing someone solves anything (putting aside whatever procedure or act was performed on an operating table).

• WHEREAS crime is at its lowest point in 25 years; WHEREAS violent crime has steadily dropped over the last 15 years; WHEREAS car thefts have decreased in the last 10 years; And WHEREAS youth crime has dropped;  BE IT RESOLVED THAT all candidates must continue to play on peoples fears.  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT all candidates must increase budgets and staffing as well as changing or enlarging the definition of crime.  BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT all proposed courses of action must ignore the root causes of crime.
• If the public service has need to speak during a campaign, they must shut-up.  Speaking provides information.  Information can be interpreted in ways which the government does not want for the electorate.  Governments speak for Canadians and do not need Canadians speaking or thinking for themselves.
• A long sentence is often hard to understand.  It is often even harder to understand when the person constructing the sentence is trying to sound intelligent.  The use of long sentences generally is a direct result of the speaker forgetting and ignoring the audience.  Case in point: Stephen Harper and Prison Sentences.
• The European and Asian markets are tumbling.  The US has a crisis.  But, from his armchair, Harper does not see any problems in Canada and offers several dollars a month more to parents.  Because, as we all know, when the world burns you want to be able to choose which daycare you can’t afford.
• The way to stop the world from burning is to slow the growth (Cons), tax the polluter (Libs), sell the atmosphere (NDP),  use bandaids (Bloc), tax the polluter and the commuter (Greens).  And while these solutions are more complex than I describe, none of them come close to dealing with the complexity of the issue itself.

I left Canada on August 20 and arrived in Seoul, South Korea on August 21. I arrived in the island paradise of Jeju Island on August 29. I started teaching English the following Monday. I live on the scenic south side of the island and am enjoying myself. I have been forced out of my comfortable reclusive and semi-hermitic lifestyle.

Continue Reading… »

Well, I am en-route to the Seoul of the Republic of Korea.

doo-do-doo.

From up here my ecological footprint looks like an ant.

doo-wop.

In less than 30 hours I will be boarding a plane in Winnipeg headed to Calgary. Once in Calgary I will clear US customs and fly to Seattle. I will wait four hours in Seattle and then fly to Seoul, where I will be for 9 days or so. Then to the island paradise of Jeju which I will call home for the next twelve months.

I think I have everything. Visa, passport, some cash, clothes, deodorant (which is not readily available in Korea), other toiletries, my laptop with adaptors and a book or two to read. I can’t think of anything I am missing but I have this feeling of dread that I have overlooked something major.

What in the world have I forgotten?

Today I received my visa. In a few shorts days I will be moved out of this apartment and moving back to the mother-city. Here is what I had to do to get to where I am right now.

• Apply online
• Communication with recruiter via email and phone calls.
• Get criminal record check and vulnerable sectors search (I’d suggest other people do this before anything else gets started. It takes time.)
• Get University degrees, CRC and VSS notarized.
• Send notarized University degrees, CRC and VSS, and university transcripts to the consulate to get their stamp.
• Have a phone interview.
• Get accepted.
• Send application, recommendation letters, passport time photo, University transcripts (direct for University), notarized copies of CRC, VSS and Degrees to Korea.
• Wait
• Wait
• Keep waiting.
• Receive notice of appointment.
• Send documents to consulate for visa
• Wait
• Get visa.

It is not a huge amount of work but it is a mess of teeny, tiny steps. Frustratingly annoying.

The realization that a decision is imminent and quite quickly approaching coupled with a newly found awareness that a drastic change is necessary are, together, the impetus for a neo-genesis of Elijah Rintrah and, subsequently, rintrah.ca.

Continue Reading… »

Well, not really. But the political blogging should. I mean, really. What is the point? Who are we trying to impress, convince or prove wrong? Or are we just getting “the word out?”

We can impress ourselves and those who think like us. (And so far I am less than impressed.)

We can convince no one (Really? You think that your blog will provide someone with a Damascus Road conversion story? Seriously? You think that?)

We can prove others wrong all day long, but what is the point? (Seriously, you think that you being right proves something more than just your point?) Because being right does not mean anything unless it can make some sort of change. And really who are you kidding? What kind of change have you been able to spark as a result of your blog?

We can get the word out, over and over again. But if we all have the same message (vote for me on the Canadian Blog Awards, yeah!!) then maybe the word already is out.

And so, I am hanging up my political blogger hat. I have other ideas for this space. They may come to nothing, but I have high hopes.