RAT PATROL

Looking for the perfect gift for that enviro-weenie in your life? Everybody knows one - not necessarily an environmental activist, maybe just someone with no life who enjoys ratting out their fellow man at every opportunity. Well, look no further - the eco-snoop is here: a phone app that enables you to post photos of environmental transgressions directly to a website (frequented by other losers with no lives) where you can all obsess about the evil cleaning lady leaving the lights on in the closet in some office building.

If you type in eco-snoop on YouTube, you'll get to watch an enlightening video featuring some smarmy skank with a bad makeup job telling you how to bust eco-crime in your community. Lovely. What kind of a lame-brained waste of skin would spend their time patrolling their neighborhood on a Friday night, looking for dripping taps and redundant porch lights? Hmm, I'm guessing someone with the self-esteem of a cabbage and no date.

How insane is this? How did we as a society get so pathetic that the only way some people have left to feel valid is by trying to give themselves some sort of perceived authority as enviro-enforcers? I can only imagine the interesting scenarios that would ensue if people were to actually follow the advice given on the video. Just take the photo into the offending business, Miss Skankleton suggests, they are probably not even aware of the problem and will be only too happy to fix it. Yes, I'm sure the manager would be just thrilled to be interrupted at work by some smelly permanently-unemployed self-righteous planet-saver explaining to him how he could run his business more efficiently. In fact, he would probably be so grateful for the input that he'd open a free can of whup-ass and provide a handy styrofoam container to take their teeth home in. Good God - the unmitigated GALL of it!

I shouldn't be surprised - this trend has been gaining popularity, especially with the younger set. Kids have been getting indoctrinated right and left (mostly left) to nag, whine, pester and rat on behalf of the eco-freaks. Anthony Watts, on his most excellent website wattsupwiththat.com, has an article (2008/07/27) about Climate Cops - a club for kids who have had the misfortune of being born (or exposed) to misguided environmental nitwits. He shows excerpts from an ad in a British newspaper which exhorts children to not only investigate their own families for "climate crimes", writing reports and keeping files on "cases", but also to spy on the homes of relatives and school friends. They are instructed to check back on cases periodically to make sure no one slips back into their wasteful ways. The very idea of some snot-nosed brat from down the street telling me to stop idling my car would be laughable if it weren't for the chilling similarity to the campaign mounted by a certain deranged little fellow with a funny moustache in order to transfer children's allegiance from their parents to the state.

I wish they'd leave the kids alone, a five-year-old should not have to worry about his carbon footprint or that Santa may not get to his house because humans are causing global warming and melting the North Pole. This was the theme of a kid's Christmas video propaganda series on the popular Build-A-Bear website, until backlash from outraged parents forced them to remove the video and issue an apology. Kids today are constantly bombarded with lies about dying animals and our imminent destruction in the fiery CO2-induced hell caused by their parent's addiction to nasty things like driving them to soccer practice. Talk about growing up with a guilt trip, as if kids don't despise us enough when they become teenagers - why give them any reason to start sooner? This undermining of parental authority is one of the most disturbing aspects of the green movement, along with the promotion of products like the rat-a-phone which encourages people to go around tattling on their neighbors and local businesses.

I guess there's a whole crew of modern-day Barney Fifes out there now, with their imaginary badges and no bullets, keeping an electronic eye on the rest of us and feeling like heros. Adolf would be proud.

PANTS ON FIRE

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Vindication!!! Schadenfreude!!! Good old-fashioned outright absolute GLOATING!!! Yes! It has finally happened - Climategate - and I'm doing the happy dance.

When the story broke a few days ago it just seemed too good to be true, but now it has been confirmed and it's the mother of all Christmas presents for the climate realists. Information has been released from the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit in the U.K. outlining the nefarious activities of those in the climate lying/carbon persecution/green fraud business. A file containing over a thousand e-mails and documents has been obtained by persons unknown and posted on the internet. Hackers are being widely credited for this, but many people believe it is the work of an insider who was just fed up with the corruption, which makes more sense to me. However, blaming "hackers" and focusing on the criminality of leaking the information allows the perpetrators to attempt to gain the moral high ground in the press. What a laugh - if it was an environmentalist busting Exxon for the same kind of shenanigans, the media would be all over it praising the whistleblower as the savior of humanity.

But amazingly enough this development is actually getting some media attention, in some cases even acknowledging the wrongdoing of the climate fraudsters and supporting an investigation into it. I should hope so, since the incriminating e-mails include references to deleting files in order to thwart freedom of information requests, preventing peer-review and publication of papers which do not support the theory of anthropogenic global warming, and fudging data to "hide the decline" in temperatures. This is pretty nasty stuff and it will not be possible to sweep it under the rug like in the good old days when we depended on the mainstream media to tell us what our opinions should be.

When the actual observations don't fit their predictions, they blame the data. Mother Nature not co-operating? Temperatures embarrassingly dropping? Well then: "the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate". Yes, that must be it. It couldn't possibly be a flawed computer model - it's supposed to be WARMING, goddammit!!! The X-box says so!!!!

It's about to get hotter for the alarmists all right, but not in quite the way they had envisioned. Senator Inhofe in the U.S., a longtime opponent of the global warming scam, has stated that he will be calling for an investigation into the matter and I will certainly be looking forward to seeing that condescending dimwit Barbara Boxer try to squirm her way out of this one (I've never forgiven her for being so appallingly rude to Michael Crichton). There's a little something for your buddy BHO to take to Copenhagen, missy.

Just going to algorelied.com or climatedepot.com gives links to hundreds of articles documenting and discussing the perversion of science that has been allowed to take place in the name of cheating taxpayers out of billions of dollars and saddling us with insane carbon-related regulations. Of course, the alarmist community will have no problem throwing these guys under the bus; they will declare it outrageous, call for resignations, play the "one bad apple" card, and then go right back to lying through their teeth about exactly the same things.

Even the Goracle is not leaping to their defense - I went to his lame website (it's a necessary evil, like cleaning out the kitty-litter box, but you just have to hold your nose and do it) and he is keeping his piehole firmly shut on this one. I didn't even know he was capable of that, but who would have expected otherwise - there is no honor among thieves.

These indications of foul play are not surprising to climate realists - Chris Horner cites many examples of exactly this type of thing in his excellent book Red Hot Lies, and the climate blogosphere is rife with articles debunking such fabrications as Mann's famous hockey stick, the hurricane connection and ridiculous predictions of catastrophic sea level rise. Lawrence Solomon's book The Deniers also has some good information, but most people just aren't interested enough in the subject to read up on it. They should, because if this deception is allowed to continue we are going to find ourselves in a different world, with all aspects of our lives micromanaged under the guise of saving the planet from evil CO2 emissions. Addressing this latest development in the mainstream media will lead people into becoming more informed, even if only out of curiosity. Nothing like a good scandal to get people's attention, and the more they learn about this issue, the less likely they will be to fall for "green" solutions to nonexistent problems, or to fork over money for dubious "research".

Cost of financing the global warming scam: Billions

Cost to all of us if cap and trade passes: Unlimited

Catching climate liars with their pants down: PRICELESS!!!

Schadenfreude. Sometimes you just can't say it in English.

RISKY BUSINESS

CBS news has just released information from a months-long investigation of the swine flu "emergency" (at CBSnews.com - "Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?"). In July, the CDC stopped testing/counting individual swine flu cases, supposedly because there would be no point in keeping records since it's a PANDEMIC and all, so we can just go ahead and assume that it's the swine flu, right? Wow, that is really scientific. We can just ASSUME!!! Who knew??? I doubt they could get away with this crap if they were testing dog food at the Purina factory. They'd probably expect, well, actual DATA or something. So I guess you could stop tracking it in order to throw the resources into fighting it (their excuse). OR maybe you could stop tracking it so the public wouldn't realize that the cases are far less than we have been led to think, and we are once again being hoodwinked by the big pharmaceutical companies and their bumboys in the government. Personally, I'm going with answer B.

Reports are coming out based on "estimates" and "reported cases", with the media running headlines like "X number of people infected with H1N1". Not lab-confirmed. Just assumed to be infected because they had symptoms which happened to be common to many other ailments. When my grandson recently stayed home with a cold, the school asked what his symptoms were. Now school secretaries are diagnosing swine flu? Do kids with the right symptoms get written up as "probable" H1N1 so they can prop up their statistics? This kind of shoddy data-collection wouldn't be tolerated in any private business, but it appears to be good enough for the government-run health care system that people pay for and entrust their lives to.

Investigative reporters had to resort to the Freedom of Information act in order to force the CDC to release their statistics, which showed that the number of CONFIRMED cases was a very small fraction of the "guesstimates" that were making scary headlines worldwide. Look around, for God's sake - it's not happening!!!

And yet this weekend Mr. Obama declared this supposed pandemic a national emergency so they could bypass federal requirements and get this vaccine into as many people as possible. Now if this man is so divorced from reality that he considers this a reasonable measure, he is obviously not fit to run a lemonade stand, much less an entire country. If he does understand the situation and is knowingly going ahead with this deception, then he is a criminal.

Of course we are getting our share of hysteria in Canada, too. Just look at any of the mainstream media to see pictures of the sheeple lined up to get their magic bullet. Guaranteed to save you from the big bad piggy flu. Really? Flu vaccines sure haven't come with a money-back guarantee so far. The ability of the flu virus to mutate has become a major selling point for the fear-mongers, but that inherent quality is exactly what makes flu vaccines such a crap shoot in the first place. Not much point getting a vaccine for the wrong strain of flu, is there?

Interest in getting flu shots is waning, and Big Pharma is resorting to ever more desperate measures to convince us that we need them. For the first time in history we have almost unlimited access to information, and the more informed people become the less likely they are to be suckered into undergoing an invasive procedure which has been insufficiently tested and is potentially damaging. So the real emergency would seem to be more economic than medical - millions of dollars spent and resources wasted on what is starting to look more and more like a manufactured crisis. Not to mention the fallout yet to be seen from the side effects of the shot. The vaccine is being recommended for pregnant women, yet even the vaccine manufacturers admit that the effect on the fetus is unknown. That's a pretty big gamble to take with the life of your unborn child.

Do you take a chance with unknown side effects or take the chance of contracting this milder version of the standard flu? Since we appear to have been reduced to getting our medical advice from the media, maybe it's time to to get some advice from someone who is just as qualified to advise us as the news reporters are. In the immortal words of Dirty Harry: "You've got to ask yourself one question. Do I feel lucky?" Well, do you?

HAIR

I've been a little preoccupied lately, and haven't been keeping up with the mundane things in life such as coloring the old grey hair. I never gave it much thought until about ten years ago, when my husband started making "old grey mare" and "grey as a mule" remarks (he's nothing if not romantic). I originally wrote it off as jealousy, since at the time his hair was rapidly losing the battle for territory with his forehead. Hah, I thought, just sour grapes. But then my brother started nagging me too. He's a real diplomat: "My God you're grey!" - "Your hair looks like crap." -"Why don't you dye that rats-nest?". You know, subtle hints designed to spare my feelings.

Now, he's pushing fifty and still sports a luxuriant mullet that would turn Joe Dirt green with envy, but I was still skeptical until the day I got reading glasses and a decent mirror light. YIKES! Where did that grey-haired old bat come from? Okay, okay, I get it. Off to Wal-Mart for a box of instant youth.

The results were pretty good, so for years I've been dyeing my hair a basic boring brown. Unexciting, but better than grey. But lately I've been putting it off. That little strip down the center of my scalp has been widening steadily, eventually giving rise to the usual Pepe le Pew comparisons from my eagle-eyed family members. I'm not sure why, but this time I decided to do something a little different (here's where the warning bells should have gone off) and change the color ever-so-slightly. Maybe put a little red in it - after all, I had auburn highlights in the prehistoric days of my youth - it would probably suit me. So I bought the same brand, same basic color, just with a little red thrown in. Or so I thought.

Well, I thought wrong. That box did not contain "copper-red brown" like it said on the label. Oh no, it was more like "Highly Unlikely Red", "Incredible Redible", or "What The Hell Were You Thinking?". Or, as my comedically-inclined daughter suggested: "Prosti-tutti-frutti". I think not - with this look, I couldn't give it away in front of the Courtenay House at twenty-five cents a pop. I mean, it's really hideous. Calling it God-awful would be a compliment.

You can't possibly imagine my feelings when I viewed the final result (unless you have had the same unfortunate experience, in which case you have my sincere condolences). The first glance at my flaming head brought to mind visions of Nicholas Cage in Ghost Rider. It looked like someone had doused my head with red paint then set it on fire. As I stared into the mirror, I found myself gripped by the overwhelming urge to go out and slap cuffs on the Hamburgler. Oh man, this one is going to be hard to live down.

But I'm stuck with it now, for redder or for worse, for at least a month - I'll just have to wash it lots, wait for it to wear off, and maybe start wearing a hat. Or just stay home and pretend I've gone on vacation. I've already resigned myself to looking like some kind of geriatric streetwalker, but the worst is yet to come. My brother hasn't seen it yet. I'm already steeling myself for the Olympic Torch jokes.

THE C-WORD

Euphemisms have an amazing effect on people. They influence our perceptions, shape our values and can even control our behavior. Take "going green" for instance: sounds nice - kinda harmless - brings to mind those idyllic leafy forest scenes in the commercials where willowy girls in long white dresses swan around chasing butterflies and being thrilled to be having their period. Now who wouldn't like that? But if "going green" was referred to by the more accurate term "lifestyle regulation", I'm thinking not so many people would be interested in signing up.

"Sustainability" is the new word-of-the-week, since people are wising up to the green scam. The green profiteers keep having to change their buzzword as the new wears off and people become aware of the actual meanings. When global warming became downright embarrassing as the earth continued to cool in the face of rising CO2 levels, it became "climate change". Can't argue with that, can you? It's like that old detective show where the "names were changed to protect the innocent". Except they're doing it to protect the guilty.

This sustainability thing needs to be recognized for what it really is, and I'm going to have to use the c-word here. I don't like to use it because people tend to stop listening when I do, but here it is anyway: communism (what the hell were YOU thinking?).

If you look at the official "sustainability strategy" for our valley, it's not hard to see where it's going - rationing of energy and water, control of the business and housing sector, land appropriation, indoctrination of the children, and my personal favorite: "ecosystem protection on 100% of public and private land". Meaning basically that if you have any "threatened" plants or a body of water bigger than a mud puddle on your property... you, my friend, are screwed. It pretty much hands over the keys to your kingdom to the government, in the name of environmental protection. Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that a whole lot of things are going to become "eco-sensitive" in the not-so-distant future?

And community gardens. Oh Lord, please save me from community gardens. I am not a friggin ANT, I'll pick my own gardening buddies, thanks. No one should be forced to associate with idiots because the only access to land will be as part of the collective. The community garden thing is very trendy in theory, but in practice, well, not quite a bed of roses - I know perfectly rational people who thought it was a great idea until they actually tried it. I can think of few things more nauseating than the thought of sharing my favorite pastime, the thing that gives me time alone, renews my soul and keeps me sane (well, as sane as I get) with a bunch of politically correct, Prius-driving, sprout-sucking, doughnut-hating numbskulls from Al Gore's Holy Church of Climate Change. Which, from my friend's experience, are the type of people who tend to participate in these things.

Yes, I've heard the stories and I can just see it now: Mr. A. is pissed off because Mr. B. isn't using the approved brand of fertilizer, and omigod it might leak onto HIS plants. Mr. B. is pissed off because Mrs. C. isn't pulling her weeds fast enough and omigod they might invade his patch. Mrs. C. is pissed off because people should be planting according to an approved color scheme so everything looks harmonious. Mr. D. just wants to kick Mrs. C. where the sun don't shine because she is an insufferable self-righteous bitch. And Mr. X wants the whole area declared a turnip-free zone because he is allergic to rutabagas. Yes, I can just see myself there. I think I would be using the c-word a lot.

Socialism. It just doesn't work. It is totally antithetical to human nature. Yes, we are herd animals but we are not hive animals. In a hive, every member is hardwired for his job, he is content with his role and does not aspire to anything else as long as basic needs are met. In a herd, there is an ongoing struggle to better one's position, to always be looking to improve the situation. Even starfish fight over territory (very cool on speeded-up film). Are we expected to be more docile than an invertebrate?

This is not to say we aren't altruistic. We care about each other and try to help others, this is what has enabled us to survive. But socialism asks us to give the illusion of doing this at the expense of individual advancement. Are we helping people by creating a system that rewards mediocrity and conformism? That penalizes success? That allows the indolent to parasitize the industrious? There is a world of difference between helping those genuinely in need and giving a free ride to those who won't pull their weight.

With communism, the "people" who supposedly control the government find themselves clutching a handful of nothing. Everything is "public" property, but it can only be accessed under the conditions imposed by that governing body. The bigger the government gets, the more corruption and profiteering occurs, taxation escalates and personal freedom becomes curtailed in the cause of the "greater good", which in these times comes in the guise of saving the planet. There are an awful lot of people getting rich off rescuing poor old Mother Earth.

It's happening right now. The U.N., European Union, our friend Mr. Obama and the global governance crew are hard at it working toward the New World Order. (This is where you start thinking to yourself "I knew it - Mrs. Pelican is a certified conspiracy-theorist nutbar"). Well OK, I do listen to Glenn Beck. But you can't really call it a conspiracy when they're so obvious about it. It's not like they're hiding it or anything. In fact, we're expected to embrace it. To think globally. To be good global citizens.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, in communities all over our nation "sustainability" plans are being implemented. Based on "global sustainability targets". Using the bogeymen of "climate change", "our deteriorating planet" and even overpopulation. All a complete crock of crap, but it makes a mighty fine stick to beat the unsuspecting sheep with. While I appreciate people who are trying to keep our planet clean and improve living standards world-wide, I take exception to those who use lies to justify things like carbon taxes, increased energy costs, erosion of property rights and forced green retrofitting of our homes before we can sell them. They call themselves environmentalists. I think it's time we started calling them by their real name. I think the c-word would be appropriate.

MARMOT MADNESS

Marmots. No wonder Mother Nature's phasing them out. They look like a cross between a squirrel and a gopher, only apparently they are fatter and more useless, spending most of their time lounging around on rocks and only bothering to get up and look for food when they get really really really hungry. Hmm.... must be some marmot genes somewhere in our family background, sounds a lot like my brother.

Anyway, what's the big obsession with saving these guys? What's the likelihood of the average person ever running into one? Don't get me wrong, I personally have nothing against them. In fact, I've never even seen a real live specimen but I'm pretty sure if I did, I'd like it. Preferably on a plate. Fried, stewed, breaded, broiled . . . perhaps roasted with some nice mashed potatoes and gravy. Mmmm . . . marmot. I bet they're even tastier than spotted owl. First Nations people used to hunt them for food so they must be at least palatable, if not downright delicious.

As you can see I'm definitely not anti-marmot, at least from a culinary standpoint. But I do object to subsidizing the bucktoothed little bastards. Not content with throwing money around like drunken sailors on shore leave to finance stupid crap like the Olympic Games and carbon persecution, last year our government forked over $233,000 in rodent welfare payments.

This isn't just housing subsidy, maternity benefits, free food and day care for the kiddies, this is also relocation funds, an expensive clothing allowance (radio transmitters don't come from WalMart) and their very own personal militia to ward off pesky predators. And here's where it gets ugly.

The marmot advocates, exhibiting typical eco-loon tunnel vision, don't have a problem interfering with other forms of wildlife in order to pursue their own goals. It's fine for them to put up nets and fences, play tape recordings of annoying noises and in general disturb every living thing in the area because they happen to think marmots are cool. It's okay to capture, traumatize, and tranquilize cougars and make them wear radio collars so their dedicated crews of marmot shepherds ( I'm not kidding, this is what they call themselves) can be alerted and put the run on those bad nasty kitties when they come looking for lunch. They don't even mind using a cougar hound to chase and harass the poor cats because marmot-saving is very ecologically correct.

But the eagles had it worse. In Green Mountain near Nanaimo in 2003, seven golden eagles felt the wrath of the marmot-lovers. In a misguided attempt to reduce marmot predation, employees of the provincial government killed these federally and internationally protected birds by baiting them with a deer carcass and then shooting them. How low can you go - you can bet the general public wasn't in on that one. Coincidentally, the guy in charge at the time just happened to be the chairman of the provincial marmot recovery team. Your tax dollars at work, killing eagles. Disgusting.

And is this kind of one-sided disregard for other species going to help the marmot? Not if Mother Nature decides that Vancouver Island marmots just aren't working out. New species are constantly being discovered and other ones are disappearing - it's just how nature works, get over it. If we saved every type of life form on earth there wouldn't be any room for the new ones. Complicated schemes involving human interference won't save a species that is slated for the cosmic dumpster any more than buying carbon credits will affect the temperature of the planet. In fact, well-meaning intervention by humans has historically only made things worse. If marmots aren't going to make it on their own, we won't change that by giving them life support until the funding runs out. If they are meant to survive they will.

I suspect we don't really know how many there are in the wild anyway. After all, they are reclusive creatures - they aren't going to show up and fill out census forms. They also tend to pop up in unexpected places: earlier this year, a female showed up in a gravel pit in Port Alberni. Two days later a male was found in a backyard in Nanoose. In a display of mind-numbing stupidity, these poor things were trapped and relocated on Mount Hooper in hopes that they would mate. Good grief, did it not occur to anyone that these two might not find each other attractive? That one of them may have been the marmot version of a double-bagger? Or that they already had friends and family in the neighborhood and had no desire to be transported elsewhere? God Almighty, even glorified gophers can't escape from government interference in their lives these days.

If they disappeared completely, would anyone even notice that this creature they had never seen wasn't there anymore? I don't see anyone whining and crying about the demise of the dodo. This year the government has cut funds for the marmot program, to the great chagrin of the would-be marmot saviors. I guess the powers that be have realized that people who can't even get decent health care aren't exactly thrilled to waste what little money they have on a marmot dating service. How fitting that Mukmuk the marmot should be a mascot for the Olympic games - both represent our government's amazing ability to blow money on feel-good projects while our real priorities go unaddressed.

SELLING US DOWN THE RIVER

Well, thank God the horrendous heat wave seems to be over - I've managed to keep my garden alive by endless hand-watering, but my lawn is toast. Or at least toast-colored. But I'm getting used to it, I've had a brown summer lawn for a few years now because I actually believed the bullshit about us having a water shortage. And because having water meters forces you to comply whether you believe it or not.

Yes, having a green lawn nowadays identifies you as being an environmental criminal, even lower in the social order than a smoker, global warming skeptic, non-recycler, or (that lowest of the low) an employed white heterosexual non-handicapped male. But here's the interesting thing - the water shortage only seems to apply to local taxpaying residents, not to tourists or greedy developers. Apparently it's okay to drop the level of Comox Lake by AN ENTIRE FOOT to accommodate the all-important Kayak Festival, but if you're planning to top up the old Mr. Turtle, you'd better do it in the dead of night so your neighbors won't rat you to the Water Police.

This kayak event is estimated to attract about 200 tourists, bringing "economic benefits" to the valley. Big deal, so a few hotels, stores and restaurants making a couple of extra bucks justifies such a massive waste of this supposedly scarce resource? There certainly aren't any economic benefits for the average resident. Think about this: Comox Lake is 9 km long, with a surface area of 2116 ha and a depth of 120 meters. If we can afford to drop the whole thing by 30 cm just to provide for some out-of-towner's boating pleasure, how much of a water crisis do we actually have?

If the situation is so dire, why on earth is development being allowed in Union Bay that would add 12,000 more users (I'm guessing four to a home) onto the system? Union Bay currently gets its water from Langley Lake, bringing it all the way up to Spindrift where Royston can access it if necessary. At this time it could service about 2300 new connections according to their website, but in the future expects to be part of the Comox Valley water system. The original proposal was for about 1700 residential units, but somehow that has morphed into 3400, DOUBLE the original amount. How do they even get away with this crap? Let's see, maybe because the proposed new bylaws (made up when convenient to the current agenda) will include "density bonus" provisions, which means that if the developer will "donate" enough multi-family ratholes to cram the unwashed masses into, he will be "allowed" to build extra properties for private sale to people who want real houses. An interesting business transaction, to say the least. But we all know that developers are just bristling with altruism, all they want to do is provide affordable housing for the good of humanity, they really CARE about people. Of course, not quite enough to actually live in one of these slum crapshacks themselves. Oh no, they will be off saving the world somewhere else as soon as they have collected their enormous paycheck.

So which is it? You can't have it both ways. If we have enough water to accommodate another 12000 people, then quit with the restrictions and phony guilt trips. If we don't have enough even for ourselves, then obviously any new development should be completely out of the question. Why are we being sold two diametrically opposite scenarios? That can only mean we're being lied to one way or the other. And where do these new residents plan on working? Or going to school or getting medical treatment? Or parking, for that matter. Well, I guess that's all just part of the package, isn't it.

Most of us have settled here because we like the small-town feel. I'm always hearing the rah-rah about our lovely little valley, nestled in the wilderness, how lucky we are to live in such an unspoiled paradise, etc. Well, yes we are. But not for long. The profit-seeking of developers and the willingness of the Regional Board to sell us out is hurtling us headlong toward becoming another Vancouver. We're told it's a good thing because it will be "sustainable" and ever so eco-friendly. Unfortunately, sustainability is just a politically correct term for developers cramming the largest amount of people into the smallest area possible and then saddling them with insane amounts of green regulation. They get brownie points for this in the form of LEED certification, which sheeple think is great because they don't know what it is, but it's green, so it must be good. Baa.

Yes, tiny lots, multifamily housing and a bunch of shared greenspace. I guess if you enjoy the communal lifestyle, that's okay, but most people would rather have bigger lots and their very own greenspace and privacy - that's why we live here instead of the big city. So why are we letting the big city come to us? I'm just going to come right out and say it: I don't want more people here. I don't want more crime and more traffic congestion and more nagging about how we don't have enough resources. If we don't have enough, the solution is simple: QUIT ENCOURAGING NEW DEVELOPMENT!!! Is that such a difficult concept to grasp?

It's like pulling teeth to get a decent hospital or even snow removal or road maintenance for the people who already live here, but let's just roll out the red carpet and invite a few more people over - that should improve the situation. It's becoming painfully obvious that our elected officials care more about constantly creating more income through new development than in maintaining and improving services to those of us who have been paying taxes here for years. They will be too busy rubbing their hands together at the thought of the expanded bureaucracy and all the money it entails to mourn the loss of a unique little town like Union Bay. They would do well to remember that the people who put them where they are can also remove them. I'll certainly be thinking about it every time I drive by the maintenance crews tending to all the annuals planted in the name of beautifying Courtenay for the tourists, while on my way home to NOT water my own.

FUN WITH FOSSILS

Today I thought I'd take a break from slaving in the garden and do something completely different, perhaps something relaxing and less physically demanding than shoveling and pushing a wheelbarrow around. With this in mind, I volunteered to go fossiling with my daughter the paleophile, envisioning a nice leisurely stroll on the beach with maybe a break for lunch at some seaside cafe. Ah, rest and relaxation, just what I need.

Unfortunately I overlooked the fact that, to a dedicated ammonite-hunter, fossiling is SERIOUS BUSINESS. Let me explain this: if you've ever worked on a chain gang, you've already enjoyed the equivalent of what passes for entertainment in the world of fossil collectors. Breaking rocks in the hot sun, to be exact. In fact, the poor slobs with the leg shackles actually have it a lot easier, because they get to crack rocks in the blazing heat WITHOUT also lugging along a giant bag of hammers, chisels, extra clothing, umpteen bottles of water and a variety of unhealthy snack items. Plus a ten-pound purse full of change (since the stupid slot machines stopped taking quarters, I'm just not motivated to clean it out anymore).

Yeah those prisoners had it pretty good, the old warden probably let them rest once in a while, but an enthusiastic fossiler will unmercifully flog you onward in search of the elusive Bostrychoceras or Eupachydiscus. "Oh, look - just over there" (looks to be about 2 kms away) "just past that enormous impenetrable wall of razor-sharp barnacle-encrusted boulders, my friend found the most AWESOME Nostoceras!" Oh, goody - I'm sure we too will find a dozen or so when we get there. Trudge trudge. Pant pant. Onward.

I learned a lot on this trip. Mainly that the reason fossils are still around after millions of years is that they're good at hiding. Oh yes, they're cagey little buggers all right. Hiding under seaweed, disguising themselves as oysters. Embedding themselves in rock formations and jumping out of the way when you try to remove them, causing you to hammer your thumb and invent a bunch of new swear words. No wonder no one's ever captured a live specimen.

Aside from discovering that it's entirely possible to whack yourself in the shin while aiming in the totally opposite direction, I learned that my tolerance for crawling around on hot rocks like a lizard is a lot higher than I thought. We spent five hours out there, which is about four and a half hours past my usual limit for sun exposure (I will know who to blame for those future wrinkles coming my way), but I actually had fun. I got to spend the day with my daughter, which doesn't happen nearly often enough, and I learned a whole pile of impressive new paleo words.

Our efforts did not go unrewarded, either - we didn't find a Nostoceras (not for lack of dragging Grandma through the tide pools), but we did come home with an assortment of fossils, most of which I got to keep. Luckily for me, a specimen has to be pretty unique to be worth adding to Paleogirl's collection, so I get them by default (although I'm pretty sure she would have beat me insensible with a rock hammer if I'd tried to make off with a Nostoceras).

So at the end of the day, here I am: dehydrated, sunburned, barnacle-scraped and exhausted, but by God, I've got a pretty fine Baculites sitting on my desk in front of me. Now how cool is that?

CHICKENSHIT WHITE BOYS

You've probably heard all about it by now - a trio of brain-dead punks with nothing better to do attacked a local landscaper outside McDonalds. The video has been on and off YouTube, but now that the media has picked it up, it's all over the place (google "racist attack Courtenay" and take your pick).

It seems these heros decided to harass this guy from their truck, yelling insults and threats as he walked past minding his own business. When he had the audacity to respond, they bailed out and surrounded him. What a pathetic display - it's apparent from the video that these losers were sharing one set of balls between the three of them. If any of them had tried it one-on-one, he would have been crying like a little girl and calling the man "sir" in about thirty seconds flat.

As it was, the victim was defending himself admirably until he had the bad luck to slip and fall, then they were all on him, kicking, punching and screaming obscenities. It reminded me of a Wild Kingdom episode with a pack of baboons or hyenas, except animals have the excuse of not knowing any better.

Now because the victim of this crime happened to be black, people are yelling racism. I don't think that's the case - he could just as easily have been gay, homeless, Asian or even a fat white kid - any excuse would have done for a bunch of little boys trying to (unsuccessfully) to prove their (nonexistent) manhood.

Some people are saying it's the victim's own fault for responding to their initial verbal assault. Really? You mean hardworking respectable citizens are supposed to just shut up and take crap when confronted by a bunch of lowlifes? Reinforce their appalling behavior by letting them get away with it? Turn the other cheek and all that? If he had ignored them and gone home and reported it to the police, what do you think would have happened? Yeah, exactly. Nothing. They just would have had more confidence built up for the next time because there were no consequences.

I'm glad he had enough self-respect to defend himself, and I'm surprised and disappointed that no bystanders intervened. Do we just let this stuff happen, no one say anything, just walk by and pretend we didn't see? Don't get involved? Are we that big-city yet?

Either way, it was a stupid move, boys. After pulling a stunt like this, it might not be prudent to leave the house alone for a while. Not because of some perceived threat of retaliation from the black community, but because of outrage on the part of anyone recognizing you from the video. How sad for you that cowardly performance was caught on tape for all the world to see. I'm not saying you 'll get beat up (very few people are as stupid as you), but it's going to be uncomfortable and embarrassing, especially for your poor parents. Did you even think about that when you were acting like such supreme jackasses? They must be really proud - I feel sorry for them. Now, thanks to the internet, you have managed to embarrass not only your parents and relatives, but your entire community. Way to go.

$USTAINABILITY $CAM

Greetings, Comrades! Good news! Our wise and benevolent local government has come up with glorious plans to save us from ourselves! For a mere $340,000.00, the CVRD has hired an out-of-town planning company to come in and tell us how to live. The Green Socialist Manifesto (oops, I mean draft 3 of the Comox Valley $ustainability $trategy) is 80 pages long and available online at the CVRD website. I would heartily recommend that you take a look at it, and while you're there it wouldn't hurt to take a gander at how much we pay the staff to sit around all day picking their noses and rejecting septic tank permits.

This $ustainability $trategy is just bristling with wonderful green ideas, like cramming us all into cheap multifamily housing in town (a developer's dream), taking cars away from 85% of us, and forcing us to use mass transit. Oh yes, I'm sure that I will enjoy sitting on the bus with the winos and crackheads who will be infesting these future ghettos, but the plans include lots of "greenspace" conveniently located so the criminals can mug me on my way home from the bus stop. After all, bad guys have to make a living too - equal employment opportunities and all that.

We are also going to reduce our carbon footprint in a big way. In fact, the CVRD is so dedicated to this that they're planning to send a couple of their henchmen (make that loyal employees) on a free trip to China to explain to the Chinese people how wonderfully the green agenda is working in the Valley. That should reduce those pesky CO2 emissions all right - if they're planning to walk, bike, or take the bus. Excuse me, but isn't this a bit redundant? I mean, it's CHINA, for God's sake - they already KNOW how to be communists!

They'd also like us to reduce our energy and water use by 50%. Yes, I can see it now: after a fulfilling day of attending sustainability workshops, volunteering for community projects and memorizing the quotations of Chairman Mao, I can pick up my ration of organic tofu, shove it into my recyclable bag knitted from armpit hairs and trudge home to my hovel in the inner city. Then I could enjoy a fun night of squatting around in the dark smelling my own feet - with 50% reduction in water use, it won't be long before we all smell so bad you won't be able to tell us from the environmentalists.

Maybe we should reduce our crapping by 50% too. That would be a great waste-management strategy. We could even do offsets - constipated folks could sell their crap credits to people with diarrhea. There you have it: Mrs. Pelican's Crap and Trade program. Think I could get a grant for that?

PS: Take a look at what the Fraser Institute has to say about "Smart Growth". It's not pretty.

AND NOW THE NEWS

Shout it from the rooftops! Third swine flu death in Canada! Same crap, different pile. Third person to die. All three had chronic preexisting conditions, this one had even been in the hospital "for some time" before his death. Yet the headline is CANADA REPORTS THIRD SWINE FLU DEATH. Some people just scan headlines so - mission accomplished - there will be people out there believing that the swine flu is lethal.

How about some honesty? How about SWINE FLU NOT KILLING HEALTHY PEOPLE IN CANADA? Why are they beating this thing to death? A sick man dies, and just because he happened to pick up the swine flu virus on his way out, we're supposed to believe that's what did him in. If he just happened to have athlete's foot too, did that kill him? Betcha if the fearmongers were promoting an athlete's foot pandemic, it would have been at least a "major contributing factor".

The World Health Organization is still trying to drum up business, saying the swine flu is going to get more severe and kill more people. Wow! More! At last count it has killed 115 people in 62 countries. Omigod, that's almost two people per country!!! Run for you lives!!! I wonder how many people world-wide died from athlete's foot complications?

So why the fuss? Let's see, could it be the billion dollars the U.S. is putting into "fighting" it? Or the 32 million Japan is planning to spend? How about Sanofi-Pasteur, Novartis, Baxter, or GlaxoSmithKline? Think they're going to make any money by selling flu shots? Drug companies did pretty good off the bird flu scare - in fact Roche still has three million packages of Tamiflu (an antiviral) stockpiled in anticipation (or hope) of some great pandemic. Heaven forbid that stuff should expire, there goes the gosh-darn profits. But if everyone can be sufficiently alarmed and convinced that we need to get vaccinated, I'm sure they can more than make up for any losses.

What I can't believe is all the media attention this is getting, considering the pitiful evidence they have to present. How do you make something like this into a big scary deal? Misleading headlines? Opinions obscuring facts? Guesswork? A whole pile of could, would, might, maybe, possibly? It worked for Al Gore, but you'd think maybe the media would grow a collective pair  and actually present facts without putting the alarmist spin on things and catering to the current groupthink. No wonder newspapers are going out of business.

THE DEER HUNTER

Wow, long time no blog. Finally, finally, FINALLY getting over the awful flu. Of course, I couldn't be lucky enough to get the cool trendy SWINE flu, where you get a few days of sniffles and your picture in the paper. Oh no, I get stuck with the cheap-ass, low-budget three-week long horkorama that is the ORDINARY flu. No fame. No glory. Just dirty looks from the cat when my coughing into the wee hours disturbs his beauty rest by dislodging him from my pillow. That's one nasty cough - I think my left lung is in a landfill somewhere along with 40 boxes of generic tissues. But I'm all better now.

Unfortunately, while I was occupied with trying to keep my lungs on the inside of my body, my garden woke up and realized winter was over. Everything immediately started growing like crazy (everything being weeds), which was the signal for the deer to come in and start eating the good stuff, like the apple tree.

This awoke the primal instinct in the old man (mighty hunter), who decided to show those effin deer who's the boss, once and for all. Well, he underwent several changes of persona during this little episode. First he was Elmer Fudd, with his trusty musket, vowing to get rid of not only the effin deer, but the wascally wabbits as well. Number of deer eliminated by this process: zero.

Deciding to scale back the technology a bit, he morphed into Hiawatha, stalking the wily forest-dwellers with his crossbow. Number of deer killed: zero, although several of the rabbits looked slightly nervous.

Being persistent, if not very accurate, he then took up the Dennis the Menace approach, and, armed with a bag of marbles from the dollar store, stood in the yard taking pot shots at them with a slingshot. The deer seemed to like this, as it gave them something to look at while they were finishing off the clematis.

When he was finally reduced to becoming Og the cave man and hurling rocks and invective at them, I realized that it might just be an opportune time to (once again) broach the (touchy) subject of finishing off that deer fence. Amazingly enough, he agreed. " Yes. Too hard kill effin deer. Og do fence now. Woman right". Ah, evolution.

CRYING WOLF (OR PIG)

God help us all, now it's the friggin swine flu. Again. People just aren't panicking enough about co2, climate change or terrorism, so how about a big fat nasty GLOBAL PANDEMIC? That oughta get the public's attention.

There's no shortage of photo-ops, what with people walking around like jackasses in their Michael Jackson masks, trying to avoid the seething pestilence emanating from their fellow human beings. Although a determined virus could probably get through one of those low-tech masks if it really wanted to. People would actually be better off wearing sunglasses, because (little-known fact) the virus is more likely to infect you through your eyes (nice moist surface, no natural barrier) than your nose or mouth. And you'd still get to look like Michael Jackson. Only not as creepy. 

The first figures I heard on the subject estimated almost 2000 cases in Mexico, with 150 suspected deaths. If that's not cause for alarm, I don't know what is (except maybe George's being closed when you're dying for a mushroom cheese deluxe). China and Russia were alarmed, and banned import of pork from Mexico and even some parts of the U.S.  I have no idea why - what self-respecting flu virus is going to hang around in a piece of dead pork? Egypt even ordered the slaughter of 300,000 pigs, even though they haven't had one case there.

The latest figures are far less scary: there have been no deaths outside Mexico with the exception of one child who had just arrived in the States from there, and most patients outside the country have only had mild symptoms. Of the original suspected deaths in Mexico, 58 were found to have died from other causes, 16 deaths are confirmed, and the rest are still being looked into. So this big scary flu epidemic is looking about par for the course as far as flu outbreaks go. In that case, why discourage flying to Mexico? Why ban their pork? Is someone pissed off at Mexico for some reason that I don't know about?

Not one to miss a spending opportunity, President Obama has asked Congress for 1.5 billion (yes, that's billion) dollars to fight the swine flu problem. Man, this guy has some serious money management issues. After all the spending on climate change, fighting terrorism, going green, handing out bail-outs and flying in pizza, he's got to be getting a little short. Maybe what he should be fighting is his urge to spend taxpayers money on nonexistent problems. Of course, part of this money would go to developing a new flu vaccine, which should be ready by about the time this has all blown over. Not that I'd rush out and get a flu shot anyway, the only benefit I can see from a flu vaccine is to make money for some drug company.

And let's not forget the previous swine flu scare of the seventies - predictions of a dire health emergency led to a massive vaccination campaign, resulting in hundreds of people suffering severe side effects including paralysis and death. In fact, there were more adverse effects from the vaccinations than from the great pandemic that never materialized. But hey, if you can declare co2 a dangerous substance and use it to justify taxes,  maybe you can declare a run-of-the-mill flu outbreak a major health emergency and justify mandatory flu shots. It wouldn't surprise me.

Everything's a crisis these days - we must ACT NOW and, more importantly, we must spend money on averting the current catastrophe.  People have become desensitized to the fear-mongering and instead of going into panic mode over the latest lurid headline, they are more apt to yawn and turn to the sports section. Biased reporting and sensationalism have caused a lot of folks to be skeptical of what they hear in the news, and many of us dismiss alarming headlines until we've checked it out on the internet. This mistrust of the mainstream media's habit of crying wolf has it's own repercussions - it creates the very real possibility that, in the event of a genuine emergency, people might not be inclined to take it seriously. And that could lead to a REAL crisis.

(DON'T) SHOW ME THE MONEY

Well, the business world has finally achieved the pinnacle of salesmanship - we now have the privilege of actually being able to purchase a product that doesn't exist. In fact, it's even better than that - we can buy a NEGATIVE quantity of something, which certainly solves the problem of manufacturers running out of stock.

I was looking at my weather site this morning, hoping that global warming was coming soon to my yard (which is stubbornly refusing to get with the program and warm up), when I noticed a "climate change" section. Of course, I had to have a peek - my, my, what a surprise: an infomercial from an alarmist website explaining how you can spend your (real) money to buy (not real) carbon credits. Sounds like a deal to me, you know how annoying it is to have all that extra money laying around and getting in the way. A big whack of carbon credits, being invisible and all, would take up much less space in my wallet.

Working on the premise that the potential buyer is in the habit of buying swampland in Florida and has recently had a lobotomy, the information is presented very simply. First it explains that everything you do produces carbon dioxide ( you know, that stuff that makes plants grow and supports life on Earth?) and that you are ruining the planet. But there is hope - you can purchase magic "carbon offsets" and thereby negate the environmental impact of your farts or whatever.

Yes, if you just send a bunch of money to some guy you've never met, you can light your BBQ with a clear conscience. In fact, if you're disgustingly rich, you can emit all the co2 you want. Al Gore could fly a jet to Costa Rica, take a crap in the rainforest and still have enough carbon credits left over to wipe his ass with non-recycled toilet paper. But hey, he's rich. We're not, so you just better do your part and quit idling in the McDonald's drive-thru. You filthy polluter.

Next we are told to prepare for the inevitability of greenhouse gas regulation and taxation. Hold on a minute there, not quite so fast - that's what the profiteers are trying for, but there is a lot of opposition. People are so bent about BC's carbon tax that the NDP (who normally love Ministries of Regulating Everything) have made repealing it one of their most popular campaign promises.

Of course, they plan to replace it with an even more devastating cap-and-trade scheme, but they're desperate for votes, right? Good luck with that. It's funny, all this fuss about co2 when water vapor is the major greenhouse gas. Wonder when they'll get around to making money off that?

Anyway, the infomercial goes on to tell us that not all carbon offsets are created equal. Price varies, and the "high-quality" ones are better, so you are encouraged to shop around. Yes folks, do some bargain hunting - you want to get the best nothing for your dollar, don't you? I mean, I'd feel real stupid if I paid a high price for nothing when I could have got it on sale.

How the heck do they plan to keep inventory on this? How many times could a company sell the same carbon credit? When your stock is non-existent, how do you know if some is missing?I guess we should be more trusting, everyone knows it's for our own good. Just send the money and don't worry your little wooly head about it.

I have an idea - I'll buy carbon credits, but in keeping with the spirit of the times, I'll purchase them with "lifestyle credits" instead of money. I can use the $40 I didn't spend at the casino last week. Yes, and the $12.95 I saved when I passed up that chocolate cheesecake at Thrifty's (I'm actually regretting that one). How about all the money I don't spend on crack? Do I get double credit for money I don't lend to my kids because they only pay me back half the time? The math is getting complicated here, but I can see where axe-murderers and armed robbers could really make a killing, so to speak. By purchasing "criminal lifestyle" credits and refraining from acts of mayhem, they could help to reduce "social pollution". Now, where's my Nobel Prize?

Excellent info site: ilovecarbondioxide.com  ( look at:  co2 facts)

EARTH HOUR UPDATE

Apparently I haven't been giving the folks in our fine valley enough credit - there are WAY more sensible people here than I thought. When I heard Big Brother reminding me through the WalMart speakers to remember to turn off my lights for Earth Hour, I thought to myself: this tears it - now a DEPARTMENT STORE is nagging me about global warming? Has everyone gone completely nuts? I was so depressed I had to buy two giant Aero bars to console myself.

Oh, the stupidity of it all - as I looked out my window in April at the snow-covered fields, I had pretty much given up hope that there were any rational people left on the planet. Then last night I read the local paper. I could hardly believe it - Headline: Valley Shines Bright During Earth Hour! Yes, electrical consumption in the valley actually INCREASED 1.3% during the event! Not only that but province-wide, the lights-out response was only half of that recorded last year! Yes! People are wising up to the scam and, even more important, are sending a message: up yours, you money-grubbing, co2-taxing profiteers - we do not buy the lie!

Of course, like a typical brainwashed Gore-worshipper, the local organizer of the event tried to ignore reality by saying that some people might have forgotten (yeah, right), and that the increased energy use during Earth Hour was "not the point". How ridiculous - it was EXACTLY the point. People are fed up with the bullshit and they showed it, in a big way. Think how many people must have turned their lights on to not only compensate for the idiots who sat around in the dark burning candles (which, by the way, are up to 100 times less efficient than light bulbs and produce 10-100 times more indoor air pollution), but to actually INCREASE the energy use. The irony is that the candle-burners probably did more damage to the environment.

But that's typical - most global warming believers have not bothered to find out anything about the real pollution issues or the economic and human damages caused by this so-called crisis that was invented to line the pockets of the rich. They just watch one movie starring Lardbutt McScammer and get sucked in, then go around feeling all smug and self-righteous and expect the rest of us to follow suit, feel guilty, and throw money at the government.

Haven't they figured out that the scientists who disagree with the global warming/co2 theory have nothing to gain by their statements - the ones that promote it are all depending on the program to provide funding, political gain, and money through taxation and investment in the carbon control business. They have a trillion good reasons to lie - the dissenters don't. Not hard to figure out who's more likely to be honest. Al Gore and the IPCC have been caught lying and providing false information to the public (Chris Horner's book "Red Hot Lies" gives some good background on this), but it doesn't seem to matter to the truly converted.

Locally, it was a great moment for the climate realists, and it got even better when I saw the letter to the editor from a man giving his opinion on the climate hoax (loved the part where he compared global warming alarmists to lemmings!). I haven't felt such a sense of community spirit in years. And pleasant surprise that our local paper doesn't predigest our news for us or refuse to print politically incorrect viewpoints like some of the larger ones do.

Anyway, enough gloating - suffice it to say that I was so surprised and elated that I had renewed hope for the future - rational thought seems to be prevailing. I even went out and gardened today. In my friggin PARKA! But hey, it was my way of (belatedly) celebrating Earth Hour.

Best climate information site: algorelied.com  (lots of links to other good sites)

You Tube: Not Evil Just Wrong - trailer for upcoming movie showing the true cost of climate hysteria

New book: Red Hot Lies by C. Horner explains the politics and deception behind the global warming issue

SYSTEM ERROR

I've noticed that quite often when a person or a group wants to regulate something, they haul out their well-worn mantra : "it's a drain on the health care system". It's become a very popular excuse for a bunch of sanctimonious sissified do-gooders to tell you how to eat, work, drive, and now even how to play. This week it's skiing - the proposal for mandatory helmets on the slopes of Quebec - coming soon, of course, to a ski hill near you. Because if you ski, you might get hurt. And if you get hurt, you become... any guesses? That's right - a miserable selfish DRAIN ON THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM. 

When are people going to realize that our health care system wastes money faster than my brother at a blackjack table? We aren't draining the system - it's draining us! We pay and we pay, but when we need treatment we have to wait, sometimes until it's too late. Or the treatment is not available, or is hopelessly inadequate - not enough equipment, beds, or staff. Why? Because all the money that is drained out of us does not go to patient care - a huge proportion is spent on studies, advertising, "information" programs, and paperwork. Then, to add insult to injury, we are treated disrespectfully by health care providers and hospitals, because we are seen as inconveniences rather than paying customers. People feel free to pass judgement; if you just hadn't eaten that extra Twinkie or skipped that exercise class, you wouldn't be in this fix. Now, say ten Hail Marys and put out that smoke.

Contrast that attitude with the way you are treated by your dentist or optometrist - prompt, courteous, and competent - right? Imagine how different things would be if you were paying directly for your health care and were actually perceived as a customer. They would WANT to give you good service, because you would take your business elsewhere if they didn't. You would no longer have to feel pathetically grateful when some bitchy nurse finally calls your name after a three-hour wait and can't even be bothered to look pleasant, much less apologize for the delay.

The problem with socialized medicine is that someone other than the consumer gets to decide how the money is spent, so we have virtually no control over our treatment or options, or where the funding ends up. Are you happy with the millions of dollars poured into "preventative" health campaigns that don't work? Or the brainwashing of your kids in school about health and the environment, even when the information is not correct? Are you happy to fork over money so junkies can have nice clean needles and a comfy place to shoot up? In a smoke-free building, of course - wouldn't want to put their health at risk.

In a free market system, you control how your health dollar is spent, you decide when you get treatment, and you live with the consequences of your own actions. Right now, the health care system is being drained all right, but not by sick people. It's being drained by special interest groups pushing their own agendas: anti-smoking, anti-drinking, anti-obesity, anti-sport, anti-marijuana, and now even anti-co2 ( talk about taxing the very air we breathe!). They all have one thing in common - using your health care contributions to finance their own cause.

If we weren't paying outrageous taxes to finance government spending, we could all afford to pay our own medical costs, directly or through private insurance. Medical care is expensive because the government is perceived as picking up the tab, so everyone feels free to abuse the system, from within and without. And then blame others for "draining" it.

Some people don't want to pay for smokers or fatties or skiers that don't wear helmets. Fair enough - but I don't want to pay for hypochondriacs, crackheads or neurotics who run to the doctor every time they see an ad for a new happy pill. And I sure as hell don't want to pay for studies on the health impact of fictitious global warming.

As an adult, I don't need anyone telling me how to live. I don't want or expect anyone else to finance my health care. I expect value for money spent, and I'm not getting it under the current system. People seem to think it's some kind of safety net, but if you look closely you'll see that net is full of holes and fraying at both ends. People are going out of country to get the care they need, either because they can't get it here or the wait could literally kill them. 

The present situation can't last - the demographics won't support it. The birth rate in Canada is below replacement level, and there are more and more people moving into retirement as the baby boomers leave the work force. Who will finance the big machine then? Not the kids, there aren't enough of them. When the system collapses, people will have to make their own arrangements. No one will have to pay for anyone else's "lifestyle choices", and therefore will have one less excuse to impose their values on others. We'll all have to get over this nation-wide "failure to launch", and stop expecting a parent government to look after us, because it won't.

Personally, I look forward to the day when I can go to the emergency room at three in the morning with a crying baby and have the staff actually show some concern instead of acting like I'm interrupting their coffee break. I expect better than that, I deserve better than that, and I'm more than willing to pay for it directly, avoiding the expense of a middleman and the constant harping of those who think my lifestyle is their business.

TEACH YOUR CHILDREN

I just read an article in the Province about a new phenomenon known as "sexting". Actually, it's not new, they've just coined a word for it. I guess the actual definition would be "stupid teen-age girl e-mailing slutty naked pictures of self to boyfriend without using her one brain cell to realize that he could forward them". That's pretty long - maybe it could go in Wikipedia.

Apparently some people are pretty bent about it, more so in the States than here. One poor sap in Florida (18 yrs old) split up with his 16-yr-old girlfriend and then shared some naked pictures she had sent him. He ended up having to register as a sex offender and attend rehab classes.

Did his girlfriend really think he would never show anyone those pictures? Duh, excuse me: he's a young guy. They like to show off to their buddies. People break up, sometimes not amicably. Come on girls, wake up - it's not rocket science. And who took the pictures in the first place? She didn't get charged for producing the "pornography", but he's in trouble for distributing it. If stupidity was a crime, we'd all be in jail.

Some people are calling it child pornography. Give me a break - child pornography involves CHILDREN, and anyone caught doing that should be castrated and thrown off the nearest cliff. Sixteen-year-olds who hold jobs, drive cars, and have consensual sex are not in the same category as lowlife scumbags who prey on kids in daycare centres.

Baring it all is no big deal to kids these days. Just drive by your local junior high, it looks like a hooker's convention. The message from the media is that looking "sexy" is all-important - kids are encouraged to use sexuality as a replacement for personality or achievement. Their role models are brain-dead idiots like Paris Hilton, and anyone who can afford a decent set of implants has a crack at being the next reality-tv star. Reality tv. There's an oxymoron for you.

It doesn't help that a lot of parents don't spend time with their kids any more. Young people have cell phones, iPods, computers and video games, but they don't have involved parents. Because of our crappy economy, most families need two incomes and it doesn't leave a lot of time for the kids. They end up being raised in daycare or by grandparents ( if they're lucky). Then, when Mom gets a break, she wants to have some "me" time, so she gets a sitter and goes out. These kids are raising themselves and if they end up thinking that getting tattooed and pierced and hanging their boobs out on the internet is the ultimate way to develop self-esteem, whose fault is it?

Many parents have no idea what their kids are up to because they are so wrapped up in the pursuit of their own happiness. Unfortunately, when you have a baby, your quest for self-fulfillment has to take a back seat. For a long time. Kids need our support and attention, and that job should be as full-time as we can make it. Not that it's fun to spend time with a surly know-it-all teenager who thinks you're the stupidest person that ever walked the earth. It isn't - but someone's gotta do it.

Kids are going to make mistakes, it's part of growing up, but it doesn't hurt to talk to them about the pitfalls of life, even if they don't seem to be listening most of the time. I wouldn't have thought it necessary to point out that it might not be a real smart idea to send naked bimbo pictures into cyberspace, but there you go - you have to know what they're up to. The internet is great, I love it, but it exposes kids to a gazillion nutbars who are setting up websites, blogging, video chatting, and promoting their own ideas of right and wrong. The undeniable fact is, if we don't provide our kids with values and guidance, someone else will. Just think about that.

THE VOICE OF REASON

Well, I see my old buddy Shallow Al Gore took a pretty good pigbeating at the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change a few days ago. Sponsored by the Heartland Institute, it was attended by almost eight hundred people, including scientists, economists, and even (gasp!) interested politicians. Seventy-five speakers from meteorologists to astrophysicists came forward to voice their concerns over the global warming fraud.

You couldn't swing a cat in there without hitting a PhD, so this wasn't some mickey mouse gathering of crackpots. Video from the conference is available on-line at heartland.org and it was indeed heartening to hear rational discussion instead of the blatant fearmongering we've been subjected to in the interest of hosing the taxpayer.

Ironically, as I was writing this I heard the words "climate change" on my television. Sure enough, there was the standard bike-helmeted nitwit telling me to get my ass over to Environment Canada's website and find out what I should feel guilty about this week. So I did. No surprise there - a wealth of outdated misinformation on climate, and some pointers on windmills, light bulbs and calculating my carbon footprint. Actually, there was a ton of suggestions for decarbonizing my entire existence, but I didn't want to hang around there too long in case stupidity is contagious.

They handily provide a link to Health Canada's climate change site, so I went there too - and found a list of predicted "health vulnerabilities" related to global warming. For instance: cold and heat related illnesses ( you gotta wonder how much it cost for some numbskull to come up with that one), damaged public health infrastructure ( oh, please God, yes), heart attacks, diarrhea(?!!), and of course their favorite bogeyman, cancer. They like cancer so much they even listed it twice. Good old cancer, a most profitable commodity in this age of fear. Everything gives you cancer, so probably best to just stay home holed up in your closet clutching a bag of bean sprouts and a dog-eared copy of An Inconvenient Truth. Or the Canada food guide.

Although, if you actually do get cancer, and you probably will if you live long enough, good luck getting treatment or a bed in a hospital. There isn't any money for that because too much has been squandered on telling you how to live so you won't get cancer and die. Which is the impossible dream - you can follow all the health guidelines, live an exemplary life and then get cancer anyway. And die. Because valuable resources are being wasted on "healthy living" promotion instead of finding alternatives to barbaric treatments like chemotherapy.

This bogus global warming business is being approached in the same way. If the world decides to warm up, our feeble efforts are going to be like a spit in the ocean. What inflated idea of self-importance has led us to think that we can control nature? If the earth was actually warming, which it isn't, wouldn't it make more sense to be planning strategies for dealing with it instead of bankrupting ourselves in a futile attempt to stave it off?

The voice of reason is finally being heard. First on the internet, then slowly filtering into the mainstream media as it becomes painfully obvious that the public is being taken for a ride. When enough people have wised up, the profiteers will drop the global warming cause faster than rats leaving a sinking ship (or Al Gore fleeing a public debate). But meanwhile, how much money has been wasted? How many acres of farmland hijacked to produce biofuel? How many businesses losing money, shutting down or scrapped in the making because of anticipated environmental costs? We are forking over billions of dollars to do penance for an imaginary sin, and I'm sick of being expected to feel ashamed of enjoying a decent standard of living.

If anyone wants to feel guilty, go take a look at the impact of the global warming scare on development in the third world countries. That should make you feel a lot sadder than contemplating the fictitious plight of the polar bears.

Some good videos on YouTube: The Language of Fear (Michael Crichton), States of Fear: Science or Politics? (Michael Crichton parts 1-7), The Great Global Warming Swindle (parts 1-9)

Some informative sites: heartland.org, newsbusters.org, skepticsglobalwarming.com

                                                          

CARBON CREDIBILITY

Probably everyone can remember at least a few of the major disaster predictions in our lifetime. Overpopulation, global cooling, radioactive fallout, ozone depletion, nuclear winter, silent spring, SARS and Y2K, just off the top of my head. These panics run their course - people get bored waiting for the end of the world, theories fall apart and we move on. But there's a huge difference with the latest one - the global warming scare comes with a big fat price tag.

It has gone from an environmental issue to a political issue, and inevitably to a financial one. Fueled by propaganda like "An Inconvenient Truth", climate hysteria has spread world-wide like a giant international case of the clap. There are now an awful lot of pigs feeding at the carbon trough and they're not going to pull their snouts out without a fight. Al Gore is just loving it - he flies to his save-the-planet rallies in jets that puke out thousands of pounds of co2, but that's ok, because he's filthy rich and can purchase carbon credits to "offset" it. From himself.

And while he's onstage congratulating himself as the new environmental messiah, he's got his limo running outside so he can ride in air-conditioned comfort back to the airport. What a hypocrite. He probably has shoes that cost more than my annual hydro bill, but I'm supposed to keep my nasty little carbon footprint off Big Brother's nice clean rug. I don't think so.

Now that government and big business have become involved, it is politically incorrect to even question the theory of man-made climate change. Scientists who do so are criticized, ostracized and ridiculed. They endure job discrimination and funding cuts - as with any political issue, the big research and development money goes to the people who produce the right answers. The media tells us what to think as usual, slanting our views in the accepted direction with biased reporting and misinformation, right down to the language that they use: people who disagree are "deniers", and have been equated with Holocaust deniers (a cheap shot in lieu of honest debate). Environmental extremists like David Suzuki have even advocated throwing people in jail for having the wrong opinion.

The whole thing has become an embarrassment to many legitimate scientists, who realize that the credibility of their profession is being undermined by this insistence that co2 is a major problem despite evidence to the contrary. Why pick on poor old carbon dioxide? It makes up less than .04% of the atmosphere. How about a breathing tax - we exhale it. It is not a pollutant, it's a naturally occurring substance that is necessary for life. In fact, higher atmospheric levels in the past have produced beneficial effects on humanity due to increased plant growth.

Right now there are scientists and economists all over the world protesting this "consensus" that the debate is over, but the politicians don't want to wait until all the facts are in. Oh, no: it's a crisis, a catastrophe, a state of emergency - we must ACT NOW or we are all doomed. Yeah, yeah, I know the routine - grab your wallet and bend over. Once the controls and restrictions are in place, the facts won't matter anyway.

It won't matter that co2 is not wreaking havoc on our planet. Or that this monumental waste of time, money and energy could be put to far better use helping people develop resources and improve their standard of living. The global warming fanatics will never admit this, because the carbon credit scam is one of the biggest cash grabs ever to come down the pike. With what some see as the potential for global enforcement of carbon regulation, new laws are going to be making a lot of rich people even richer. And we'll be paying for it.

GREYHOUND JUSTICE

Just what is it you have to do in Canada before they will lock you up and throw away the key? I guess being insane is like a "get out of jail free" card here. A guy goes loony on a Greyhound bus, stabs a young man to death while onlookers flee in horror, then proceeds to dismember and desecrate the body. Heaven forbid the RCMP should actually take him out while he's still going at it - I mean, it's not like he's a Polish immigrant or anything.

And now we have a psychiatrist saying he could possibly function in the community at a later date. Hopefully not in my community. Being evaluated on a regular basis with the chance of rejoining society is outrageous - a person who commits a crime because of a mental malfunction is far more dangerous than one who is rational. Sane people who commit serious crimes like murder or armed robbery have obvious motivation - hate, greed or whatever, so you can be aware of the danger and at least take steps to prevent it. People who think they're getting commands from God or the devil are like ticking time bombs - you can't possibly protect society because you don't know when they're going to go over the edge.

Why is it that lack of mental capacity gives a person immunity from responsibility (I couldn't help it - I was drunk, on drugs, psychotic, etc.)? The results of the crime are the same regardless of the state of mind of the perpetrator. The victim is no less dead, the family no less bereaved, the witnesses no less traumatized just because the criminal has mental health issues.

What this man did was an atrocity. He murdered a person in cold blood in front of witnesses - there is no doubt of his guilt. For that, he should spend the rest of his life in a secure facility - to do otherwise is to spit in the face of the victim's family.

Yes, I believe that Mr. Li was psychotic. Yes, I feel sorry for people with mental illnesses. But that doesn't mean they should be exempt from the rules which govern the rest of us - he should not be allowed to escape the consequences of his actions. Confining him to a hospital for an indefinite period means he could be pronounced "cured" at some future date and released back into the general public. He brutally murdered an innocent man.  He caused pain and heartache for the victim's family that can never be erased. Should he then have the chance to enjoy life, happiness and freedom, those things he so cruelly stole from Tim McLean? Giving him that opportunity may be legal, but it sure doesn't feel like justice.

FOUND A PEANUT

Well, if anyone is clinging to the belief that we have NOT turned into a nation of complete jackasses, this should set you straight. Last year in Massachusetts, a lone peanut was discovered on the floor of a school bus full of ten-year-olds. The bus was immediately halted, the students removed, and the bus sent back to the depot for decontamination. This was not anthrax, it was not a dangerous chemical, it was not a BOMB, for crying out loud - it was one lonely, lousy little peanut.

Not that I blame the bus company - there are just too many litigation-happy nutbars (no pun intended) out there to take a chance. But it flies in the face of common sense - I doubt the kids on the bus were scrambling and fighting each other for the chance to eat a dirty old peanut off the floor, even with the two-second rule.

In this age of hysteria, fear-mongering, and catering to the minority, it seems that rationality and reason have flown out the window. Probably cowering in a tree somewhere, alongside freedom of choice and having the wrong opinion.

Food allergies in kids under 18 have increased by 17% between 1997 and 2007, according to the CDC. Are these actual cases? Diagnosed by specialists? Suspected? Self-diagnosed? Invented by some parents afflicted with a strange form of Munchausen's by proxy, in which they enjoy the extra attention?

Or are they real, perhaps due to the recent practice of not exposing kids to various foods in early childhood. Interestingly,  the incidence of children's nut allergies in the UK is about 2%, while in Israel, where kids are fed nuts from infancy, it is only .17%. Allergies in general are on the rise, possibly due to the current obsession with having a germ-free home environment.

I'm not saying there aren't cases of severe peanut allergies, just like shellfish allergies or bee-stings, where the person is in actual danger of dying. I'm just saying that with any allergy, many people claim allergic status when it isn't really there. It's a lot easier to get people to stop wearing perfume in the office if it affects your health than it is to just say you don't like it, right?

The problem is, everyone wants their own issues to be paramount. In the US, only 2,000 hospitalizations per year are due to food allergies of any kind - with only 150 resulting in death, and not all of those death by peanut. So how did such a tiny percentage of actual risk end up justifying such extreme measures?

How did it get so ridiculous that the overwhelming majority of students can't take a perfectly nutritious, affordable sandwich to school because a handful of kids have (or may have) an allergy? How did it escalate to the point where some people now believe that molecules of peanut in the air can harm their kids? Where people are cutting down nut trees in their yards, even though peanuts don't even grow on trees. They're a LEGUME, like a pea, for God's sake!

This trend cannot possibly sustain itself. The me-first attitude that says everyone around you must change their behavior to accommodate your wishes is not viable in the long run, because more and more people want to push their own agenda. If the peanut thing flies, how far behind is the no-tuna rule? Look at all the problems just in the allergy sector. Shellfish, eggs, milk products, dust, pet hair, feathers, cosmetics: everyone brings something with them or on them to school. 

What happens when, inevitably, the "rights" clash? If one kid has an allergy to sunscreen, then what? Do all the kids stop using it at school to accommodate the one? How would that scenario play out, since sunscreen use is even more promoted than peanut awareness? That one should be interesting.

I guess the answer would be to issue all the kids HAZMAT suits instead of school uniforms. Or, better yet, home-school them. At least they'd be safe from the latest communicable disease: media-induced paranoia.

MRS. PELICAN'S KILLER COOKIES (delicious!)

1 c. artery-hardener (butter or marg)

1/2 c. white death (sugar)

3/4 c. brown death (brown sugar)

1 cholesterol-raiser (egg)

2 1/4 c. lethal carbohydrate (flour)

1 tsp. acid neutralizer (baking soda)

1/2 tsp. hypertension inducer (salt)

3/4 c. pancreas-destroyer (chocolate chips)

Mix artery-hardener with white and brown death. Add cholesterol-raiser. Add dry ingredients and pancreas-destroyer and mix well. Drop by spoonfuls onto ungreased baking sheet. Don't flatten. Bake at 325 for 8 to 10 minutes or until done.

Make some caffeine-loaded beverage of your choice. Stick Cremo in it. Grab those still-warm weapons of mass destruction and start chomping. Eat. Drink. Smile. Be glad that you're not afraid of cookies.

NO SWIMMING

There is a new breed emerging. Or maybe they're not so new. You remember them from grade school - those whiny, bossy, spoiled little tattle-tales that no one wanted to play with. Well, they're all grown up now, and STILL no one wants to play with them.

They don't get invited to fun things like beach parties, so they want beach fires banned. After all, fires cause smoke and pollution, and often lead to unhealthy activities like beer-drinking and hot-dog eating. Health Canada wouldn't like that.

These kind of people are very big on preserving things for the future. Who's future? Not mine - I've noticed that as soon as local busybodies get local government involved, things get "preserved" right out of the public's hands. Seal Bay park is a prime example. It used to be a nice place to walk, bike, or ride until the Regional District got hold of it. Now it is a disgusting mess of barriers, man-made structures, plastic pipe and ditches. Trails are closed or segregated, access restricted, and everywhere those Godawful signs, including one with a handy rat-line number in case you want to report someone farting in the wrong spot.

People are getting into heated confrontations over who's allowed to use which trails, and bad feelings abound. It never used to be like this - everyone just peacefully coexisted and enjoyed themselves. But hey, local government knows best, it's for the public good. Oh yes, I just LOVE to see my tax dollars spent on ensuring that I can only visit the park during certain hours or use certain trails. I'm just waiting for the paved parking and admission charge. Nature park, my ass.

And now I read in the paper that some do-gooder wants to get the pesky swimmers and campers out of Comox Lake. This person has been here A WHOLE TEN YEARS and has "noted with concern the intensive and expanding use of the Comox lake watershed". Well, I've been here forty years and you know what I've noted with concern? The increasing number of meddling ignoramuses who move here because they like it, then try to "improve" it to suit themselves. Somewhat similar to the city people who move to the country because it's "natural", then try to get bylaws passed because they don't like the smell of the dairy farm next door.

From what I understand, the water in the lake tests just fine - the only way we are going to have a problem with the water supply is if we keep allowing development which encourages people like this to move here. I think getting rid of the greedy developers would do a lot more good than getting rid of campers. What's the answer? Stop enjoying the lake, as most of us have been doing all our lives? Put a big fence around it with "No Trespassing" signs? We could just show our kids pictures of the lake while they play in their Mr. Turtle pools in the back yard.

Apparently this person is contacting the Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. What the hell is that? When the heck did we get one? Boy, they snuck that one right by me. Doesn't "living" come under the category of your own personal business? Oh, wait a minute - it must be a branch of the "Government Taking Your Money And Using It To Dictate Your Behavior" department. I forgot about them.

Well, I hope this person isn't successful in sucking the fun out of Comox Lake. I somehow think there's a better way to address the issue of water management than banning swimming and camping on a very small area of a very large lake.

But for some people, solving the problem isn't really the point. The point is to come up with more regulation and restrictions - I guess it makes them feel important. No wonder no one wants to play with them.

IN DEFENSE OF FAT

I'm not loving this low-fat business. I went to my favorite (cheap) store yesterday to buy yogurt, and my usual brand was gone. Seems they had to drop some varieties to make room for the million new kinds of low-fat, non-fat, calorie-reduced, aspartame-laced crap the public has been gobbling up lately. I can't believe the Great Media God has actually convinced people to be afraid of fat. WAKE UP!! WE NEED FAT!! YOU WOULD ACTUALLY DROP DEAD WITHOUT IT!!!

What do you think your brain is made of? About two-thirds fat, is what. And kids need fat, too. In fact, children under two should not have fat-restricted diets because of adverse effects on growth and development. So there.

The point is, fat is not your enemy: ignorance is. Do you really think the manufacturers of 'healthy' and 'lite' products give a rat's ass about you? Give me a break - if there was a profitable way to recycle kitty litter and market it as a granola bar, somebody would be doing it. Fat itself is not inherently bad, as some people would have you believe, just a problem if you eat the wrong kind in the wrong amounts. And removing fat does not automatically make a food 'healthy'. 

What troubles me most is that so much advertising is aimed at parents, insinuating that the products being promoted are somehow better for your kids than real food. Vitamin packed! Good source of minerals! Gives them the energy to play hard! Yeah, well so does a sardine, but it doesn't have a picture of a superhero on it or a bunch of ads showing how cool you'll be if you eat it.

Here's how it works: take a perfectly good piece of food, process most of the nutrition out of it, add back some 'enrichment' and preservatives and don't forget the artificial sweetener. Add a few hundred thousand dollars worth of advertising and a picture of someone in spandex bike shorts grinning like a chimp. Voila: health food.

Heaven forbid you should send your kid to school with a peanut butter sandwich and a piece of fruit. Omigod - the kid sitting three rows down might keel over and drop from third-hand peanut breath exposure. Then you'd all have to go for counselling. 

Bad enough that adults fall for this so-called healthy lifestyle advertising, but I really resent the fear-mongering that allows big business to pimp our kids for profit. Don't give your kids cheese, it's BAD for them. But our new low-carb fat-reduced just-about-cheese product is GOOD. And conveniently packaged in plastic with an expiry date of 2052.

Take a look at the ingredient list on some of the so-called healthy foods. You might be surprised to find sugar (or worse, sugar substitute) listed near the top. If you listen carefully to the ads, notice phrases like "may help to", "studies suggest", and "has been associated with". Translation: We're not allowed to outright lie, but we sure as heck would like to give the impression that this stuff is good for you.

When a company makes a profit from a trend, it behooves them to get others on the bandwagon. The more money involved, the easier to get others on board. Finance some studies, take some surveys, get some intense media campaign going, and you can pretty much demonize anything you want. If you can get the government in on it, so much the better. Restricting ads for certain products and imposing taxes on them (such as is now being considered for 'unhealthy' foods) is certainly creating an unfair marketplace, not to mention trampling our freedom of choice into the ground. It is not the role of the government to influence what I choose to eat or drink. I personally believe that eating sugar is healthier than eating a chemical substitute (go to Mercola.com for a gazillion reasons not to use artificial sweeteners, including weight gain!). Slanting the market in favor of so-called 'healthy' choices is not concern for public health. It is SOCIAL ENGINEERING. Two of the scariest words in the English language.

"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"

(Squealer speaking to the farm animals in George Orwell's Animal Farm, 1945.)