I visited my friend Dave's blog yesterday, and something I read there really bugged me, but I couldn't quite put my finger on what it was. He's Canadian and we disagree on many things. I say that for context, because I'm quite far to the right of Dave, or he's far to the left of me depending on how you look at it. Anyways, this morning while doing drywall (have I mentioned how much I hate doing drywall?), I was turning it over in my mind and I understood what it was about Dave's post that annoyed me so.

He wrote:

Sure the Liberals were corrupt, EVERY government is corrupt as long there are men and women sitting in positions of power. Corruption breeds in backslapping handshaking environments where people get paid 6 digit figures for working 20ish days a year. Deal with it.

Dave, you should never just "Deal with it" when it comes to your government. That kind of milquetoast, bend-me-over-and-please-sir-can-I-have-another attitude is exactly what those ruling bastards are counting on. You, my friend, are a fucking SHEEP, and if I saw you I'd kick you in the balls to remind you that they're there.

If your government screws you over (and by all accounts, they've been screwing you long and hard), then you vote them out. Don't like the opposition? Fine, hold your nose and vote the current party out anyway. Because you never ever reward corruption and theivery by allowing them to remain in power. And if the next government turns out to be as bad, then you vote those assholes out too, and you keep doing your goddamn job as a citizen until someone running for office understands that the people aren't going to put up with "business as usual" and cleans up their collective act.

Being screwed by your friends feels no different than being screwed by the other guys. If you don't recognize that, then you've already given up. You have the ultimate authority in your form of government, yet you're too lazy to use it.

A wise man once said that people get the government they deserve, and Canada is living proof of the accuracy of that. It doesn't have to be that way.

Posted by: Ted at 10:04 AM | category: Links
Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 384 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I take it Dave doesn't read The Red Ensign Standard when it comes out? You should tell him to google that phrase and read some of what comes out.

Oh, and how do you like doing drywall, Ted?

Posted by: Victor at November 11, 2005 03:25 PM (L3qPK)

2 The drywall is done except for finish mudding. Today I did the ceramic tiling in the shower.

Yay hats!

Posted by: Ted at November 11, 2005 04:01 PM (+OVgL)

3 Baaaa

No, but seriously, I do vote for the opposition, but it's apparently never the populare opposition. Of course calling Canada's government corrupt coming from an American, that's a lot of the kettle calling the pot black brother. And I wasn't speaking just of our government but of all governments in general.

Besides, any corruption carried out by government officials is usually covered up so well during their time of office that no one ever knows about it. It has to be a seriously big stinker, like, say, outing a Secret Agent, before anyone is removed of office.

Posted by: Oorgo at November 11, 2005 08:00 PM (1JIkb)

4 LOL Be sure of your facts, amigo. It's only against the law if the "agent" is undercover, and Plame wasn't and hadn't been for at least five years. I know several CIA agents (living near DC and working for Uncle Sam, you meet lots of gov people), and a very small percentage are actually "secret" agents. Plame wasn't one, therefor no crime could be committed because you can't "out" someone in that status. By the scenario that you suggest, then anyone answering the phone at CIA headquarters wouldn't even be allowed to give their name.

Now as for corruption being covered up, well, Gomery seems to have shined a pretty bright light on some rats in Ottawa.

But all that misses my point, and that's the frustration I feel when I see the apathy that people have when that sort of corruption happens. Go back and read through my archives, and you'll see that I hold the current administration's feet to the fire when they need it too. I'm not blindly partisan, there's enough stupid on both ends of the spectrum to be annoyed about.

Posted by: Ted at November 11, 2005 08:48 PM (+OVgL)

5 Heh, yeah, Gomery shone a light on the rats in Ottawa, and the GOOD thing about the current liberal leader is he did something about it, and has all the books open to the public. He's trying to fix a party that's been long plagued by old farts in suits lining each others pockets.

The Conservative party though, that's an entirely different sort of corruption, man look at when THEY were in power and how much of our sovereignty they gave away, plus on top of that is their current religious fervor which so resembles the US Republican party hardliners (such as Pat Robertson).

You see why we have so little choice, I mean do you think that anyone will vote in a party like the NDP? They would in all honesty most likely drive us right back down the black hole of debt. I vote for them because I'm as you say left of you, mainly because I would never vote for someone who would govern based on his beliefs rather than the common good.

Posted by: Oorgo at November 12, 2005 02:00 AM (1JIkb)

6 And do mind the mental wandering, that's what beer does to me

Posted by: Oorgo at November 12, 2005 02:02 AM (1JIkb)

7 That's an interesting thing you say there Dave, about "govern based on his beliefs rather than the common good".

I'm not religious, but I can't see why an openly religious leader would be a bad thing. Religion is codified morality, and as long as the person didn't try to prosetilyze (I know I misspelled that) from office, knowing exactly what a person's beliefs are seems like a good thing to me.

And from my point of view, too often when I hear the phrase "common good", it translates into "we know what's better for you than you do, so we're raising taxes".

Posted by: Ted at November 12, 2005 12:32 PM (+OVgL)

8 I guess since According to Wiki almost 80% of Americans proclaim themselves to be Christian then it would be the majority good. The minorities can suck it right? (I'm just jabbing at you now, you know that right? Poke the bear, poke the bear).

Posted by: Oorgo at November 13, 2005 02:47 AM (1JIkb)

9 A politician who says he is acting for the common good has one hand in your pocket and the other stabbing you in the back.

If they say they are acting out of self-interest, then you can trust them... As long as they're in sight and in range.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at November 14, 2005 08:43 AM (QriEg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment