Facts I have learned about the British today:

1. Southwark = "suth-erk"
2. The Tube is basically like the TTC, except apparently British people are quite short because the ceiling is about six foot at the max.
3. 5p looks like a dime, 10p looks like a quarter, 2p looks like a loonie, and the tiny, unassuming bronze thing is a pound.
4. "Walk left stand right" is exactly the same as back home, not the opposite, as I was told it would be.
5. Although it LOOKS like you can go through a Tube gate with your Oyster card from either direction, this is not true. There is a tiny X or green check telling you if you can pass through that side or not.
6. Street signs. Where are they?

USING GUNS TO STOP PEOPLE FROM USING GUNS IS A GREAT IDEA, YOU GUYS

I am late to the party on this one but I spend too much time trawling the Internet and running across macros like these in the months since the tragedy at Sandy Hook:

The NRA (and apparently some young people with too much time on their hands) believe that teachers should be armed to defend against school shooters. This is a terrible, terrible idea. The argument that one needs guns to defend oneself from other maniacs with guns is bullshit; what is really necessary is better control, licensing, and regulation, so that nobody has a gun and everybody avoids ballistics-related injuries at school. Virtually all of the weapons used in school shootings are obtained legally and legitimately, but the NRA somehow thinks the problem lies in a LACK of guns.

I mean, sure, it’s technically possible to fix a problem with more of that same problem. For example, the government could probably get rid of drug dealers by importing and distributing kilos and kilos of heroin – effectively flooding the market, dropping the price of a piece through the floor, and putting dealers out of business. But you don’t see anybody jumping at THAT plan, do you? Just because something will technically work doesn’t automatically make it the best plan, or even a feasible one.

Arming teachers is a similarly terrible idea. This residual Cold-War obsession with mutually assured destruction doesn’t work on a small scale because school shooters aren’t afraid of their own destruction. Arming teachers doesn’t keep maniacs out of schools, it just increases the likelihood that more children will be caught in the crossfire.

Oh, also? The spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry says the comparison between terrorism in Israel and school shootings in the US is nonsense, and that Israel actually depends on incredibly strict gun licensing laws. Nice try, Neo-Republican Assholes.

LITTERING

Part of me can't even believe people still do this. Maybe I'm just noticing this more now that I work at a conservation centre, but roadway littering is kind of a problem, and I don't get that. Littering requires deliberate movement; avoiding littering is a non-action - it requires zero effort. DO NOT roll down your window on the expressway, DO NOT shove your McDonald's wrapper or juice box or legal documents out the window. Congratulations, you have successfully NOT LITTERED.

I understand (at least sort of) how people might not want to get off their arses and plant a tree or walk to work. But when it comes to preserving the environment by NOT doing something, how effing hard is that?! If you are purposely expending energy to give the planet the finger, you might need another hobby.

BEARDY McBEARDERSON

PART MAN, PART PIT BULL

So, Tom Mulcair is in charge of stuff now over at the NDP desk. I suffer from a fatal character flaw: I’m a pragmatist. To that end, I’m not sure it matters if Mulcair’s plan on bringing the centre to the party is indeed the opposite. I just want a clear alternative so that Canadians stop voting in the Conservatives out of poverty of choice. Harper is not just ineffective, he is actually anti-progress. His government undoes good things and good laws that already exist. The legislation it enacts (or at least attempts to enact) does not reflect reality. In their minds, the Conservatives are already governing the perfect society they apparently hope to create. Their social platform is a series of hard lines drawn in the sand; their legislation is not based on any real survey of what the population needs, but rather on fulfilling the central party dogma.

Will the omnibus crime bill lower the crime rate, lower the recidivism rate, help rehabilitate non-violent offenders before their prison education ruins them for life? It’s highly unlikely. But that’s okay, because these are the Conservatives, and Conservatives are Tough on Crime.

Or the debacle a few years back, when Tony Clement threatened to rescind InSite’s government exemption? Never mind how many overdoses InSite has prevented, how many users were saved from HIV and hep C infection, how many users accepted passage into heroin detox facilities…Tony Clement is a Conservative, and Conservatives are Tough on Drugs!

This is no way to govern; these fools have to go.

Is Mulcair too Liberal? Almost certainly. After spending more than a decade as a Liberal MNA, I have no illusions that he’s magically left-ified all of his deepset political ideas.

On the count of divisiveness, I’m inclined to count the suit for defamation as a strong strike against him; obviously he doesn’t know how to play nicely with the other children (although I really just want to know what he said). On top of that, I also think he’s spent too much time dealing with the peculiarities of Quebecois politics and risks alienating the West by having the gall to reside in Central Canada. (I have no hope for Alberta, but the CCF-CLC merger was born in Saskatchewan, so the lack of NDP seats there is rather embarrassing).

Finally, does he need a shave? Quite desperately.

But, most importantly, does he represent a viable alternative to the Conservative juggernaut? If that answer is yes, how could we disagree? With the real Liberals in disgrace, maybe the best chance this country has of unseating the fuck-ups we let in this time is to present a centre-leaning, aggressive, outspoken leader who has enough street cred with Quebec to prevent the separatists from blowing things sky-high and derailing an otherwise productive term.

Anyway, forget all of this, I don’t have much faith left in the executive branch. As far as I’m concerned, elections are a kind of placebo that exists solely to give people the illusion of choice. The real work of keeping the nation on the rails falls to the judicial arm, so consider me an amicus curiae, at least until I end up with my own defamation suit.

YOUTH CULTURE FOR THE LOSE

I REACT TO THE TOP 15
I occasionally like to check out the MM(M) Top 10/15/20 to keep just enough on top of current music that my students can make fun of me for being so "mainstream". So, I braved the first top 15 of 2012:

1. Domino (Jessie J): Remember that time when Jessie J put out Do it Like a Dude and pretty much told the world that they could listen to her stuff or kiss her gargantuan balls? Yeah, I miss that time. What's with the downturn into bland synthpop, man?

2. Sprawl II (The Arcade Fire): Shit, I hate the Arcade Fire

3. Michigan Left (The Arkells): Didn't I JUST listen to this song?

4. Love on Top (Beyonce): As much as I love a woman in a ringmaster's jacket, there is no reason funk guitar should be anywhere near this video. Or music in general.

5. Party (Beyonce): Apparently this 90s-diva thing is the intended feel for the record. Hey, at least it seems more wholesome than some of the other stuff on this list. Oh wait, what's that? "So tonight/I'll do it every way/knockin' till the morning light"? Never mind.

6. It Will Rain (Bruno Mars): Is this the guy that did that stupid "Lazy Song"? I'm putting a hit out on this kid's head.

7. Hit Me Up (Danny Fernandes): All right, this is what I'm talking about! Get rid of whoever's singing, dial up the bass, and this is sheer dancehall.

8. Don't Stop (Foster the People): I don't know. Like Franz Ferdinand, only fuzzier. Is "shitty speakers" a mix effect now?

9. One Life (Hedley): "We been up when we should have been sleeping". Exactly. Rock out responsibly, kids. Even Hedley says you should.

10. The One that Got Away (Katy Perry): So maudlin. Obviously ghost-written by me.

11. Stronger (Kelly Clarkson): Don't break up with Kelly Clarkson 'cause she will write a kick-ass song about how she doesn't need you and then who's going to be sorry?

12. Marry the Night (Lady Gaga): I don't know, guys. I'm just not crazy about this Gaga single. I'm not feeling it.

13. It (Rich Aucoin): Son, you need a shave, and your music video consists entirely of you badly reenacting scenes from famous movies.
I like you.
Seriously, though. Like, do you need a razor or something? If you're not good with blades, I can get you an electric one.

14. Our Day Will Come (Amy Winehouse): Like I'd talk shit about Winehouse even if I didn't love this track, which I do. But, Amy-girl, if we can learn anything from Back to Black and your untimely death, it's that it's much safer to love blow than puff.

15. Stand Behind the Music (Anjulie): This girl had better be twenty-one or younger. Otherwise this bad-girl screw-the-industry rant veers from charmingly brash into wake-the-hell-up territory.

Conclusion: BAD NEWS, KIDS. Most of your shit sounds exactly the same. Someone bring me a Tommy James and the Shondells LP.

FELLOW HUMANS:

People, I cannot stress this enough: DO NOT FIRE GUNS INTO THE AIR.

Yes, the bullet will go up. Yes, at some point, its velocity will reach zero. But after that, it will fall back to Earth, and the effect of acceleration due to gravity will make sure it is travelling very, very fast on its return trip. Just like that penny thrown off the CN tower, a bullet falling from a thousand feet is going to hurt.

AWW, CRAP. ELECTION TIME AGAIN?

BRACE YOURSELVES - THE MAELSTROM IS COMING
How have I managed nine entire months without once needing to cuss out a public figure? Heaven only knows. Fortunately, we've got a provincial election coming up, which means plenty more stupid is about to hit the fan around here.

Let's start with the provincial Lie-beral promise, if elected, to extend teachers' college to two years.

Now, I AM a preservice teaching student, and can tell you that the vast majority of us are already in a minimum of five years' worth of debt. It must be nice for the province to be able to double the program length without spending any more money, but that scenario won't be the same for us.
I would also dearly love to know exactly how many professors who actually teach at teachers' colleges were consulted before this piece of brilliance was developed - I am guessing the number is zero. But hey, we can just pull another year's worth of content out of thin air, right?
Thirdly, let's address the math issues the Liberals are suffering here: they claim that they are going to reduce the number of graduates, as approximately 9000 new teachers are "flooding" the province each year. Well, yes. Throwing down another year of teachers' college will drop the number of graduates this year to zero - but only for this year. After that, we're back to 9000 grads a year who are even deeper in debt and even more desperate for teaching jobs.
This is such a bass-ackwards way of addressing the oversaturation of the teaching profession. Want fewer grads? Admit fewer teaching candidates. Don't try to temporarily stem the flow of output by hurling a one-time monkey wrench at the pipeline.