Tropical Topical Topics. It's not really tropical, I just wanted the word.

I was about to read this one guys blog post, going by the topic it sounded like it would be a short and sweet affair... but it just keeps going!

Window closed.

It feels weird that I'm complaining about a guy writing on and on... a criticism that has been aimed at my own comic review work at times, but I've honestly never seen it.

I mean come on, I average about 500 words, topping out at a 1000 (and if it's 1000 then that's probably the only review I did that day). It takes two minutes to read, come on.

That's part of why I'm so fond of people who take the time to read anything I've written- it's apparently a rare gift to be able to stare at a screen for three minutes.

I've actually had occasion to write a personal e-mail to someone, and when I ask about it later have them tell me they didn't even read it. That was years ago, but it burns me up. Oh, they got it, they just didn't read it.

ANYway- I'm cutting it really close with old April. I've got three days to write three posts to reach my quota. Fortunately (I've been using that word EVERYWHERE lately, it's getting on my nerves. Alright, I'm declaring a moratorium on "fortunately") I've got some topics on hand for just such an occasion.

In reverse order of when they will be discussed: My thoughts on and experience of the film "Source Code" (because that should in theory be a relatively short post, and I know I'll be hard up for time the last day of the month), followed by my recounting of the books I've just finished, and for this post that I'm already well into I'll delve into that timely but dangerous subject of politics.

Sort of. I'm more thinking of electoral reform.

When I think back on how the system of government works here in Canada I flash back to my high school law teacher (well, the one I remember, I'm sure there was another person before I moved to Toronto...) Mr. Katz.

Mr. Katz was a funny guy, he kind of reminds me of Bill Maher or Denis Leary, with the main difference being I actually like Mr. Katz (sorry guys, John Stewart is great because when people are idiots he talks about it as though he's sharing this information with the viewer, you two sound like you're constantly accusing the viewer of being idiots, and I don't have the energy to constantly defend myself against a prerecorded performance). Maybe he just didn't care what he said, if I'm remembering right it was his last year before retiring. Regardless, Mr. Katz was pretty cool, and here's what he said about our system of government:

"It's stupid- if you want to elect the leader of the party then, whoever it is, you have to vote for the meatball in your riding, or if you have a really good representative but don't like his leader, then you're screwed that way."

Yeah, don't super quote me on that, but that's the general idea.

I was mostly reminded about that, not just because of election fever, but because of the Harper assertion that a coalition government isn't legitimate. That it isn't the will of the people. And in a sense, that statement isn't so far off.

The problem (not that I'll take the time to figure out the whole definition of "the problem") is that we're operating under a mish-mash of U.S. political envy/"knowledge" and the actual system we've got in Canada. So people are under the impression that a coalition isn't legitimate. It helps when they're specifically told "a coalition isn't legitimate".

"You hear that fellers? Coalition governments aren't legitimate!"

All the attack ads over the leaders of the parties, over "their" policies, and that's how people will be deciding over random guys A, B, and C in their own riding!

As a quick side note, there's now this one attack ad on the NDP that starts out mentioning the Conservative tax cuts. The words themselves are saying those tax cuts were and are a good and helpful thing, and I won't argue that point, I don't have the numbers for that, BUT the narrator of the ad sounds like she's being sarcastic over this point.

"Suuuuure those were good tax cuts by the conservatives..." - paid for by the conservatives. I find that funny. And then I think the whole thing is disingenuous, attacking the NDP only after they become a real political threat, as opposed to spending the entire campaign discussing the merits of each-ish of the party's platforms. AND there's a Liberal dig in there as well.

Well, the narrative of the ad itself isn't very cohesive, but man, it definitely sticks it to the maximum groups possible.

Back on track: I'm thinking I'd rather the focus be entirely on campaigns between MP's in individual ridings. Let each area determine who's best to represent them, and then have those people meet up in Ottawa (or wherever, maybe Quebec, throw those guys the bone, I don't care), only THEN would leaders be chosen, nominated and elected after the fact by the representatives of the people.

Also, if we could get rid of the need for the short-hand of different party banners to explain the difference between candidates, that'd be good. It's harder to do, but I'd rather we just knew the MP's themselves and their beliefs, and then elected who was best for the job.

As opposed to our current method of one day going to a school, looking at a card, not knowing any of the names, and then saying, "guess I'm voting for you, glad to meet you...r name."

That's of course only my recommendation if we wanted to embrace our Canadian-ness. We could also swing the other way, full on American style like the ads would have us think we already have it.

I wouldn't necessarily mind switching to that full on American style, just so long as it's one or the other!

Oh politics, ye dangerous and revealing of subjects.

Peace out!

*drops microphone*