What the hell can be evil about guaranteeing that people in your own country can see a doctor if they need to? What is this culture of angry, vicious selfishness and how did they manage to convincingly wrap it in a cloak of Christian morality? To tell the truth, I have issues with giving people money on the subway. I feel bad about it, but after naively giving a fiver to a sad homeless lady in DC who had been following me for a while and realizing that she was undoubtedly a crackhead, I don't feel much like supporting those types of habits anymore. If I have extra food I happily give it away, and in the summer I gave a woman inexplicably wrapped in blankets a bottle of water I bought specifically for her...but universal health insurance is nothing like that. When there is clear evidence of healthier and more productive societies with this system overseas (i.e. the Scandinavians, Switzerland, and other pinnacles of Western development known for chocolate, watches, and beer), why would we prefer to group ourselves with developing countries?
Which brings up another question: why do we seem to enjoy being in the company of Somalia when it comes to our human rights record?? The Convention on the Rights of the Child has been ratified by every other UN member but the US and Somalia. Balls. And now we have yet to sign something newer and extremely important (although for obvious reasons): the International Convention against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED). They have a very good website. Well I must say if we want to keep up this practice of disappearing people ourselves because of the "war on terror" it would be a bit hypocritical to sign this. But perhaps we should just change our ways, no? Even Guatemala has sign on, for chrissake.
Enough of my annoyed blathering on...here is one of the most lovely things I heard about this week, which ensures that, despite all this nonsense, Obama still holds my heart:
*This is a translation from Watching America of an article originally in French from La Presse, please to find it on the WA website here here.
Obama 10, Harper 0
By Nathalie Petrowski
Translated By Andrew Lusztyk
6 March 2010
Edited by Brigid Burt
Click here for the originalEvery second Monday for the past three years, almost religiously, the author Yann Martel sends a letter and a book to Stephen Harper. Rather than educate him, the books are meant to accompany his moments of silence, as Martel explains on his Web site [See here].
So far, 76 books have been sent to the prime minister, each accompanied by a polite and comely letter, in which the author explains his current literary selection and what the prime minister should look out for in the book.
With the exception of five letters of acknowledgment, the first sent by an assistant and the remaining four by correspondents, Martel has never received a letter, note or single word from Harper. Nothing in three years — a great epistolary silence.
In addition, Martel recently experienced quite a shock when checking his mail. Rather than finding a dispatch from Harper waiting in his mailbox, he found an envelope sent from the White House. Inside, there was a note that addressed him personally, handwritten by President Obama himself.
Imagine his astonishment. Snubbed for the past three years by his own prime minister, Martel is now receiving consolation from the most powerful man in the West without ever having asked for it. What delicious irony …
“Mr. Martel,” wrote President Obama, “My daughter and I just finished reading Life of Pi together. It is a lovely book — an elegant proof of God and the power of storytelling.”
Martel nearly fainted from joy. His heart skipped a beat as he wrote back, adding that the selfless gesture was what had stunned him the most. How, indeed! Barack Obama had effectively nothing to gain politically, financially or even diplomatically by writing to a Canadian author who lives in the deep end of Saskatchewan. Martel wouldn’t help Obama get reelected, pass his health care reform or regain full control of the Senate.
Obama had nothing to benefit from his gesture. And yet, he wanted to do it anyway. He wanted to write this little handwritten note in person, which says everything. Before this, he wanted to read a book that wasn’t a thriller or a bestseller sold in airports, but a beautiful philosophical story — one that was deep and complex. Lastly, he wanted to share this story with his daughter.
Do you know many presidents who read books with their children? Does Harper do the same with his children? I certainly hope that it happens from time to time. After all, Harper is also a father. Except that, so far, he’s been a father who gives his children a handshake rather than a kiss when dropping them off at school. He’s also a man who recently admitted that if he had had the choice to become a prime minister or a hockey player, he would have rather been a hockey player.
This coming June, it will be exactly five years since Harper told us that he was writing a book on the history of hockey. At this point, writing the book seems to be a laborious process that consumes all of the prime minister’s free time. We could suppose that this is the real reason why Harper never replies to Martel. Otherwise, how can we explain that the prime minister of Canada — who, moreover, recently enjoyed an extended vacation from Parliament — hasn’t taken the time to write three sentences to one of his country’s important authors and winner of the prestigious Man Booker Prize when, on the other side of the border, the most powerful and busiest man in the free world could do so? If it isn’t a question of time, then I can only think of two reasons for Stephen Harper’s epistolary silence: arrogance and a lack of class. How worrying.
So far, 76 books have been sent to the prime minister, each accompanied by a polite and comely letter, in which the author explains his current literary selection and what the prime minister should look out for in the book.
With the exception of five letters of acknowledgment, the first sent by an assistant and the remaining four by correspondents, Martel has never received a letter, note or single word from Harper. Nothing in three years — a great epistolary silence.
In addition, Martel recently experienced quite a shock when checking his mail. Rather than finding a dispatch from Harper waiting in his mailbox, he found an envelope sent from the White House. Inside, there was a note that addressed him personally, handwritten by President Obama himself.
Imagine his astonishment. Snubbed for the past three years by his own prime minister, Martel is now receiving consolation from the most powerful man in the West without ever having asked for it. What delicious irony …
“Mr. Martel,” wrote President Obama, “My daughter and I just finished reading Life of Pi together. It is a lovely book — an elegant proof of God and the power of storytelling.”
Martel nearly fainted from joy. His heart skipped a beat as he wrote back, adding that the selfless gesture was what had stunned him the most. How, indeed! Barack Obama had effectively nothing to gain politically, financially or even diplomatically by writing to a Canadian author who lives in the deep end of Saskatchewan. Martel wouldn’t help Obama get reelected, pass his health care reform or regain full control of the Senate.
Obama had nothing to benefit from his gesture. And yet, he wanted to do it anyway. He wanted to write this little handwritten note in person, which says everything. Before this, he wanted to read a book that wasn’t a thriller or a bestseller sold in airports, but a beautiful philosophical story — one that was deep and complex. Lastly, he wanted to share this story with his daughter.
Do you know many presidents who read books with their children? Does Harper do the same with his children? I certainly hope that it happens from time to time. After all, Harper is also a father. Except that, so far, he’s been a father who gives his children a handshake rather than a kiss when dropping them off at school. He’s also a man who recently admitted that if he had had the choice to become a prime minister or a hockey player, he would have rather been a hockey player.
This coming June, it will be exactly five years since Harper told us that he was writing a book on the history of hockey. At this point, writing the book seems to be a laborious process that consumes all of the prime minister’s free time. We could suppose that this is the real reason why Harper never replies to Martel. Otherwise, how can we explain that the prime minister of Canada — who, moreover, recently enjoyed an extended vacation from Parliament — hasn’t taken the time to write three sentences to one of his country’s important authors and winner of the prestigious Man Booker Prize when, on the other side of the border, the most powerful and busiest man in the free world could do so? If it isn’t a question of time, then I can only think of two reasons for Stephen Harper’s epistolary silence: arrogance and a lack of class. How worrying.
No comments:
Post a Comment