A Woman Cannot Rape

Upon reading this article on Foxnews.com, I decided I had to speak out. The article is about eight year old Sandra Cantu who was raped and murdered earlier this year. While her story is tragic, and I mourn her death, I feel that several prejudices within the Fox article (and other like articles) must be addressed.

For the past several months I have worked closely with many individuals who have suffered from abuse and rape. Many of their stories are shocking and horrific. The article claims that many people feel that

Huckaby could not have acted alone, that no mother would rape another's child, that the scenario was too improbable to be true. The case is so striking that police initially shared the public's reaction.

While it is not entirely surprising, I find the police's reaction disturbing. The article continues that the police initially looked for another suspect or thought of Huckaby as an accomplice. They thought that since she was a woman and a mother to boot she could not have done this heinous crime - at least not alone. I would presume that if the main suspect had been a man no one would have the same questions. If the man had been a father, some doubt would have been raised but not to the extent that it was in Huckaby's case.

From my experiences and the stories I have heard, I know of many cases or rape and abuse committed by women - and mothers. Often, the rape and abuse is committed by the poor child's own mother. In my experience the most brutal abuse is done by the parent's of a child. I know of individuals who have been raped by men and by women. Both are horrific, but sometimes the women are worse. They are not as phsyically violent perhaps, but they are more brutal, more cruel and do more damage than men. The police force (and general populace) has a convoluted view of rape which must be changed. I will not go into detail but highlight a few things that need to be realized.

1. Anyone can rape, man, woman, child, teenager, grandparent.
2. Rape can happen within a relationship such as dating or marriage.
3. Just because a woman was wearing a short skirt does not mean men have an excuse for rape
4. No one deserves rape.
5. Just because someone doesn't say no doesn't mean they say yes.

People need to realize not only how common rape is, but how varying the victims and abusers are. Anyone can be abused and anyone can abuse. Men can abuse women. Men can abuse men. Women can abuse men and women can abuse women.

May We Not Forget

September 11 2001

Still Unpacking, Light Blogging

I'm still unpacking from my move, so blogging will be light.

What's an election without issues? - a good article about the upcoming "election" now that Ignatieff has "pulled the plug"

Arctic Warming - Apparently this is new news. I guess no one told them that this global warming business was "settled." If I find the time I have a few good links which disprove the hockey stick graph. Some scientists redid the tests and found that the original had major errors. I will try to find time to look it up. If given time I could find more fallacies in the article, but sadly I'm busy.

All This Election Talk

Is really getting old. The MSM hasn't ceased to stop talking about when Iggy is going to "pull the plug" on the government, or who will win this supposed fall election. Remember a few months ago? It was all about a Summer election. And before that? A Spring election? And before that? The coalition government. Will they just give it a rest already. I've been without a computer for a while now and stuck listening to election this, election that. The only thing worse was the never-ending blather about Michael Jackson's death. Where all this election nonsense is coming from I don't know. Even the CBC says that there is no decision yet on triggering election. There may well be an election, but it would sure be nice to hear about something else. With internet access and a computer again expect a few more posts from me - and not about the "election."

More Bad News for Alta Farmers

Farmers once again are in trouble after another storm leaves farms across Alberta badly damaged. The year started off badly when cold temperatures lasted well into the summer months. The first storm hit towns outside of Calgary such as Crossfield, Airdrie, Irricana and Carstairs the worst. Piles of hail reached up to four feet! Personal gardens and farmer's fields were damaged if not destroyed. A second storm Monday evening ripped through the Cardston-Lethbridge area with heavy rain and large hailstones. Another leg of the same storm hit farther north past Calgary. With a late start in the summer and poor growing weather the storm could be a major setback for farmers and place a lot of strain on government coffers. Compensation to the farmers will not aid the still struggling economy in any way. Low crop yields are sure to cause further strain. The weather shows no immediate signs of warming, with cool, wet temperatures for most of Alberta.

Further Reading

Storm Leaves Alberta Farmers Devastated

Baseball-sized Hail

In Pictures

Re: Natives

My comments appear to be on the fritz. My reply to Cmax is posted here instead.

Cmax, you make me out to be some big white demon who wishes to oppress the Natives and all those who oppose me. That is far from the truth. Tell me how I am oppressing the Natives? For that matter, how is Canada oppressing basic rights of the Natives. Anyone, native or not has the basic rights and freedoms allotted to them. A Native woman can go to university, get a job, or practice their religion just as I can. I do not, and have never suggested that these things should be taken away from them. I did not say that we should cancel any and all scholarships and funding for First Nations people. In fact I would not mind if it were increased. I merely said I wished that there would be a scholarship for us poor(er) average Joe Canadians. There is nothing at all racism about that statement. Wherein my past statements have I been even in the least racism? Please do point it out to me.

Furthermore, I did not say that we should ignore or “suck up” social inequality. I stated that the Natives and anyone for that matter should not hold onto past injustices simply for the sake of being pissed off. As I have made the point in my previous post, apologies must be made, and restitution (if possible) agreed upon. However, all of those gesture are for not if the Natives do not accept them. That is my base point. If the Natives do not accept the apology and restitution there is NO solution to the problem.

To be a conservative is to hang on to the old biasness, the old cultural ways of exclusion, for the benefit of one segment in society. Once a racists always a racist!

Your statement reacts of radical Liberalism. You label me a racist for remarks that do not even resemble racism. Yet, you paint me and all conservatives with the same brush. That is not racism but I am sure it is some sort if “ism” or prejudice against and all of the right wing. If you reread my statement with your mind and not your bias you will see that I did not advocate the elimination or exclusion of the Natives. For Goodness sake man, I simply stated that us “white folk” should have scholarships designed for us as well.

Yet native people have been stripped of all things, and yet people can still point the finger at them for their poverty. They have no land and no less little access to its resources on the land in which they reside.

It seems to me like you did not read my rather large post concerning the Natives. You colour me as someone who is hell bent on keeping the Native people downtrodden. If you take care to read what I have written you should see that I am advocating equality. I will not get into my views on Native reservations and what not at the present, but I fail to see how I am being so racist and oppressive. You are misquoting my words and intentionally misreading them in such a way as to justify your anger against the “oppressive white man” and to justify your bias against conservatives.

Harper Interview with Globe and Mail

I noticed the article on the interview, and instead skipped to the transcript of it. There's some interesting stuff here. It shows, in my estimation, Harper to be a smart man, careful with words so that they are not twisted. He talks about G8 and the economy among other things.

Read it yourself here

Reverse Discrimination

Following my post on the First Nations land claims, I stumbled across this older article about the University of Saskatchewan. The bursary was intended for Nursing and Medical students. The alumni proposed the bursary wanted it to be for "non-aboriginals."

The woman approached the university last month with the donation request and was met with resistance when she asked the money be given to a non-aboriginal student, she said.

When asked why she wouldn't then be sympathetic to a student of any background who doesn't have the means to afford post-secondary education, she said aboriginal students, in particular, are more likely to have an opportunity to receive a scholarship or other benefits....

"All I'm asking for is fairness," she said. "I think there is an unequal playing field ... I want to reduce the barriers for non-aboriginal students who don't expect or receive benefits."

I can certainly see where she is coming form. As a student myself I have slogged through pages of information on different scholarships. I rarely meet the criteria. Many scholarships are designed for those of visible minorities, Natives (a separate category from visible minorities), genius level IQs, and the very poor. There are not many scholarships for the average Joe male or female Canadian. I see no problem with a scholarship designed for white Canadians. To cater only to the minorities is discriminating against the majority. In this case the majority is white Canadians. Just because I am not a visible minority, Native, or living on the streets does not mean I do not have financial difficulty.

One comment stated

Education is the first step to improving our world, it is definitly important! I have seen many scholarships saying anyone can apply but preference will go to a minority student. So how about saying "anyone can apply but preferenece will be given to a non-minority student" no race card being played! school is expensive, everyone needs help.

Exactly.

The First Nations: Apologies and Reconciliation

Recognition would be easier if what are now called First Nations wanted to be recognized the way the rest of us would like. 1

The “native problem” is one which has no easy solution. The problem is not simply that a group of people have been unjustly displaced from their lands. It is not simply a dispute about who owns what land. It is not simply about keeping alive a culture. The native issue is one which is, ultimately, the white man’s fault. The previous statement does not give one the right to demonize every white man in existence. The sins of Canadian’s fathers do not rest on the heads of their posterity – at least not entirely. Some responsibility should be taken; apologies and restitution made if possible. However, such restitution is not a simple matter; it may be impossible. In order to appraise such restitution an evaluation must be done.

What injustices have been done to the Native people of Canada? First of all, they were harmed and killed by the invading white man. Granted, cooperation and agreements were made. Yet, there were fights between Europeans and Natives. Furthermore, bands could more easily attack each other (or anyone) due to the influx of “modern” weaponry from Europe.

Secondly their land was taken by the white man. The agreement for land use was not mutually understood. According to native culture, land was not a commodity to be given away. Furthermore, settlers agreed to compensate the natives for land – land they believed that they had “bought.” The natives, believed those agreements meant peace. A lack of understanding caused conflict – past and present. These crimes happened long ago. One of the demands of some Natives is that the government restores lands to them which they claim were given to them. Yet, the legalities involved are far from simple. For one, if land is (or was) not a commodity to be divvied up, then the Natives claim for their land back is ludicrous. Granted, it was, according to modern belief of ownership, Native land which the Europeans took. Whether this “theft” was intentional or not is a question that cannot be accurately answered. In any case, it was a series of misunderstandings to which restitution is nearly impossible. Whose land it was, and who stole from who cannot be accurately verified. Even if ownership could be arbitrarily assigned and agreed upon, could it be given back?

The final question is how to preserve the First Nations culture. But, what is the Native culture? Some, like Samuel Hearne described he natives as wild and exotically primitive: in essence your “savage” stereotype. The other popular image is that of the Spiritual Native. It is described as:

the mythic Noble Savage. Elevated to a sphere of goodness unreachable by those in contaminated white society and usually possessing some spiritual connection to the land, the Noble Savage (who American academic Rennard Strickland calls "the first ecologist") communes in a cloud of mysticism and places no value on material possessions.

2

There is also the “loyal sidekick,” the sexual Native woman and many other portrayals of the First Nations people. Were Natives great spiritual leaders in harmony with nature and themselves? Where Natives wild, savage and (the woman) sexually uncontrollable? Both options are equally unlikely. The idea that the First Nations culture has been lost is likely. The White Man’s romancing, demonetization and misunderstanding of Native culture has caused a least a partial bastardization of the true Native culture. In effect, it has been lost.

Thus, how these crimes can be paid for when one cannot return knowledge that was lost, nor lives that were lost. Or, even, return land which did not belong to the Natives (according to their traditions) but was everyone’s land to use. What was lost is (redundantly) lost. It cannot be regained. I would argue that the government cannot pay restitution. What then should be done? The question may not have an easy answer. I do not have an answer. Throwing money at the Natives or even throwing land does no good. Would programs and grants for Native research and historical preservation help? It is possible. Might I suggest a simple solution: a sincere apology from the government on behalf of all Canadians (or, rather our ancestors) and an acceptance of the apology by the Native people. After all, there are two sides to the coin. An apology needs acceptance in order to be valid. If the Natives wish to move past their history and work towards bettering their future they need to forgive and forget past wrongdoings. Forgetting does not mean that society must turn a blind eye to the atrocities which occurred. Rather, the misdeeds must be recognized as something that happened, and the Natives must forgive those who harmed them (and their ancestors).

In over eight hundred words I have not laid out a clear plan for any governing body. I neglected to address what should be done with reservations, with funding and what not. Those questions are not easy. I doubt that all Natives would quickly give up their reservations and fully integrate themselves into society. I also question whether that is a good solution. I also wonder what purpose the reservations serve – or more accurately what they were designed to serve. In essence I have spent 800 and some words purposing nothing more than an apology. Is the solution really so simple? I’ll leave that up to you to figure out.



1. Hunter, Ian. 06 June 2009. Many Questions Remain about Reconciliation. http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=5d594eff-0af3-4ead-a58b-170cddc6a04d&p=1

2. Media Awareness Network. 2009. Common Portrayals of Aboriginal People.
http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/aboriginal_people/aboriginal_portrayals.cfm


(see also) http://www.afn.ca/misc/FSFNE.pdf

http://www.albertasource.ca/treaty7/treaty/perspectives_first.html

Funny Link of the Day

Halifax Harbour Plugged...with Tampons

Alberta News - Bill 19 and Bill 36

Bill 36: Alberta Land Stewardship Act
A proposal which is stated to "compensate landowners whose property values are affected by conservation and stewardship restrictions under regional plans." Yet, it is also said to "open up sub surface rights to government expropriation without compensation." (http://www.wildrosealliance.ca/content/view/151/175/) According to the Stelmach Government's Website the aim of the legislation is to:

* gives the Lieutenant Governor in Council authority to direct the development of, and subsequently approve, regional plans as legally binding documents under the Act;
* outlines what must be included in regional plans, plus what may be included to respond to regional needs and circumstances;
* allows the appointment of regional advisory councils to provide advice to government on developing regional plans;
* provides for reviews of regional plans at least every 10 years, or more often if needed to respond to changing circumstances;
* creates a secretariat to support regional planning; and
* requires provincial departments, regulatory agencies, municipalities and other local government authorities to align their decisions, plans and bylaws with regional plans.

The bill is related to Bill 19 which is entitled the Land Assembly Project Act.

Some reading on the bills and reactions to them.

Edmonton Journal

General Information on Bill 19

Projects in the Works

I haven't given much time to blogging lately. My apologies. I was sick and got behind. I have a couple of pet projects which I am looking at. The first is the Gun Registry Program and exactly what should be done about it. In effect, I wonder if the program should be overhauled or scrapped entirely. I have gotten some (inadequate and evasive) information from the RCMP and I am awaiting replies from Canadian police forces - whom I hope will reply. The other area which I am researching is Native land claims. I have written a portion of a blog entry which I originally intended to post a week back. But, I have decided to expand my original response and learn more about the subject. Any resources are appreciated.

Rubber Ducky You're the One...

Remember that song from the old Sesame Street Show? Well now the beloved rubber ducky may no longer be a friend to many little children.

Health Canada moved Friday to ban the use of harmful chemical additives called phthalates in children's soft vinyl toys.

There is a great deal of debate in the comments on CTV. Thoughts?

Links of the Day

NDP Vote Scandal

H/T Craig on Blogging Tories

Why Bailouts Don't Work Video

Sexism in America Michelle Obama's First Fashion Misttep

I could care less about what she wears. Why must the first lady be treated as a fashion icon instead of a intelligent (or unintelligent) woman in her own right. First Ladies are all about some pet "pretty" cause that makes them look good, but when do you ever hear about their political views? To me that would be far more interested and important than some ugly skirt.

Gun Registry: Scrap or Overhaul?

Today in the HoC, a petition was issued to scrap the gun registry program (I neglected to note from whom the request came). The Gun Registry Program has been under fire for its scandalous rendezvous with the Liberal government around 2006 following Governor General Fraser's report. But, is the program completely worthless or is the process of registering guns beneficial?

background information on the scandal

I have attempted to search for data regarding the amount of murders of gun related crimes in which the perpetrator has been caught through the use of gun registry. That search would include perpetrators who used their own (or a family member's) registered gun, or other cases in which the program has led to a direct arrest of the criminal. In addition any statistics or what have you that provide credentials to the claim that the program aids cops by informing them of possible weapons in a suspect's house (on scene before they enter). I am unsure whether in the latter situation, the gun registry actually aids instead of gives the cops a false sense of security. Any information would be beneficial. In my opinion, I do not think that a criminal would be foolish enough to use a gun registered to him to commit a crime, but that is only my own supposition.

From what I have so far gathered, crime rates have decreased from prior to 1995, when the program was introduced. However, there is no direct correlation between those statistics and the gun registry program. (See Stats Canada 2002 Death Involving Firearms. 3,7).

In April 2009 a bill from the Senate was introduce to repeal the Firearms Act. It would remove the need for a registration certificate for non-restricted firearms; however, it would not remove the requirements nor the license required in order to own or use a firearm.

Now, as a one who does not own or come into frequent contact with guns I cannot give too much of an uniformed opinion on a possible alternative. But from my vantage point the bill (found here) is far better than the current Gun Registry Program.

Now A Part of Blogging Tories

I am proud to say I'm now on the blogroll for Blogging Tories.

A short read to start your day:

Weather Malarkey

Truth in Sentencing Act

Following the passing of the bill on mandatory minimums for drug sentencing, the Tories have put forth another bill aimed at improving the justice system. Bill C-25 seeks to "specify the extent to which a court may take into account time spent in custody by an offender before sentencing."(Bill C-25 summary) You can find the text of the bill at Parl.gc.ca if you feel like reading through it. If not here is a brief summary:

From what I understand a court may reduce a sentence if the convicted has spent time pre-sentence in custody as a result of the offence. The amendment says that the credit for that time is a maximum of one day for each day spent in custody. It's a small thing, but to me a good addition. Now if someone could clarify what constitutes "time spent in custody" that would be beneficial.

Links of the Day

I was sick for a couple days so pardon the lateness of these articles. They were written last week. I'll plan catch up tonight.

Got your Permit to Study the Bible?

On April 10 (Good Friday), a county code enforcement officer visited the home of David and Mary Jones after receiving a complaint about their Christian gatherings. The Jones' attorney Dean Broyles, president of The Western Center for Law & Policy, conveyed in disbelief, "The county asked [Mrs. Jones], 'Do you have a regular meeting in your home?' She said, 'Yes.' 'Do you say amen?' 'Yes.' 'Do you pray?' 'Yes.' 'Do you say praise the Lord?' 'Yes.'"

The officer then warned the family to "cease and desist" the "religious assemblies" or they would face fines up to $1,000 weekly (or more). Two days later, the county delivered a citation claiming that the Joneses were guilty of "unlawful use of land," mandating them to "stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit."

The Peril of Buying American

What I've been saying all along. Protectionist measures during a recession do not work!

Foreign and domestic companies that employ hundreds of workers in this country cannot bid for government projects because they cannot guarantee the American provenance of all the steel, iron and manufactured goods in their supply chain, as the provision requires. Others are scrambling to figure out whether American-made alternatives exist to replace their foreign inputs.

The steel company Duferco Farrell, for example, has cut about 600 jobs in Pennsylvania after it lost orders from its biggest customer because some of its goods are partly produced abroad. The Westlake Chemical Corporation of Houston has lost sales to a Canadian vinyl pipe maker that is cutting back production because it can’t bid for some American jobs.

The Global Agenda (PDF)

A poll - taken with a few grains of salt of course - about the "global agenda" or, rather what are people worried about. A few highlights:

- 54% believe government should restrict imports
- 66% believe that “massive government spending” indicates a lack of clear direction
- Worldwide the most important concern is Jobs, while global warming is at the bottom (Ipsos Reid 2009)

It's worth the look.

Sexual Education

An article on CBC states that sexual education should begin in Kindergarten in an "age appropriate" manner. What age-appropriate is, I cannot say, but I have been thinking about the subject. My preference is to have parents teach kids the basics of sex ed and puberty. I remember getting a book detailing puberty when I reached the age of eleven or twelve. It didn't talk about sex, but talked about the changes in the body and what to expect as a young female. That knowledge was not taught to me in school at all. We had a brief two week course on sex ed, which I only remember vaguely as a couple of videos that basically said you put one body part into the other. (I ended up skipping out of those classes). I am hesitant to put sexual education into the hands of the Education system.

First of all I think Kindergarten is too young. Children should be taught (and I would hope by parents) that people don't have a right to touch them in their "private areas," but beyond that they are too young from my standpoint. If they ask questions - as children are wont to do - I see no harm in explaining things to thing in basics. And, the proposal, in some ways sounds good: educate teens about sexual relations. A lack of information isn't a good thing after all.

Interviewer David Anokye said teens want to hear about more than HIV/AIDS, pregnancy and birth control, which are covered in Ontario's sex ed curriculum.

"A lot of people talk about more the scare tactics and not much the pleasure part of it," Anokye said. "I mean, we know people are being sexually active, and we know people are out there doing these things, but no one's really teaching us about it."

I do not agree with his proposal. While I personally believe that sex should be saved until marriage - as I myself am doing - that doesn't mean everyone believes such. It may be unfortunate, but, it is fact. I think educating teens about STDS, birth control and safe sex is necessary. However, to teach them different techniques and tricks about sex is too much for me. It is one thing to keep them safe from STDS, but it is not the responsibility of public schools to teach the techniques of sex. It seems like general teaching would change from "sex is bad don't do it" to "sex is good, here is how you do it." I disagree with both approaches. If a teen wants to have sex, that is their (perhaps unwise) choice. But, I would hope they would at least be safe about it. But to say that sex is natural, should be done and to go as far as one individual in the comments said that it is "bad to not have sex" is not right. It should be taught that having sex is a choice and that people can abstain.

To condone sexual activity and condemn abstinence is just as bad as or worse as not informing teens about sex at all! The information provided to teens -and I admit to being ignorant in what is currently taught - should be factual. It should tell them how to be safe IF they CHOOSE to have sex, and that abstinence is perfectly fine. I do understand the difficulty in teaching about sex. Some teachers may believe that sex should wait until marriage and (more likely) others may believe that it should be done by teens. Both of these beliefs shouldn't be taught in the classroom. Those beliefs are something teens should decide on for themselves through facts about sex, and their own religious (or non religious) backgrounds and parental influence. The school system should not do so for them.

Think Adscam is History?

Here is an update at The Star and more information at CTV

Former federal Liberal executive Benoit Corbeil is the first political figure to plead guilty in the federal sponsorship scandal and he's suggesting he might name other figures involved in his influence-peddling plot.

He may name other people who profited from the scam. This could get interesting.

H/T to The Canadian Sentinel

Interesting Reads

C02: Pollutant or Breath of LIfe

So Called Tory Negative Ads

Why We Must Teach Religion in Schools

Reader Tips welcome.

A Plug for the Non-ecofriendly Plastic Bags?

The article on Canoe about the risks of reusable grocery bags caught my attention। I have long complained about having to pay at Superstore for the reusable bags simply because I forgot to bring one of the twenty I already own। I understand that people are trying to cut down on waste, but I think there are uses for your good ol' plastic bag. The article also holds a number of ironies. The article begins:

The growing popularity of reusable grocery bags could pose a health risk to Canadians by increasing their exposure to dangerous bacteria...Forty per cent of the reusable bags tested had yeast or mould, and some had detectable levels of coliforms and fecal intestinal bacteria

The bags create this problem mainly because of the possible spillage from meats or eggs which can cause food poisoning। an easy and viable solution would be to wash the bags - if that can be done - but, many people do not see the possibility contamination from the cloth bags. Naturally, before an argument for not eliminating plastic bags can be made, I feel I need to address the irony found in the article.

First of all, the study which determined that "64 per cent of them (the bags) were contaminated with some level of bacteria" was done by the Canadian Plastics Industry Association. Naturally the association would not want to condemn plastic bags.

Furthermore, the vice-president of Loblaw (a grocery company) argues that the studies' point is moot:
"Perishable items are put in plastic bags or other types of wrap packaging prior to being placed into the reusable bag, providing minimal opportunity for contamination of the bag."

He does have a point; however, the use of gratuitous plastic on packaging is another contributor to the landfills. One contributor which environmentalists do not seem to be concerning themselves with is the excess packaging on many products. In my estimation, the over wrapping of other items - with the exclusion of items such as meat which need to be sealed - is as much of a problem as plastic bags. My family and I reuse plastic bags for different things. Here is a small list, gathered from my own usage and from the website listed below.

1. Garbage bag liners
2. For disposing of cat and dog feces
3. Use them in lieu of plastic gloves or a shower cap
4. Use them as packing material in lieu of the dreaded white foam peanut
5. Use them to store wet beach towels in
6. Use them as you would a rubber glove when you don't have rubber gloves handy

(4-6 taken from here)

In addition, stores such as Wal-Mart have started placing bins for bag recycling outside their stores. That to me is a good idea. To conclude, I think plastic bags have their uses. They shouldn't just be done away with. The full article is worth the read.

Full Article at Canoe

Commentary from a member of the ‘Stupid Youth’

In response to the blame game highlighted here , I have something to say in defense of my fellow young people - American or Canadian as the case may be.

First of all, I will grant the author a few points about the foolishness of youth. In general youth are more idealistic, optimistic, and leftist. Following graduation the average youth is bombarded by messages of one's world-changing persona. In addition, they want to distance themselves from the mistakes and leverage of the preceding generation. That is understandable and to be expected. Studies have shown that the young are more liberal and that as people age they become more conservative. Fine, but does being young - which I will say is under thirty - necessitates a complete lack of understanding of any and all political happenings? Does being young mean that your only concerns are frivolities? I will admit that there are more than enough of people who fit that description. However, I would gather that many of said people will remain ignorant and unconcerned with politics for the majority of their lives. Some, not all. Some youngins' just need life experience, but many will follow the general American and Canadian tradition of being misinformed and uninterested in politics goings-on.

Furthermore, youth can jump on the bandwagon because of ignorance. Yet, do not many adults do the same? The young are also skeptical, which would mean they are questioning and will not believe something just because some high-up says it is so. Perhaps I am padded from my peer's stupidity to a degree by being in University. University holds a higher percentage of those interested or at least concerned with politics and the world. I will say that students are most definitely not immune to the sway of apathy or leftist tendencies. But, I find that many of the youth I know are far from entirely ignorant. Even if the young lean to the left - for reasons said below - I think they are no more to blame for problems than the older generation.

May I offer an explanation for Obama's victory - different from that of "stupid young voters." I will combine it with an explanation for why the young are so pro-Obama. First of all, Obama has charisma. He sounds good, he looks good, and he inspires a feeling of empowerment. He is different, both because of his skin and his political leanings. Voters were drawn in by his charisma and the blissful idea of breaking barriers and electing a black president. (Which as an aside, is a minor form of racism itself). Now, to return to my generation. We have been labelled often as "post-materialist." This entails being overly concerned with outward issues and changing the world. Such issues include the environment and peace. Because we do not, as a rule, have to work for our bread and butter at age ten, or even at age twenty five as the case may be, we instead focus on other social issues. This phenomenon is partially responsible for the voter's choice of Obama.

As a final word, there are those who will remain ignorant - or stupid if you will - in every age group and ideology.

Blog Opening

A few may remember me from my previous blog "Young Conservative." Seeing as the aforementioned blog has fallen by the wayside, I feel the need to start over. Any tips, or tidbits are appreciated. I hope to first catch up on any news I may be lacking information about, and then get started on reporting, analyzing and other aspects with which I feel the need to write. Without further ado, welcome to my new blog!