|
|
|
Radwanski's Ramblings... Nothing for everyone Note to self: Avoid doing radio shows about federal budgets when you haven’t had more than three minutes to look at what’s actually in the budget. Don’t get me wrong – I had fun chatting with Charles Adler, as I always do, and taking calls is always an experience. (A sidenote: It’s nice to see Charles doing a syndicated show, in addition to his usual Winnipeg gig. He’s a good host, and a really good guy.) But if it had been a moments later, I’d have had a chance to realize this whole thing was an optical illusion. See, it’s one thing to spread promises over five years to make the dollar amounts look bigger – if you spread them out relatively evenly. But when every commitment is so heavily backloaded that it barely takes effect for two or three years, it doesn’t really mean a hell of a lot. By the time the big dollars are supposed to kick in on defence, the environment, or pretty well anything else, another government – or the same one, for that matter - may choose to go in a totally different direction. That said, I can’t quarrel with its success as a political document. Something for everyone doesn’t always work, but it did this time. Stephen Harper’s on board. So, I suspect, will be Jack Layton, in spite of all his protestations. Paul Wells likes it, which is probably more surprising than Harper (given that Wells is usually a more effective critic and all). Even folks who live to bash the Liberals (like the nice people who called in for a radio chat) seem to be having a hard time getting themselves worked up. In other words, it’s a great budget…so long as you’re not counting on it to actually do anything. Bet ya there'll be some sweet-ass hospitality suites, though It’s nice to know there are real, live Liberals with opinions. Honest. But at the risk of coming off a tad cynical, this is window dressing – at best. There are parties where the policy resolutions debated and voted on at conventions mean quite a bit. The NDP, for instance, and to a lesser extent the Conservatives (or at least, the old Reform/Alliance…we’ll see what happens when the new party finally has its first convention proper this spring). But for the Liberals, it’s a way for the kids to let off a little steam, and not much else. Whatever it is that makes up Paul Martin’s mind on missile defence, it ain’t gonna be which cards the campus club from UBC or the middle-aged couple from Moosejaw hold up. So long as they clap on cue when the great man enters the main hall, they'll have done their job. Why is this man smiling? I’ve mostly stayed away from the NHL’s Armageddon. Unlike in ’94/95, when I was glued to my radio or TV waiting for every update, I’ve found myself inclined to wish a plague on both their houses and wait for the CFL season to start. And if anything, I’ve sided more with the owners – if only because I’ve had the misfortune of interacting with Bob Goodenow, but been spared the pleasure with Gary Bettman. Last night, though, I was at a local establishment having a pint with a friend when a clip of Bettman canceling the season came on behind the bar. Maybe it was the lack of audio; it couldn’t have been the beer, since I hadn’t had much. But whatever it was, I got a good look at his eyes for a moment (er, Bettman’s…not my friend’s), and it all became a little clearer. Maybe I’m reaching here. But I don’t think so. Cause you know, we’ve all had our rough spots – enough to know what someone looks like when they’re there. The commissioner of the National Hockey League, coming out of days of fruitless negotiations, forced to make the most disastrous announcement in NHL history, should have had that look. But he didn’t. He looked like he’d look announcing a draft pick, or handing over the Stanley Cup, or announcing another bloody expansion team. He looked in control, and confident, and more than a little bit self-satisfied. That’s not how he looked in ’94, when he was genuinely terrified he’d be left holding the bag for a cancelled season. I remember seeing him looking haggard, and a little wild-eyed, and thinking this was a guy who was one more failed negotiation away from losing it. At the time, I don’t think I thought it was a good thing. But in hindsight, it probably was. Then, at least, he was trying to avoid the unthinkable. This time, I’m pretty sure avoiding it was the last thing he wanted to do. See? I'm not as cynical as you thought As you may recall, I had high hopes for a whole bunch of new releases from old favourites heading into ’05. So far, the old guard’s letting me down a bit (even if I’ve found plenty of other pleasant surprises). The new Soundtrack of Our Lives ain’t all that much next to Behind the Music, and while Brendan Benson’s follow-up to Lapalco is better, it’s not nearly as exciting as what came before it. That said, early signs from the Eels are encouraging. Count on Mr. E to make everything right. Information you can't live without Sorry for the brief absence. If you’re looking in the paper for my column (and who isn’t?), you’ll notice a brief delay there as well. From now on, it’s running on Fridays, not Thursdays. At least, that’s the latest plan. These things have a way of changing. Thank God we got rid of that inarticulate guy before him How do you spend the better part of two decades in federal politics, and not learn how to speak in sound bytes? Random music notes Caught the Comas, as previously pledged, at Lee’s last night. It wasn’t earth-shattering, but they were good enough to remind me of how arbitrary the music business is. Any number of bands of similar talents are getting magazine covers and O.C. play; these guys are playing for free to a half-empty room. While we’re on the subject, it was a typo, not general stupidity, that led my attempted reference to Death Cab for Cutie in yesterday’s Post plug to read “Death Can for Cutie” instead. Just thought I should highlight the proximity of “b” to “n” on the keyboard, lest whatever semblance of music credibility I have go out the window. I have to confess that I bailed on last Sunday’s show at the Kool Haus before Keane ever made it to the stage. And truth be told, the Zutons didn’t do all that much for me…though objectively, I guess they were quite good. But the Redwalls, who opened the show, were pretty fun. Derivative would be an understatement (they sound as Beatlish as an band from Chicago is capable of), but they have a good stage presence and a fun schtick. And apparently the Strokes like them - though it remains to be seen if that carries the same currency as, say, Jack White. La De Da, out next Tuesday, is a significant step forward for Joel Plaskett. Funny thing, though: One of the tracks that most jumped out at me, Non-Believer, was the one he was least comfortable talking about in our interview earlier this week. Fair enough…even writing a song about your religiosity (or lack thereof) can’t be easy, let alone analyzing it in loving detail. I’ve yet to actually sit through a full episode of Craig Ferguson, the guy who (mercifully) replaced Kilborn late-night on CBS. But based on the couple of times I’ve caught the tail-end of his show, the dude has some decent musical guests. First time it’s Trail of Dead; the next it’s Bright Eyes, complete with a guitar smashing that wasn’t as embarrassing as it could have been. So if you’re idle around 1:25 a.m., it’s worth flipping over to see what’s on. Friday February 11, 2005 Remember when? The PM seems to have given us absolutely nothing to sink our teeth into with yesterday’s testimony. Good for him. Seriously, if you’re in his camp you have to be pleased that he managed to score points by going in front of the inquiry without losing any once he was there – not that there really should have been much danger of that, since his connection to this scandal is tenuous at best, but with Martin you never know what hole he can dig himself into. One quote, though, I can’t quite get past: “The responsibility of the minister of finance is to set the financial context ... in which overall spending can be done ... Once the minister of finance does that, which is essentially the presentation of the budget, his responsibility comes to a total end." Makes sense, taken on its own. But why did the Martinites spend all those years telling anyone who’d listen that their guy was actually the brains behind all the major government decisions? >> Send your comments to Adam RadwanskiRadwanski's Ramblings from January 28-February 10, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from January 14-27, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 31, 2004-January 13, 2005 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 17-30, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from December 3-16, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 19-December 2, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from November 5-18, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 22-November 4, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from October 8-21, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 24-October 7, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 17-23, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from September 3-16, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 20-September 2, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from August 6-19, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 23-August 5, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 16-22, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from July 9-15, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 25-July 8, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 18-24, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 11-17, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from June 4-10, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 28-June 3, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 21-27, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 14-20, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from May 7-13, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 23-May 6, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 16-22, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 9-15, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from April 2-8, 2004 Radwanski's Ramblings from March 26-April 1, 2004 All rights reserved. |