Two more sleeps 'till SANTA!

Christmas is right on our door step and I have been thinking on the day and what it means. To the Christian faithful it is a celebration of the birth of Christ. Although most theological scholars believe that he was born sometime in the spring. Nevertheless we use this day every year to celebrate his birth.

To non-believers it's a day that is highly commercialised and a time of great stress as we dash from store to store, fighting the mobs trying to find the perfect gift for someone that we hope is doing the same thing for us. It is a day that most get off work and for those who don't it means a lot more money to do the same job as you would normally do, but someone decided this day should be a holiday (the word is derived from Holy Day) and you should be compensated for having to work it.

Some people shop all year round and avoid the mobs (these people are generally smarter than most and are also usually women). Most people will also tell you that it's the giving of gifts that makes the day rather than the receiving of gifts. Tell that to a small child and see how far it gets you!

However I digress. December 25th is undeniably Christian, whether you are or not. The whole day is fraught with Christian symbolism. From the lights on the tree, to candy canes (the Indiana story is not true if you are looking it up), even to the giving of gifts. Incidentally, my beloved Jaci for as long as she can remember says that she and her family only got three gifts on Christmas; because if three gifts was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for them.

I love Chistmas and since I have been married, the day has been developing meanings than run deeper than the superficial. The more I look, the more I find and more than ever I am seeing how the feelings of the day should be kept throughout the year.

How would the world be I wonder? If everyone that celebrates Christmas kept the spirit year round, how much brighter would it be? Instead of standing back and critiquing, would we offer more hands to help?

Most non-Christian faiths have celebrations around this time as well. The Jewish have Chanukah which is technically a festival. The giving of gifts during this time I have been told is the Americanized version. Traditionally the only gift is Chanukah geld, which today usually means foil covered chocolate (or chocolate covered money to Karyn). During this time there is merry making, and eating, and wishing others well.

Islam has Eid ul-Fitr at this time (usually shortened to Eid). This commemorates the end of the holy month of Ramadan and is marked with celebration and feasting. Eid is a time to come together as a community and to renew friendship and family ties. This is a time for peace for all Muslims in the world to devote to prayers and mutual well-being.

Call me crazy but this all sounds eerily similar. So imagine if you will, if the spirit of Christmas, Chanukah, and Eid ul-Fitr were kept the year round? You know what might happen? Maybe some Peace on Earth, Goodwill toward men?

At any rate, I wish you all a Merry Christmas and I sincerely hope the Spirit fills you with as much happiness as it does me.

Be well all.

The leadership debate continues....

So since my post on leadership a little more than a month ago, I have still been thinking on various aspects. There has also been some major changes on the local and national leadership scenes that I think merit some comments if not discussion.

Locally, Larry Di Ianni got the boot. I was greatly surprised and exceedingly happy to learn that the citizens of Hamilton voted in Fred Eisenberger as our new mayor. Di Ianni was a crook and I'm happy he now has time to think about how he screwed this city.

The federal liberals have a new leader in Stephane Dion. Going into the leadership convention Dion was a desolate fourth of seven candidates when most believed there wasn't really more than two candidates and Gerard Kennedy barking at their heels. Who would have thought that the man the federal liberals decided would be the best choice to lead them and (they hope) the country has two citizenships. That's right, their man Steph holds not only Canadian, but also French passports.

Does this mean that if Steph fails as a Canadian politician, he can always resort to getting a job with the French. Am I the only one that thinks he should hold loyalty only to the nation he wants to lead? Apparently so. I have to say that I'm a little disappointed. More than a little actually.

Onto the law enforcement front. The RCMP are going to be getting a new boss. Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli is resigning his position. Some would think in disgrace, but I do not. His handling of the Arar case was to say the least piss-poor. However, he is still (as of this writing) the only federal official that has apologized to Arar. In addition to which, Zaccardelli is not getting a "golden parachute". He is retiring with only the pension he has earned through the RCMP. I think he finally realized that regardless of how political his job is, he is first and foremost a cop, and a leader of cops.

Zaccardelli refused to discipline subordinates and instead took the blame for all that has happened. He apologized for his actions and the actions of the RCMP and when he was told that he no longer held the confidence of his boss, he tendered his resignation. All of which are marks of a good leader.

All of this brings me to where I am going with this missive. Point number one: when someone attains a leadership position, one of their responsibilities is to train their replacement. Jean Cretien trained Paul Martin (before the rift) but Martin didn't train his replacement. Which lead to a months long fight for the leadership and resulted in a leader with French citizenship.

Point number two: people in leadership roles should never be comfortable. There is a reason that people who hold leadership positions are given limits on the term of office. The problem lies when these same people get so concerned with keeping their job, that they forget to do their job. Their are countless examples of this.

Where you don't, as a general rule, see this behavior is the military. If you are appointed to a command position, your term is usually three years. If you do really well, you will get another, and hopefully better position. The point is that you know you will not be in your current job in a few years so you make every effort to leave the job in a better position than when you found it.

Should this idea be mandated? Interesting question. Even if someone is elected should they still be forced out after so long? For instance, you can only be President of the US for two terms. I think this is good; it should make them think about what they leave behind.

Take for example the union leadership at work. The same core people have been basically doing the same job for years. They are voted in year after year. The question is, are they voted in because the majority believe they are doing the job better than anyone else can do it? Or instead is it that no one who wants a change is brave enough to be seen in opposition to the establishment? I can only speak for myself and what I know from firsthand knowledge and I will say the side of that fence you land on generally depends on how long you have been there.

However, I'm straying. Based on my experience, knowledge, and training, the longer you have the same job, the less likely you are to try something new and possibly innovative. So regardless of how good a leader is or is perceived to be, I believe that reasonable limits on the time on office should be mandated.

Otherwise you run the risk of a dictatorship.

Be well all.

"It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas...

So I am now starting to feel slightly Christmas-y. Wanna know why?

It's not that I have purchased most of the presents I am buying this year (being married means I only buy for Jaci and she takes care of everyone else!). I even have those presents wrapped! Normally I shop on the 23rd of December and the wrapping has in the past just been a tightly tied shopping bag (from the store where I bought the gift).

It's not that we have our Christmas tree up. Gary and Jaci put it up one night after I went to bed and then decorated it some time later (avec wrapped presents). It's a sad tree. Jaci's parents bought it when Jaci was born and she insisted she take it with her when they bought a new one. It's just a taller version of Charlie Brown's, but Jaci loves it.

It's not that we attended our first advent meeting at church (not the first advent, just the first one we attended). Pernell talked about the magi (or the "maggie as he called them once) and the gifts they brought. Personally I like the gold best because really, what are you going to do with scented candles and embalming spice?

It's not even that 97.3 FM has been playing non-stop Christmas music for a couple of weeks now. We have to listen to it whenever Jaci is in the car.

What is really putting me into the Christmas mood is the fact that we are currently, right this second, getting some honest to goodness, wipe off the car and get the shovel SNOW! I don't know about where you are living, but right here we are having a wonderful snowfall, not too heavy but constant.

So Jaci and I have the lights on the Christmas tree, we each have a mug of hot chocolate and we are going to enjoy the evening together.

I hope you are having as much fun as I am.

Happy ho-ho everyone!