List of carpooling/ride sharing websites

People have started leaving notes posted in our apartment lobby begging for carpool partners, rides to classes, etc. due to the bus strike here in Ottawa. I feel so bad for them and wish I could help them all. Being winter and the Christmas season, it's a hard time of year for the elderly, sick, poor and disadvantaged to be stuck walking, biking, or stuck with extra expenses for taxi cabs. I have taken to printing out the following and leaving copies in the lobby for people to take. I checked out all the links and they do work. I figure at least I can do something. Maybe this will help someone online too.

As a side note, freecycle.org is an excellent place to exchange free stuff in your local area. Their goal is for people to save money by exchanging free items and reduce waste by keeping things out of the landfill - win-win. I haven't taken anything yet, so I haven't tried that end of it yet, but I've offered various things and it's worked out quite well as people come and pick them up. They're grateful to have them and I'm grateful to get rid of them with a minimum of effort and know they'll be put to good use.

LIST OF CARPOOLING AND RIDE SHARING WEBSITES

HELLO ALL, I FOUND THIS ONLINE AND THERE ARE COMPUTERS YOU CAN USE FOR FREE AT THE LIBRARY AND SERVICE CANADA,AND PROBABLY EMPLOYMENT ONTARIO IF YOU EXPLAIN YOU NEED TO FIND A WAY TO GET TO WORK. HOPE THIS HELPS SOMEONE!


Subject: [OttawaON-Freecycle] ADMIN: sites for carpooling and ride sharing
From: "Sharon Stewart"
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 17:59:39 -0500
To: "Ottawa Freecycle Group"

[NOTE: I compiled this list in February 2008, but I do not have time today
to check whether the links still work]

Here are some local boards for posting ads about carpooling and ride sharing:
http://ottawa.craigslist.ca/rid/

http://ottawa.kijiji.ca/f-community-rideshare-W0QQCatIdZ5
or http://tinyurl.com/2o9uqx

http://www.erideshare.com/carpool.php?city=Ottawa

http://www.carpoolconnect.com/search/do_search?home_code=Ottawa,%20Ontario,%20Canada
or http://tinyurl.com/2vjlzx

http://www.punkottawa.com/board/viewforum.php?f=10

http://www.autotaxi.com/autotaxi.htm

http://welcome.pickuppal.com/alpha.php?camp=people&group=Car%20Pool%20Ottawa&root=Car%20Pool&place=%20in%20Ottawa
or http://tinyurl.com/2mub9h

This one is run by the City of Ottawa:
https://www.ottawaridematch.com/Public/UserSignIn.aspx

These ones are broader geographically:
http://www.carpoolworld.com/

http://www3.sympatico.ca/dataorb/

Sharon Stewart
Moderator
Ottawa Freecycle

Steve, the Sovereigntists, and the Scare Tactics

Well, Prime Minister Stephen Harper really done it now. He's continually ploughed through Parliament with his Napoleon complex turned up to maximum, running roughshod over the parties the other 62% of voters put in office, and insisting a minority is a mandate. And now that he has finally pushed them beyond their limits, they have united against him and promised that he will fail the upcoming confidence vote on Monday. Weren't expecting that, were ya Stevie? Apparently he thought he could rule like a spoiled child king without repercussion. He was wrong.

Rather than facing the music, however, he decided to take the most cowardly option imaginable: run to Governor General Michaëlle Jean and advise her to prorogue (temporarily suspend) Parliament, thus placing her in what a number of experts are calling an untenable position. One such expert is Errol Mendes, law professor at the University of Ottawa:

Mendes says Harper's request would put Jean in a jam, "drawing her into a potential abuse of executive authority," because his reason to suspend Parliament would be to avoid defeat of his minority Conservative government in a vote on Monday that he has already postponed once.

"She is now being faced with a really incredible, untenable situation by the prime minister, because, in effect, what he's trying to do is to hide from a vote of confidence and thereby essentially drawing her into a potential abuse of executive authority," Mendes said in an interview.

"I basically consider this, regardless of whether you think the coalition should or should not take place, a profound and gross abuse of power." (link)

Tradition dictates that she take his advice and prorogue Parliament, but the circumstances under which this request is being made are outrageous. And should she deny his request, she will be placed in the equally difficult position of either calling another election days after we just had one, or the controversial move of installing the Coalition leader as PM without a vote. What answer can she possibly give that won't roil the waters even more?

Harper may be (just barely) within legal limits to do what he is doing, but ethically it's despicable.

As if all this isn't enough, he has employed the U.S. Republicans' tried-and-true tactic of sounding the alarm bells while deliberately misinforming the public (also known as "lying") about the workings of the parliamentary system, utilizing already existent ignorance about this process to exacerbate the confusion in the hopes of increasing support for the Conservatives. The Republicans have shown this method to work time and time again. Who better to emulate when you want to pull a snow job on the Canadian people? If you don't mind stooping to filthy games and embarrassing your country amid a worldwide economic crisis, by golly this is the way to go.

(All quotations below: emphasis mine)

Scare tactic lie #1: The Coalition is a coup d'état.
Implied: This is a political crisis! This is unconstitutional and undemocratic! It smacks of violent takeovers in developing countries!

Example set 1 (link):

"We will use all legal means to resist this undemocratic seizure of power," Harper said.
...

"We're realizing that no matter what we had come out with in the economic statement, their game plan was set. It's a kind of coup d'etat," Blackburn said. (National Revenue Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn)

Example set 2 (link):

Bewildered Calgary Tory MPs girded Monday for the distinct possibility their party could be relegated back into opposition within days, and lamented how a newly elected government could fall victim to an unprecedented "coup."

"The biggest loser here is the Canadian public," Obhrai fumed. "It's like a coup." (Deepak Obhrai, Calgary East Conservative MP)

"The sabotage was in effect," Anders said. "Trying to pull a coup d'etat, in a sense, I don't think will bode well for them." (Calgary West Tory MP Rob Anders)

The Cons have employed the coup d'état term again and again, using everything that term implies in an attempt to elicit fear by simultaneously associating this with unconstitutionality and violent government takeovers. Nothing could be further from the truth. Not only is this constitutional and in keeping with the Westminster System, it's been done before on both federal and provincial levels. Moreover, they tried to do it themselves in 2000 and 2004! This is not a "crisis" and for the most part the only ones getting "up in arms" about it are the Conservatives, who up until now thought they were entitled to ignore the wishes of 62% of the population.

Scare tactic lie #2: We need to go over the heads of the MP's and GG and take this to the people.
Implied: Forget all that confidence vote stuff! Forget the GG! That's all undemocratic stuff! The way it works is we have the people vote on it!

"I think what we want to do is basically take a time out and go over the heads of the members of Parliament, go over the heads, frankly, of the Governor General, go right to the Canadian people," said Transport Minister John Baird. (link)

Um, no. There is a due process for the Westminster System and you are not following it. Being the ruling party does not mean you get to rewrite the system to suit your wishes. And those MP's whose heads you want to go over, are legitimate representatives for 62% of the voting population who voted against you.

Scare tactic lie #3: This is a separatist coalition. It's sedition!
Implied: The separatists will have veto power over the government! Those scoundrels will be running the country! They're going to break up Canada! We'll be powerless to stop them!

Example 1 (link):

"The message is that Canadians do not want to see a separatist coalition. It's a plain and simple message," said International Trade Minister Stockwell Day. "The coalition does not have the confidence of Canadians. Never in our history has anybody entertained the thought of a coalition that would be controlled by separatists."

Example 2 (link):

In Ottawa, Environment Minister Jim Prentice described Monday's events as a "serious situation" that could see separatists holding a veto card over the rest of the country, while Calgary West Tory MP Rob Anders argued the opposition parties were determined to bring down the government.

Example 3 (link):

The Conservatives turned up the rhetoric Wednesday, going so far as to talk of treason.

Ontario MP Bob Dechert accused the Liberals of trying to destroy the country by aligning with the separatist Bloc.

"They're getting into bed with the separatists," he said. "They've actually written a deal giving the separatists a veto over every decision of the Canadian government. That is as close to treason and sedition as I can imagine."

Example 4: Pretty much this entire article, liberally sprinkled with similar expressions - a few quick snippets:

Sedition Coalition... quick and dirty coup d'etat... ugly alliance with a separatist party who are salivating at the thought... coalition of sedition...

Another falsehood repeated ad nauseam. The Cons allege that the Bloc Québécois would have "veto power" over the coalition government, and therefore amounts to the sovereigntists running the country. That's just ridiculous. Any minority government has to work with other parties to the extent that it maintains enough support to pass a confidence vote (a concept which Harper obviously fails to understand). Thus, in effect, any opposing party(ies) with enough MP's to tip the scale has "veto power," on an ongoing basis. This agreement doesn't give the Bloc any power it doesn't already have. As a matter of fact, they have signed away their existing "veto power" for 18 months. They are not part of the coalition and have surrendered this power in the interest of stability of the coalition government.

Also disturbing about scare tactic #3 is the inflammatory divisiveness being perpetuated by the Cons in their ongoing demonizing of the sovereigntists. Literal demonizing... they describe the coalition as "a deal with the devil." The last thing we need in this country is more antagonism between its various regions. It's worth noting that these are the same Cons who were so recently courting the sovereigntists hard, calling Québec a "nation within a nation" and pulling out all the stops for the sovereigntist vote. Once it became apparent that the level of support they sought wasn't going to materialize, they were quick to throw them under the bus. That kind of duplicity should tell you something about their Machiavellian approach to getting what they want.

Even more hypocritical: The Cons insist that they have never and would never sign a deal like this one with the Bloc, whom they say want to destroy the country. Yet the Canadian Alliance and PC parties, who later merged to become the Conservative party, secretly tried to form a coalition government with the Bloc in 2000. In that one, the The Globe and Mail has documents to prove it and Bloc officials confirm it to be true. According to one Bloc official, this even included discussions on making it easier for Québec to separate by referendum in the future. The Cons deny it all, of course. Then in 2004 while in opposition, Harper (who back then apparently did understand the concept of minority governments) asked the GG to put him in power if the newly elected Liberal government was defeated in the Commons, saying, “We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation." (emphasis mine) The situation in 2004 was a mirror image of the one today, but apparently it's only okay when the Conservatives do it.

When it suits their needs, the Cons have no qualms about forming coalition governments or making agreements with the sovereigntists... but they've proven they're willing to go to any lengths to prevent anyone else from doing so. Including lying through their teeth at every turn.

This group so desperately needs to get thrown out on their collective ear. They have repeatedly demonstrated their contempt for the democratic process, the parliamentary system, and the Canadian people. I know by convention the GG will probably have to grant Harper's request, but I'm hoping against hope she says no and he has to face the confidence vote like a big boy.

To hell with everybody else, Harper - save your own job!

Well the GG granted prorogation to Harper, meaning he can (and did) dissolve Parliament until Jan. 26. Just what we need in the middle of a global economic crisis - to force Parliament to sit on its hands for 6 weeks instead of taking action now to avoid a recession. And yet, he claims their priority first and foremost is the economy! All this so he can avoid a confidence vote and try to save his own skin - but never mind anybody else's jobs! I hope Canadians, especially the 38% that voted Conservative, are watching and taking notes. That's right folks, the Cons threw you under the bus... still glad you voted for them??

Canadian police chase

I saw this and just about fell off my chair.



Having just bought my first winter tires this year, after slip-sliding away last winter on the few occasions we'd had to take the car, I watched this and breathed a heavy sigh of relief while having a good hearty belly laugh. There is a straightforwardness here, that permeates everything from the way Canadians talk to each other to the commercials they show on TV. This is no small adjustment for these California gals, but we like it!

Prop H8 - Separation of church and state?

The #1 contributor to California's Proposition 8 to ban gay marriage, by far, was the Knights of Columbus - part of the Catholic Church - who spent over $1.4 million to help it pass. Another was the Mormon Church, who spent big bucks on TV to campaign for it. Separation of church and state, bull-oney! (Here's the list of contributors so you can see the rest of the bigots and how much they chipped in.)

Apparently from the Catholic Church's perspective, it's not okay for us to be gay or want to get married in loving adult relationships, but it's a-okay for their priests to molest children... they'll even bend over backwards to cover for them and expose them to new victims. And it's so urgent to deny gays their rights, that $1.4 million is only the latest in $millions more used for the same purpose. Gee, wonder how many poor people they could have helped instead. Boy that pisses me right off. I was raised Roman Catholic, but I have lost so much respect for the Catholic Church over the years that I could never be Catholic again, ever.

Another issue that came up during this vote, according to various pundits, is that having a minority candidate gave new hope to the minorities, brought out the minority vote, and since minorities tend to be socially conservative it ironically helped push Prop H8 through while helping Obama win. I honestly don't know why people who ought to know something about struggling against discrimination and fighting for civil rights are often the worst hypocrites when it comes to someone else's civil rights. They say, "that's different." But I want to know how it's different to deny marriage to people of two different races because some people believe they shouldn't be allowed to, versus denying marriage to people of the same gender because some people believe they shouldn't be allowed to. Who is it hurting? And whose business is it anyway? More on this in a minute.

Now before you get up in arms thinking I'm stereotyping minorities, you should know some background. My life partner and I are what they call here in Canada "visible minorities" of mixed race. My best friend is also of mixed descent. And having lived in the greater Los Angeles area for much of my life, in all of its amazing diversity, I've always had friends of varying colours, religions and backgrounds. So when I speak of prevailing attitudes within minority groups, as I have in the previous paragraph, it is not because I've bought into stereotypes, but rather because I've known so many of them personally and rubbed elbows with them every day, including my own family members, that I know from experience what the prevailing attitudes are in many groups. And as much as I hate to admit it, in this case the pundits are right about the minority vote. In general, our cultures just aren't that tolerant of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. I only wish I was wrong.

Case in point: Until a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June 1967, inter-racial marriages were still illegal in 16 states. My parents were married (in Canada) only a year after that. My mother, as a visible minority and having been foreign trained, found herself continually unable to find work commensurate with her education and experience, despite having attained Canadian citizenship and putting forth the effort for several years before finally leaving for the States (sad, isn't it?). And yet, in no small part owing to the culture she comes from, she's one of the worst anti-gay bigots I know. Sadly, she, like so many others I've known, knows what it's like to be treated like a second-class citizen for no good reason... but can't make the stretch for other people's civil rights.

Here's another sad example. A disproportionate number of the coming-out horror stories you hear - you know, where their family, upon finding out they were gay, kicked them out and they were homeless and had to sleep in their car; or maybe the father beat them up first, then kicked them out; things like that - are from minorities... African, Mexican, Asian, Native, Middle Eastern, etc. in descent. "White" families (European roots) might refuse to ever talk to you again, but for some reason we minorities seem to have a greater propensity for outright abuse in these situations. I don't know yet if this holds true in Canada too, but in the States it really doesn't take much to bear this out.

Perhaps I have been long-winded on this point, but I felt it was important to establish why I agree with the pundits on something that, at first blush, sounds like someone is trying to make a scapegoat of the non-whites and blame them for Prop 8's passing... exchanging homophobia in favour of racism... but that is most assuredly not the case.

Now in order to even entertain the idea of voting on such a proposition, one has to ignore for a moment the fact that marriage is a civil rights issue and therefore according to the federal Constitution should never have been put up for a vote in the first place. That's right, lawyers will be challenging the validity of Prop 8 based on the premises of the very document it seeks to modify. (Anyone else see the irony in this?) I understand the formidable Gloria Allred was the first to file a lawsuit. I would not want to piss her off. The one consolation I take in all this is that the ensuing fight will be interesting to say the least. But we'll see if justice is actually served.

Now there are thousands of same-sex couples legally married in CA, now left wondering what their status is and waiting to see if their marriages will be dissolved against their will. And others who didn't manage to get married before the deadline, with their weddings already half-planned and their dream suddenly crushed. I hope at least some of the homophobes will look at this situation and finally realize just how ugly and mean-spirited this thing is.

Under U.S. law, Britney Spears can go get married and then get it annulled after 55 hours "just for fun," and it's all legal and binding. But my partner and I have been together for nearly 13 years now and it was only a few years ago that she was finally granted the right to visit me in the hospital. Mind you, if we'd been living in almost any state other than California, she *still* wouldn't have that right today. What kind of person looks at that and thinks, yeah, that sounds right? A lot more Americans than you'd think. Just one more of many reasons to be thankful we live in Canada.

Rick Mercer's "Photo Challenge"

Political satirist Rick Mercer regularly conducts a "photo challenge," in which he posts photos of politicians on his website and your challenge is to "doctor" them as you see fit for amusement value. My miserable 3-second attempt to resist taking on this challenge was thwarted by the fact that this one was a pic of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whom I like even less these days given recent events. Here's the original:



I combined it with John McCain's "McTongue" grab-a$$ looking pic from when he walked off stage the wrong way after the third presidential debate:



The end result:

Congratulations, Obama!

Woohoo!!! Obama has won! Congratulations and good luck, Mr. President-Elect.

Despite projections that he would, I harboured a certain fear that it wouldn't happen in the end. I've read from numerous experts, especially those of African-American heritage, that there is a faction of voters who say they will vote for a black candidate but when it comes time to actually mark their ballot they can't quite bring themselves to do it. This could fudge the polls, they said, by several percentage points. They cited several examples where, according to the polls, a black candidate at city or state level was expected to win easily, yet when the ballots were counted they actually lost by up to 2-3%. I wish I could remember where I saw this, to share with you here, but alas I didn't take note. Suffice it to say that there were multiple sources with multiple experts, who sounded well-qualified and knowledgeable on the subject, and the consensus was pretty clear. Sad but true. So I decided rather than get all excited about an "expected" Obama win, I'd wait until the ballots were in. And anyway, to be perfectly frank, I shuddered to think what turmoil would follow if such a "mystery loss" was to happen in this election. So I put it out of my mind and hoped and prayed for the best.

It brought tears to my eyes to watch all those people, welcoming the first black president-elect with open arms, tears of joy, and scarcely able to believe it's really happening. Oprah was crying. Jesse Jackson was crying. It was incredible. And everybody was obviously so relieved that the end of the ironfisted neo-con rule is now in sight. Thank God!! It's a tough road ahead, but for a lot of people this restores hope that things can be put back on track.