The principal principle principle

Lately, I have noticed a disturbing trend in the language of the prime minister and his henchthingies. You know, the new-but-rapidly-aging trick with which, faced with any old screwup of their own making, they contrive to still appear (heh...) right, because their stand is based on "Principles".

This phrase is uttered in tones of finality. The kind that suggest that all things the PM labels as "Principles" cannot, must not, be questioned. By anybody. Because it's, you know, a Principle. Therefore Unassailable.

To the PM's fans, the term also implies pleasing undertones of moral discourse. Therefore even more Unassailable. One never negotiates Morality.

In a short time, the trick has become a trope, the new lazy-ass-all-purpose spin management tool over at the PMO. Splop a few random "Principles" into the speaking points on everything very arguably sketchy and/or dumb and, hey, presto, all butts are completely wallpapered clear up to the ethical ceiling. Which at this juncture, is, ummm, low.

My Oxford Big Word Thingy, Canine Ed.©®™, is an admirably clear (and massive) reference, but with two-odd dense pages of alternative definitions for "principle" ya know there's plenty of room for creative (and handy) misinterpretation.

Avowed principles - especially in politics, and especially among recent ruling parties, are not necessarily fundamental or immutable, or even true. They are ideas upon which policies are based. Sometimes pretty bad ideas. Even rotten ones. If you have a minute, you could look up "rotten" in the Oxford Big Word Thingy, Canine Ed.©®™.

I could, of course, have gotten all of this deplorably wrong. I am semimythically canine and fallible.

The prime minister could - and maybe would - logically argue that his principles can't be wrong. Because he has none left.

O'Brien's brain

Anybody heard much from Mayor Larry lately? I mean, aside from innocuous grip and grin snaps in throwaway tabloids, and the usual public pabulum? No? Thought not. Us coyotes, neither.

We may have to thank the mayor's latest handlers for this. It's the kinda brain trust that epitomizes a simple rule: if ya don't have a brain yourself, buy one. Although I note that in this case there's a whole team of, ummm, expert henchthingies to stitch up the ol' intellectual fabric. Possibly from the whole cloth.

While we can imagine it, coyotes are not party to the (no doubt) Hunter-Thompson-esque blend of medieval restraint devices, modern psycho-pharmacology and space age adhesives that it might take to keep some kinda lid on hizzoner's natural, ummm, exuberance. Whatever it is, it works like a damn. The result has been (mostly) blessed quiet for the citizenry. We needed it after all that came before.

Enquiring coyotes everywhere suppose that the reason His Nibs is actually paying heed to his high-powered advisors for a change is because he might still be eyeing that second term in the big chair, and hoping a short stint of relative decorum will do the trick.

Fortunately for those of us who are sensitive, the new strategy so far has merely reinforced the esteem with which we hold our beloved mayor. One hopes the electorate's famously lousy long term memory holds on just a teensy bit longer, so we can all support him right out of office in fall elections. In the style which he deserves.

Scammed and looking for advice...

I was scammed last spring by an Ottawa U professor who reminded me of Mr. Bean. Here is the sequence of events:

1) I met Mr. Bean at a conference in a European country. Mr. Bean confesses that he has no cash, and can't even buy himself a cup of coffee because he can't get the bank people to understand him and for some reason he can't get a cash advance on his credit card.
2) Aggie, realizing that he is from Ottawa, the city in which she lives, hands over 50 Euros to Mr. Bean, along with her business card, saying, "Here. Borrow this. I know where you work."
3) Mr. Bean is grateful, and says how embarassing it is, but takes the money.
4) Aggie does not hear from Mr. Bean.
5) Aggie decides to email Mr. Bean in late August, reminding him that she is there.
6) He responds with photos of the conference, good wishes to Aggie, and says he is heading off to Paris for another conference.
7) Aggie responds with, "Have fun in Paris. Don't forget to bring your Euros this time!"
8) Mr. Bean doesn't respond.
9) Aggie's work colleague who also met Mr. Bean at the conference runs into him by chance on the Ottawa U. campus and says, "Hi. Remember me. Aggie's friend. Remember Aggie, the one who so generously bailed you out." He mutters, "Oh, yes." then rushes off.
10) Aggie's colleague recounts this chance meeting to Aggie. Aggie is now pissed off at this scamming bastard and sends another email, this time saying. "Ok, Mr. Bean. Write me the check for $80 and send it to this address"...
11) Mr. Bean responds curtly with a "Yes". No thank you. No Sorry. Nothing.
12) That exchange was a week and a half ago. No cheque has arrived.

So, blog readers. I am asking for your advice here. What are the next steps? What should Aggie do?