CuriousByNature

Nope. Just on the cheek from family and friends. I should specify, face cheek. LOL

I have found Quebecois french to be quite nasal-sounding and it seems less refined than what I have heard in France. One of Canada's Prime Ministers, Jean Chretien, used to be laughed at because his Quebecois french was even less refined that that of most Quebecois. It was still much better than mine.

He no longer looks hungry, so that is good.

You may need to take a page from sweet Molly Malone. Just go up and down the streets of Dublin's fair city (with your wheelbarrow), crying 'cockles and muscles, alive alive-ohhhhhh'. 😉

I always thought that referred to Pago Pago...

I wish I could stay IN the British Museum... that place is amazing.

So quite literally, one man's macro is another man's micro?

Never had one - but it sounds like it must be nice

That's a good question. I wouldn't be surprised if someone on each shift needs to have some degree of french proficiency, since a person can ask to be dealt with in either language in theory.

One thing to point out - many jobs in the Canadian government do not require bilingualism. An uncle of mine worked for many years as a federal employee in Saskatchewan and never needed to learn french. Apparently positions in Ottawa, Quebec and New Brunswick often require a degree of fluency in both languages, but most parts of Canada require fluency in english only. I imagine the higher level positions anywhere will have a higher likelihood of french requirements, and not having a solid understanding of the language could be career-limiting. But my uncle was making a very good salary of more than 120K per year when he retired, and french was not a requirement for his position.

This is ridiculous. I'm all for people learning new languages, but in no way should Trudeau be telling the CEO of a private company that he needs to learn french. AirCanada is not a department or agency of the government, nor is it owned by the government. It has been a private company for more than 30 years and is responsible to its shareholders, not to the political elites. The government owns about 6% of the company and Trudeau has no right to compel the CEO to learn another language. The only place in Canada that is officially bilingual is New Brunswick. And if memory serves, Quebec, which is overwhelmingly francophone, even has laws that restrict the use of english rather than encouraging its population to be bilingual. It is true that there are likely more francophones who can speak english than there are anglophones who can speak french, but this whole situation only serves to show that once again Canadian politicians are missing the target on determining what is important. Rather than focusing on urgent matters like pandemic recovery, Canada's leader is concentrating on a matter that means very little to the majority of Canadians.

I get that, for sure. But in a pandemic everyone needs to be mindful of how their choices might impact the health of others. As someone who believes, myself, I know it is less fulfilling when not being able to meet in person, but the right to gather in worship doesn't trump public health concerns. Many churches now have pre-authorized giving, so hopefully the lack of attendance is not too impactful on finances. And some of the operating costs are not accruing at the moment. But I do understand what you are getting at.

Don't try walking to that area from the cruise port - it is way further than it looks. Trust me.

I'm finding it hard to link his firing directly to his personal faith. Covid restrictions are a public health issue and not a personal freedoms issue. Thousands of churches have been operating in a virtual capacity, though there are a few - relatively very few - that have contradicted restrictions by insisting on in-person worship. Worship does not require people to gather in one place. Yes, it may facilitate the fellowship aspect of worship, but worship does not depend on it. I question those who insist on gathering whether they are motivated truly by worship, or if it is primarily about the social aspects of it.

Does anyone know what happened to Big Dale? I haven't seen any of his posts in a pretty long time...

Another whose posts I miss is Big Dale - I haven't seen anything from him in ages....

Packaged phyllo pastry and and packaged puff pastry to save time.

I often look forward to a flute of nicely chilled Yersinia Pestis '47 at the end of a long day. It's not just for celebrations.

If I recall correctly, you regularly provide links for others. Just wanted to say it is appreciated

Yup - Kookaburras just sit in the old gum tree...

That's have gone.

Fanciful or not, that is what I remember reading in a guidebook. I think the square may date from the 17th century but was known by a different name originally. The use of 'soho' as a hunting call apparently dated to late 15th century to 16th century Tudor times when that area still had woodlands.

Not sure how accurate this is, but I read somewhere that Soho was once a hunting ground in Tudor times, and that the word 'soho' may have been a hunting cry. There was a square built that was eventually called Soho Square sometime in the mid 1700s, but I don't know if the name of the area came from the name of the square, or vice versa.

They are searching for a way to be relevant. Even though they are no longer part of the inner circle of the Royal Family, they are still magnitudes of degrees better off than the average person, yet they portray themselves as having similar struggles to everyone else. They really seem to be out of touch. I have no doubt their struggles are real, but they are not the same struggles as mine or yours. Part of the issue is that many Americans seem to gravitate towards royalty as if they are trophies, and put them on pedestals to get in their good graces. Harry and Megan no longer have royal gravitas - they are now simply a young, good-looking, rich couple with a family living in a privileged situation. Had they truly wanted to have a quieter life outside of all the limelight and paparazzi, they should have stayed here in Canada. The fact that they chose to live amongst the celebrities in Southern California suggests to me their deeper desire to remain in the public eye but without any duties or obligations that are expected of those who are royal. I wish them well, but I think they need to be more honest about their motivations for the change that they made.

I think I read somewhere that giant sequoias, when fully grown, are very resistant to fires. I can't recall if it is the thickness of the bark that provides the protection, or something else. It's likely General Sherman has withstood numerous fires over the centuries, and hopefully will continue to do so for many more to come.