Post-election post mortem

[bush_cheney2004]

I can't say that I disagree with a lot of their observations from a cultural and psychological perspective, but it should be noted most of the neurosis is English Canadian, not French Canadian! The Quebecois are very sure about their cultural identity and history....just not so sure about their future. And, I would suspect something similar of the Acadians, Franco-Ontarians, and any other French-speaking populations in the Country. It's English Canada which has been adrift for the last 50 years,

I'm sure that is the case as well, but the Francophones have their own version of anti-Americanism for different reasons. I don't get to see much of that here, but it is evident elsewhere. Ironically, French-Canadian language is not welcomed at this English language site.

Americans are not really responsible for how Canadians choose to deal with their own actions and cultural/economic transition from the UK/Europe to the USA. I just know that Canadians on one hand resent being ignored, while at the same time are fearful of growing to close too the Americans.

The only other note I would make is that Canadians typically exclude Mexico from the "North American" conversation, even though it has a much larger population than Canada and impact on the USA demographically. It is as if some Canadians want to be considered less foreign by the Americans compared to other nationals, even as most Americans are made to feel decidedly foreign when in Canada.

In the end, I guess Canadians will deal with the American elephant as they wish/need, while the Americans can largely ignore what happens in Canada. It would also seem that some Canadians have to or wish to exist in a citizenship duality that causes additional conflict and stress far beyond simple cross border shopping and watching American television.

Edited November 25, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[WIP]

I'm sure that is the case as well, but the Francophones have their own version of anti-Americanism for different reasons. I don't get to see much of that here, but it is evident elsewhere.

Yes, that's true; but there is also anti-Canadian or anti-federalist sentiments among Quebec nationalists. What I was thinking of is that English Canada's identity used to be tied to being part of the British Empire and Commonwealth, and as England progressively declined and Canada's economic and cultural links with America grew -- by the 60's, no one was sure exactly what it means to be a Canadian, except not American. It's worth adding that we haven't even touched on Aboriginal issues yet; especially that it is impossible to discuss what this country is without mentioning that land treaties had to be taken seriously in the early days when Canada had a sparse European population. We didn't have the Indian Wars like the U.S.; it was more of a case of gradually growing in population and economic power, and trying to marginalize the natives....in many places, it still hasn't been resolved.

Ironically, French-Canadian language is not welcomed at this English language site.

Well, what do you expect? Even if everyone using the board was bilingual, it would make things confusing. I'm sure there are French language forums where you get to write in English.

Americans are not really responsible for how Canadians choose to deal with their own actions and cultural/economic transition from the UK/Europe to the USA. I just know that Canadians on one hand resent being ignored, while at the same time are fearful of growing to close too the Americans.

Those could be different people talking. Personally, I don't see the few Canadians who have become pop stars or famous athletes in the U.S. as doing anything for this country.

The only other note I would make is that Canadians typically exclude Mexico from the "North American" conversation, even though it has a much larger population than Canada and impact on the USA demographically. It is as if some Canadians want to be considered less foreign by the Americans compared to other nationals, even as most Americans are made to feel decidedly foreign when in Canada.

That's true. We usually lump Mexico in with Central and South America, as a totally separate issue.....except for when NAFTA started!

In the end, I guess Canadians will deal with the American elephant as they wish/need, while the Americans can largely ignore what happens in Canada. It would also seem that some Canadians have to or wish to exist in a citizenship duality that causes additional conflict and stress far beyond simple cross border shopping and watching American television.

The biggest issues in the future won't be cultural; it will be economic and military. The U.S. right now is an empire in decline. But, from what I can gather from environmental and resource trends, the other competing powers like Russia and China, are straining under the same constraints that are occurring because of both renewable and non-renewable resource scarcities. So, they don't have much room, or a whole lot of time to build up their nations and project military power either.

Looking further into the future, maybe after our time, a melted Arctic becomes the last place of refuge for millions of people trying to migrate north, as a heating world, warmed by about 6 degrees C, and becomes the last place in the northern hemisphere that's still habitable, as global warming cooks the tropics to a level too hot to sustain plant and animal life. We have a few precedents for this in the planet's long history -- last time likely occurred during the PETM about 55 million years ago. But, we weren't around to have to live through it! I can imagine that at a time like this, which we are doing nothing to prevent from happening, those who are living will have greater things to worry about than Canada - U.S. relations.

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes, that's true; but there is also anti-Canadian or anti-federalist sentiments among Quebec nationalists. What I was thinking of is that English Canada's identity used to be tied to being part of the British Empire and Commonwealth, and as England progressively declined and Canada's economic and cultural links with America grew

OK, but from what I can read on the matter, the UK never embraced Canada on that level either. Canada may have made the cultural and economic transition as the American hegemon displaced Great Britain, but the Americans left that train station long ago without looking back. The definition of a distinctly Canadian identity rests largely on what it is rather than what it is not, despite claims to the contrary. It is not America's burden to "notice" or affirm what that identity may be.

Looking further into the future..... We have a few precedents for this in the planet's long history -- last time likely occurred during the PETM about 55 million years ago. But, we weren't around to have to live through it! I can imagine that at a time like this, which we are doing nothing to prevent from happening, those who are living will have greater things to worry about than Canada - U.S. relations.

Well, the relatively recent glacial periods clearly demonstrate that mankind has adapted to "climate change" to a far greater degree than anticipated, as have the planet's flora and fauna. A conscious decision to do nothing respects that there are risks and opportunities associated with climate change.

[dre]

That doesn't answer any of my questions. So did you revoke your U.S. citizenship? And why do you care more about American politics than Canadian?

Its fairly normal for Canadians to pay attention to politics in the US. Theres two major reasons for that...

1. What happens in the US has a major impact up here because of how our economy is tied to yours.

2. People watch it for the same reason people gawk at car wrecks. Its surreal and hard to look away sometimes.

[bush_cheney2004]

3. Canadian politics is totally boring in comparison.

[dre]

3. Canadian politics is totally boring in comparison.

Thats true. Its almost like comparing a documentary to some kind of bizzare slapstick comedy.

[wyly]

Thats true. Its almost like comparing a documentary to some kind of bizzare slapstick comedy.

boring is good...usa politics are dysfunctional...

[bush_cheney2004]

But boring and dysfunctional is even worse. Oh my...the mayor has been turfed ! Yawn........

Edited November 28, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[-TSS-]

Many countries still don't accept dual-citizenship at all in any case and some countries don't accept dual-citizenship with some other countries they don't want to share their citizens with.

[bush_cheney2004]

Many countries still don't accept dual-citizenship at all in any case and some countries don't accept dual-citizenship with some other countries they don't want to share their citizens with.

The concept escapes me....why not n-citizenships ? Doesn't this ultimately unravel the very reason and purpose of citizenship to begin with?

[WIP]

Many countries still don't accept dual-citizenship at all in any case and some countries don't accept dual-citizenship with some other countries they don't want to share their citizens with.

What a lot of people don't figure on when they think dual citizenship only has an upside, is that if it is U.S./Canada, you are actually under more scrutiny and more likely to have your car flagged for inspection if you're holding dual citizenship than if you are just a regular cross-border shopper without it. When I was in my early 20's, driving across to the U.S. with my drinking buddies, unless I was lucky enough to see the same face behind the booth, they wanted to pull me over to check the trunk...obviously assuming that I was a drug dealer or smuggler of some sort. And it was the same thing when crossing back into Canada afterwards. And this was long before 9/11, Homeland Security, body scanners etc.

Even treaty status Aboriginals who have the equivalent right to cross the U.S./Canada border, often complain about all of the hassles they get when doing so. One Six-Nations Indian I know, who lived right on the border in Niagara Falls, told me he rarely went across to go shopping or to buy gas because he always gets pulled aside, even though he's never had a criminal record in his lifetime.

[bush_cheney2004]

..... One Six-Nations Indian I know, who lived right on the border in Niagara Falls, told me he rarely went across to go shopping or to buy gas because he always gets pulled aside, even though he's never had a criminal record in his lifetime.

Right, and that is to be expected, long before 9/11 as you stated. I don't live far from the CanAm border, but never have any reason or desire to cross. I suppose others do for hunting, fishing, family visits, whatever....but the hassles involved are diminishing such interest.

"To buy gas" or cigarettes seems like a very trivial reason to cross an international border.

[WIP]

Right, and that is to be expected, long before 9/11 as you stated. I don't live far from the CanAm border, but never have any reason or desire to cross. I suppose others do for hunting, fishing, family visits, whatever....but the hassles involved are diminishing such interest.

"To buy gas" or cigarettes seems like a very trivial reason to cross an international border.

Like I said before, I have had an easier time being a Canadian-only citizen than as a dual citizen. I haven't been crossing much since moving too far away to shop, but when I lived in Niagara Falls for a number of years and doing a 50 mile commute to work, I was going across late at night on the weekend to fill the tank and a gas can to bring back and get me through till the following weekend....along with a few groceries....never smoked....never bothered bringing back booze since I quit drinking years ago. But, now that I only use the car a little on the weekend, driving across the border would make no sense. I was never asked for more than my driver's license, and only had my car pulled over...one out of 20 crossings at most. But, I hear since Homeland Security arrived, that cross-border shoppers have to put up with a lot more crap now than prior to 9/11.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... But, I hear since Homeland Security arrived, that cross-border shoppers have to put up with a lot more crap now than prior to 9/11.

OK...but why bother? Just for cheaper gas? That's pretty desperate. I know it bugs some Canadians that those damn 'Merkins have cheaper gas and other stuff, but so what?

[WIP]

OK...but why bother? Just for cheaper gas? That's pretty desperate. I know it bugs some Canadians that those damn 'Merkins have cheaper gas and other stuff, but so what?

What I know now, but never thought much about during my life as a suburbanite, was how much the real cost of gas is. America should put gas taxes at higher rates to cover the negative external costs of dumping carbon into the atmosphere....as Canada also has gas taxes that are far too low. Gas prices are going to start climbing over the next few years regardless, because of the increased extraction and development costs associated with tar sands and shale deposits for oil. Carbon fuels should be priced at a penalty cost to stop the building of more and more suburbs, the highways to connect them, and cars also! The environmental costs of having everyone motoring around in their own one to two ton iron boxes is not practical from a resource nor an environmental basis. And, the alternatives, like low cost, frequent transit systems need to be put in place now before there is no money left for any infrastructure funding at all.

[waldo]

The thing Republicans may have to face up to is that as the 47% becomes 57% and onwards, the commons will start to vote themselves entitlements. No amount of finger-wagging or preachy pining for the old days from Bill O'Reilly is going to work against that. If the Republicans can't make trickle-down work as they seem to think it should, then they're in for a big fight.

I believe that it will also be an expensive fight for them, because it will cost more to convince swing voters in the post-television age.

they seem to have composed themselves after the election beat-down... they appear to have learned a tough lesson... it looks like they have a clear plan/path and they're moving forward to reclaim past glories!!!

[Michael Hardner]

they seem to have composed themselves after the election beat-down... they appear to have learned a tough lesson... it looks like they have a clear plan/path and they're moving forward to reclaim past glories!!!

David Frum nailed it when he talked about the right-wing media Frankenstein's monster. The Republican party should well break into two parties soon.

[bush_cheney2004]

David Frum nailed it when he talked about the right-wing media Frankenstein's monster. The Republican party should well break into two parties soon.

Not as likely now as in the past. American political parties have more critical mass than the schizophrenic political parties in Canada, IMHO.

[Guest American Woman]

The Republican party should well break into two parties soon.

All I see that accomplishing is splitting the Republican vote, ensuring a Democratic win.

[Pliny]

David Frum nailed it when he talked about the right-wing media Frankenstein's monster. The Republican party should well break into two parties soon.

David Frum....hmmmm....wasn't he a part of the right wing media Frankenstein's monster before he split?

Ohhh...perhaps that's why he thinks that...everyone should follow him.

When I think of Barbara I have trouble thinking of David as a conservative.

[kimmy]

David Frum has been branded a Republican In Name Only-- a "RINO"-- as have the rest of the increasingly rare breed of Republicans who have the unmitigated gall to suggest that they should focus on economic conservatism, and that extreme social conservatism is alienating large groups of voters.

If you don't talk about JEEEZUSSS, don't support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, don't support Fetal Personhood, and don't take the Grover Norquist pledge, then you're a RINO.

-k

[Pliny]

David Frum has been branded a Republican In Name Only-- a "RINO"-- as have the rest of the increasingly rare breed of Republicans who have the unmitigated gall to suggest that they should focus on economic conservatism, and that extreme social conservatism is alienating large groups of voters.

If you don't talk about JEEEZUSSS, don't support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, don't support Fetal Personhood, and don't take the Grover Norquist pledge, then you're a RINO.

-k

I think the shoe fits for him...or perhaps neo-con would be more appropos.

Extreme social conservativism has no place in politics and neither does extreme social liberalism. You seem to be

mentioning Jeeezusss more these days than the Reverend Wright. Do you think that someone will be making you read the

Bible?