What would it take?

[Cosmo]

Re: RE: What would it take?

We don't want Canada to join our great Republic. We'll take Alberta though. We sure don't want Manitoba.

Well, Toro, I can think of a few Albertans I wouldn't mind sending your way! <rummages around the profiles page>

 

[Aitrus]

It would take the US deciding that it wanted to annex Canada.

As long as we keep trading and funneling them our natural resources, they have no reason to want a political union with us. They already control everything they need from us with economic levers (~80% of Canada's exports go to the US, and Canada has an export-economy, do the math).

We wouldn't even have a say in the matter. They'd create a crisis to help ease people's minds about the union and then just go ahead and do it. But as I said, they have no reason to unless we try to get tough about trade - which we can't unless we want to cripple our own economy.

Go dependency!

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

As much as our politicians would like it to happen, at least economically, the truth is that Canadians and Americans are moving in opposite directions and have been for a very long time.

Americans are becoming more and more conservative, returning to organized religion (especially fundamentalism), and still measuring themselves largely by 19th century mores such as wealth, imperialist military power, and religion.

Canadians are becoming more Liberal. We go to church less and less and fewer of us identify as belonging to a specific religion every day. We see the world more through a lens of cooperation and mutual benefits.

What would it take for Canada to join the US? You've seen what Iraq looks like, right?

While Blair is true of the present, his future may be wrong. The way some see it, is that Canada is basically where the US was during the Clinton years of liberalism in the US. Americans looked over the edge of that cliff, and stepped back rather dramatically, despite the influence of hollywood elitists, and the mainstream media, who were viscious in their attacks on Reagan, and are now on Bush. Given this supposition, it is entirely possible that Canadians will eventually tire of the cost of our liberalism, and step back from the edge of the socialist cliff as well, especially if the conservatives get a leader who is palatable to Eastern Canada. It is not so much the policies of the conservatives, it is the fact that Harper is from the West which makes him unpalatable to eastern Canada.

 

[bulldog]

No1 - "Better re read your history Bulldog. Hawaii did not beg to become a state. "

Bull. I was alive. I remember it well. The US did not steal Hawaii. They begged to become a state, and it was related to the Pearl
Harbor attack. I saw it on TV and in the newspapers. You don't know what you are talking about from first-hand experience. Being there counts for more than internet crapola.

After today in London - I'm thinking the United States of ABC. Just wait and we will see how this filters out. What will it take?
I think I know.

Bull Dog

 

[PoisonPete2]

Re: RE: What would it take?

It would take someone stepping over my cold dead body.
Seriously, I really can't think of anything other than a "The Day After Tomorrow" scenario.

Hawaii begged to be a state. They had no military protection, and they were rather isolated. Hawaii really hasn't had any serious clashes with the US that I know about....have they?
Bull Dog

Answer: Hawaii did not 'beg' to become a state. The U.S. Navy requested a docking site, which was granted by the Queen of Hawaii. The Americans than poured in thousands of personell and then demanded a plebecite to seek to become a territory of the U.S. The land was stolen be an empirical nation. There is still an resistance against this crime in Hawaii but doesn't get press coverage.

 

[Reverend Blair]

While Blair is true of the present, his future may be wrong. The way some see it, is that Canada is basically where the US was during the Clinton years of liberalism in the US. Americans looked over the edge of that cliff, and stepped back rather dramatically, despite the influence of hollywood elitists, and the mainstream media, who were viscious in their attacks on Reagan, and are now on Bush. Given this supposition, it is entirely possible that Canadians will eventually tire of the cost of our liberalism, and step back from the edge of the socialist cliff as well, especially if the conservatives get a leader who is palatable to Eastern Canada. It is not so much the policies of the conservatives, it is the fact that Harper is from the West which makes him unpalatable to eastern Canada.

The trends have been noted since the 1950's, Blue. Indications are that those trends are accellerating, not slowing. Canadians are far more liberal than the US...your little band of extremists excepted, of course.

There is no cliff that needs to be stepped back from. The cost of liberalism is the betterment of all and increased personal freedom...what used to be the American dream before the cranks and charlatans seized power.

What makes Harper unpalatable to the rest of Canada is that he's hateful little nutbag with no political acumen and a complete inability to control himself or the most radical elements within his party.

 

[Andygal]

Actually I think the Klien worshippers would be happy living in Texas. Considering Alberta is more or less Canada's answer to Texas.

The American dream is dead, Bush getting elected twice shows that all too clearly. If the Patroit Act didn't stop him from getting re-elected then nothing will.

All we can do now is avoid giving into the pressure of the US government and the Harperites and keep from falling off the same cliff the US has. We can't trust Paul Martin not to go along with them, he;s too wishy-washy, we need Jack Layton and the NDP, they at least have strong belief in upholding this country's values. Jack Layton wouldn't let Bushie steamroll over us.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

We don't want Canada to join our great Republic. We'll take Alberta though. We sure don't want Manitoba.

Alberta says: Let's talk! And you are right about Manitoba, has some faux religious types that claim to hate religion.

Actually, in all seriousness, I do think that Alberta is closer to the US than any other province or area in the country. Has a lot to be with our history. Many of our ancestors came from the US.

Thanks for the invite, see what you can do, okay? 8)

 

[bluealberta]

While Blair is true of the present, his future may be wrong. The way some see it, is that Canada is basically where the US was during the Clinton years of liberalism in the US. Americans looked over the edge of that cliff, and stepped back rather dramatically, despite the influence of hollywood elitists, and the mainstream media, who were viscious in their attacks on Reagan, and are now on Bush. Given this supposition, it is entirely possible that Canadians will eventually tire of the cost of our liberalism, and step back from the edge of the socialist cliff as well, especially if the conservatives get a leader who is palatable to Eastern Canada. It is not so much the policies of the conservatives, it is the fact that Harper is from the West which makes him unpalatable to eastern Canada.

The trends have been noted since the 1950's, Blue. Indications are that those trends are accellerating, not slowing. Canadians are far more liberal than the US...your little band of extremists excepted, of course.

There is no cliff that needs to be stepped back from. The cost of liberalism is the betterment of all and increased personal freedom...what used to be the American dream before the cranks and charlatans seized power.

What makes Harper unpalatable to the rest of Canada is that he's hateful little nutbag with no political acumen and a complete inability to control himself or the most radical elements within his party.

I guess you have not done any research on Asia, especially China, who is moving to a capitalistic society, albeit very slowly, but they are moving away from socialism. Europe is proving that socialism does not work, Europe is fast becoming as irrelevant as Canada. The Asian tigers, with their Capitalistic methods, are a force in the world.

Of course, having had all this explained to you in great detail by TORO, who had facts as opposed to opinions, so you know all this. Accepting you are wrong is the first step in the process of getting over yourself.

The world is moving right, too bad Canada is out of step, as usual. Maybe some day we can get it right again, but not until we drive the left and socialists from power. Hopefully it will not be too late by the time this country wakes up.

 

[Reverend Blair]

There is one thing I can say about Toro, Blue...at least he had the balls to move to where he was comfortable.

You seem to think that Chinese communism is equivalent to democratic socialism, which just shows how far out of touch you are with reality.

You also seem be under the incredibly flawed impression that liberalism and socialism are the same things and that capitalism and democracy are interchangeable. You are not only wrong, but your confusion shows you to misunderstand political theory and reality so grossly that I can only assume you are also incapable of finding your ass with two hands and a flashlight.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

There is one thing I can say about Toro, Blue...at least he had the balls to move to where he was comfortable.

You seem to think that Chinese communism is equivalent to democratic socialism, which just shows how far out of touch you are with reality.

You also seem be under the incredibly flawed impression that liberalism and socialism are the same things and that capitalism and democracy are interchangeable. You are not only wrong, but your confusion shows you to misunderstand political theory and reality so grossly that I can only assume you are also incapable of finding your ass with two hands and a flashlight.

Democratic socialism is an oxymoron, just as you are a ..... oh never mind.

Liberalism and socialism are totally related, just as capitalism and conservatism are related. At least I can admit that, too bad you cannot. Socialism and communism are very close, except that communism was bastardized to make the ruling elite in communism the benefactors of socialism.

We have electricity in Alberta, so unlike Manitoba, I don't need a flashlight. From what I hear, you need a super flashlight to find your ass. 8)

 

[Reverend Blair]

Communism is authoritarian at heart, Blue. That would make it closer to the kind of conservatism that you and your heroes practice.

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

Communism is authoritarian at heart, Blue. That would make it closer to the kind of conservatism that you and your heroes practice.

No, that is fascism. Conservatism believes in freedom of choice, along with the consequences of those choices. Totally opposite of authoritism. Conservatism believes in less government internvention into the lives of citizens, socialism and liberalism believes that citizens are too stupid to be able to make their own choices. As a result, those who support liberalism and socialism are too afraid or stupid to be trusted to make their own decisions. No wonder you like socialism and liberalism.

 

[peapod]

Bulldog said:
Hawaii begged to be a state. They had no military protection, and they were rather isolated. Hawaii really hasn't had any serious clashes with the US that I know about....have they?

Hey bulldog did you get that info from the lifesite 8O amazing how you guys re-write history....

In 1898 Hawaii was finally annexed by the United States, and in 1900 it became a U.S. territory. On August 21, 1959 it became the 50th American state. In 1993 Congress and President Clinton formally apologized for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Ah, Blue...you have no idea what you are talking about. Your conservatives put forth fascist policy all the time. What the hell do you think the calls for increased "security" are? What do you think the cozy relationship between corporations and governments are?

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

Ah, Blue...you have no idea what you are talking about. Your conservatives put forth fascist policy all the time. What the hell do you think the calls for increased "security" are? What do you think the cozy relationship between corporations and governments are?

After today, you have the insensitivity to complain about increased security? Shameful. And the last I checked, which you confirmed, the Bay Street merchants support the socialist Liberals in this country. So who is cozy with who?

Conservativism means getting out of the lives of the citizens, liberalism and socialism means controlling the lives of the citizens. If you want that, fine, I reject it. I can think for myself, you obviously need someone to tell you when to take a crap. And how to wipe. Twice please.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Re: RE: What would it take?

No, that is fascism. Conservatism believes in freedom of choice, along with the consequences of those choices.

Hmmm...like abortion...

So what you're saying is that Conservatives believe in freedom of choice as long as it doesn't involve a woman and her body...

k...gotcha... :roll:

 

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: What would it take?

No, that is fascism. Conservatism believes in freedom of choice, along with the consequences of those choices.

Hmmm...like abortion...

So what you're saying is that Conservatives believe in freedom of choice as long as it doesn't involve a woman and her body...

k...gotcha... :roll:

WTF? The Conservatives in Canada will keep the status quo regarding abortion in Canada. What more would you want?

While my wife and I would have never considered an abortion, we also would not dispute the decisions of others in this matter. So personally, I am against abortion, but politically, I woul never legislate against it. That is how you can be for and against something at the same time. Personal choices vs political dictates. And for what it is worth, I would not support a candidate who did not feel the same way. My CPC MP feels exactly the same way I do, so I can vote for him. And did.

Choices, Vanni, personal and political. Get with the program.

 

[Reverend Blair]

We've been over the dishonest way your party wants to ban abortion, Blue. We've also been over the fact that the economic policies of the Liberal Party are very close to the ones that you Party favours. And the fact that you protected Cargill from contempt of parliament charges (I think they gave the Harperites something like $20,000 the year before that). Harper also went to court when the federal government limited corporate donations to political parties.

You sure weren't for freedom of choice on the issue of same sex marriage.

 

[bluealberta]

We've been over the dishonest way your party wants to ban abortion, Blue. We've also been over the fact that the economic policies of the Liberal Party are very close to the ones that you Party favours. And the fact that you protected Cargill from contempt of parliament charges (I think they gave the Harperites something like $20,000 the year before that). Harper also went to court when the federal government limited corporate donations to political parties.

You sure weren't for freedom of choice on the issue of same sex marriage.

I wish I could talk to you about Cargill. I cannot, due to my job requirements. But you are wrong. I will see if there is some way to post this without violating my job requirements. And no, I am not involved in any kind of related business.

The conservatives do not want to ban abortion, your continued lies in this matter are getting tiresome. Your opinions are not facts. In fact your opinions are outrageous and fanciful. What exactly are you growing on that farm in Manitoba, anyway?