15% of Canadians for Bush

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Who cares?  What are the Canadians going to do about it?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Well, it shows CANADA'S opposition to Bush. I'm sure most European countries would follow suit, but prolly a little higher.

And your point is....what?  

Are they going to stop trading with the US?  No, they're obviously are more economically dependent on us than we are on them.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

It's days like today that I wish canada was a state-in fact, a few states, then they'd have more EVs. If all the canadian provinces joined, what would there EVs be?

I dunno the actual pop'l of them all, but just estimating, it would be 3 for Yukon, NWT, and Nunavut, 5 for BC, 5 for Alberta, 4 for Manitoba, 4 for Sasketchewan, 16 for Ontario, 10 for Quebec, 4 for NB, 5 for Nova Scotia, 3 for PEI and 3 for Newfoundland, or so, which would mean 68 new EVs, most of which would go to the Democrats.

They'd win BC, Ontario, Quebec, NB and Nova Scotia, at least, eh?

Better yet, why don't you just go to live in Canada?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I think most americans would like to have Canadians as US citizens

Please spare us from learning how you reached such a conclusion.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I did not make this thread to try to expose JMF's xenophobic ways, but it has done just that.

Look, just because your educational path didn't lead you to stumble upon the fact that the GOP was known as the "conservative" party back in 40-60's, don't add insult to your own injury by taking the desire to live in an independent country and confusing it with the condition of xenophobic.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I don't think the US would cease to be an independent country if you allowed Canada to join...

Nor do we cease to be independent by NOT allowing the Canadians to join.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

2 entries found for xenophobic.
xen·o·phobe    
A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.

I have never indicated a fear or contempt for foreigners.  I just don't want them mucking around in my business.  Same goes for next door neighbors on my block.

Pro 25:17 "Seldom set foot in your neighbor's house- too much of you, and he will hate you."

Wanting independence and privacy is not a symptom of fear, rather it is a sign of confidence.

---

I never referred to the GOP as the liberal party.  What I said was that many Democrats were more conservative than many Republicans at that times, see Wallace v. Nixon, Thurmond v. Eisenhower.

I don't know by what "conservative" measure you're using to compare these people.  But the fact are clear and are not in question:
1)the GOP was known as the conservative party in the time frame in question
2)the GOP has a voting record more accepting of civil rights than the Dems voting record.  This record dates back to the 1850's.
3)racism, by definition, is not a "conservative" doctrine of Christianity.  Racism and Christianity are in conflict with each other.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I don't think the US would cease to be an independent country if you allowed Canada to join...

Nor do we cease to be independent by NOT allowing the Canadians to join.

No...but how is that relevant? That nothing changes if you change nothing is kind of obvious.

Well, Canada joining would mean that the US is no longer independent of Canada.

Why do you have a problem with American independence?  Does it offend you that we do not choose to give up our sovereignty to other country?  Does the world find the US's Declaration of Independence offensive?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

What? In what way have I shown that I "have a problem with American independence"? All I am saying is that I do not believe you would be giving up you independece, Canada would be giving up their's, b/c they're much smaller. Got it?

Well, if you have no problem with American independence, then there should be no problem with the US and Canada remaining separate countries.  Problem solved!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I never said Christianity = Racism.  You know that I never said that.

Never said that you did, I simply was stating that racism can not be considered conservatism because the South is basically filled with Christians and a racist Christian is no conservative at all because racism is against their faith's foundation - the NT.

---

And, at the old forum, you displayed much comtempt with European members.

Pointing out an unhealthy interest in someone else's business is not showing contempt.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Yes. You must develop a British accent and stop brushing your teeth. Immediately.....Actually that is a mystery to most Brits. If a backwater like England...

Funny how you can get away making such comments with being labeled as xenophobic.  

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Again, you fail to back up an argument without using the bible or religion.

Because you can't seem to understand the desire for privacy, I quoted a proverb showing that good neighbors mind their own business.

Only the wise respect proverbs, but the quote should end the argument nonetheless.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Alright, I'm just going to say a few things here.  First, I don't think Canada would EVER join the USA.....All in all, Canada will never join the US in the near future, so all the debate is quite useless.

Also add to that the fact the US doesn't want to join with Canada.

Contrary to the opinion of others on this forum, it is totally healthy to want to be independent.  In fact, the mental illness is with those that mock independence.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

jmf-if people like you got there way back in the 19th century, you wouldn't even be part of the US.

How so?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

What? In what way have I shown that I "have a problem with American independence"? All I am saying is that I do not believe you would be giving up you independece, Canada would be giving up their's, b/c they're much smaller. Got it?

Well, if you have no problem with American independence, then there should be no problem with the US and Canada remaining separate countries.  Problem solved!

I never said there was a "problem with the US and Canada remaining separate countries" either. Stop putting words in my mouth, please.

Then why even argue a case for a US/Canada union?  You're basically trying to advocate a shotgun wedding for two people who have no desire to marry each other.

I don't see this as a heated argument, maybe "frustrating" but not heated.  Its frustrating for me because I don’t understand this mentality that tries to make everyone a carbon copy of each other.

I am be very good friends with my next door neighbor, but that doesn’t mean I wish to build one big house in order to share the same roof.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

As for American fear - remember federism...BTW, I really ask you all to cool down on the personal retorts.

You refer to "American fear" within a discussion of the desire to keep the US independent, yet you then turn around and ask us to cool down the personal retorts?  

There may be great economic benefit for me to share the same roof with my next door neighbor, but that doesn't mean that I care to do so.  And my desire to remain under separate roofs has nothing to do with "fear".

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Because you can't seem to understand the desire for privacy, I quoted a proverb showing that good neighbors mind their own business.

How are the European members infringing on your privacy?  They just discuss policy with us Americans.  They are not barging into your house, or even cluttering the boards with useless threads.  They mean no harm, and they do no harm.

My comments were not limited to foreigners; the comments were inclusive of even my next door neighbor, which is why I quoted:

Pro 25:17 "Seldom set foot in your neighbor's house- too much of you, and he will hate you."

Notice the verse doesn't chastise the homeowner's desire to be left alone nor his hatred towards a neighbor hanging around too much; rather it warns the uninvited "guest" to respect the privacy and individuality of others, especially neighbors.

It’s simply a matter of common sense, yet you’ve turned that common sense on its head and labeled it xenophobia.  

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

This is not your forum, therefore they have not set foot on your property.  And we have all set foot on Leip's property, whether we live in New York or Texas or London or Berlin.

Another tangent meant to increase tension?  Grow up.  My comments had nothing to do with the property of this forum, and you know it.

In fact, I basically told Leip the same thing.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I have not argued the "case for a US/Canada union". Again, please stop labeling me with opinions tha i haven't expressed.

OK, this is probably a case of you getting into the middle of an debate between me and someone else.  I was arguing a case for independence and you inserted the following comment:

"I don't think the US would cease to be an independent country if you allowed Canada to join..."

A US/Canada union would obviously end US independence from Canada.

Living under the same roof as my next door neighbor may still have me independent of you, but I have still lost some independence nonetheless.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I know he was.

OK...then why the "that really isn't much like what I said"?

Read this thread starting at page 4 and you'll understand.

No, sorry, but I don't... I guess I am just tired from sitting up late yesterday watching Sweden-Australia in tennis.

Don't bother, MiamiU is attempting to go off on a tangent because I have made a sound point in my argument with him.

He desires to illogical label those wanting independence as xenophobic in order to justify his attempts at controlling their lives.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

What I meant was that in the union you would decided everything, since you're a much bigger country, so you wouldn't lose much independence, instead you would gain control over Canada, so they would be the ones losing independece, mainly.

OK, but I have no desire to take control of Canada, I have no desire to muck around in their business.  So let's just let sleeping dogs lie.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I didn't think this would be a debate thread...but then it just happened

Actually this thread has exposed some of the differences between modern conservatives and liberals:  Liberals want to force agreement, conservatives want the right to agree to disagree.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

What I meant was that in the union you would decided everything, since you're a much bigger country, so you wouldn't lose much independence, instead you would gain control over Canada, so they would be the ones losing independece, mainly.

OK, but I have no desire to take control of Canada, I have no desire to muck around in their business.  So let's just let sleeping dogs lie.

I didn't say you had, I was, for the last time, not stating a position, since I am not from any of these countries it's not really my business anyway, I was just making an empirical evaluation of the "what-if" scenario. That's all.

OK, but you shouldn't be surprised that you were thrown into the middle of the argument when you decided  to throw in your two cents.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I do not blame you for wanting independence from canada. (I don't think the USA should unite with Canada.)  I do blame you for being the only forum member to openly stand up against the Europeans at the forum.  You did this alot at the old forum.

Yet you attributed my agrument with a fellow American on the subject of a US/Canada union as further evidence of my supposed "xenophobia".

But, as a matter of fact, I do find odd the desire to debate another country's internal politics.  

BUT...BUT...BUT...BUT...I also find odd the desire to debate your next door neighbor's internal family business.

So my supposed "xenophobia" is not tied to fact that someone is a foreigner, rather it has to do my lack of understand of the desire to mettle in someone else's business.

And I have taken great pains to explain my relationship with my next door neighbor, in order to make the point perfectly clear.

Yet you repeatedly keep labeling me "xenophobic" merely to stir up trouble between me and the foreign posters on this forum.  And you always seem to bring up the label when you have no other point to make.  Kinda like a white person labeling a black person a “n” in order to discredit their opinion.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I don't want forced agreement...however the point of debate may be to persuade other people to take your side of the argument.  That rarely happens, but I do believe that is the purpose of debate.

Agreement can only take place when there is a common foundation so that the standard of "truth" can be defined and opinion measured against the standard.