Skip to comments.No, Canada! (United States of Canada vs. Jesusland)
Posted on 11/06/2004 11:32:23 AM PST by spyone
You have probably heard the idle chatter: ''I'm thinking of moving to Canada." You may have received the JPEG Sent 'Round the World, labeling the northern part of North America -- the right-thinking part, as liberals would have it -- as the United States of Canada, and the pro-Bush leaning ''red" US states as Jesusland
It sounds so alluring. Good beer. Cheap Viagra. Hardly any crime. Friendly, if somewhat ineffectual, people. Terrific, if underappreciated, novelists. (This means you, Rohinton Mistry.) Secure borders, courtesy of the US Department of Defense.
But before you pack, consider this: There are plenty of reasons not to move to Canada. Let me count the ways.
1. They don't really want you. Canada is full of losers like you. If you're really rich, or a brain surgeon, maybe. But if you are, say, a newspaper reporter, be prepared to wait at least a year just to live there legally, and several more years to become a citizen.
If you have some special qualifications, like a PhD, plus a lot of work experience, and if you are under 50, you have a better chance of crashing the gates of Snow Mexico. Or if you're loaded. That's right. If you have a net worth of $800,000 Canadian or more, and are willing to invest $400,000 of it in Canada, come on in! And you thought George Bush's America was a plutocracy. . . . Think again.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Shouldn't Alberta and Manitoba, at least, be included with Jesusland?
I meant Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan.
Can we change the name to "HaShemland" or "Bibleland" please?
They think their Black Fundamentalist constituency worships Darwin.
Wouldn't European concepts like "democracy" and "republicanism" be an insult to the quaint indigenous pipples and their various chiefs, kings, and emperors?
Three cheers for Red Canada
I was being sarcastic . . . you know, pointing out the incongruity of worshipping "indigenous cultures" while somehow believing those cultures would express themselves throught a Marxist democratic republican vegetarian society?
Hey, we still got Alaska...
And British Columbia, to a lesser extent.
"Better yet, we'll force everyone in the blue areas up into New England and let Canada have that in exchange for Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, British Columbia, Nunavat, Northwest Territories, and Yukon Territory."
1) Don't presume to trade away my state. The libs can whine and flee if they so desire. You WILL NOT abet them at my expense.
2) Nunavut, Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory all voted for the Liberal Party in the 2004 election.
Okay, okay. There are still some sane people left in NH. How'd you manage that feat right in the middle of New England? As for the Canadian territories, let's at least take the Yukon. We need some direct land route to Alaska and ANWR.:)
"How'd you manage that feat right in the middle of New England?"
IMHO the only reason NH went for Kerry was cross-border voter fraud. I was poll watching and there were twice as many people registering as new voters as there were actual registered voters. Maybe three times as many. And we couldn't check the new registrants.
"As for the Canadian territories, let's at least take the Yukon. We need some direct land route to Alaska and ANWR."
Alaska has a land border with BC. We don't need the Yukon Territory.
BTW, there are only about 100,000 people in those three territories all together.
I'm just waiting for some liberal whiner to start flaming about us coveting Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia (it's okay for *them* to talk about busting up the USA ...)
In any case, they'll get not one square inch. They don't deserve it, and they probably don't own very much of it. No doubt the vast majority of Kerry voters don't actually own anything. They just want to take ours.
Yeah, you're right about BC and AK sharing a border. I just forgot.
Since the county boundaries do not follow the electoral districts in Canada it is difficult to tell. Here are my GUESSES in Ontario based on political trends and cultures (some are not legally counties, but independent cities, regional municipalities or districts):
Extreme blue - Toronto
Strong blue - Peel, York, Hamilton, Prescott/Russell
Moderate blue - Essex, Middlesex, Waterloo, Wellington, Halton, Durham, Frontenac, Ottawa, Greater Sudbury, Sudbury (district), Thunder Bay, Cochrane, Algoma, Timiskaming, Kenora, Brantford
Nearly 50/50 - Rainy River, Manitoulin, Nipissing, Stormont/Dundas/Glengarry, Peterborough, Niagara, Lambton, Chatham-Kent
Moderate red - Hastings, Prince Edward, Northumberland, Simcoe, Huron, Perth
Strong red - Renfrew, Lanark, Leeds/Grenville, Lennox and Addington, Haliburton, Kawartha Lakes, Muskoka, Parry Sound, Dufferin, Haldimand, Norfolk, Grey, Bruce, Oxford, Elgin, Brant (county)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ontario_Census_Divisions - to see the list of them and where they are
Whoa - this is an old thread!
Coincidentally, for the first time tonight, my bride and I discussed moving to the High River, Alberta area from our native B.C. We've been scouting around the southern interior looking for a retirement abode and we realized that south-western Alberta is about as sweet as country gets. Prosperous, too.