[Posted by The Angry Clam]
Remember all the lefties whining and bitching about how they can’t win elections so they’re going to move to various other countries, like Canada?
Remember how I encouraged them to go, and with good riddance?
They might not like it so much- Alberta and the Western Provinces, the Canadian political equivalent of our South, is about to have its revenge.
Go Tories!
– The Angry Clam
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | |||||
Powered by WordPress.
Yeah, but the “extreme far right” in Canada is somewhere slightly to the left of Schwarzenegger, and Hubert Humphrey would be center-right. Meanwhile, center-left is someplace like George McGovern. They have Communists in parliament, although they call them something else.
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:07 amMy offer still stands – we give Canada the New England states in return for everything West of Manitoba.
Walter E. Wallis (8a1177) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:09 amProgress is progress.
It will piss off the lefties, there and here, and I still want them to get the fuck out of my country.
Angry Clam (a7c6b1) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:10 amCan we keep Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island?
Imagine a country of Ontario, Quebec, and New England? (We kind of need to keep New York.) Then we annex Mexico, for the oil; might as well, since we’ve already got the people! 🙂
Dana (3e4784) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:23 amWe won’t need that dump of a country with the oilfields of western canada.
Angry Clam (a7c6b1) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:32 amThe Mexicans are the hardest working people I’ve ever seen; they’ll work all day long, at jobs that make good Americans run and hide. I’ve come to the conclusion that it has got to be their government, because any people that work that hard ought to have created a paradise. How bad does the Mexican government have to be to have ruined a country with people who will work like that?
If we annexed Mexico, and put American Republicans in charge, Mexico would rival the US as an economic power within a generation.
Dana (3e4784) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:40 amBy George, Dana, you might be on to something there.
Illegal immigration as plan for taking over Mexico, and grabbing up all that slippery oil for ourselves, not to mention those great vacation spots. What a plan, what foresight, it sure explains GWB’s reluctance to put a stop to all those little amigos dashing across the border.
GWB even has the Liberals working on the plan to include Canada too. Wow, soon we’ll have the whole of North America all to ourselves. One nation, under Conservative leadership, with no liberals allowed. Cool.
It’s simply brilliant, you’ve got to hand it to GWB and the GOP. I’m impressed.
Black Jack (d8da01) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:42 amOf course, the opposite is also true: if we put the Democrats in charge the way they’d like to be, in a generation, the US would rival Mexico as an economic power.
Dana (3e4784) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:42 amCome, come, now,
We aren’t going to put Dems in charge of anything. Why, that would be like giving women the vote.
Black Jack (d8da01) — 1/23/2006 @ 9:54 amToday is Liberation Day in Canada!
Aujourd’hui est jour de Liberation au Canada!
Vote Conservative.
Votez Conservateur.
Molson, eh?
Justice Frankfurter (2dcd84) — 1/23/2006 @ 11:39 amMolson, ne’est-ce pas?
In canada, tens of millions misspent brings down a government. How quaint.
actus (ebc508) — 1/23/2006 @ 11:52 amI just cast my vote for the Conservatives here in Alberta. I’m looking forward to seeing what will be uncovered once the Fiberals are evicted from power – although I suspect the shredders have been working overtime in Ottawa since the polls showed their support leaking away.
As an aside, I checked the map and if the US wants western Canada then just take everything west of Manitoba – you’d have a nice contiguous land mass up to Alaska and all the oil, water and wood you can use. It even works politically – Alberta + Saskatechewan is 4 million Republican voters, British Columbia is 4 million Democrat voters. See it can work! Please! Just let me know the day of the invasion so I can put a pot of coffee on for the USMC boys!!
paul (c9a53d) — 1/23/2006 @ 12:34 pmI too just cast my vote for a Conservatve, in my case in BC.
Interestingly, I can also see a Tory minority govt as being more amenable to true conservative values (meaning smaller govt, classical liberalism etc) than if they get a majority.
How so, you ask? Cuz they’d end up taking support from the Bloc Quebecois to stay in power. The Bloc are not conservative, but they do want more power for Quebec. And most Tory supporters are in favor of decentralizing power from Ottawa to the provinces in general (it’s been getting over-centralized, big-time, for generations).
If that’s the largest area of philosophical agreement, then I could see 18 months or so (that’s how long our minority govts usually last) where Ottawa gives up some power to the provs. And decentralization is inherently conservative, as it creates competition and choice.
The fly in the ointment is subsidies. I can see the Tories & BQ getting together and agreeing in principle to more provincial power, right up till the BQ says, “but, of course, we’ll still be more equal than the others and you’ll send us extra money, too … r-i-i-g-h-t?”
Harper strikes me as soft – I hope I’m wrong – and more inclined to go along to get along than to fight. I guess we’ll find out soon enough.
ras (f9de13) — 1/23/2006 @ 1:39 pmpaul,
BC is la-la land, with no coherent philosophy. It merrily voted for Reform (a true conservative party) to oppose the federal Liberals and their socialist ways, then turned around and elected the NDP (socialists) for a provincial govt … only to replace them with the provincial Liberals after that.
4m Dems? Nope. 4m swing voters who can turn on a dime, leaving you scratching your head every time.
Remember, our very first premier, way back when, legally changed his name to “Amor de Cosmos” (Lover Of The Universe, sigh). Maybe it’s something in the air….
ras (f9de13) — 1/23/2006 @ 1:43 pmOK, one last comment, then back to work.
In a parliamentary system such as ours, it’s normally winner-take-all. In that scenario, you really wanna have your MP on the govt side of the house.
Moreover, if govt is not gonna be reformed/shrunk, an incentive trap is in place and it says that as long as there’s redistribution, you should elect a redistributionist. Anything else is just tilting at windmills.
If a true national conservative party comes along – Reform was too regional – promising a Reagan revolution, and stuck to its guns rather than trying to “appease” the media, Canada would vote it in. But it’d take a very strong and charismatic leader to pull that off, and those are rare.
There’s a parallel in this in the US: you guys generally vote more conservatively in your presidential choices than you do in the House, for ex, and have for generations.
I think that’s cuz the president, being national, does not have a vested interest in redistributing wealth from one part of the country to another. But a congressman (I use that term gender-nonspecific, btw) does, and will fight for a bigger share of the redistributionist pie and be rewarded at the polls for it. With the pres., you vote your beliefs. With the House (and to a lesser extent the Senate) you also vote strategically.
It’s a rational response by the voters in both countries, given the natures of the games.
ras (f9de13) — 1/23/2006 @ 1:55 pmVancouver always struck me as a very clean version of San Francisco.
What do you say to that, ras?
Angry Clam (fa7fff) — 1/23/2006 @ 2:04 pmClam,
Yeah, but less loonie, actually.
One of the ironies of the vast majority of Canada’s politically correct, wherever they are w/in the country, is that if you give them accurate info (aot media bias) they will almost invariably choose a fairly rational, small-c conservative approach to solving a problem, same as the rest of us.
That’s the real culture here; our media distort it with some very effective spin, but that too is changing. Look at the influence that even just one blogger, Morrisey, has had on this election, for ex.
It’d be interesting to look at neighborhoods (of grown folk, not kids still in school) and xref how they vote with how much they rely on the msm for their info. I suspect you’d find quite the correlation.
ras (f9de13) — 1/23/2006 @ 2:16 pmras,
Good point about the BC voters, I was generalizing that I figure BC would lean more to the Dems than the GOP. I shouldn’t generalize, I know.
Good luck with the results tonight!
paul (c9a53d) — 1/23/2006 @ 3:16 pmI’m glad they stayed – just because it pisses Clam off!
Psyberian (1cf529) — 1/23/2006 @ 6:06 pmBlack Jack??? Are you perhaps mon ancien ami, Blacques Jacques Shellcques from Montreal? Long time no see my old friend.
Fred Z (83acf5) — 1/23/2006 @ 7:13 pmJust before 10:30 p.m. EST, the Conservatives were leading or elected in 108 seats, to the Liberals’ 95. The Bloc QuĂ©bĂ©cois was leading or elected in 50 and the NDP in 26.
Libs did slightly better than polls had suggested.
The Globe & Mail says Harper pledged to “resurrect the gay marriage issue” and pull out of the Kyoto accord on climate change.
Can he deliver on that?
steve (65013e) — 1/23/2006 @ 7:43 pmCanada has like some 10 provinces and 3 territories, under something called a constitutional monarchy that is also a parliamentary democracy and a federation.
BTW, the Live preview of comment is a killer!!! First time that i have seen such…a killer, for sure, huh KOS.
OK. Stratfor has a great input on all of this, especially if you are some Hollywood actor or actress who promised to move to Canada or elsewhere if W won in 2004. BTW, W clearly won in 2004, but i haven’t seen much movement for such Hollywoodies since they ran their mouths…so to speak. Perhaps, one of these days, America’s Left will finally realize that Talk is cheap, especially during a War. Bill Clinton Talked a lot whilst Saddam and Osama slapped him around in front of the whole Planet Earth. Some Legacy, huh, being Bitch Slapped by Saddam and Osama in front of the whole Planet Earth. Who voted for such a Prison Punk, *TWICE*!?!
Canada ain’t much, and would be even less if we didn’t cut them some slack. They tried to follow America’s Liberals, and just look at where that got them.
Stratfor said it best…
KĂĄrmiÇømmĂĽnĂ®sâ€
KarmiCommunist (211ad2) — 1/23/2006 @ 7:47 pmMore than 90 percent of the Canadian populace lives in a thin continent-wide ribbon, snug up against the U.S. border.
KarmiCommunist (211ad2) — 1/23/2006 @ 8:08 pmactus–
“misspent” — you must be trolling. That’s like calling Watergate misplaced eavesdropping equipment.
They took millions in government funds, laundered them and put them in the ruling party coffers. If DeLay did that, I truly doubt you’d be saying “misspent.”
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 1/23/2006 @ 8:41 pmHey, if we get western Canada, can we build some real roads? Like in Vancouver?
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 1/23/2006 @ 8:48 pmKevin,
Roads in Vancouver? Now there’s a concept. If you ask the city council, their answer would be “sure, but no cars!”
ras (f9de13) — 1/23/2006 @ 8:52 pmFred Z,
Sorry, no, it ain’t me. Although I did spend a few hours in the Montreal jail back in the summer of ’69. It was during my first visit to Canada, loved Montreal, and decided to stay for a week or so. I rented a room across the street from the lake, but unfortunately was caught up in some local civil disobedience. The French boys were burning police cars.
I was mistakenly rounded up with the miscreants and incarcerated till the matter could be straightened out. Met some nice fellows there in the can, and was subsequently invited into their homes for some wonderful meals and delightful evenings.
I have fond memories of that trip, and have been back to Canada several times. I consider the USA fortunate to have such civilized, kind, and generous neighbors. Oh, Canada.
And, don’t you believe a single word John the Welshman says. I didn’t do it.
Black Jack (d8da01) — 1/24/2006 @ 8:57 amJack, should we be worried that you have “fond memories” of a trip in which you wound up in jail?
Dana (3e4784) — 1/24/2006 @ 9:40 amNo worries, Mate. It only took a few hours, was an understandable error, and I met several swell guys who made it up to me with excellent food and jolly good fellowship. I consider it time reasonably well spent, and would gladly do it all over again. My virtue is intact.
Black Jack (d8da01) — 1/24/2006 @ 10:01 amThe article said “misspent.” In the future I will be less credulent of Angry Clam links.
actus (ebc508) — 1/24/2006 @ 12:23 pmJohn Fund, writing in The Wall Street Journal:
” . . .Canada’s election is a
Justice Frankfurter (2dcd84) — 1/24/2006 @ 1:09 pmwatershed. The Liberals have
so dominated the country’s
politics that they were in office
longer during the 20th Century
than even the Communists in the
Soviet Union.”
[…] Two years later, we know that threatened mass exodus didn’t happen. As far as media coverage would have us know, no one made a hurried post-election-day-2004 immigration. Those who made the threat didn’t mean it seriously, of course, though that doesn’t keep conservatives from occasionally telling criticizers to pack up and go north. The “I’m moving to Canada”-ers, as we all knew, made up their battle cry as an illustration of how badly they thought the country would devolve with “Four more years!” under its belt. […]
Dangerous Intersection » Blog Archive » When to stay and when to go? (c4020a) — 9/12/2006 @ 6:34 pm