TOPICS:
AceT
Portland, OR
April 2004
NOV 28, 2006 11:52 AM
Andvari said:
AceT said:
Colinism said:
yes thats why I said hopefully the West part of canada, IE everything to the west of Quebec. 
How was that hard to understand. 
Indeed, I edited soon after posting, but you seem to have caught it anyway.
I like this approach better...
Why would Alaska be part of Jesusland? Aren't they reasonable?
And where does Hawaii fit in all this? I want Hawaii.
They've voted Republican in 11 of the last 12 elections, and every one of their members of Congress are Republican. It's the reddest of the red states. It's Texas with snow.
I only know two people that live there, stockula and Senator Ted "intertubes" Stevens, and they're both crackpots. I have a feeling the rest of the state isn't much different.
NOV 28, 2006 11:55 AM
Andvari said:
AceT said:
Colinism said:
yes thats why I said hopefully the West part of canada, IE everything to the west of Quebec. How was that hard to understand.
Indeed, I edited soon after posting, but you seem to have caught it anyway.
I like this approach better...
Why would Alaska be part of Jesusland? Aren't they reasonable?
And where does Hawaii fit in all this? I want Hawaii.
Uh, Blue Hawaii? Duh.
NOV 28, 2006 12:21 PM
NOV 28, 2006 12:24 PM
NOV 28, 2006 12:28 PM
NOV 28, 2006 12:43 PM
NOV 28, 2006 01:03 PM
DancehallDreamer said:
d20 said:
as a fun side note: there's fossil evidence from south america that makes it appear as though the people we call "native americans" came across the land bridge from asia a while back and killed off the more simian natives of this continent. go murderous homo sapiens go!
That sounds interesting, where did you hear about that?
I've seen it mentioned on a couple of different programs on the Discovery Channel. And the History Channel.
NOV 28, 2006 04:30 PM
NOV 28, 2006 05:44 PM
Colinism said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061128/wl_nm/politics_quebec_dc
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's Parliament recognized Quebecers as a nation within a united Canada on Monday, backing a controversial proposal that has already prompted one minister in the minority Conservative government to quit.
The House of Commons, Parliament's elected chamber, voted 266 to 16 in favor of the motion, which the government said it saw as a way to head off pressure from separatists who want to break away from Canada.
But critics said the proposal could actually bolster the separatists, and the pro-independence Bloc Quebecois said it would use the change to demand extra powers, including Quebec's right to speak at international meetings.
Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong resigned over the vote, and said the separatists would use it to sow confusion.
"I believe in this great country of ours, and I believe in one nation, undivided, called Canada," Chong, whose cabinet brief included Ottawa's ties with Quebec and Canadian provinces, told a news conference.
"They (the separatists) will argue that if the Quebecois are a nation within Canada, then they are certainly a nation without Canada."
Chong's resignation does not threaten the government's survival, but it does underline political tensions over the status of Quebec, which has already held two closely contested referendums over whether to break away from Canada.
Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper drafted the motion last week in response to one from the Bloc that recognized Quebecers as a nation, but did not include the words "within a united Canada."
Chong said he remains a Conservative member of Parliament and was loyal to Harper.
He was the first minister to leave the cabinet since Harper defeated the Liberals in January. Chong quit after the government said it would dismiss cabinet ministers if they did not vote for the proposal.
French-speaking Quebec already calls its legislature the Quebec National Assembly and calls Quebec City its national capital.
"It won't change anything in their day-to-day lives," Industry Minister Maxime Bernier, a leading Quebec legislator, insisted during Parliamentary debate. "It won't give Quebecers more powers."
Many Canadian politicians have welcomed the motion as a way of mollifying Quebecers. But others said it risked opening the door to the break-up of Canada down the road.
Hopefully when they break up the non french speaking west part of Canada will finally join the lower 48.
You really have no clue what any of this actually means, do you?
NOV 28, 2006 06:03 PM
It's a pretty straight forward article, I made a light hearted joke at the end. Whats wrong?
NOV 28, 2006 07:04 PM
NOV 28, 2006 07:20 PM
So basically, your mad that I posted a news article for people to read and discuss? What have I said that would make you think I did not know what the article was about or understand it? Please lets keep the discussion civil, your personal attacks are not needed.
NOV 28, 2006 08:34 PM
Colinism said:
(article) -
Hopefully when they break up the non french speaking west part of Canada will finally join the lower 48.
So basically, your mad that I posted a news article for people to read and discuss? What have I said that would make you think I did not know what the article was about or understand it? Please lets keep the discussion civil, your personal attacks are not needed.
Dude ! you are fuckin retarded.
the french speaking chicks are hot as hell.
we want the FRENCH speaking part !
pft.
NOV 28, 2006 10:17 PM
NOV 29, 2006 10:31 PM
I find it amusing that the Americans seem to be the least vitriolic about this particular portion of Canadian politics. We have angry Canadian anglophones going off about how Quebecers are all leeches and don't contribute anything, and then there are Americans speaking truth about just how cool (and hot) Quebecers (especially those from Montréal) can be... Ontarians seem to think they're the only Canadians, and Albertans think they're the shit because they're sitting on top of oil.* Canada would not be Canada without Quebec, official multiculturalism, and the French language -- without these things, it would truly be a backwoods mimic of the United States.
The term "nation" is essentially subjectively defined by members of that group and there's little else that others can do about it. Some define nation ethnically and culturally, others use the term nation as a replacement for state or country. They are not the same things... A country can have many nations within it, but it can also be it's own country.
Personally, I don't want Canada considered as "one nation" of people. Our acceptance (or rather tolerance) of diversity is one of our greatest strengths. There are too many great communities out there to lose it in a morass of "The Tragically Hip, Beer, Hockey and Tim Hortons."** Sure, they're all good to great things, but I wouldn't want to lose the flavour that an acceptance of diversity brings.
* A retarded monkey could run Alberta's economy with a surplus. Oil is like winning the lottery. I really wish some of the Albertans I know would stop pretending they're the be-all and end-all because they have money. I know a lot of idiots who have money, and guess what, they're still idiots.
** Not to say anything against these four corners of Canadian culture, but there's so much more out there.
d20
as a fun side note: there's fossil evidence from south america that makes it appear as though the people we call "native americans" came across the land bridge from asia a while back and killed off the more simian natives of this continent. go murderous homo sapiens go!
True, however, the few thousand years should still amount to something more than being treated like sub-standard immigrants in one's own country. Or else it's all just an absurd and tragic game of King of the Hill.
Besides, need I remind anyone of the Great European Genocide of the Neantherthals?
NOV 29, 2006 10:36 PM
AceT
Portland, OR
April 2004
NOV 30, 2006 07:50 AM
erleichda
Germany
May 2003
NOV 30, 2006 08:07 AM
I thought this was about wild brass music now being made in Canada. You can never have enough of that.
FreakPirate
Canada
November 2002
NOV 28, 2006 11:51 AM