Hey folks
A couple of times I’ve heard the refrain “If Bush wins I’m moving to Canada.” I know that mostly this is just an expression of dislike for Bush – but it bugs me anyway.
Picture yourself in a crowded room. There is a madman right beside you and he picks up a loaded gun from the floor. Do you run, or try to get the gun away from him?
Bush is the madman. The US is the gun. Leaving for Canada is the equivalent of running for the door without doing anything to stop him. America is too powerful and too important to leave to the right-wing extreme.
Regardless of next Tuesday, I plan to stay.
I agree; the worst is that he would be there for four more years (maybe I am too optimistic? Is there a loophole, like “during wartime”? Maybe he is provoking enough animosity to…)
ugh.
I’ll stay either way, of course, but that doesn’t mean I’ll be happy about it.
Canada, ha! they all talk funny up there.
I’m guilty of uttering those words myself (sometimes substituting “Sweden” for “Canada”), but I see your point and you’ve inspired me to stay and fight the good fight against the right.
Besides, it’s too cold in either of those places for me anyway.
Yurk…I was just glumly pondering how much, if Bush wins, 2005 will be like 1965. And now this blog comment. Spooky.
We may talk funny, but we can say the words ‘flu shot’ just fine. Heck, we can even say ‘universal medicare’ too. Of coruse, we can also say ‘provincial-federal dispute’.
It still looks very close, but personally, I am getting used to the idea that US foreign policy will be deranged for the next 4 years, US government spending will remain out of control, and the Canadian dollar will reach parity with the US. When Bush took office, the USD was worth over C$1.50, it is now at $1.20. Similar pattern for the Euro. How the heck have the Democrats failed to hold Bush responsible for this massive deterioration of American wealth?
I wonder if when the dust settles, there will be reflections on the GOTV efforts in favour of but not affiliated with the Deomocratic party. It would seem very likely that the difficulties of coordination would cost the Dems a swing state, and quite possibly the election. Both ‘sides’ have about the same amount of money, but the Republicans would appear to have superior coordination. It would be horribly ironic if the Nader effect was inadvertently replicated at the level of the organizations isntead of the ballot box.
One of us has a proposal….
http://members.shaw.ca/ianking/junk/usa.jpg