Take it to the Canada Board
 

You see the kind of shit Americans dish out? They don't even want to talk about Canadians.

Canadianist Fuck.

How many lynchings?

Trick question - I'm not falling for this one. There are no governors in Canada - they're premiers.

Unless you count the governor-general, Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson, who is Chinese.

Not sure what you mean by governor, but the former lieutenant-gov of Ontario, Lincoln Alexander, is black. Adrienne Clarkson, a woman of Asian descent, is the Governor-General. 71 out of 191 MPs are minorities. I looked up the MP number but the others are off the top of my head.

Anyhoo, this is getting boring.

Take it to the Canada Board
 

We have a lot of Canadians in my office. They are the butt of all office jokes, but they don't seem to care as long as their Molson is cold.

That is simply wrong. More diversity north of the border? You may try and argue that race relations are more harmonious, but Canada is not as diverse as the US. White make up 69% of the US population where whites make up 90% of the Canadian population. As far as the Anglos and the French: they are the same race and they don't get along. You do not see inner racial problems (problems between people of the same race) like this is America. True, we have a common language but in Swizerland four different language groups of caucasians seem to get along fine.

The reform party in Canada is an openly racist party, and it does rather well in national elections. Is there such a counterpart in the U.S?

We have many mayors, congressman etc. of racial minorities. Where else does that exist. Brazil is the only other large country that I can think of that is more diverse than the US. However, even though Mulattos and Black make up more the fifty percent of the population, it is hard to find any blacks in the upper income brackets, and they certainly don't get elected very much.

You've been more than patient. And I thought it was quite restrained of you not to throw the imbecilic "Let's Annex Mexico" idea of his back in his face when he brought up the Quebec/Rest of Canada rift.

You Canadians are too gosh darned nice!

Hmm. Reform party has not existed for a number of years. When it did exist, it was not "openly racist." That is just complete and utter bullshit.

And who says "Mulatto"?

We have conflicting facts here. Canada is not made up of 26% of non-white. Your study must be including italians and portugese etc.

The Study Area was urban. Includes South Asians, Chinese, etc.; and, yes, Toronto and Montreal are 26% non-white. And to correct my stats, the 26% is visible minorities, i.e., non-whites other than aboriginals; there is a higher number of minorities, which would include all hispanic, Italian, etc.

Dude, time to call it quits, before you bore/offend all the attractive female posters. Because if they go, you lose Clubbie, too.

I will let it go: two points. Here is an article that, although I disagree with some if its points, does point out the racial problems in Canada:

http://zena.secureforum.com/Znet/zma...ec94austin.htm

On the subject of the Reform Party, I belive the term racist is thrown around way to much. Having said that, part of the reform partys platform is reducing non-white and non-european immigrations. That smacks of racism in my book. The reform party has been replaced by the conservative party which is still a significant party in Canda:

http://www.lilithgallery.com/article...nspectrum.html

Boring? I think not. Look what happens if we let down our guard!!

Quebec Separating
 

I don't doubt that you are right, but what happens if Quebec has another one of those referendums and they vote to split off. Do those votes have any legal significance or are they just a show of popular will. Would a yes vote on a referendum actually do anything?

Except where the fucking Irish are concerned.

My Irish-French-Canadian Great Grandmother would have said, fucking Irish, yeh. After eleven with me he maws that American hussy and what, eight more? Yeh, he was a fuckin Irishman sure.

Great Grandpa was a legend.

schools
 

It seems like an excessively blunt tool to solve a more sophisticated problem. I have no idea whether 65% is the right number to pick, but if the problem is that school boards are inclined to spend money on their own administrative apparatus instead of teachers, then we need to find a better way to run school boards. The people who complain most about government waste are usually complaining about the federal government, but I have no problem believing that local government has a lot of waste going on.

eta:

It occurs to me that this sounds like sort of government regulation that you can't abide in other contexts. If the mechanisms for controlling school-board spending are broken, let's fix then, instead of dictating a certain result in this way.

schools
 

Not so sophisticated a problem in my mind; administrators always beget administrators. I personally would like to see teacher run schools, with almost no administration.

BUT, what does that 39% administration number include -- if it includes special ed, reading support services, continuing teacher education, and the various special areas like art, music and sports, or if it includes all building maintenance costs (a very big number), the cuts have a very different meaning.

For example, if the budget really breaks down 61% full time regular teaching staff, 8% special staff, 9% pure administration, and 22% building costs, then cutting 4% is going to be pretty tough since 22% of the costs are fixed. I may still want to take a big ax to admin to benefit teaching, but I probably can't cut 50% of the admin budget. Even if I fire all the principals and superintendents, I'm going to need to pay the teachers something to administer the place, because we aren't going to get them to do both admin and a totally full teaching load without compensation.

And how do we make sure the cut admin stuff stays in the school for teaching?

I don't get it.
 

So what was the alternative?

I don't get it.
 

Emma's War just arrived today from Amazon.com. It better be good, or I may have to go dinasaur hunting.

Reparations now, muthafucka!

http://www.celticdragonpubco.com/shop/nina2cd.jpg

How is your sig line any different than nfh's posts? except that no one could possibly care about your "news." Do you spend much time updating it? Better you should just masturbate yourself.

W A T E R
 

Pat Buchanan is really really really out there. And I think he is moving farther away all the time.

aV

Quebec Separating
 

After the referendum when the yes vote came close, and there was much hand-wringing, I think the answer was that a yes vote does have legal significance. Of course, you will remember in that case that a drunken M. Parizeau blamed the "no" victory on "money and the ethnic vote." Which shows that he is no beacon of tolerance, but also arguably indicates that Quebec is not a monolithic french society and has a significant minority presence.

Quebec Separating
 

that's where the terrorists live mostly.

Quebec Separating
 

Bien sur, in Terroristville (spelled the same in both French and English!).

Quebec Separating
 

So if it had been a yes vote what would have happened? You said that there was all sorts of legal issues with the indiginous tribes. In addition, isn't Quebec completely intertwined with the rest of Canda through the health system and every other federal institutions. So the idea of succession is a little bit unrealistic. So what were the separatists planning if they won the referendum?

Heh
 

The Minutemen are pussies and aren't welcome in Texas. These assholes make me root for drug runners.

Quebec Separating
 

Actually, in a secession, the legal rights of the native tribes might well be completely wiped out. The reason they are so anti-secession is that the Quebec government has been pretty cavalier about native lands - they tend to turn them into dams and parks - while the Canadian government is protective of them. Most of the protections available to the native tribes are found in the Constitution, and a secession would remove that doc as the prime mover of the new land.

But, they still haven't even figured out what a "winning" vote means. The Canadian SC decided that "the government" is the entity that must decide whether a majority or a supermajority is required to secede - and so the Quebec goverment said, 51%, and the Canadian (fed?) government said, "we're not sure, but it's higher than that, we think, but ask again later", and then, in a fit of humor, titled that the Clarity Act.

Heh
 

Don't worry, you'll still get your drugs. The Minutemen are talking about Texas' northern border.

Did you spend much time writing this pointless post? Better you should just blow me.

Quebec Separating
 

My understanding is that the secessionists have put it about that Quebecers would keep their Canadian citizenship, the Canadian dollar, their Canadian pension and health benefits, and the province would remain part of NAFTA in the event of secession. The Can. (and re: NAFTA, US) gov'ts have said, basically, um, no, and you get to pay your portion of the national debt, and have to purchase all federal buildings, infrastructure & land you take with you. You are right that it is a stupid idea that wouldn't work. Doesn't mean they won't still vote for it. Frankly, if they were sane they wouldn't even vote for it - every time they do businesses flee Montreal, not wanting to risk being stuck in what would effectively become an indebted north-American banana republic.

Re: First Nations (I do like that name) land issues, the various indigenous tribes, not anxious to be stuck in a separate country with Francophone Canadians, have basically been arguing "If anyone has a claim to be a "unique culture" and therefore have special rights, it ain't you assholes, so if secession is OK for you, then secession is not only OK generally but must be OK for us, and we can and will secede from you in turn." Which would potentially remove a huge amount of the land area (including much of the hydro power generation). Alternatively, I've heard some suggestions that Quebec, on seceeding, would only be entitled to take historically independent Quebec lands and would have to return all lands granted to the province by the central government - which would reduce Quebec to a few-mile wide strip along the St. Lawrence from Montreal to Quebec City (most of what is now Quebec was, I believe, Hudson's Bay Company land).

As per the legal issues, my understanding is that the gov'ts position is that a one-province referendum has no legal effect, and it would require a national referendum to effectively allow Quebec to secede. That's based on absolutely no independent knowledge, but I was told the Can. Sup. Ct. had a ruling to that effect last time there was a vote.

Other side of the Mississippi, but not as far as CA. You still find a frontier/pioneer mentality out West: they don't care if you're male, female, white, black, yellow or blue, so long as you pull your own weight and don't fuck up anyone else. There is definitely more widespread bias against hispanics out there, but I've had rather a large number of black and asian friends who have lived both here and out there insist that the difference between living somewhere "very tolerant" of minorities and living somewhere people just don't give a shit at all is like night and day.

I don't think it can be attributed to comparable lily-whiteness, either (i.e.: the critical mass of visible minorities isn't high enough to trigger an alergic reaction). At least one of the places I lived has a quite (surprisingly) large visible minority population and the observation held true.

But not red.

Going for the hat trick:

no comment from the Peanut Gallery on the leak (subsequently denied) in the online version of the People's Daily that the yuan would be revalued sometime next week?

From what I've heard that would take even less time.

Better dead than red.
 

That goes to the "so long as you aren't fucking up other people" point.

Damn commies.

BR(Damn Ty, fucking up my hat trick)C

I thought it hilarious that an inexperienced (in the field) reporter's mistranslated musings could have such a cataclysmic effect on the markets. And also, that the PD, long thought of as the official organ, now vets its stories just like the LAT.

So, you think it was actually a mistranslation rather than intentional?

I do - mostly because I read the interview with the reporter somewhere in a blog or news story this morning. (Can't remember where.) Sounded shocked, and probably wondering about job security issues.

Reasons
to Fear Canada.
BY SEAN CARMAN

- - - -

Ninety percent of population is massed within 100 miles of northern American border.

Seems not to mind that one of its provinces has turned almost entirely French.

Excessive politeness only makes sense as cover for something truly sinister. But what?

Citizens seem strangely impervious to cold.

Decriminalization of marijuana and acceptance of gay marriage without corresponding collapse of social institutions indicate Canada may, in fact, be indestructible.

Has infiltrated entertainment industry with singers, actors, and comedians practically indistinguishable from their American counterparts.

Consistently stays just below cultural radar yet never quite disappears.

Parliamentary government and common-law judiciary appear to function acceptably yet remain completely inscrutable.

Never had a "disco phase."

Seemingly endless supply of timber, donuts, and Scotch-plaid hats with earflaps.

Keeps insisting it "has no designs on America" and "only wants peace."

Plays a mean game of pond hockey.

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/lists/20SeanCarman.html