# Ask an American...



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Here's a thread for us Canucks to ask our American ehMacers questions about America... Chas_M and Miss Gulch, please feel free to answer.

My first question:

Why is there no federal electoral standard/commission in the U.S. (like Elections Canada)?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

gmark2000, you could also ask the ehMacLanders who are Americans and Canadians.

The FEC is what you might want to look at re your questions.

Federal Election Commission Home Page


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Gary, why did you think there wasn't one?


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Some states have advance voting today and some don't. Some states use lever ballot machines, some use electronic voting etc... There were huge lines to vote. 

There doesn't seem to be homogeneity in standards. The Canadian election is still using paper ballots and there's a fairly straightforward voter registration. I didn't think there were huge lines to vote etc...


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

gmark2000 said:


> Some states have advance voting today and some don't. Some states use lever ballot machines, some use electronic voting etc... There were huge lines to vote.
> 
> There doesn't seem to be homogeneity in standards. The Canadian election is still using paper ballots and there's a fairly straightforward voter registration. I didn't think there were huge lines to vote etc...


The US election system is a complete mess. It's unreliable and can't actually be accurately verified the way it's currently set up.

The best thing that the future Democratic controlled Congress could do for their country would be to force a change that takes the control out of state's hands with their partisan-controlled commissions and sets up a completely non-partisan Election Commission that is committed to running clean and verifiable elections.

It would be more difficult to use paper ballots because of the number election races, candidates and referendums that people have to vote on. It can be done but slows down the counting. That's why there is such a push for touch-screen and other computer systems. Of course that system is ridiculously insecure.

They could simplify their elections to not do so much on one single day, but short of that optical scanners of paper ballots can be a good solution, as long as there are random checks of the systems and available hand recounts. This is where a non-partisan national commission would help.

Oh ... sorry, ... I'm not an American. But, I lived there for a while, though. And ... I have some American friends and relatives. OK, I'll shut up now.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

My question for the resident USians is:

Are you doing everything possible to ensure that everyone you know will go to the polls and throw the Republicans out on their arses?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Are you doing everything possible to ensure that everyone you know will go to the polls and throw the Republicans out on their arses?" Yes. I have voted for Obama in Georgia, as has my son. I have also convinced five people teaching here at Memorial whom I know were either going to vote for McCain or not vote in their home states. They are now have all voted for Obama in their home states, two of which are "battleground states". 

So, I did my part.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I have a similar charge to the American people: Vote Obama because his brand of socialism is more profound than the one offered by McCain.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

One of the big differences is that the Canadian federal elections are for a single MP whose job is to represent the views of his party or the government to the voters. An MP who attempts to represent the views of his constituents to the party will find himself kicked out of said party. Not voting in Canada is a very clear vote in itself, the vote being "NONE OF THE ABOVE". In the most recent election "NONE OF THE ABOVE" got a lot more votes than Herr Harper.

US elections are for President, US Senator, Congressman, State senators and representatives. Perhaps state attorneys and judges. Also county commisioners, sheriffs, judges, dogcatchers and in my state a gaggle of statewide ballot issues. An unprepared voter will spend a lot of time in the booth although the line-up will usually give him enough time to sort out the options.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> My question for the resident USians is:
> 
> Are you doing everything possible to ensure that everyone you know will go to the polls and throw the Republicans out on their arses?


I hope that doesn't backfire on you GA. Hopefully not as badly as your attempts to get us to toss the Conservative government out on their arses.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Note: Gratuitous, let's leave the political sparring to the temporary Politics side-forum.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: "Why do Americans call soft drinks "soda" versus Canadians "pop"?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

FWIW, some Canadians use neither term. I call them soft drinks and have done so for over 50 years.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

SINC said:


> I hope that doesn't backfire on you GA. Hopefully not as badly as your attempts to get us to toss the Conservative government out on their arses.


Let me translate that from SINC-ese.

Nyah-nyah, nyah-nyah, nyah, nyah!!









* * * * * *

Well, I had no real hope that Harper would get thrown out, but I was grateful that Canadians prevented him from getting his mitts on majority power. As far as the US election, I think the Democrats chances are better. Even if McCain wins, the House and Senate as well as many other down-ticket races are looking to go blue this time.

Here's a non-political question fer the Yanks:

Why would someone have a US tourist in Vancouver asking if the prices written down are in US dollars or expecting to get their change back from US currency in US money? I wouldn't ask if it was an isolated incident, but it's very, very common. Tourists from anywhere else in the world never do this.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Q4A: "Why do Americans call soft drinks "soda" versus Canadians "pop"?" People in New York City call it soda while those in upstate New York call it "pop". A pop in New York City is ice cream on a stick.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I have a similar charge to the American people: Vote Obama because his brand of socialism is more profound than the one offered by McCain." True, Macfury, and Obama's socialism is the kind that FDR brought to the US with the New Deal.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I hope that doesn't backfire on you GA. Hopefully not as badly as your attempts to get us to toss the Conservative government out on their arses." Georgia is the only pink state in the US south. We shall see.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr.G. said:


> "I have a similar charge to the American people: Vote Obama because his brand of socialism is more profound than the one offered by McCain." True, Macfury, and Obama's socialism is the kind that FDR brought to the US with the New Deal.


Obama's socialism, like McCain's, brought $700 billion to Wall Street with nary a string attached. Of course it helped ordinary Americans who aren't seeing a penny of it because the banks are holding it in reserve. This is the single largest act of traitorous corporate welfare ever conceived and both McCain and Obama approve of it.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

HowEver said:


> Did you call them something else before that time?
> 
> 
> .


A typical nitpicking response deserves a simple reply.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Obama's socialism, like McCain's, brought $700 billion to Wall Street with nary a string attached. Of course it helped ordinary Americans who aren't seeing a penny of it because the banks are holding it in reserve. This is the single largest act of traitorous corporate welfare ever conceived and both McCain and Obama approve of it." Macfury, I am not sure if I would not have voted with Obama and McCain on this "bailout", although I would not have wanted to in the final analysis. I agree that the people of the US, who are picking up the tab, have not really benefitted yet. We shall see.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Dr. G: To me this is the perfect example of government in bed with business and a perfect illustration why this relationship can't be trusted. Church and state? Business and state is bad enough!! This is the transfer of $700 billion to people in thick with both parties--with the grudging approval of the taxpayer. I believe that both parties were aware that some sort of meltdown was coming and were both prepared to make this transfer of taxpayer dollars to bankers. The notion that this was an "emergency" prevented the type of scrutiny such a transfer would require. Instead we have vague assurances and billions in pork tacked onto the bill.

If this is a failure of regulation (I don't believe it is, because regulations were already in place to control this eventuality) then where are the emergency banking regulations that are supposed to prevent this from happening again?

How about, instead of handing $5,000 per taxpaying American to the banks, the money was given to taxpaying Americans with the proviso that it MUST be used to either purchase bank shares or be placed in a savings account for the period of one year?


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Dr. G: To me this is the perfect example of government in bed with business and a perfect illustration why this relatinship can't be trusted. Church and state? Business and state is bad enough!! This is the transfer of $700 billion to people in thick with both parties--with the grudging approval of the taxpayer. I believe that both parties were aware that some sort of meltdown was coming and were both prepared to make this transfer of taxpayer dollars to bankers. The notion that this was an "emergency" prevented the type of scrutiny such a transfer would require. Instead we have vague assurances and billions in pork tacked onto the bill.
> 
> If this is a failure of regulation (I don't believe it is, because regulations were already in place to control this eventuality) then where are the emergency banking regulations that are supposed to prevent this from happening again?


CBC Radio Toronto reported today at 8:21 that Democratcs have 64% of the pre-registration votes and the Republicans have 22%. What does this mean Dr.G? How does this pre register system work? Is this good or not all so good news?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Adrian. said:


> CBC Radio Toronto reported today at 8:21 that Democratcs have 64% of the pre-registration votes and the Republicans have 22%. What does this mean Dr.G? How does this pre register system work? Is this good or not all so good news?


It's just an advance poll that--only in some states--will record whether the early voter was a Democrat or Republican. It does not count votes. The numbers have no bearing on the election, since Republicans traditionally vote on the day of the election.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> My first question:
> 
> Why is there no federal electoral standard/commission in the U.S. (like Elections Canada)?


Great question.

The answer is "a misguided view on states' rights."

There are some things the federal government SHOULD handle, and anything that is meant to be completely uniform across the country should be at the top of that list. So "federal elections" should be handled by the federal government.

Back in the bad old days, northern states wanted everyone to vote, while southern states wanted only white people to be able to vote. Compromise: you have to allow every legitimate voter to vote, but you southern states can (wink wink) decide how you enforce and implement that law yourselves.

Thus, today we have voter suppression on a wide scale by Republicans. They are gaming the system THEY created (see also "gerrymandering").


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Macfury said:


> It's just an advance poll that--only in some states--will record whether the early voter was a Democrat or Republican. It does not count votes. The numbers have no bearing on the election, since Republicans traditionally vote on the day of the election.


Correction: high numbers of advance voters (and how they vote) WILL have some bearing on the election. How much is not yet clear, but a vote is a vote, and thus (assuming they're counted) will have SOME bearing on the outcome.

PS. Your statement "Republicans traditionally vote on the day" may be broadly true, but in Florida, for example, it doesn't hold up. Most Republicans are elderly and take huge advantage of the absentee ballot system, even when they aren't actually going to be absent. It's "vote by mail" as far as they are concerned.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas-m: I was indicating that the number of registered voters who vote in advance polls is not an indication of the final results. Republicans are more greatly represented in mail-in ballots or in overseas military ballots, but these are not included in the numbers of registered voters who have voted in those states where registered voter affiliations are counted at advance polls.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: What happens in a 911 medical emergency? Are trauma patients taken to the nearest hospital or do paramedics search the patients wallet for health coverage?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"CBC Radio Toronto reported today at 8:21 that Democratcs have 64% of the pre-registration votes and the Republicans have 22%. What does this mean Dr.G? How does this pre register system work? Is this good or not all so good news?" Adrian, in the US, in order to vote in most primaries on a national, state or local level, you have to be registered with a party (e.g., Dem, Rep, Indep, etc). If I was in the State of Georgia and wanted to vote early, I would go in to the local place of voting. There, they would see that I was a registered Democrat. Then, I could vote for whomever I wanted to in a secret ballot. I could vote for Obama (which I did by absentee ballot), or for McCain, Nader, Barr, et al, all of whom were on the GA ballot for president. 

Then, I would be counted as a Dem who voted. The fact that so many Dems are voting early is an indication of the concern over some polling districts running out of ballots. Amazingly, over the past two presidential elections, this has happened 95% of the time where there were heavily Democratic voters. As well, oftentimes this is a paper ballot and leaves a trail. Thus, there is some evidence that I voted for Obama, unlike what is happening with the voting computers in a district in Ohio where you push Obama and McCain's name lights up, even after repeated attempts. When Fox news shows this as a news item and is concerned, then you know this is not an isolated news item re one person.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

No tongue in cheek either - already happening



> Three Putnam County voters say electronic voting machines changed their votes from Democrats to Republicans when they cast early ballots last week.
> 
> This is the second West Virginia county where voters have reported this problem. Last week, three voters in Jackson County told The Charleston Gazette their electronic vote for “Barack Obama” kept flipping to “John McCain”.
> 
> ...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> One of the big differences is that the Canadian federal elections are for a single MP whose job is to represent the views of his party or the government to the voters. An MP who attempts to represent the views of his constituents to the party will find himself kicked out of said party.


You don't know what you are talking about. Having worked on the Hill for years I know that what you say is not true. MPs lobby their respective caucuses all the time on behalf of their constituents specifically to address issues and positions held regarding legislation. In the end it is up to the Minister (or Critic in the case of the Opposition) to weigh those opinions and representations and what to do with them, i.e. amendments etc.

It is true that in the case of most Government legislation (not Private Members Bills which are almost always free votes) once Cabinet has determined a position backbenchers are Whipped to vote a certain way, this is true of Government and Opposition MPs. I agree that the Whip is anti-democratic, but it is a function of the Parliamentary party system where a Government can be brought down as a matter of confidence just because a Government Bill does or does not pass.

In my estimation, the only Bill that should represent a matter of confidence should be the budget and as in the US, if the budget is not passed, it keeps going back for amendments until it finally passes.

However all that being said your statement "An MP who attempts to represent the views of his constituents to the party will find himself kicked out of said party." is completely untrue.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

This is a quote from the blog "The Progressive Curmudgeon". I've been reading this guy's post almost every day and like him because I agree with him - that doesn't necessarily make either of us right  



> Even if your name isn’t purged and you aren’t challenged at your voting place, Kennedy notes your vote may still not count. The US Commission on Civil Rights investigated some of the 2000 returns from Florida and found that African-Americans were 10 times more likely than whites to have their ballots rejected, a ratio that holds nationwide, Kennedy reports in his Rolling Stone article.


So my question for the Americans is: *how can they single out and reject votes by certain people? *

Here in Canada, they hand me a folded ballot, I go behind the screen and mark it, fold it and go back to the desk where they rip off a strip and hand it back to me so I can slide it into the box. When the votes get counted, they don't know which one is mine - or have I missed a step. Do our ballots have serial numbers or something? Do American ballots have serial numbers?

Please enlighten me.

Margaret


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

screature said:


> ...
> 
> However all that being said your statement "An MP who attempts to represent the views of his constituents to the party will find himself kicked out of said party." is completely untrue.


Unless he has the courage to do it in parliament. Harpo did promise to change this but when push came to shove, he prefers and continues to follow the good old back room approach. The united front BS is simply a fear that openly debating the merits of an issue is a sign of weakness. The truth is constituents deserve to know where their individual MP stands on an issue not just the parties stand.beejacon As an example an MP that believes wire tapping is immoral has an obligation to say so publicly and to vote that way even if his party is pushing a bill to tap all Canadians phones and emails.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> Unless he has the courage to do it in parliament. Harpo did promise to change this but when push came to shove, he prefers and continues to follow the good old back room approach. The united front BS is simply a fear that openly debating the merits of an issue is a sign of weakness. The truth is constituents deserve to know where their individual MP stands on an issue not just the parties stand.beejacon As an example an MP that believes wire tapping is immoral has an obligation to say so publicly and to vote that way even if his party is pushing a bill to tap all Canadians phones and emails.


No this is the practice of ALL parties. MPs make representations in their Caucus meetings to discuss the concerns of their constituents regarding legislation. NO repeat NO MP would do it in the House and blindside their own party. The place to bring up such concerns IS in Caucus (what you call back room) it is the nature of a whipped parliamentary democracy. Until there is significant (legislative, which is near impossible in a minority parliament on such matters) Parliamentary reform this IS and will remain the lay of the land, if you think otherwise you are just naive and know nothing of how Parliament works. beejacon


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Did I stumble into the wrong thread? I thought this was "Ask and American" not some tired old thread where two or three long-winded politico wannabees snipe at each other.

Can we get back to asking our American neighbours questions about there system so we can better understand it?

I asked what I thought was a good question, but I'm afraid the page will roll over before any of our friends get to read it.

Thanks, Margaret


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

winwintoo said:


> *How can they single out and reject votes by certain people? *


I'm really interested in this question too!

I've always had a gut feeling that the US is much less democratic then it believes itself to be and this question cuts to the heart of that feeling.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Margaret, I read the article in Rolling Stone and then went to the "Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election" Report.

Thus, this estimate was based on a statistical analysis. Hope this helps.

"This disenfranchisement of Florida voters fell most harshly on the shoulders of African Americans. Statewide, based on county-level statistical estimates, African American voters were nearly 10 times more likely than white voters to have their ballots rejected in the November 2000 election. 

These figures are based on a complex statistical analysis of statewide estimates using county-level data. The analysis is more fully presented in a report prepared by Dr. Allan Lichtman."

Block the Vote : Rolling Stone

Chapter 9: Findings and Recommendations


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

Oh, I think I get the picture now. Less voting machines, ballots etc for those counties with a higher non-white population. Then a partisan vote verification system that knows where the votes were cast and sets different standards for votes by location. 

Ugly... Really ugly.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Once the ballot is in the box, or the lever has been pulled or however they do it, how do they know which ballot was submitted by a white person or a (dash)-American? It says that "ballots" are rejected. 

I read most of the Rolling Stone article too and some of the reasons for rejecting voter registrations are laughable. How can they do that and call themselves a democracy?

This is the country that thinks it can oversee elections in other parts of the world? Hah.

I'm beginning to wish I hadn't taken an interest in this election - I was happy being ignorant.

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Margaret, it was a statistical consideration. If a population in a district is 75% African American, and 100 ballots were rejected, statistically speaking, it is assumed that 75% of these ballots were cast by African Americans. Thus, if this demographic votes for Democrats in certain states 90% of the time, you can see how the percentage of 60% was arrived at in the 2000 election.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

I don't remember any of my third year Poli-Sci class on the American political system (Dr. Hoberg) except for the fact the federalism in the United States was supposed to give more power to the individual states but the U.S. Federal government has more power instead. Conversely, at confederation, Canada was to have more power to the federal government but instead the provinces became more powerful than federal government.

However, seeing this US electoral system, it really seems F***ed-up compared to Canada.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

gmark, those powers which are not expressively given to the federal government are reserved for the states. The federal government is a balance between the presidency, the Congress and the Supreme Court. This system of "checks and balances", in theory, was very wise.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Dr.G. said:


> Margaret, it was a statistical consideration. If a population in a district is 75% African American, and 100 ballots were rejected, statistically speaking, it is assumed that 75% of these ballots were cast by African Americans. Thus, if this demographic votes for Democrats in certain states 90% of the time, you can see how the percentage of 60% was arrived at in the 2000 election.


Ah, now I see. I was taking the statement literally and thought it meant that someone was snatching the actual ballots cast by African Americans and destroying them or rejecting them. 

The registration system and the purging of voters lists seems pretty broken though.

Margaret


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> Did I stumble into the wrong thread? I thought this was "Ask and American" not some tired old thread where two or three long-winded politico wannabees snipe at each other.
> 
> Can we get back to asking our American neighbours questions about there system so we can better understand it?
> 
> ...


Fair enough Margaret, your thread went astray for a bit, however it doesn't give you the right to refer to people as long-winded politico wannabees. I for one actually have years of experience working at the House of Commons. I am no politico wannabee, I actually have been in the trenches, unlike the rest of the armchair combatants here, so while I appreciate your frustration with the tangent your thread took, I take greater exception to your flippant little bit of name calling and branding.

Yours is not the first nor will be the last thread to take a little meander away from the topic that was originally posted. If you can't handle it with a little more dignity and poise then I suggest you might want to consider not starting threads at all.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

BTW the so called ACORN scandal revolves around people being paid to get voters to register. They pick a name like Micky Mouse and submit the registration and collect their "bounty". Acorn knows they are phony but are required by law to submit them to the state. Usually they attach a note stating that certain applications are suspect. the state than purges those from the list. It is actually ACORN that is being defrauded, not at all the way McCain tries to portray it.


----------



## titans88 (Oct 3, 2007)

This thread reminds me of a Chappelle Show segment called, "Ask a Black Dude" with Paul Mooney, yet its not nearly as funny.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

screature said:


> Fair enough Margaret, your thread went astray for a bit, however it doesn't give you the right to refer to people as long-winded politico wannabees. I for one actually have years of experience working at the House of Commons. I am no politico wannabee, I actually have been in the trenches, unlike the rest of the armchair combatants here, so while I appreciate your frustration with the tangent your thread took, I take greater exception to your flippant little bit of name calling and branding.
> 
> Yours is not the first nor will be the last thread to take a little meander away from the topic that was originally posted. If you can't handle it with a little more dignity and poise then I suggest you might want to consider not starting threads at all.


Well, I didn't start the thread, I just saw it as an opportunity to get an answer to a question about US politics that has bothered me for some time.

And I get it. You can characterize me but I can't characterize you based on your performance. Hmmmmm.

Margaret


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: "Why do Americans call soft drinks "soda" versus Canadians "pop"?


Actually, this particular terminology varies around the country.










As you can see, there are parts of the country where the term "pop" is used. I had a former GF from Pittsburgh who used that term.

Having lived in England, I too (like SINC) used to use the term "soft drinks," and I still do when speaking of them generically (of the "still" or "sparkling" variety) -- but when referring to them specifically, I call it "soda" probably from my years in south Florida.

I have started to learn to correct myself now that I'm here in BC, and use the term "pop" most of the time. I never hear any of the natives refer to it as anything BUT "pop."


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Macfury said:


> chas-m: I was indicating that the number of registered voters who vote in advance polls is not an indication of the final results. Republicans are more greatly represented in mail-in ballots or in overseas military ballots, but these are not included in the numbers of registered voters who have voted in those states where registered voter affiliations are counted at advance polls.


Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: What happens in a 911 medical emergency? Are trauma patients taken to the nearest hospital or do paramedics search the patients wallet for health coverage?


Another great question.

The answer -- and I ashamed to type this, but it's the truth -- is "depends on what colour you are."

If you're white (or blue by this point), you're taken to the nearest hospital and emergency work is done on the assumption that you (or your health insurance provider) will pay them later. This often results in bankruptcy (70% of all personal bankruptcy in the US), even for people who have insurance, since the insurance company only pays at their discretion. If they fail to pay the whole bill, the balance is to be paid by you. Even a brief hospital stay in the US can rack up tens of thousands of dollars in charges you will be responsible for.

If you're brown, you will be taken to *a* hospital, but not necessarily the nearest one. You will be taken to the local "charity" hospital that will do the emergency work and attempt to get the money from you later, or try to get the government to cover it via Medicaid/Medicare. You will probably get the same quality INITIAL care as a white person, but definitely WON'T get the same quality of follow-up care once the immediate crisis has passed. In some well-documented cases, you will get dumped out on the street after the initial crisis has passed if it's obvious you have no money.

I strongly urge any Canadian travelling to the US to carry some kind of paid health insurance with them for the duration of their trip. Your government won't pay for you when you're in the US, and nobody will treat a foreigner without health insurance (unless you're obviously rich).

It's a very sad picture, but it's true.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> So my question for the Americans is: *how can they single out and reject votes by certain people? *


They don't really (apart from absentee ballots) -- but party leaders as well as election officials have electoral maps that show where concentrations of minority voters live, since they tend to be packed together. In my old city of Orlando, any vote from Eatonville was a black voter, and was cast in a district with a very small budget for the election. Consequently, votes from these areas were ALWAYS challenged, and most discarded for the wildest of technical excuses.

This is called "voter suppression" and "disenfranchisement" and it is widespread. But because it is almost exclusively used against black districts (since they vote nearly 100% Democratic), nobody in a Republican administration, a Republican-politicised Justice Department or a Republican-dominated Congress cares.

I think you will find that these "suspicious e-voting error" stories will exclusively originate in districts that are reliably Democratic but are supervised by Republican election officials.

Still, more than 50 years ago some Democrats in Chicago did it too, so that makes it okay for Republicans to commit vote fraud now. That makes sense, right?


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

chas_m said:


> Still, more than 50 years ago some Democrats in Chicago did it too, so that makes it okay for Republicans to commit vote fraud now. That makes sense, right?


Thanks Chas. I have another question. We know about this here is Canada because we're surfing the web and looking for ways to mock our powerful neighbour to the south, but does the average American know that this is going on? Do they think it's right or do they just not care?

Take care, Margaret


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: Isn't it pretentious to call it the World Series when it's not an international championship?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> Thanks Chas. I have another question. We know about this here is Canada because we're surfing the web and looking for ways to mock our powerful neighbour to the south, but does the average American know that this is going on? Do they think it's right or do they just not care?
> 
> Take care, Margaret


Americans are by and large aware that this sort of stuff is going on, though probably not to a huge degree (unless you're a black average American). Some of it is 'willful ignorance' of the problem, hoping it will be fixed by itself at some point in the future.

A lot of it is "emotional overload." Americans are subjected to a *non-stop barrage* of crises, fearmongering and alarmist news* (murder! rape! fire! layoffs! WAR!!) and devices intended to stop you from thinking about the real world altogether (like XBoxes, HDTV and yes, iPods). Faced with this overwhelming amount of things to try and focus on, many people just give up and bury their heads in the sand, focusing only on their own well-being.

_*Seriously -- the CBC at its MOST sensationalistic seems like a cricket match compared to most cities' local newscasts. Canada as a whole comes off as tame as a library on Monday afternoon by comparison._

The trick, which I think the US government really fully realised about 25 years ago, is to make it fairly easy for even the poorest people to have some luxuries -- what's the old line about "bread and circuses?" This keeps them (politically) docile, and uncaring about what's really going on as long as the lights stay on and there's a neverending stream of distraction.

This passivity is what's allowed the US to slip into such a horrible state of affairs, while reform efforts till now met with a huge yawn of inaction from the public. I guess it takes a "tipping point" of great urgency or direct threat to people's well-being to get them off the couch anymore. 

Here's a visual aid to help people understand it better:


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: Isn't it pretentious to call it the World Series when it's not an international championship?


It's our world, you just live in it. 

(theme music)

This has been another episode of ASK AN AMERICAN!! I'm your host, chas_m, saying "so long till next time!"


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I recall that when I first moved to Waycross, Georgia in 1973 to teach, I tried to register to vote. I was told that I had to wait 6 months to prove continued residence in the state. This seemed fair to me. 

So, 6 months later I returned to register once again. They said that I had to pass a literacy test. I was not sure if this was legal, but I figured that I would read aloud for them since with a master's degree, I should have no problems with this task. They asked me to read off the preamble to the US Constitution ("We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.") 

Since I knew this by heart, I read it aloud to them without looking at the page in front of me. They said that I was not reading it to them, and asked me to look at the page and read it for them. I did so. Then, they asked me what it meant. Since I was an American History major in university, I had no problem with this either. 

Then they asked me to prove that I was a citizen of the State of Georgia for six months. I produced a letter addressed to me at my Waycross address from over six months prior to this date. They then said that they needed to get something with my current address from today. I had to walk home, get my mail and bring it back to show them. 

Finally, after explaining to them why I was in Waycross, and why I had moved down from New York City to come to teach in Waycross, they finally let me sign my name and register to vote in the State of Georgia. Democracy triumphs once again.


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

The World Series, I thought, was created by the World Newspaper. Is that right? Then the name makes sense.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> This passivity is what's allowed the US to slip into such a horrible state of affairs, while reform efforts till now met with a huge yawn of inaction from the public. I guess it takes a "tipping point" of great urgency or direct threat to people's well-being to get them off the couch anymore.


Where are the reform efforts. What was the tipping point? Even the guy in the cartoon is upset when the government says it will take his money. It just took a trillion dollars, both parties thought it was a great idea and the populace--by and large--is OK with it.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Where are the reform efforts. What was the tipping point? Even the guy in the cartoon is upset when the government says it will take his money. It just took a trillion dollars, both parties thought it was a great idea and the populace--by and large--is OK with it.


I'm not speaking of the bailout (nor is the comic). I'm speaking of the economic crisis in the first place -- watching your 401K and/or retirement disappear GOT PEOPLE'S ATTENTION. Most Americans are not rich, but the hardworking ones have salted away a few thousand in savings and retirement accounts -- much of which has now evaporated.

Now, suddenly, they're focused on what's going on. And if you think for one second that the bailout bill was popular with the rank and file public, you've really been up north too long. People of all backgrounds are FURIOUS about it, but their investments were LITERALLY held hostage.

It's kind of like the Iraq War -- the majority of Americans are against it and getting more so every day, but we're entrenched, you can't make it unhappen, or even go away quickly. We're stuck, and unhappy.

That explains more about *why* a political unknown with a light (but quality) resume is about to beat an all-American (a POW who dumped his first wife and married a rich lady -- how much more all-American can you get?!) political giant for a job seen by many as the exclusive province of the establishment than all the pretty speeches could ever say.

When you're only allowed two choices, and one of them has explicitly promised to "stay the course," and "the course" SUCKS bad enough, you have to take a chance on the other guy. The war didn't do it, Katrina woke up some people but not enough, the scandals and torture and Constitution-raping didn't do it. Then one day the money's gone, and you tune in the news and see that McBush has picked ANOTHER clear incompetent for an important job, and finally a lot of people said "ENOUGH!"

As for "where are the reform efforts," you'll probably have to wait two years to see them fully. I have a feeling that this newly-empowered voting public is going to make some other history (besides the black guy thing)in the local races in this upcoming election, and the next Congressional midterm will probably be a much more contested event than it has been. A lot of "old hands" in Washington are finally going to get shown the door over the next four years, either by being pushed out or by jumping (record number of Congressional retirements last year, for example -- the early rats beating the traffic off the sinking Republican ship). A generational "clean sweep"* is upon us, I think.

*I don't, of course, mean ALL of the old boys will be gotten rid of -- there's no such thing as a truly "clean sweep" in US politics. But some of the deadwood from both parties will finally be shed, and that's a start.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## titans88 (Oct 3, 2007)

Dr.G. said:


> I recall that when I first moved to Waycross, Georgia in 1973 to teach, I tried to register to vote. I was told that I had to wait 6 months to prove continued residence in the state. This seemed fair to me.
> 
> ..........
> 
> Finally, after explaining to them why I was in Waycross, and why I had moved down from New York City to come to teach in Waycross, they finally let me sign my name and register to vote in the State of Georgia. Democracy triumphs once again.


That is absolutely unbelievable Dr. G. When I was younger, I always looked to countries such as Canada and the USA as the pillars of democracy. We were doing things right, fair and just. The older I grow, the more I witness - I just find it all hard to deal with. Here we are, "fighting for the rights" of people elsewhere, when we aren't even providing those universal rights to the people at home whom we govern.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> I'm not speaking of the bailout (nor is the comic). I'm speaking of the economic crisis in the first place -- watching your 401K and/or retirement disappear GOT PEOPLE'S ATTENTION. Most Americans are not rich, but the hardworking ones have salted away a few thousand in savings and retirement accounts -- much of which has now evaporated.


Is that why this is such a close election?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> Well, I didn't start the thread, I just saw it as an opportunity to get an answer to a question about US politics that has bothered me for some time.
> 
> And I get it. You can characterize me but I can't characterize you based on your performance. Hmmmmm.
> 
> Margaret


No characterization what so ever on my part, please point out where I did. I only said that your comments lacked dignity and poise, you were the one conducting characterizations. 

And what specific "performance" of mine would you be referring to? Conducting a knowledgeable exchange in a thread with another forum member, albeit off topic? Ooohh, I'm sorry to have offended.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Naming aside what is the difference between the New Hampshire Primary and the Iowa Caucus? 

Who is being picked in these elections? The candidates or the delegates to pick the candidates to make the selection at a convention for the presidential run.

If it is delegates how are the delegates divvied up? Especially when someone running drops out?

Is this system fairly strait forward or is the system convoluted by being filtered through the States electoral process?

Are average citizens generally knowledgeable about this process or are citizens specifically knowledgeable about the process in their state only? Or is it a case of “it’s vote day and let’s see now who’s the popular one?”


----------



## Billionairess (Jul 15, 2003)

bgw said:


> The World Series, I thought, was created by the World Newspaper. Is that right? Then the name makes sense.


I'm afraid that's just an urban legend.  

snopes.com: World Series


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Billionairess said:


> I'm afraid that's just an urban legend.
> 
> snopes.com: World Series


Dang. Is anything true?

Margaret


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Is that why this is such a close election?


It's not close. You're relying on national polls. Big mistake.

Even if the popular vote was close (which it isn't), that's not how the US chooses a president.

I'd wager you a pint that I'm right, but you don't live near me and thus couldn't honour the wager.

But I'll be happy to wager a "virtual pint" if you like ... I say Obama will win by at least five percentage points in the popular AND more than 50 electoral votes (which is what really matters).

You in?


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

titans88 said:


> That is absolutely unbelievable Dr. G. When I was younger, I always looked to countries such as Canada and the USA as the pillars of democracy. We were doing things right, fair and just. The older I grow, the more I witness - I just find it all hard to deal with. Here we are, "fighting for the rights" of people elsewhere, when we aren't even providing those universal rights to the people at home whom we govern.


If you look at what the shrub has done to the constitution you will realize that there is a very determined movement to strip the US population of the very rights that are the foundation of the nation.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

BigDL said:


> Naming aside what is the difference between the New Hampshire Primary and the Iowa Caucus?


This is a really good and remarkably perceptive question. I wish Americans knew 1/10th as much about Canadian politics as you guys do about American politics.

A caucus and a primary are two completely different things.

A _caucus_ is a party-organised meeting of only _actual party members_ of a given political party. They conduct a non-binding (but in the case of Iowa, hugely influential) straw poll among the candidates of that party to determine who they prefer as nominee. Most states hold caucuses before primaries, but after Iowa it's mostly a community-building exercise rather than a meaningful vote, though it is often interesting to see who the "hardcore" political population of a given state prefers. These results sometimes give new hope to longshot candidates.

I suppose caucuses are roughly analogous to how Canadians pick their provincial and national party leaders. Ironically, in the US "party leader" is a separate and "regular" job not given to the presidential candidate. The presidential candidate is in most cases the "political" leader of his or her party, but there's someone else who's job it is to actually carry out the mission of the party before, during and after the election. Currently, Dr. Howard Dean is chairman of the Democrats, and Mike Duncan (a very low-profile fellow -- I haven't seen him on a single teevee show this election!) is chairman of the Republicans.

A _primary_ is a state-organised vote among all registered voters, though since you are registered Republican or Democrat or whatever you can only vote for your preferred candidate within your party. I know, this is profoundly dumb. The whole voter-registration and primary system is profoundly dumb. People who choose to register "independent" or third-party aren't even allowed to participate in the primaries!



> Who is being picked in these elections? The candidates or the delegates to pick the candidates to make the selection at a convention for the presidential run.


Delegates to the national convention of each party are chosen by the upper brass of each political party. Democrats have a very stupid and overly-complicated system for this that will likely be scrapped next year -- it had all kinds of "x amount of delegates must be women, x amount must be black" etc and then a second tier of "super" delegates, and you saw how well that worked out.

The Republicans have a much more straightforward system of picking delegates: the state chairpeople pick the most loyal soldiers, who are usually local officials and big donors. Simple.



> If it is delegates how are the delegates divvied up? Especially when someone running drops out?


The number of delegates each state has is generally based on population. Delegates are "pledged" to a candidate based on their share of the vote in that state, but losing candidates traditionally (though not always) "release" their delegates from their pledge and they can support who they want (since they are representatives of the party, they usually though not always support the official party choice).



> Is this system fairly strait forward or is the system convoluted by being filtered through the States electoral process?


For some reason never made clear to me, the Founding Fathers did not trust the general voting population of the time (let's recall that this would have consisted of mostly dirt-poor farmers and a minority of gentried landowners, all white and all male) to make the right decision (or maybe they just sought to avoid a "beauty contest" mentality) and deliberately removed the popular vote away from direct election.

So delegates choose the candidates, and the electoral college chooses the President (influenced by, but NOT beholden to, the popular vote).



> Are average citizens generally knowledgeable about this process or are citizens specifically knowledgeable about the process in their state only? Or is it a case of “it’s vote day and let’s see now who’s the popular one?”


Most Americans are woefully ignorant of the entire process, but the blame does not lie fully on them; it is, in point of fact, ridiculously overcomplicated to keep track of candidates and ballot proposals, register and maintain one's voting rights, and try to drill through the rivers of bull**** on all sides and try to make intelligent decisions about who can best lead the country/state/town (if a typical voter even thinks about it that much -- this is a country where "American Idol" candidates get 4x the number of votes of presidential candidates!). Thus, the intent of the founders has been defeated, and the whole thing is generally a "beauty contest" after all. This is not helped by the candidates and their campaigns, who routinely allow themselves to get distracted (or deliberately distract), participate in ritually humiliating events (Obama bowling comes to mind, kissing babies or participating in skits on SNL too), and generally empower the circus atmosphere that leaves a lot of "low-information voters" (read: morons) unable to distinguish between reality and a "reality show."


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"That is absolutely unbelievable Dr. G. " I was waiting for them to charge me a "poll tax" or require me to register under the "grandfather clause" (i.e., your grandfather had to be a registered voter), both of which were ruled unconstitutional. Lucky me. I did not have any money on me at the time, and my grandfather came from Russia in 1903 when the Czar kicked all Jews out of Russia.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> If you look at what the shrub has done to the constitution you will realize that there is a very determined movement to strip the US population of the very rights that are the foundation of the nation.


Actually -- and ironically -- this election really _is_ a referendum on socialism, at least the American definition of it. But it's the exact _opposite_ of how McCain frames it.

Believe it or not, today's contentious division between Republicans and Democrats all goes back to a common source: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the four-term Democratic president. He implemented a "New Deal" set of programs that focused on three key areas: building infrastructure, government-supported equalisation of basic services across both rural and urban areas, and providing a social safety net for elderly, retired, sick and injured workers. If he had lived out his final term, I'm sure he would have tried to put the US on a "universal health care" system similar to Canada's.

The Republicans of his day -- real conservatives, IMHO -- were staunchly opposed to the fundamental reasoning behind these ideas. They felt (and still feel) this was not the job of the government, or at least not the federal government, to impose standards across states without consideration for the wishes of certain states, and that the private sector or charity (or, failing that, state and local government) should handle most if not all of these jobs. Capitalism demands that people in rural areas, for example, should pay a lot more for (let's say) water/gas/food/electricity than urban dwellers, because it costs more to distribute it to them. If a highway needs to be built, why shouldn't some private company sell shares, build it, charge a toll and profit from it?

As for workers, allowing the government to guarantee some kind of income in their golden years encourages a nanny state; medicare allows people to be lax about safety in the workplace, and social security means you won't save for a rainy day (in the view of the Republicans of the time, a view still widely held) and raise generations who demand ever more benefits. Worse still, having the government so invested in the everyday lives of Americans contradicts the traditional conservative view and breeds laws designed more to control behaviour than simply protect American standards in their view.

I'm not trying to paint the Republicans as villains here; these are in my view valid points that have merit when discussing the age-old question of "where the line is" between government assistance and handout, infrastructure or pork, "safety net" or socialism, protection or "erosions of liberty." It's all a question of degree.

Roosevelt, they feel, rammed this new, more "intrusive" and "dominant" type of government down their throats. Ever since, they have tried (without much success until 1994) to dismantle his reforms. Along the way somewhere, they confused "freedom" with "free market" and "liberty" with "every man for himself."

Over the last 15 years, they have met with decidedly mixed results; their efforts to reform welfare were actually AIDED by Democratic president Bill Clinton and have largely been seen as successful in ending the most flagrant abuses of the system. In most other areas of their focus, the Republicans have run into a staunch wall of opposition that has quelled most of their more radical efforts, like the proposal a few years ago to privatise all or part of Social Security. In hindsight, the US really dodged a bullet on that one!

Their ability to "weaken" many of the "rights" expanded by Roosevelt and others in piecemeal efforts, however, have largely worked, given a big boost by the 9/11 attacks (a scenario I'm sure was unforeseen by the attackers).

The result, having now been in majority power for most of the last 10 years, has been massive borrowing and government expansion and loads of foreign entanglements -- exactly the sort of things the 1940s Republicans would be aghast over. Worse still, all those trillions in borrowing haven't been reinvested in America; that "wealth" has been "spread" for the benefit of a select few.

I'm genuinely hopeful that this coming defeat of Republicanism on the federal and state levels will cause the party to look back to their roots and cast out the weirdo "social conservatives" and get back to being the party of fiscal conservatism. In a two-party system, you NEED both parties to have valid, workable ideas, and real conservatism (like real progressivism) offers a lot of that. Sadly, the "adult" voices of conservatism have been drowned out by ideologues and "culture war" zealots.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I'm genuinely hopeful that this coming defeat of Republicanism on the federal and state levels will cause the party to look back to their roots and cast out the weirdo "social conservatives" and get back to being the party of fiscal conservatism. " An interesting point, chas. While I don't see this happening, in that there would almost need to be two Republican parties, I actually see the fiscal conservatives in the minority. Thus, they would be the ones who would be "kicked out" of the party, or more to reality, have no party that furthers their views. We shall see.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

chas_m said:


> Actually -- and ironically -- this election really _is_ a referendum on socialism,
> 
> ... snip ...
> 
> I'm genuinely hopeful that this coming defeat of Republicanism on the federal and state levels will cause the party to look back to their roots and cast out the weirdo "social conservatives" and get back to being the party of fiscal conservatism. In a two-party system, you NEED both parties to have valid, workable ideas, and real conservatism (like real progressivism) offers a lot of that. Sadly, the "adult" voices of conservatism have been drowned out by ideologues and "culture war" zealots.


Which is why you are actually seeing some of the adult conservatives criticizing the McCain campaign, with some actually coming out for Obama, such as Christopher Buckley (son of William F.) and Colin Powell.

Good analysis in general Chas. I think the only reason FDR was able to push the reforms he did was because of the utter collapse and failure of the laissez faire free market system that brought on the Great Depression. We may be headed for another replay.

No USian took a stab at answering my earlier question so I'll post it again:

"Why would someone have a US tourist in Vancouver asking if the prices written down are in US dollars or expecting to get their change back from US currency in US money? I wouldn't ask if it was an isolated incident, but it's very, very common. Tourists from anywhere else in the world never do this."

Hey, where's Miss Gulch, our favourite USian?


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

More adult conservatives:

Barry Goldwater's granddaughter explains why she's voting for Obama:


> There always have been a glimmer of hope that someday, someone would "race through the gate" full steam in Goldwater style. Unfortunately, this hasn't happened, and the Republican brand has been tarnished in a shameless effort to gain votes and appeal to the lowest emotion, fear. Nothing about McCain, except for maybe a uniform, compares to the same ideology of what Goldwater stood for as a politician. The McCain/Palin plan is to appear diverse and inclusive, using women and minorities to push an agenda that makes us all financially vulnerable, fearful, and less safe.





> Arne Carlson, a former Republican governor in Minnesota, has endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
> 
> Carlson said Thursday that the Illinois senator's stances on the Iraq war, the economy and green energy goals won him over.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

First Wiliam F. Buckley's son and now Barry Goldwater's granddaughter all voting for Obama???? What is the conservative wing of the Republican party coming to?????? I think that they are coming to their senses. We shall see.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: Do Americans think Canada is a socialist country?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Susan Eisenhower too Dr. G - not only voting Obama- she resigned as a Republican


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Susan Eisenhower too Dr. G - not only voting Obama- she resigned as a Republican." Yes, MacDoc, I forgot about her.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

gmark, re your question "Do Americans think Canada is a socialist country?", many Americans think Canada has a socialized medical system. Some of us, when we were in the US, liked this idea, and others did not. Personally, I always thought that this was a good idea, and I still do.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Hey, where's Miss Gulch, our favourite USian?


Aren't "USians" an alien race from one of the Star Trek series? Are they the shape-changers, mind-readers or salt suckers?  



> Q4A: Do Americans think Canada is a socialist country?


Americans don't think about Canadian politics. While I can't speak for any American but myself, I believe the association is mostly beer, hockey, Mounties and SCTV (maybe). 

Edited to add: A few well-informed Americans are envious of Canada's health care system that covers everyone.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Susan Eisenhower too Dr. G - not only voting Obama- she resigned as a Republican


Ike would, too, if he saw how his party turned out.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Ike would, too, if he saw how his party turned out." Sad, but all too true, Ms. G.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

MissGulch said:


> Aren't "USians" an alien race from one of the Star Trek series? Are they the shape-changers, mind-readers or salt suckers?


Maybe Americans are Cap'n KIrk and Canadians are Spock ... wait ... Shatner's a Canadian ... now I'm confusing myself. 










Actually "USians" are my tongue-in-cheek term that points out the confusion of using American for those who are citizens of the USA. The country is called the United States of America, which can refer to either North America or the Americas, both north and south. That would mean that everyone in every country in both North and South America could also technically call themselves Americans, since they are part of these 2 continents, just like Europeans, Africans or Asians so why should only those in the USA get to call themselves that? If I'm from Germany, I'm a German and a European, if I'm from Morocco, I'm a Moroccan and an African, but if I'm from Canada, I'm a Canadian, but not an American, unless I have dual-citizenship.

So could we call you guys United States-ians or USians as a compromise? Or should we just stick with Yankees?


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

MissGulch said:


> Aren't "USians" an alien race from one of the Star Trek series? Are they the shape-changers, mind-readers or salt suckers?


This is a gentle reminder, Miss G, that those we call "Americans", are citizens of, and physically occupy, only a small part of the Americas. Candidly, Canadians are Americans, Mexicans are Americans, Brazilians are Americans, etc.

It is also the reason that many of us do not refer to your great country as "America", but rather as "the States", "the U.S." and other variants.

America is much, much bigger than the country occupying the middle bit of the northern portion of the western hemisphere's land mass, but some work is still needed on a catchy short hand descriptor.  

So, being our favourite USian is a high honour indeed, Miss G. We do love you! :love2:


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> Good analysis in general Chas. I think the only reason FDR was able to push the reforms he did was because of the utter collapse and failure of the laissez faire free market system that brought on the Great Depression. We may be headed for another replay.


I think that's what Obama is hoping for -- to be another FDR -- and people like SINC, EP, MacFury et al fear this. Not completely without cause.



> No USian took a stab at answering my earlier question so I'll post it again:
> 
> "Why would someone have a US tourist in Vancouver asking if the prices written down are in US dollars or expecting to get their change back from US currency in US money? I wouldn't ask if it was an isolated incident, but it's very, very common. Tourists from anywhere else in the world never do this."


My wife currently works in the tourism industry, and gets this a lot. As a "USian" herself (though Canadian by grace of birth), this behaviour has deeply shocked her. It's interesting seeing the "ugly American" from this side of the fence.

But again, I would point you to my earlier post regarding the "self-centeredness" of most Americans. The farther you live from the border with Canada or Mexico, the less likely you are to have ever travelled much, and given that so much of the world accepts US currency and speaks some measure of English, the idea that America is the centre of the universe gets very deeply entrenched.

Compounding this is the very real notion many Americans have that Canada isn't a full-blown independent country, more like a spin-off of America. Sorta.

They're surprised Canada has it's own money ("what's the point when your economy is so dependent on us?") and assume that if an issue is important to Americans, it's important to Canadians. My uncle in Alabama was _astounded_ to hear that we don't have an illegal immigrant problem to speak of in Canada.

I know the above statement will offend some readers. It offends me. But it's a genuinely held belief by many of our less-travelled brethren.



> Hey, where's Miss Gulch, our favourite USian?


I'm NOT your favourite USian??  

tptptptp


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: Do Americans think Canada is a socialist country?


An emphatic YES!! When they think of Canada at all, which is usually:

1. When health care comes up for debate
2. Hockey season
3. Repeat of SCTV or Red Green is on
4. Having a Molson's


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

chas_m said:


> I'm NOT your favourite USian??
> 
> tptptptp


Well, you ARE among our top two or three favourites!  Since you're already "landed" here, you aren't quite as much of a USian as Miss Gulch is, so the USian meter swings to her side by a couple of millimetres. 

You know how insecure they are, down there, so we can't hurt Miss G's feelings, now, can we?  :lmao:


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

chas_m said:


> My wife currently works in the tourism industry, and gets this a lot. As a "USian" herself (though Canadian by grace of birth), this behaviour has deeply shocked her. It's interesting seeing the "ugly American" from this side of the fence.
> 
> But again, I would point you to my earlier post regarding the "self-centeredness" of most Americans. The farther you live from the border with Canada or Mexico, the less likely you are to have ever travelled much, and given that so much of the world accepts US currency and speaks some measure of English, the idea that America is the centre of the universe gets very deeply entrenched.
> 
> ...


Sorry Chas, Miss Gulch has seniority. 

I don't want to dispute your explanation. I've wondered something along similar lines but as I found that so many of tourists in question could not be written off as mere slack-jawed yokels and seemed to be reasonably intelligent, otherwise informed and educated normal folk, I really began to wonder why. Upon hearing the question "is that price in US dollars?" I would look at the person and find I was lost for words. Occasionally sarcasm would emerge, "No, that price is actually in Greek Drachmas", but usually that approach would never end well.

I'll always remember the lady who came to me and said "Do you take Canadian money?". I looked at her for a second or two wondering how I could respond to this and then said "Hmm, why not, I guess I can, _just this one time._" She didn't even miss a beat and exclaimed, "Oh thank God, because someone gave me this Canadian bill in my change and I didn't know what I was going to do with it."

Oh well, it was a sale.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I had to think twice when I was at the Canadian Consulate in Atlanta, Georgia getting my papers for my Landed Immigrant status to come to Canada in 1977. One person did not know that Newfoundland was a province of Canada, one person tried to talk me out of coming to NL, and one person gave me a brochure about NL that had Joey Smallwood as Premier (Smallwood had been out of office for about 5 years prior to my coming to NL).


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

chas_m said:


> I think that's what Obama is hoping for -- to be another FDR -- and people like SINC, EP, MacFury et al fear this. Not completely without cause.


The old memes about FDR saving the country are a load of fireside chat claptrap--a jolly old myth. I don't fear it for the sake of the American people--if they want a King instead of a president, so be it. I'm just sort of sorry to see the age of American Exceptionalism come to an end so soon. It's like America came of age, then regressed into second childhood.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

I loves you all toooo. I need to get a room with 20 million of ya. :love2:


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

GratuitousApplesauce said:


> I'll always remember the lady who came to me and said "Do you take Canadian money?". I looked at her for a second or two wondering how I could respond to this and then said "Hmm, why not, I guess I can, _just this one time._" She didn't even miss a beat and exclaimed, "Oh thank God, because someone gave me this Canadian bill in my change and I didn't know what I was going to do with it."


I have been to Tijuana, Mexico a few times (buying Day of the Dead clay figurines and other weird junk),and they take my Yankee clams with no problem. They do conversions right at the register, and I get change back usually in "USian." One time I thought I'd do the right thing and change my money at a bank, so I got some Mexican money which had me at an exchange disadvantage. From now on, it's USian for me. 

Bermuda, a British colony, seems to take only US money. When my family was traveling to London, I had to explain to my father at length that he needed to change his money to pounds sterling. He had never been to Europe, and firmly believed the US dollar is good at every register on Earth. So went another Yank, but it can be confusing.


----------



## titans88 (Oct 3, 2007)

When I worked retail years ago in Ottawa, we would always accept USian money, but at a horrible exchange rate for the customer. We would also only give change back in Canadian dollars. 

I once served a customer from Buffalo who threatened to call his Embassy because he felt he was being treated poorly because of the exchange rate and not getting American change. I told him the exchange rate I got in Buffalo was equally as horrendous and I never got my change in Canadian dollars. He looked at my briefly and walked away shrugging.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Paul O'Keefe (Jun 3, 2005)

*Shoes on or off?*

Do people in the United States talk off their foot wear when they enter a home?


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> Do people in the United States talk off their foot wear when they enter a home?


I've had people talk my ear off, but nobody's ever talked my shoes off before. Sounds exciting!


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> Do people in the United States talk off their foot wear when they enter a home?


It depends strictly on how obsessively neat they are. An old friend's mother insisted on it, and likewise her many aunts. My own aunt keeps her house so clean you could clean your tongue by licking her floor, but no shoe removal (which remains a mystery how it's done). As for my house - please, are you joking! If I vacuum three times a year it's a lot.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

*Thank You*

chas_m thank you for the detailed reply very informative distilling a complicated question into a concise post.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> Do people in the United States talk off their foot wear when they enter a home?


Depends on where in the US you are. Up north, where they actually have winters and rainy days, it's probably more common. In the south, "mud" and other tracking-in stuff is more or less non-existent, so it's rare to have to take your shoes off.

Exceptions are made for people with new carpeting, and buddhists.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

It might also depends upon your faith. I was friends with various grad students at the Univ. of Georgia. One was Hindu, the other was Muslim. Upon entering their home, I was asked to take off my shoes, which I did without question.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

That's it, no more questions? There was the one shoe inquiry and then....? My question for you: why do Canadians have a foot fetish? :lmao:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"My question for you: why do Canadians have a foot fetish?" Because our fingers and nose are so cold for most of the year. 

How are things in NYC?


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> "My question for you: why do Canadians have a foot fetish?" Because our fingers and nose are so cold for most of the year.
> 
> How are things in NYC?


Technically speaking, I'm on LI and not in NYC, but ok enough I guess. Mayor Bloomberg wanted another term in defiance of term limits, and he got it. Nobody says no to the Big Bloomie I guess.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I grew up in Queens, and always resented the traffic signs that said "To the City" in that we were in one of the five boroughs of NYC.

Yes, I heard about the third term vote in City Council. He still has to win that third term. Any real opposition him running for a third term?


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

Dr.G. said:


> I grew up in Queens, and always resented the traffic signs that said "To the City" in that we were in one of the five boroughs of NYC.


Depends on where you are. If you go to LI's east end, the signs point toward "NY," but they mean the beginning of the NYC border, as in Rosedale. 



> Yes, I heard about the third term vote in City Council. He still has to win that third term. Any real opposition him running for a third term?


Probably not. The competing party will throw up some sacrificial lamb for the job because they have to.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Interesting. When I lived in NYC, the main competition was in the Democratic primaries, since a Dem. usually won. Of course, John Lindsay broke this mold, but he was a moderate and progressive Republican and I would have voted for him if I were old enough back then.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: What's with the brewed iced tea? Canadians expect the sweetened Nestea.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

In Georgia, if you asked for tea, you got ice tea. If you wanted hot tea, they thought you meant "sun tea", which was made by keeping a huge kettle filled with water and tea bags and sliced lemons out in the sun until the evening.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

A quality eatery will have unsweetened tea available, which can drink plain or sweeten how you like. Fast food places have stuff like sweetened iced tea from a dispenser, which is loaded with sugar. Depends on where you're getting your drink. 

It's actually a bit imprecise to label regional differences "American" or "Canadian," as these things are distinct to areas and not countries. In my area, called soda "pop" tags you as an outsider, and I cringe when people called ketchup "catsup." Upstate, you find hoagies, and in New England there are grinders, but here they are hero sandwiches. I see food differences between NY and CA; you see far less pizza and Chinese because they sell tacos instead.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Ms. G., growing up in NYC, we had it easy. There was New York City, upstate New York, and the rest of the United States, in that order. Of course, back then, we had the debate of who was a better center fielder -- Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle or Duke Snider.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: What's with the brewed iced tea? Canadians expect the sweetened Nestea.


There are three kinds of "iced tea":

1. Hot tea with ice in it. Sweetened/lemoned to taste by consumer.

2. "Southern iced tea," which is the maximum amount of sugar possible to be suspended in a perfect brown solution. It is so sweet your dentist buys a new boat every summer from all the extra business.

3. The brown lemonade North Americans call "Nestea." More like "NAS-tea" if you ask me. WAAAAAY too citrus-acidic, and only available where you buy pop (not brewed). This applies to both Coke and Pepsi's brands ("Brisk" as well as "Nestea").


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

chas_m said:


> There are three kinds of "iced tea":


What about Long Island Iced Tea?



> A Long Island Iced Tea is a highball made with, among other ingredients, vodka, gin, tequila, and rum. A popular version mixes equal parts vodka, gin, tequila, rum and triple sec with 1 1/2 parts sour mix and a splash of cola. Close variants often replace the sour mix with sweet and sour mix or with lemon juice, the cola with actual iced tea, or add white creme de menthe. Some restaurants substitute brandy for the tequila.
> 
> The drink has a much higher alcohol concentration (~28%) than most highballs because of the proportionally small amount of mixer. The cola is just for color.
> Outside of the United States, this highball is often altered, due to the unpopularity of sour mix. Long Island Iced Tea served outside the States is often made of liquors and cola alone (without sour mix), with lemon or lime juice, or with lime cordial.
> ...


My son was traveling in the US with his lacrosse team and being a naive 14 yo prairie boy, he was surprised when the "iced tea" he ordered wasn't the brown mix that he was used to at home.

Margaret


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

The worst iced tea on the planet is Snapple diet raspberry flavoured. I doubt our resident Snapple Quaffer is drinking this dreck.

I make iced tea at home, microwaving water and tea bags in a plastic container. It's way cheap and the most healthy.

Once when I was in Britain, I ordered a cider and expected a nice apple juice drink. It had a bit more of a kick than apple juice.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Margaret, I have had Long Island Ice Tea a few times. Not the sort of drink you want to have and then have to drive back into Manhattan.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

MissGulch said:


> T
> Once when I was in Britain, I ordered a cider and expected a nice apple juice drink. It had a bit more of a kick than apple juice.


When I was in England, I tried for 10 days to get a decent cup of coffee - even Starbuck's didn't have good coffee  



Dr.G. said:


> Margaret, I have had Long Island Ice Tea a few times. Not the sort of drink you want to have and then have to drive back into Manhattan.


Sean was only 14 and I don't know how much experience he had with drinking. He told me about it when he got home which reassured me that he was not impressed. 

Take care, Margaret


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I do *love* a good Long Island Iced Tea, but as there is no actual tea in it, I didn't include it in the list.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

True, Margaret. One has to be an experienced drinker to appreciate/handle this sort of "tea".


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Chas, the trick is to serve it to someone who actually is expecting tea.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Ah, I remember having these in university 20 years ago. A place in Vancouver called PJ Burger had $2.50 Tuesdays of Long Island Ice Teas. I needed a taxi back to campus...


----------



## Paul O'Keefe (Jun 3, 2005)

Do US citizens pay more taxes on average than Canadians?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Paul, it depends. Federal Income taxes are less in instances, and have different deductions (e.g., mortgage interest). As well, some states that have income taxes, and cities that have income taxes (e.g., New York City), add to this tax burden. As well, many school districts get their money from property taxes. So, it all depends. 

I have a friend that has income over $4 million, and I actually paid more taxes than he did this past year. He has a mountain of deducations that he used, and actually did not use some of them because he felt that they were not legal (they were on the borderline) and some that he felt he could not consider himself an American and use these tax loopholes.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> Do US citizens pay more taxes on average than Canadians?


Tax freedom day for Canada was approx June 15-20, for 2007.
For the USA, it was approx April 30-May 06.
(approx June 1 for UK)

Tax freedom day marks the day in the year at which point all money earned to that day went to taxes ( in one form or another). Everything made after that is what you actually get to keep.

The US tax freedom day can vary by weeks depending on the State/City.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Fellfromtree, keep in mind that we also have some of our taxes go to paying for our medical care. If I was living in the US when my daughter was born profoundly disabled back in 1983, I would still be paying off the hospital bills to this day. So, there is no real freedom for those without gold-plated medical insurance.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

Yes Dr. G, individual mileage may vary. The date is an average or mean, probably applicable to very few individuals in reality. As a comparison from country to country, the Tax Freedom date is probably fairly consistent with other indicators and rankings. I would expect the Swedens, Denmarks, Norways, etc to have the later dates. 

I have been hearing a lot about 'socialism' from Americans (who seem to use the word as a quick step to 'communism'), and as always, 'democracy', but I never hear Americans speak of 'social democracy'. 
Consistently, the top countries in the world (health, education, income, life expectancy, economy, et al) are (modern) social democracies. Do Americans not see this?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Paul O'Keefe said:


> Do US citizens pay more taxes on average than Canadians?


This is actually a very easy question to answer, I don't know why nobody has given it up till now:

Looking at the chart found here, we can see that a single individual with no children earning the average wage in that country pays a slightly higher percentage of his/her income in Canada (31.6%) versus the United States (29.1%). This does not include all forms of taxes, just income tax, and of course the Canadian system subsidises health care with some of that money, whereas the US system does not. Makes a big difference if you ask me.

When you add in all taxes, US residents pay roughly 40% of their income (with an average individual income of $40K, that would equal $16K) in total taxes.

I wasn't able to find pre-tax average incomes for individuals from a recent year in Canada, so it's hard to estimate what total percentage percentage spent on taxes would be. My guess would be that average incomes aren't quite as high as the US average, but the percentage of that income paid in total taxes is about the same or slightly higher.

Again, however, Canadians get some or all of their health insurance paid with part of that money, whereas Americans don't (and it's expensive!), so if you add that in, I think it's safe to say that a Canadian's tax burden is about the same or less than an American's.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: How can the U.S. function with a $10 trillion debt? Who are the lenders?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: How can the U.S. function with a $10 trillion debt? Who are the lenders?


Lots of countries, primarily China and Saudi Arabia.

Despite everything that's happened, these countries apparently feel that the US will, over time, continue to at least _service_ that debt, making the lenders enormous amounts of money. It's kind of like how predatory "payday" lenders prey on poor people.

The US continues to MAKE enormous amounts of money, so there is the expectation that it can continue to service its debt with only a minor fallback of its quality of life. I don't think the lender nations expect to ever be repaid on the principle -- at least, not for several generations to come -- but as long as the US looks like it can continue to pay the profit on the debt, it's in those nations interest to continue propping the US up.

We are, however, getting to the point where the party will be called off if the lender nations ever come to believe that we will not honour our debt or not continue to service it. The massive borrowing is not, as you might expect, to pay for things like the Iraq Sham or the Wall Street Bailout -- it's to maintain the American standard of living, which should have flattened or gone down with the shifts in the economy over the last couple of decades.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

fellfromtree said:


> I have been hearing a lot about 'socialism' from Americans (who seem to use the word as a quick step to 'communism'), and as always, 'democracy', but I never hear Americans speak of 'social democracy'.
> Consistently, the top countries in the world (health, education, income, life expectancy, economy, et al) are (modern) social democracies. Do Americans not see this?


No, strangely, they do not.

As part of that Amero-centrism I've mentioned in other posts, Americans simply do not comprehend how other countries function. I have stopped many of my friends (even liberal ones) dead in their tracks by asking them to explain how Canada can possibly run a _surplus_ with universal health care, gay marriage, marijuana-tolerance, far-left* politics and facing the brunt of the climate change in North America.

*"far left" by American standards

These things would (if you believe the right-wing) cripple America. Yet Canada thrives.

This is such a classic case of "cognitive dissonance" I'm surprised there aren't more books on the subject out there, but it's a huge blind spot.

In part I think this is a throwback to the "red scare" of the 1950s. Many seniors were impressionable youth in those years, and for them the Cold War was the background of their lives. They are genuinely scared to death of anything that even remotely resembles "socialism" even though they really have no idea what the term means or how it applies. They will even turn their democracy into a laughing stock to avoid it.

Even in the face of the US nationalising huge banks and financial corporations -- about as "socialist" as you can get short of taking over the oil companies -- they don't see this as socialism because Republicans endorsed it and they would never do that. Sounds like a mother defending her murderer son, doesn't it? But we've seen the public turn the same blind eye to torture, invasion, war-mongering and other heinous crimes that are actually ongoing, not just something that happened "in the past" (which apparently extends up to literally yesterday).


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

chas_m said:


> These things would (if you believe the right-wing) cripple America. Yet Canada thrives.


But it *would* cripple America ... in their ability to throw their weight around Globally.

And they are not about to give up their mighty armed forces, any time soon.

So, each person without health care and other social programs, are de-facto donating to the Imperialist mind-set.

Too bad, eh.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: What do Americans think about the Canadian anthem? (Noting the American anthem is so hard to sing and has archaic lyrics.)


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Q4A: What do Americans think about the Canadian anthem? (Noting the American anthem is so hard to sing and has archaic lyrics.)" Love singing it in public. Far easier than the Star Spangled Banner.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

chas_m said:


> No, strangely, they do not.
> 
> As part of that Amero-centrism I've mentioned in other posts, Americans simply do not comprehend how other countries function. I have stopped many of my friends (even liberal ones) dead in their tracks by asking them to explain how Canada can possibly run a _surplus_ with universal health care, gay marriage, marijuana-tolerance, far-left* politics and facing the brunt of the climate change in North America.
> 
> ...


Well there is a little, and dead, Italian Marxist by the name of Antonio Gramsci who wrote some really confusing and cryptic notes while in jail in Italy for stirring up some red talk called Prison Notebooks. His idea has been called "Cultural Hegemony". Essentially, the ruling class no longer need to resort to coercion as we will consent to their policies and governance based on, crudely, our "brainwashed" minds. He obviously explains it much more intellectually. Extremely interesting and profoundly applicable. Think of a poor, jobless and starving man in any town USA and ask him if he would go live in Cuba? Hell no! would be the answer even though Cuba would provide him with a life leaps and bounds better than the life he leads in the US.





It's only 15 bucks on Amazon if you ever have the time:

Amazon.ca: Selections from the Prison Notebooks: Antonio Gramsci: Books


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: What do Americans think about the Canadian anthem? (Noting the American anthem is so hard to sing and has archaic lyrics.)


They think the Canadian anthem is "Blame Canada!" from the South Park movie.

Seriously. They do.

If you mean, what do Americans who have moved up here think of the anthem, then I can only give you my opinion which is that it's a lovely anthem, and as Dr. G said easier to sing.

I have to be honest and confess that hearing it fills me with both pride and the giggles. Pride because it was a dream of mine to move here, and it has been accomplished. The giggles because the song reminds me so much of my old (UK) school anthem -- it's very like every British school anthem, really.

The US anthem is, while difficult to sing, also wonderful -- full of vivid imagery and born in battle. America has a second, more "normal" anthem called "America the Beautiful," and I think Canada should find a song like that, one that paints the mental picture of Canada's incredible natural beauty married to its love of freedom, peace and prosperity, to serve as a "Miss Congeniality" anthem. 

The old Hockey Night theme, while stirring, isn't quite up to the job IMHO.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

Adrian. said:


> His idea has been called "Cultural Hegemony". Essentially, the ruling class no longer need to resort to coercion as we will consent to their policies and governance based on, crudely, our "brainwashed" minds.


I'd heard of this before, but hadn't thought about it in many decades. Thanks for the reminder, and the link.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

In an episode of "House" the patient was incapable of showing displeasure. To House, this was a symptom, of course, and he goaded the man, trying to get him to react. Finally, in exasperation, House said, "what are you, Canadian or something?"

Don't know if I got the quote right, but you get the idea.

On another forum, someone mentioned being involved in a bar fight in Canada and another poster said, "Bar Fight? In Canada? What did you do, sit there and frown at each other?"

So. Do Americans see us as non-emotional, peaceful people?

Is that a compliment or a slur?

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"So. Do Americans see us as non-emotional, peaceful people?" My mother was born in Montreal, so I grew up knowing about Canada. However, I would say that when I was completing my doctorate at the University of Georgia, and told folks that I was accepted for a teaching position at Memorial University of Newfoundland, most had never heard of NL. Of course, many Canadians have never been to NL either. Still, many in the US have little understanding of Canada.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Dr.G. said:


> ...told folks that I was accepted for a teaching position at Memorial University of Newfoundland, most had never heard of NL. Of course, many Canadians have never been to NL either. Still, many in the US have little understanding of Canada.


I was on the phone with a biotech company support rep in Boston last week. While she was waiting for a query to produce results on her computer, she asked me where I was. I told her I was in Fredericton, New Brunswick, and she asked what state that was. I said, New Brunswick is a province in Canada, and she asked if it was part of Toronto. I said no, we're east of Toronto... we're just a little north of you in Boston, and she assured me that Toronto was the easternmost city in Canada.  

cheers


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I placed an order with Apple Canada back about six years ago. The person in TO told me that I would have to contact Apple Europe since Apple Canada only shipped to Canada. I asked her where she was located and it was in the GTA. I asked her where she was born and where her parents were born and again, it was in the GTA. I told her that Newfoundland and Labrador were part of Canada and we were Canada's 10th province. "Really?!?" was her reply.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

MazterCBlazter said:


> I used to have a pen pal in Texas... I would send him pictures of igloos and dog sled teams and explain that this was our house and this was how we went to school. Other pictures of eskimos, polar bears and penguins...


So it's _your_ fault! I always wondered where Americans got these ideas.

When I was at a meeting in San Francisco, I had an American colleague who was genuinely surprised to learn that we had TV in Canada.

You should've put antennas on the pictures of the igloos.

Cheers


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MissGulch (Jul 20, 2005)

gmark2000 said:


> (Noting the American anthem is so hard to sing and has archaic lyrics.)


You could ask us if we _like _the US anthem. In my case, no. I prefer "America, The Beautiful" by a long shot. What divine lyrics it has: 

America the Beautiful
Words by Katharine Lee Bates, 1913
Melody by Samuel Ward 

O beautiful for spacious skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the fruited plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for pilgrim feet
Whose stern impassioned stress
A thoroughfare of freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America!
God mend thine every flaw,
Confirm thy soul in self-control,
Thy liberty in law!

O beautiful for heroes proved
In liberating strife.
Who more than self their country loved
And mercy more than life!
America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness
And every gain divine!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood
From sea to shining sea!

O beautiful for halcyon skies,
For amber waves of grain,
For purple mountain majesties
Above the enameled plain!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till souls wax fair as earth and air
And music-hearted sea!

O beautiful for pilgrims feet,
Whose stem impassioned stress
A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till paths be wrought through
wilds of thought
By pilgrim foot and knee!

O beautiful for glory-tale
Of liberating strife
When once and twice,
for man's avail
Men lavished precious life!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till selfish gain no longer stain
The banner of the free!

O beautiful for patriot dream
That sees beyond the years
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
America! America!
God shed his grace on thee
Till nobler men keep once again
Thy whiter jubilee!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

YouTube - America The Beautiful

YouTube - American anthem - Star Spangled Banner

YouTube - God Bless America!!!

YouTube - The Star-Spangled Banner (American National Anthem)

The last clip is the version of the Star Spangled Banner we had to sing in public school. Of course, the voices of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir bring a lump to my throat.

May God bless and watch over America and Canada in the next few days.

Paix, mes amis.

O! say can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

winwintoo said:


> IOn another forum, someone mentioned being involved in a bar fight in Canada and another poster said, "Bar Fight? In Canada? What did you do, sit there and frown at each other?"


How do you get a bunch of drunken Canadians out of a swimming pool?






Say "Out of the pool please."


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

This is, in my opinion, the most dramatic moment in a movie when a national anthem was sung. If you know the circumstance of the Vichy regime, the words and history of Die Wacht am Rhein (English: The Watch/Guard on the Rhine) and the words to the translation of La Marseillaise, you will have an even greater appreciation for this clip.

YouTube - Casablanca (1942) la Marsellesa - la Marseillaise scene


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

And right after that scene (I have the DVD). Major Strasser orders Captain Renault to close Rick down. 



> *Rick*: How can you close me up? On what grounds?
> *Captain Renault*: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! [a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
> *Croupier*: Your winnings, sir.
> *Captain Renault*: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
> ...


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Yes, iJH, a great scene. However, I found it interesting that the majority of people stood up and sang their national anthem, knowing what it might mean. 

During a service here in NL, just after 9/11, which was held for the hundreds of Americans that were put up here in St.John's, they played the national anthem of the US. The American tourists were on one side of the service, and the people from NL were on the other side of the podium. When they played the Star Spangled Banner, I stood up immediately, and with hand over my heart, began to sing. About half way through, I realized that I was one of the few people standing and singing. A few of the Americans came over after the service and asked me why I did what I did that morning. I told them that I was an American, and it was the first chance I had to sing the Star Spangled Banner in many, many years.

YouTube - National Anthem: Star Spangled Banner


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

winwintoo said:


> So. Do Americans see us as non-emotional, peaceful people?
> 
> Is that a compliment or a slur?
> 
> Margaret


Those USians who might think that have probably never seen a hockey game.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Obviously these comments about Canadians indicate they haven't been to Surrey, BC.


Surrey: the tourists check in — they never check out. beejacon


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> So. Do Americans see us as non-emotional, peaceful people?
> 
> Is that a compliment or a slur?


Non-emotional? No.

Peaceful, polite to a fault, slow to anger? Yes.

Is it a compliment or a slur? Both.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Where is this peaceful and polite part of Canada?
> 
> Not the Vancouver area.
> 
> Moncton or Montreal perhaps?


Small town Canada.

Places with populations near 1,000 people where everyone knows each other like:

Okanagan Falls, BC
Bon Accord, Alberta
Windthorst, Saskatchewan
Ninette, Manitoba


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

In a small town, politeness is not so much a character attribute as it is a necessity. You never know if they guy you steal the parking spot from today will be the only strong back around next week when you're stuck up to the axle in either snow or mud  

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Where is this peaceful and polite part of Canada?" St.John's, NL perhaps.


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

SINC said:


> Small town Canada.
> 
> Places with populations near 1,000 people where everyone knows each other like:
> 
> ...


And my island and the other Gulf Islands in my neighbourhood.

Although I'm a city boy, I've lived in the boonies for a decade. What I can't stand now when I go to the city, and the big difference that I notice immediately, is how people are so damn rude to each other. Not just in big ways, but in a thousand small and subtle ways as well. It's disheartening. Fortunately many city-dwellers try and fight that as best they can.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Every time we spend a few days in my wife's home town, the aforementioned Windthorst, SK. I marvel at the laid back pace of life. 

A coffee in the only cafe is an opportunity to take the pulse of the community every morning and the pub affords the same opportunity every afternoon where more coffee than liquor is consumed. 

The tiny grocery store fills the need of the 350 residents as does the post office and the RBC branch. 

My brother-in-law's tire shop has a half dozen chairs in a circle around a support pole and most of those chairs are full at mid afternoon. 

The walk to and from the cafe, or the pub, of the grocery store is under five minutes and if you have the time, a conversation can be had with every single person you meet on the street. And during those conversations, the vehicles passing give a friendly toot and wave as they go by whether they know you or not.

The community hall, the curling and hockey rinks are full of all generations every evening as family and friends cheers on their local sports heroes or play cards or take woodworking lessons.

It is a much simpler life and one that would be envied by many who have never experienced such things.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Don't know where to put this so I'll try here.

I've heard of "In God We Trust" - it's on US pennies I think, but isn't this going too far?

I've been looking for apps for my iPod Touch and clicked a link that took me to an app that shows the US national debt. On the same page there is a section that points out "related apps" Take a look at the attached image.

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I've heard of "In God We Trust" - it's on US pennies I think, but isn't this going too far?" Yes, that is on one side of the penny, but on the other side is "And all others pay cash".


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Did you notice that all the "related apps" to the debt calculator are versions of the Bible?

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Did you notice that all the "related apps" to the debt calculator are versions of the Bible?" Jesus saves, Moses invests ................ and the US government borrows.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Dr.G. said:


> ................ and the US government borrows.


I must have missed that part in Sunday School. Is it in "Numbers"?

Margaret


----------



## iJohnHenry (Mar 29, 2008)

No, "Revelations".


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Exodus and Proverbs-- Now the LORD said to Moses, "Rise early in the morning and present yourself before Pharaoh, as he comes out to the water, and say to him, 'Thus says the LORD, "Let My people go, that they may serve Me."

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

Typically, when a federal or provincial government changes hands there are horror stories about the previous government's money handling.

Does the same thing happen with changes in administration in the U.S? When Barak Obama finally sits in his new office will he find the U.S. a few more trillion in debt then Bush's administration was admitting to?

The fact that the American government could be worse then what it presently appears really scares me. So much needs to be done and I'm wondering if there is any room to maneuver!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"The fact that the American government could be worse then what it presently appears really scares me. So much needs to be done and I'm wondering if there is any room to maneuver!" As they say back in Georgia, Obama "has a tough row to how." Still, I would rather see him as president than anyone else right now.


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

Dr. G,

I agree. But will he get a big financial surprise?

Is the accounting separated enough from the party in power, unlike in Canada?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Where is this peaceful and polite part of Canada?


Victoria. 

Actually, the concept of "peaceful and polite" is all relative. Compare Vancouver to, say, Miami, and I think you'll find it more "peaceful and polite" than you thought.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

SINC said:


> Every time we spend a few days in my wife's home town, the aforementioned Windthorst, SK. I marvel at the laid back pace of life.
> 
> A coffee in the only cafe is an opportunity to take the pulse of the community every morning and the pub affords the same opportunity every afternoon where more coffee than liquor is consumed.
> 
> ...


So you're telling me that "Corner Gas" is a documentary?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

bgw said:


> Is the accounting separated enough from the party in power, unlike in Canada?


Ostensibly, yes. There is a separate, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and a allegedly nonpartisan government watchdog called the GSA (Government Services Administration).

But under the Bush administration, such watchdogs were bypassed. I hope Obama will return to using "real numbers."


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

chas_m said:


> So you're telling me that "Corner Gas" is a documentary?


You didn't know that?  

I'm just curious, have you been to Saskatchewan? 

Margaret


----------



## bgw (Jan 8, 2008)

chas_m said:


> Ostensibly, yes. There is a separate, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and a allegedly nonpartisan government watchdog called the GSA (Government Services Administration).
> 
> But under the Bush administration, such watchdogs were bypassed. I hope Obama will return to using "real numbers."


This is not good news 

I suspect the Obama will go through the proper channels. He hasn't raised my 'Mulroney' meter at all. (Hope you get the joke chas_m.)


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: What Canadian TV shows are popular in the U.S.?


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

SINC said:


> Every time we spend a few days in my wife's home town, the aforementioned Windthorst, SK. I marvel at the laid back pace of life...


Is there 3G coverage for an iPhone?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> You didn't know that?
> 
> I'm just curious, have you been to Saskatchewan?
> 
> Margaret


No I haven't. I'm a city kid so I'm not sure I'd enjoy the more rural parts that SINC seems to favour, but I've no doubt the province is riddled with friendly people and beautiful scenery like the rest of this fine country.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: What Canadian TV shows are popular in the U.S.?


If you mean "popular" as in "most Americans have seen and enjoyed it," then nothing.

"Red Green" had a successful run on Public Television, "Kids in the Hall" was a modest hit thanks to Comedy Central, and the various "Degrassi" shows found a niche on one of the kids networks. Oh, and I've heard that "Corner Gas" has (ironically) been picked up by channels that cater to the "hillbilly" crowd, but on the whole Canadian television does not make its way south of the border.

EDIT: I forgot that SCTV was a big hit in the US back in the day.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Chas, SK is beautiful ........... at least it was in the July I was there a dozen years ago. I assume that it still is as beautiful.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

chas_m said:


> No I haven't. I'm a city kid so I'm not sure I'd enjoy the more rural parts that SINC seems to favour, but I've no doubt the province is riddled with friendly people and beautiful scenery like the rest of this fine country.


chas_m, here are a few shots to give you an idea of the Saskatchewan landscape, but it is much more diverse than these show.

North Saskatchewan river valley near Saskatoon:










The town of Oddessa southeast of Regina:










Backyard garden in Windthorst, southeast of Regina:










A rural back yard in Whitewood near the Manitoba border:










A campground in Battleford:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Don, it is beautiful to drive by the fields of yellow, which I was told was canola. An amazing sight.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Dr.G. said:


> Don, it is beautiful to drive by the fields of yellow, which I was told was canola. An amazing sight.


Ah, you mean fields of Canola (It used to be known as Rapeseed) like this one:


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

That's it, Sinc, only more yellow. An the flatness of that area of SK was amazing.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: Do Americans know about poppies? Do any wear them on Veterans Day?


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: Do Americans know about poppies?


Yes, they are the back-up justification for the War in Afghanistan.


----------



## fellfromtree (May 18, 2005)

I'd like to know why Jimmy Carter gets no respect in America. I'm not convinced he has the right view on the Middle East, but still, I admire his convictions, his genuine concern and effort, and his intellect. Name any other American President who has been so active in human rights and human dignity, both at home and worldwide, or any former president who has given so much in charitable acts ( as opposed to fee based acts- I think Clinton is/has been effective, but he also collects a handsome fee for his efforts).
I suspect Carter is being punished in part for his organizations stance on democratic and fair elections worldwide (for which the USA has not qualify in the last 2 attempts).
Why isn't Jimmy an American Hero?
(ps-posted this before watching Man From Plains)


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

MazterCBlazter said:


> Those areas of Saskatchewan look very nice.


Agreed. Thanks for sharing, SINC.

The "big flatness" reminds me strongly of the upper midwest, like Nebraska, Montana, etc.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

chas_m, I just thought it might give you some idea of the southern portion of Sask. Much of the north is in fact forest and lakes. Hundreds of lakes.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: Do Americans know about poppies? Do any wear them on Veterans Day?


"Do Americans know about poppies"? Only in relation to Afghanistan. 

As you are aware, the US has it's own Veteran's Day (held on the same day as Remembrance Day is here), but it is a very low-key event for most Americans -- it's a federal holiday, but usually marked only by local parades and a sale in the big department stores. While under-appreciated, at least its name mirrors its function, and the meaning hasn't been lost.

The big "war" related holiday in the US is Memorial Day Weekend, which has lost all its original meaning and now just marks the start of BBQ season and acts as a precursor to July 4th. It might as well be called "Football Day." 

The whole wearing of poppies, donating to disabled vets' causes and theme of remembrance is a "British Empire" holdover and only observed in the "Commonwealth" countries.

Even "In Flanders Fields" is almost completely unknown in the US (unless some students studying World War I happened to come across it by chance). I admit I would not be as familiar as I am with the poem myself were it not for my great pal Stan Flack, the late founder of MacCentral and MacMinute. I was an early contributor to those ventures and he would resolutely shut down those sites each November 11th and print the poem instead.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

When I was a boy growing up in New York City, Nov. 11th was Armistice Day.

In November 1919, President Wilson proclaimed November 11 as the first commemoration of Armistice Day with the following words: "To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations…" 

Sadly, Chas is correct re the current observance of Armistice/Veteran's Day and Memorial Day in May. Sad. Lest we forget ............

http://www1.va.gov/opa/vetsday/poster/vetsday08-lo.jpg


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Don, I always thought that SK reminded me of Kansas.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

I don't know if this has been posted on another thread, but I just saw it again on tv and would be ROTFLMAO it it wasn't so true and only weeks or maybe days away.

Canadian Police Chase Midas commercial

Margaret


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Good one, Margaret.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Q4A: Is American Thanksgiving more important (family-wise) than Christmas? Isn't it stressful to have two big events within a month?


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

gmark2000 said:


> Q4A: Is American Thanksgiving more important (family-wise) than Christmas? Isn't it stressful to have two big events within a month?


"More" important? Not really.

Thanksgiving is, by tradition, a time when out-of-town relatives come to visit (or you go to visit them), whereas Christmas is usually a time for the immediate family (who sometimes have to gather from various places). This isn't always true of course, but we're speaking very generally here.

Both are big days off from work, featuring feasts and football, and followed by massive sales. Both days have their ups and downs of stress and relaxation. 

And yes, it's a PITA to have three such huge holidays six weeks of each other (I'm including New Year's Eve, which is also very stressful).

But that's no excuse not to have your #%@! xmas lights DOWN by no later than January 3rd!!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

gmark, Thanksgiving, when I was a boy, was a big family event in the US. It is not that way much anymore. The hassle of travel over greater and greater distances makes it difficult. As well, tomorrow is Black Friday, when stores, hopefully, get "into the black". Not sure if it will happen this year, but still, last year saw 135 million Americans buying like mad.


----------

