so, who's emigrating?

[Superman]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... haven_dc_1

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Creaking health care? At least our so called failing system doesn't have 10% of our population uninsured.

[Superman]

10% of our population uninsured

You think only 10% of our population is uninsured? Heh, it's waaay more than that.

[phongn]

His next tatic wil be to ask for Emergency Powers after the next terrorist attack, and there will be one. Then he will declare his party the only legal party and so on and so forth.

Isn't it scary when you see history repeating it self in front of your eyes?

Bush isn't going to declare Martial Law or get Congress to give him extraordinary emergency powers.

[Pcm979]

His next tatic wil be to ask for Emergency Powers after the next terrorist attack, and there will be one. Then he will declare his party the only legal party and so on and so forth.

Isn't it scary when you see history repeating it self in front of your eyes?

Bush isn't going to declare Martial Law or get Congress to give him extraordinary emergency powers.

No you fool, he's going to create a Grand Army of the Repub-Erm, USA and declare himself Emperor.

I don't like the guy either, but geez, this is taking post-election blues a bit far, isn't it?

[phongn]

As it so happens, the Grand Army of the Republic really did exist -- it was an organization of Union Civil War veterans. And yes, this nonsense about Bush being the reincarnation of Hitler is absurd.

[Broomstick]

Hmmm..... Canada....

I grew up next to the border. Yeah, think I could get along with the folks there.

My test for potentially immigrating as a skilled worker came up with a 75, with 67 points required as a minimum. (Some folks talk about moving to another country... others of us start quietly researching requirements and establishing a basis on which to take action) I actually qualify in two unrelated areas, further increasing my flexibility, AND I can communicate in French.

I would be quite willing to relocate to a more remote or northerly area, which could also count in my favor. I like winter, and I've survived -30 (that's -35 C) here on the Great Plains so yeah, I think I can handle cold, too.

I would be really surprised if there weren't jobs for bush pilots out west. I also have some experience in mountain flying. Not a lot, but it's a start.

Hmm... brush up the French, get a little more flight experience under the belt, maybe a seaplane rating, polish the corporate world resume... Yeah, it's doable.

Am I dashing off the north woods? No. Not yet. Probably never. On a personal level things are too bad for me right where I am now. On the other hand, I always have a Plan B. And Plan C. And Plan D.... As a child of refugees I absorbed the idea of having an "out" at an early age.

Give me a year or two and I could probably make my skill profile look even better than it does now. You know - polish the French, get some more airplane qualifications, take a few other classes.

Look, I don't give a damn if someone wants to emmigrate/immigrate or not, but don't expect a free ride. If you think you might want to move to a different country at some point it would be in your best interests to find out what that other country may be looking for in the way of people and make some effort to qualify.

[aerius]

Go to Canada and ask for refugee status.... seriously. No don't know how many people claim refugee status after getting of the plane with no papers.

Sadly enough that's true, it's easier to claim refugee status than to go through the proper channels and do the landed immigrant thing. Our refugee system gets abused so much it's not even funny.

[Elfdart]

Instead of emigrating one by one, why not get the "blue" states to secede and join Canada? This would leave the "red" panhandler states to console themselves with fag-bashing when the productive states remove them from the bank account and let them stew in their own stupidity.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Sadly enough that's true, it's easier to claim refugee status than to go through the proper channels and do the landed immigrant thing. Our refugee system gets abused so much it's not even funny.

You know all about this stuff. Could a US citizen seriously claim refugee status and cross into Canada and setup shop there?

[aerius]

You know all about this stuff. Could a US citizen seriously claim refugee status and cross into Canada and setup shop there?

Yes, and even worse we've had convicts, convicts from the US do that, it's ludicrous. And it only took 10 years to extradite them.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

His next tatic wil be to ask for Emergency Powers after the next terrorist attack, and there will be one. Then he will declare his party the only legal party and so on and so forth.

Isn't it scary when you see history repeating it self in front of your eyes?

Bush isn't going to declare Martial Law or get Congress to give him extraordinary emergency powers.

No you fool, he's going to create a Grand Army of the Repub-Erm, USA and declare himself Emperor.

I don't like the guy either, but geez, this is taking post-election blues a bit far, isn't it?

I was wait for a Star Wars Reference.

[Admiral Valdemar]

And here's me thinking having the Frogs send heir illegal immigrants up the Chunnel and onto our soil was bad. At least the rest of our border is at sea.

[The Dark]

*shrug* I'm not planning on leaving the country, but I'm definitely getting out of Orange County, FL. Between Mayor Dyer of Orlando, Commissioner Crotty of Orange County, Governor Bush of Florida, Senator Martinez of Florida, and now the President, one could drown in the slime the politicians exude around here. I'll simply extend my job search overseas as well. Surely there's a need for economists somewhere. Just about the only places I won't go are the rest of the Southeast or in really big cities. I'm sorry, but I'm a bit claustrophobic about people. Big crowds (DC, NYC, Atlanta-type crowds) give me the heebie-jeebies.

[Darth Wong]

You don't even know what the word "reactionary" means, do you?

Are you saying that running away somehow moves forward political progress? If so, I would like to understand how removing your voice does anything to advance the progress of politics.

Are you mentally retarded or something? Since when is it reactionary to not actively advance the progress of politics? I reiterate: you obviously have no idea what "reactionary" means.

Who said the goal of leaving was to accomplish something other than getting fed up and deciding that it's not going to change? Why do you insist on trying to force everyone else's motives to fit into your pidgeonholed versions thereof?

There's a difference between what one person's goals might be and what the results of the actions to achieve said goals produce. Case in point, this election. Some people wanted to accomplish keeping Bush in power in order to make this nation better. But does the end result match the desired goal?

How does that address my point at all? You claimed that their leaving would not accomplish their goals. I stated that you were making unjustified assumptions about their goals. How is this refuted by pointing out that goals and results aren't always the same?

If it means that at least half the country has values which are abhorrent to you, why wouldn't you be happier elsewhere? One cannot agree that it's OK to seek happiness while simultaneously insisting that they should not flee from unhappiness.

Do you claim to know specifically why these people voted for Bush?

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about people who want to leave the country, not people who voted for Bush. Seriously, are you on drugs?

Well, like I've said, if people have legitimate reasons for leaving, I have nothing bad to say to them. To the people who are bitching and moaning (especially after having spent the last several months on the "get out and vote" kick), my original statement stands.

How? Let me reiterate your original idiotic statement:

To anyone who is thinking of emigrating because of the recent election:

Fuck you. Fuck you sideways with a fucking chainsaw, you pussies.

Nope, nothing whatsoever about it being OK for them to leave if they have "legitimate reasons" (I imagine you set yourself up as the sole arbiter of what constitutes a "legitimate reason"), just a lot of hot air and stupidity.

[Hotfoot]

Are you mentally retarded or something? Since when is it reactionary to not actively advance the progress of politics? I reiterate: you obviously have no idea what "reactionary" means.

Given that the word can and is used to describe things which impede political progress, I'm afraid I don't see why this is that important. The way I used it seems accurate to me, and you have not shown how it is inaccurate. Otherwise, it seems you're getting into a debate about how I should consider people's intentions equal to what happens. The simple fact is that people before the election were saying, "get out and vote, make your voice heard, make change!" and now many of those very same people are wailing that they'll leave for Canada. That is bullshit. That is what I am pissed off about. One minute they ask for people to help politics move forward, the next, they are acting like children who have to go to have liver for dinner instead of pizza. That very act sends out a pretty negative message as far as I'm concerned, and sets back the very progress they were fighting for.

How does that address my point at all? You claimed that their leaving would not accomplish their goals. I stated that you were making unjustified assumptions about their goals. How is this refuted by pointing out that goals and results aren't always the same?

I did respond to that point in haste, allow me to clarify. If your original goal is to make a change in the nation, you won't achieve that by running away. End of story. These people who talk and talk about change and then bitch and moan about running away when things don't go quite as planned have been pissing me off for years now. I don't see, however, how you're going from people who are leaving just because of the election, and people who are leaving because of better job opprotunities and lives elsewhere. Jobs and lifestyles were never going to instantly get better if Kerry was elected, in fact, they might get worse, and who knows, maybe the US economy will undergo a massive growth spurt due to some completely unrelated event that the current administration will take credit for. These are not fucking instant changes, and to make such a life altering decision based on a regular election which, while important, is not exactly world-shattering, IS STUPID. America will still exist four years from now, more or less as it has existed through previous administrations.

If it means that at least half the country has values which are abhorrent to you, why wouldn't you be happier elsewhere? One cannot agree that it's OK to seek happiness while simultaneously insisting that they should not flee from unhappiness.

Do you claim to know specifically why these people voted for Bush?

What the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about people who want to leave the country, not people who voted for Bush. Seriously, are you on drugs?

You said that at least half the country (hardly true, come now, it was 51% of 60%, which simple math can tell us is 30.6% of people eligable to vote), has values which are abhorrent to you (in this case, the hypothetical pissed off voter). You are claiming that you know the people who voted for Bush necessarily have abhorrent values to your own, when that could easily not be the case. You don't know specifically why those people voted for Bush, you don't know it makes them people who are twisted malformations of humanity. The other 40% of the nation simply doesn't seem to give a shit at this point, for whatever reason. I can see getting annoyed at part of the 30.6%, but all of it? No. What about everyone else? If not caring about your nation enough to vote in the election is so abhorrent, why would you leave? You'd become what you hate.

Well, like I've said, if people have legitimate reasons for leaving, I have nothing bad to say to them. To the people who are bitching and moaning (especially after having spent the last several months on the "get out and vote" kick), my original statement stands.

How? Let me reiterate your original idiotic statement:

To anyone who is thinking of emigrating because of the recent election:

Fuck you. Fuck you sideways with a fucking chainsaw, you pussies.

Nope, nothing whatsoever about it being OK for them to leave if they have "legitimate reasons" (I imagine you set yourself up as the sole arbiter of what constitutes a "legitimate reason"), just a lot of hot air and stupidity.

If the only reason you are leaving is because your guy lost the election, you are a fucking idiot. There, simple enough for you? It was a rant. When people asked me for clarifications, I gave them. I'm not pissed at every single person who has ever emigrated from the USA, I'm pissed at the fuckers who keep saying that they will solely because their asshole didn't win the fucking elections! The vast majority of the time it is simply petty bullshit, often driven by the overhyped partisan campaigns of one side or the other which make the opposition seem like Satan himself.

Most sensible people, when faced with this situation tend to say, "Gee, that fellow I don't like won. Darn the luck. Well, if the jobs start getting scarce and my life starts getting tough, I guess I may have to pack up. Better make sure I can if I need to down the road."

Even before the Election has been officially decided, however, the dumbasses start with, "Gee, my bags are packed, my passport's ready, I'm heading to the promised land of milk and honey, where no bad things ever happen, and my canidate is always elected. Pardon me whilst I cry myself to sleep."

[Darth Wong]

Given that the word can and is used to describe things which impede political progress, I'm afraid I don't see why this is that important. The way I used it seems accurate to me, and you have not shown how it is inaccurate.

Oh for fuck's sake, buy a dictionary:

Merriam-Webster:
Reactionary: relating to, marked by, or favoring reaction; especially : ultraconservative in politics

No, you didn't use it correctly.

If your original goal is to make a change in the nation, you won't achieve that by running away. End of story.

And ONCE AGAIN, I point out that I seriously doubt that anyone who leaves is expecting to achieve that by leaving. What they're saying is that they're fed up and not going to raise their kids in this environment any more, dumb-fuck. Not one of them is saying "I'm leaving because this will accomplish change in America."

You said that at least half the country (hardly true, come now, it was 51% of 60%, which simple math can tell us is 30.6% of people eligable to vote), has values which are abhorrent to you (in this case, the hypothetical pissed off voter). You are claiming that you know the people who voted for Bush necessarily have abhorrent values to your own, when that could easily not be the case.

First, it is hardly unreasonable to assume that the people who don't vote are not dramatically different in beliefs than those who do; this is a vastly more comprehensive poll than any Gallup poll ever taken. Second, all of the exit polls showed that the so-called "morality" issues dominated Bush voters' perceptions of the campaign and their reasons for voting for him. Third, other kinds of polls indicated the same results, and in fact, the specific gay-marriage bans usually got more than 50% support. So it is perfectly reasonable to say that half the country's population has values that are abhorrent to you. All you're doing is hand-waving and appealing to uncertainty, ie- "you haven't absolutely proven it" even though every available piece of evidence points in that direction.

If the only reason you are leaving is because your guy lost the election, you are a fucking idiot. There, simple enough for you? It was a rant. When people asked me for clarifications, I gave them. I'm not pissed at every single person who has ever emigrated from the USA, I'm pissed at the fuckers who keep saying that they will solely because their asshole didn't win the fucking elections!

And you have not explained why this is a bad reason, you broken-record fucktard! If I could see that the country was going in the wrong direction and my hopes for positive change were dealt a serious blow by election results which proved that the situation was worse than I thought (remember: elections tell you not what politicians think, but what the people think), and I had a decent opportunity somewhere which was a better fit for my values, I would leave too. I'm not going to raise my kids in an environment which I consider to be unacceptable just because some jackass dipshit on a message board has a stick up his ass.

[Stormbringer]

Instead of emigrating one by one, why not get the "blue" states to secede and join Canada? This would leave the "red" panhandler states to console themselves with fag-bashing when the productive states remove them from the bank account and let them stew in their own stupidity.

Considering how well Civil War worked last time I don't see that happening. And given the little blue acerage there is it might not be so wise.

[Stormbringer]

I do NOT want to spend another four years watching Nitram fail to find a good job in this state.

And of course that has nothing to do with him being a foreign citizen and by your own admission having a bit of a reading and writing impairment? Jesus fucking christ, you think that might not have a lot more to do with that than the President? Or do you think Bush has nothing better to do than see Nitram doesn't find a job.

[Darth Wong]

I do NOT want to spend another four years watching Nitram fail to find a good job in this state.

And of course that has nothing to do with him being a foreign citizen and by your own admission having a bit of a reading and writing impairment? Jesus fucking christ, you think that might not have a lot more to do with that than the President? Or do you think Bush has nothing better to do than see Nitram doesn't find a job.

Wait a minute, isn't LadyTevar an American citizen? Because he should have become an American citizen by marrying her, shouldn't he? In any case, if her state is economically depressed and there's little indication that Bush intends to focus his supposedly job-creating federal spending in their direction (it apparently is better-spent on Haliburton, as per "trickle down theory"), then it may be reasonable for her to conclude that the situation is bleak.

[Melkor]

Marrying a citizen does not automatically confer citizenship upon you.

[Beowulf]

Wait a minute, isn't LadyTevar an American citizen? Because he should have become an American citizen by marrying her, shouldn't he? In any case, if her state is economically depressed and there's little indication that Bush intends to focus his supposedly job-creating federal spending in their direction (it apparently is better-spent on Haliburton, as per "trickle down theory"), then it may be reasonable for her to conclude that the situation is bleak.

Nitram's not an American citizen for a couple reasons IIRC: 1. It takes a while for the paperwork to go through. 2. He has to meet the requirements (A bit of U.S. History mostly) 3. He has to want to become one.

My stepmother is still only a resident alien, even though she married my dad 2 years ago. This impacts among other things, my ability to get a security clearence, because she's still a PRC citizen.

[Stormbringer]

Wait a minute, isn't LadyTevar an American citizen? Because he should have become an American citizen by marrying her, shouldn't he?

No, it's not automatic for marriages by any means. And I'm not sure if Nitram even wants to, from what I understand he's lived here long enough to have become a citizen if he wished.

In any case, if her state is economically depressed and there's little indication that Bush intends to focus his supposedly job-creating federal spending in their direction (it apparently is better-spent on Haliburton, as per "trickle down theory"), then it may be reasonable for her to conclude that the situation is bleak.

Sure, but Nitram is simply screwed for a lot of reasons that would still make it hard for him to find a job even in a boom economy. Sure it won't help but hearing her diatribe about it when that's the case gets really, really old.

[Sam Or I]

I maybe leaving the country, but it has nothing to do with politics.

[Hotfoot]

Oh for fuck's sake, buy a dictionary:
<snip>
No, you didn't use it correctly.

*shrugs* It's a relatively minor point, not really worth getting worked up about. I wasn't using the "especially" part, as that part of the meaning has never been really used in my frame of reference, but rather the primary part of the definition. However, if you're saying that the old rhetoric of "love it or leave it" is liberal, do please continue, because that is all this situation is when people are advocating "leaving it" when they lose.

If your original goal is to make a change in the nation, you won't achieve that by running away. End of story.

And ONCE AGAIN, I point out that I seriously doubt that anyone who leaves is expecting to achieve that by leaving. What they're saying is that they're fed up and not going to raise their kids in this environment any more, dumb-fuck. Not one of them is saying "I'm leaving because this will accomplish change in America."

And once again, I'm talking about are the assholes who whine and bitch about leaving simply because their canidate lost on election day, not because the nation has gone past the point where living there is no longer worthwhile.

You said that at least half the country (hardly true, come now, it was 51% of 60%, which simple math can tell us is 30.6% of people eligable to vote), has values which are abhorrent to you (in this case, the hypothetical pissed off voter). You are claiming that you know the people who voted for Bush necessarily have abhorrent values to your own, when that could easily not be the case.

First, it is hardly unreasonable to assume that the people who don't vote are not dramatically different in beliefs than those who do; this is a vastly more comprehensive poll than any Gallup poll ever taken. Second, all of the exit polls showed that the so-called "morality" issues dominated Bush voters' perceptions of the campaign and their reasons for voting for him. Third, other kinds of polls indicated the same results, and in fact, the specific gay-marriage bans usually got more than 50% support. So it is perfectly reasonable to say that half the country's population has values that are abhorrent to you. All you're doing is hand-waving and appealing to uncertainty, ie- "you haven't absolutely proven it" even though every available piece of evidence points in that direction.

And the general feeling on this board not one week ago was that the rise in voter turnout would result in a win for Kerry, because people don't vote unless they are unhappy with the administration. That seemed reasonable at the time, the evidence pointed that way, but that's still not what happened. Like it or not, you aren't going to get a straight answer out of politics. You aren't going to know what a nation is thinking, and no amount of polls are going to change that. The best you can get are guesses and approximations, all of which can be disproven in an instant. This is not an exact science, it's mere guesswork, and in this case, the variance of three or four percent can make all the difference. Even the exit polls miss things, people can choose not to participate, which reduces reliability, since we can't know what people don't tell us.

And you have not explained why this is a bad reason, you broken-record fucktard! If I could see that the country was going in the wrong direction and my hopes for positive change were dealt a serious blow by election results which proved that the situation was worse than I thought (remember: elections tell you not what politicians think, but what the people think), and I had a decent opportunity somewhere which was a better fit for my values, I would leave too. I'm not going to raise my kids in an environment which I consider to be unacceptable just because some jackass dipshit on a message board has a stick up his ass.

This shit has been going on since long before this election Mike, it has been going on since at least Clinton's second run for office. It crops up every single fucking time. Was the nation in dire straights in 1996? No. Was it fucked up in 2000? Not really. Yeah, the situation is a bit worse than before, but we're still getting the same shit. Moreover, you can still live in the same country and not have to directly deal with the people who's values you don't like, since clearly about half the country (by your own reasoning) share your values. Never mind that though, about half the country holds views I don't like. I'm leaving. Never mind that the people who didn't say anything may tip the balance slighty (or even majorly) back in my favor, I don't give a shit. I don't care to find out, and despite that a huge number of people share my views and values, this nation is no longer worth my time. Never mind how much I once wanted to make a difference, or how close I came, I'm out.

Yeah. That's a wonderful line of reasoning. This is not a huge fucking disparity of ideals we're talking about. Maybe it's more than you'd like to think exist in this day and age, but once again, sometimes you have to accept things you don't like.

Now here's a question for you. With all this you're giving me about half the nation having abhorant views compared to your own, you've said you'd not want to raise your children in such an atmosphere. Now, had Kerry won, would you have stayed? What difference would Kerry's victory have really made? Say Kerry won by the same margin Bush did. Would you still want to leave the country? You still have roughly half the country with opinions you find disgusting, only now it's about three percent less than the people you agree with. How does that massively change things?

It doesn't. The election was close, maybe not as close as the last one, but it was by no means a landslide. It was always going to be close, we knew that going in. So if people are so intent on leaving because the general populace of the United States of America are a bunch of backwards hicks who vote with their bible instead of their brains, and we knew this going in (which, frankly, we DID), why weren't they talking about leaving or getting ready to do so because the nation was in the crapper BEFORE the election even happened?

Kerry wasn't going to magically change this fact. Bush isn't changing it. So, since under each, America would stay largely the same for the duration of their respective terms (large scale changes in belief structures will happen over the course of generations, not a few presidential terms), why do you care which asshole won? THE PEOPLE ARE THE SAME. THEY ALWAYS WERE. Since the president isn't a primary factor in this problem, it's stupid to hang your reaction on that rather than the underlying problem.