"Adopt us, O Canada!"

[RedImperator]

I'm just curious, but suppose the Northeast and the West did secede from the US, how would it be more advantageous being part of Canada as opposed to being independent?

Wouldn't the Cali-Oregon-Washington bloc, and the Northeast bloc be better off forming their own respective countries?

Hell, the West could even form a union with British Columbia, and the Northeast could create a new country with Ontario. Maybe that would be an even more agreeable development.

The Northeast is not self sufficient in food, natural resources, or electrical power, and I don't think the Pacific Coast states are either. It would make much more sense for them to join Canada than go it alone.

[White Haven]

Take it seriously? No. Wish I could take it seriously? Yes. Rather similar to my feelings on aliens, the supernatural, etcetera. Reality sucks somtimes.

[Next of Kin]

Hilarious.

link

Don't delay, Canada. This offer expires in four years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I dunno. Right now we're seriously thinking of adding the Turks n' Caicos island chain. Maybe when we're through negiotiations with them!

[Raptor 597]

Um, no. If anything, we adopt Canada.

"I'm Moe Green! You don't buy me out. I buy you out."

Haha, you know More Green got a bullet in the eye for saying that one.

[Ma Deuce]

Um, no. If anything, we adopt Canada.

"I'm Moe Green! You don't buy me out. I buy you out."

Haha, you know More Green got a bullet in the eye for saying that one.

Yes, but the point still stands: the "Blue states" are far bigger than Canada in just about every way that matters: Population (California alone has more people than Canada), economy, and military. So techincally, the "blue states" and Canada merging into a single country would in effect be the blue states taking over Canada, not the other way around...

[darthdavid]

Um, no. If anything, we adopt Canada.

"I'm Moe Green! You don't buy me out. I buy you out."

Haha, you know More Green got a bullet in the eye for saying that one.

Yes, but the point still stands: the "Blue states" are far bigger than Canada in just about every way that matters: Population (California alone has more people than Canada), economy, and military. So techincally, the "blue states" and Canada merging into a single country would in effect be the blue states taking over Canada, not the other way around...

No. The blue states lack experiance running a federal government. There's no system set up. It would make alot more sense for canada to take over because they have these things...

[Exonerate]

Point of order: Those bombs were British. Fort McHenry was standing guard over Baltimore Harbor; the anthem doesn't describe an American offensive operation.

Did the Fort not shoot back? Some of the "bombs bursting in air" were obviously US cannons.

Brian

Just a tangent, but during that time period, the ship cannons actually had a longer range than the shore based ones (Yes, stupid, I know). The people in the fort actually played dead, then waited until the British fleet was in range, then opened fire, forcing them to retreat.

[RedImperator]

Haha, you know More Green got a bullet in the eye for saying that one.

Yes, but the point still stands: the "Blue states" are far bigger than Canada in just about every way that matters: Population (California alone has more people than Canada), economy, and military. So techincally, the "blue states" and Canada merging into a single country would in effect be the blue states taking over Canada, not the other way around...

No. The blue states lack experiance running a federal government. There's no system set up. It would make alot more sense for canada to take over because they have these things...

The Canadian system probably couldn't handle its population tripling overnight (California alone has more people than Canada). You'd probably need to form a new government to properly integrate them.

[UCBooties]

I say we take D.C. along too. They went blue and they've got a ton of cool crap I don't want the reds getting their bible goo all over. They've obviously got no need for the Constitution or Bill of Rights. And, if we take D.C., then we won't have the question about experience with federal govt. We can bring our own !

[acesand8s]

I'll be damned if I'll have a queen as my head of state. I say we join with Canada and export the Revolution to London.

[Pcm979]

Just look at this county map of the election results:
Linky
.

That county map has Kerry red and Bush blue! I thought I'd jumped into an alternate universe for a second.

[ReinnResauq]

It's amazing how our respective national anthems describe our philosophical stance as Americans/Canadians (who, I suppose, are also Americans).

O Canada speaks about being ready, but calm, as are most Canadians. Its melody is peaceful, likeable from the first moment to the end, easily memorized, and is sung most effectively in the middle to low register preferably by a low tenor or even a baritone, although is sounds extraordinary no matter who sings it, as long as their on key. Staying on key, of course, is rather easy thanks to its phrases generally ending on the root. It, in short, is Canada. Easygoing, likeable, and welcoming.

The Star Spangled Banner speaks of riding through a siege through the darkest night, a defender mentality that seems ingrained into the society of the country it represents an "If they attack us, we survive the assault and ultimately win" line of thought. The melody is intense and it takes the entirety of the first verse to achieve full effect. Thanks to several accidentals and phrasing that can go in sometimes unnatural directions and only one repeating phrase, it can be difficult to memorize. While it achieves its purpose as an anthem by being singable by everyone, it only achieves full effect when sung by a high soprano at the minimum. It really comes into its own when sung as an SATB arrangement by a mid-sized choir with a single powerful soprano and a deep bass. It, in short is America. Powerful and very uplifting, but difficult at times and only really effective when a strong leader, trained people in the middle, and a loyal base unite.

[CelesKnight]

That county map has Kerry red and Bush blue! I thought I'd jumped into an alternate universe for a second.

IIRC, traditionally Blue = Incumbent (person or party) and Red = challenger.

Hence, that map is what everyone would have been using if not for the "red state/blue state" terminology that came up in 2000.

[Drooling Iguana]

Ok, this is probably the best idea I've heard all week. Except this:

• "O, Canada": A national anthem that's much easier to sing than "The Star Spangled Banner."

Ok, no offense, Canadians, but your national anthem, while addictive, doesn't evoke the strong sense of nationalism that the Star Spangled Banner does. With the high notes and raw power, as a Canadian, I'd just have to steal it's melody and make new lyrics.

Besides, one of the coolest things about the Star Spangled Banner is that the first verse is secular. If the Pledge of Allegience sickens me, having to pray for "God keep our land glorious and free" before every baseball game would make me vomit.

Well, all the religious portions of the English version of O Canada are secular in the French version, and vice versa (the two versions aren't translations of each other. Not by a long shot), so by alternating at the correct times you can avoid that problem.

Still, I think that the assimilation of the good parts of the US would be a good excuse to come up with a new anthem. Never much liked our current one.

Some people (including my son's private school) replace that line with "O Canada, glorious and free". The original line is a piece of tradition that will hopefully wither away someday, but to be honest, atheists in Canada don't get too worked up over it. I think part of the reason for the apathy is that the religionists in our country don't have enough influence, audacity, or just plain assholery to shove it down our throats every day as proof that the nation should be run on Judeo-Christian principles. America is more divisive this way; the atheists launch lawsuits to keep their kids from saying the Pledge of Allegiance while the religionists try to criminalize anything that offends their religious beliefs. That's what you get when you view compromise as a synonym for "not having principles".

And there's the fact that "God keep our land glorious and free" merely implies religious ties to the government, while "One nation under God" directly states that the nation is a theocracy. A small distinction, but a distinction nonetheless.

Yes, but the point still stands: the "Blue states" are far bigger than Canada in just about every way that matters: Population (California alone has more people than Canada), economy, and military. So techincally, the "blue states" and Canada merging into a single country would in effect be the blue states taking over Canada, not the other way around...

Yeah, we can't take them all at once. It would be better for us to just gobble up one or two states (most likely the New England ones,) wait a while for them to be assimilated, then go after the rest.

I'll be damned if I'll have a queen as my head of state. I say we join with Canada and export the Revolution to London. :lol:

Removing the Queen as figurehead is a compromise I'd imagine that most would be willing to make.

[CelesKnight]

ReinnResauq, that's weirdly accurate.

I wonder if it's just a coincidence, if out culture shapes our songs (i.e. a Canadianized America would have switched the song to America the Beutiful), or perhaps could the song actually shape our world outlook. Hmmm...

[CelesKnight]

You don't like our "values," red-staters, you've got your wish - we're outta here.

Don't let a moose buck you in the @$$ on your way out.

But remember, the next time you want to see a Broadway show, visit wine country, Hawaii or the birthplace of liberty, don't just bring your Visa card, bring your visa.

Come on, how many Red-Staters actually do that!? Red-Staters get Vegas and Roswell, what more could we ask for.

We also get:
*NASCAR
*The World's Largest Ball of Twine
*Bob Jones University
*The Grand Ol Opry
*Montana a.k.a. America's autobane
*Disneyland
*Fort Knox
*Area 51
*North Dakota's Nukes
*Assuming the soldiers choose where to live, we get dang near the entire military.
*NASA
*Most nuclear waste dumps (you laugh now, but what are you going to do with your waste? Remember, you also get all the environmentalists).

[Loner]

*Disneyland

Disneyworld. Disneyland is in California.

[Drooling Iguana]

* wonders who would win if the guys in Mickey Mouse and Goofy suits from Disneyland and Disney World fought to the death. *

While wearing the suits, of course.

[CelesKnight]

*Disneyland

Disneyworld. Disneyland is in California.

#!@%

[dr. what]

You don't like our "values," red-staters, you've got your wish - we're outta here.

Don't let a moose buck you in the @$$ on your way out.

**ahem**

Read my profile CelesKnight--I'm already Canadian

[Aeolus]

Haha, you know More Green got a bullet in the eye for saying that one.

Yes, but the point still stands: the "Blue states" are far bigger than Canada in just about every way that matters: Population (California alone has more people than Canada), economy, and military. So techincally, the "blue states" and Canada merging into a single country would in effect be the blue states taking over Canada, not the other way around...

No. The blue states lack experiance running a federal government. There's no system set up. It would make alot more sense for canada to take over because they have these things...

But they would come to dominate any such union.

[Aeolus]

I say we take D.C. along too. They went blue and they've got a ton of cool crap I don't want the reds getting their bible goo all over. They've obviously got no need for the Constitution or Bill of Rights. And, if we take D.C., then we won't have the question about experience with federal govt. We can bring our own !

I suspect the reds would fight you over that.

[CelesKnight]

You don't like our "values," red-staters, you've got your wish - we're outta here.

Don't let a moose buck you in the @$$ on your way out.

Read my profile CelesKnight--I'm already Canadian

The "you" is in response to the "we" in the article you quoted..

[The Duchess of Zeon]

It's amazing how our respective national anthems describe our philosophical stance as Americans/Canadians (who, I suppose, are also Americans).

O Canada speaks about being ready, but calm, as are most Canadians. Its melody is peaceful, likeable from the first moment to the end, easily memorized, and is sung most effectively in the middle to low register preferably by a low tenor or even a baritone, although is sounds extraordinary no matter who sings it, as long as their on key. Staying on key, of course, is rather easy thanks to its phrases generally ending on the root. It, in short, is Canada. Easygoing, likeable, and welcoming.

The Star Spangled Banner speaks of riding through a siege through the darkest night, a defender mentality that seems ingrained into the society of the country it represents an "If they attack us, we survive the assault and ultimately win" line of thought. The melody is intense and it takes the entirety of the first verse to achieve full effect. Thanks to several accidentals and phrasing that can go in sometimes unnatural directions and only one repeating phrase, it can be difficult to memorize. While it achieves its purpose as an anthem by being singable by everyone, it only achieves full effect when sung by a high soprano at the minimum. It really comes into its own when sung as an SATB arrangement by a mid-sized choir with a single powerful soprano and a deep bass. It, in short is America. Powerful and very uplifting, but difficult at times and only really effective when a strong leader, trained people in the middle, and a loyal base unite.

Heck, think of the Star Spangled Banner in its entirety:

Oh, 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 rocket's red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.

Chorus
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream

Chorus
'Tis the star-spangled banner! Oh long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out of their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight and the gloom of the grave

Chorus
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Bles't 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."

Chorus
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Compare it with La Marseillaise:

Arise children of the fatherland
The day of glory has arrived
Against us tyranny's
Bloody standard is raised
Listen to the sound in the fields
The howling of these fearsome soldiers
They are coming into our midst
To cut the throats of your sons and consorts

Chorus:
To arms citizens! Form your battalions
March, march
Let impure blood
Water our furrows

What do they want this horde of slaves
Of traitors and conspiratorial kings?
For whom these vile chains
These long-prepared irons?
Frenchmen, for us, ah! What outrage
What methods must be taken?
It is us they dare plan
To return to the old slavery!

What! These foreign cohorts!
They would make laws in our courts!
What! These mercenary phalanxes
Would cut down our warrior sons
Good Lord! By chained hands
Our brow would yield under the yoke
The vile despots would have themselves be
The masters of destiny

Tremble, tyrants and traitors
The shame of all good men
Tremble! Your parricidal schemes
Will receive their just reward
Against you we are all soldiers
If they fall, our young heros
France will bear new ones
Ready to join the fight against you

Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors
Bear or hold back your blows
Spare these sad victims
That they regret taking up arms against us
But not these bloody despots
These accomplices of Bouillé
All these tigers who pitilessly
Ripped out their mothers' wombs

We too shall enlist
When our elders' time has come
To add to the list of deeds
Inscribed upon their tombs
We are much less jealous of surviving them
Than of sharing their coffins
We shall have the sublime pride
Of avenging or joining them

Drive on sacred patriotism
Support our avenging arms
Liberty, cherished liberty
Join the struggle with your defenders
Under our flags, let victory
Hurry to your manly tone
So that in death your enemies
See your triumph and our glory!

My opinion on the matter is thus that states founded by violent revolution tend to have the most violent national anthems, which makes since when you think about the context of their being written and their adoption.

[White Haven]

Well, if that progresses, before long we'll have Let The Bodies Hit The Floor as the anthem for some Middle East shithole.