Does the same go for Mexico?

__________________


"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Yes, although you have a huge problem with illegal immigration that complicates the picture.

No, though I could see the case for such arguments eventually. Mexico is a different culture, with a different heritage, and even in the Southwest you can tell the difference fairly easily.

This is not to say that I support extreme notions like putting the military on the border or building a gigantic fence across our southern border. However, I do not consider openness with Mexico to be nearly as important.

__________________

Sorry to break it to you but Canada has a different culture than the US as well, starting with politics. Almost all Canadian politicians of any stripe are further left than comparable US politicians. We believe in gun control. We're against capital punishment. We support the UN. We support the effort against terrorism in Afghanistan (we are in control of that effort at the moment) but we think Iraq was a stupid mistake that had nothing to do with terrorism and we were correct. We believe in an International Court (currently headed by Louise Arbour, a Canadian). We believe in a landmine ban. We believe in peace-keeping. We don't believe in the weaponization of space or Star Wars. We believe in the Kyoto Protocol even though we are one of the largest users and producers of fossil fuels on the planet and it will cost us billions to comply. We use British spelling. We use metric. We're humble and don't believe in aggressive patriotism. We belive in the world and what it has to offer - we don't think it's a scary place we have to impose our "superior" values upon like the US often does, intentionally or otherwise. We believe in international cooperation, not selfish and short-sighted unilateralism. We believe in multi-culturalism and are much more welcoming to immigrants, as opposed to your assimilationist melting pot. We don't believe being rich, famous and selfish is a virtue to be celebrated a la The Apprentice, entertaining as that show may be. We believe in decriminalizing pot and other drugs because the "war on drugs" is a failure. We don't believe it's wise to fill up our prisons with 1% of our population and use it as a last resort - subsequently we have a murder rate that is one-third of yours per capita (even though we have a more racially diverse population, especially in our large cities).
We believe in a critical free press. We don't fawn over our leaders - if they are full of crap they are skewered mercilessly. Your politicians wouldn't last a minute in Parliament's blisteringly critical Question Period. We don't automatically sue someone when we have a disagreement. In general we're a much more compassionate society and we belive that government should address inequities and that the marketplace doesn't offer all the solutions. We believe in universal medical insurance and strong social programs. We don't believe we are a "divine" nation and have a healthy seperation of chuch and state. We believe in gay marriage (it became legal a couple of years ago) and we couldn't care less about gays in the military. We take holidays in Cuba, smoke their cigars and can drink legally when we're 19; 18 in Quebec. We have two official languages.

Granted we have many similarities but Canadians don't want to be Americans because we know we live in the best country, with the best cities in the world according to the UN, the Economist Intelligence Unit, Mercer Consulting, et. al.

http://www.justabovesunset.com/id519.html

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2...475746-ap.html

According to the article above, the planned passport requirements for US and Canadian citizens wishing to enter the US has already started to damage tourism in both countries. When will someone with common sense in the Bush Administration put a stop to this silliness?

When you strenthen your asylum laws?

__________________

Jn 4:14
I have my own Kingdom. You may live in it.

First he says this.

Then he says this.


I would say Canadian patriotism is certainly not aggressive. It's more smug and condescending, with a little insecurity showing.

__________________
One day, I will sneak across the border into Canada and be an illegal alien. It will be fun.

Read his stuff long enough and you will see this is just how he posts. It gets even funnier however when he accuses others of hypocracy.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

You're out of date as usual Dago. The laws were signifigantly tightened in 2002...

http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/media/s...004/ccat_e.htm

http://www.diycanadaimmigration.com/...ugee-laws.html

Ah, but I'm NOT a typical Canadian. Therein lies the rub.

Yes, your fellow countrymen are generally far more courteous and respectful, and are genuinely interested in other people and what they have to say. They are not given to hyperbolic explosions of frenzied anti-American vitriol.

So you are certainly NOT a typical Canadian.....

__________________
"Our fears in Banquo
Stick deep; in his royalty of nature
Reigns that which would be fear'd: 'tis much he dares;
And, to that dauntless temper of his mind,
He hath a wisdom that doth guide his valour
To act in safety."

Macbeth 3:1

Read this to get a taste of why the Brazillians retaliated against the US. Other foreign tourists rightly point out that this will contribute almost nothing to keeping terrorists out of the US.......but it will (and already has) keep foreign tourists and their dollars out of the US. Who wants to visit East Germany Part 2??

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3367893.stm

http://malaysia.usembassy.gov/wf/wf1...onsimpact.html

http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000098.html

http://www.atsnn.com/story/84139.html

http://www.workpermit.com/news/2005_...ureaucracy.htm

http://www.useu.be/Categories/Justic...isaPolicy.html

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...lure_of_1.html

etc., etc., etc.......

While it is interesting to look at and mull over the opinions of foreigners with respect to what they think we ought to do on border security and visas I am not altogether sure we should take their opinions to much into consideration when making up our minds how we want our border security to work. After all didn't Canada get a little tiffed at us when we suggested their immigration policy and asylum policy was a little to lax for our tastes? I seem to recall being told essentially to butt out since it wasn't our country and they had different values than we did. ANd that is fine, it is after all their country to do with as they see fit. Suprisingly though when it comes to our own immigration and visitation policies the same "butt out" does not apply.

THis is one of the three topics our friend Bailey likes to preach about. Of course were we to tell him what we think Canada should do, as in the case of the softwood lumber issue, he tells us to essentially take a flying leap off of a very short pier. I know he wont read this, unless one of you not on his ignore list quotes it and I would prefer you didn't I like being on his ignore list, but I for one find the him to be very hypocritical when it comes to these types of things. He is constantly telling us he is glad he is not one of us. I sometimes think he secretly wants to be an American based on the amount of time he spends discussing the US.

__________________

The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

Gort, I agree with pretty much everything you said, but even you have recognized that the Mexican border is so porous that you can have all the border agents at the "legal" crossings all you want, but that won't prevent someone from entering illegally if they truly want to. I think this is the point Bailey was trying to make.

In essence, what I understand from Bailey is that the extra security may complicate matters for the few who want to enter the US illegally but it also hampers the many who want to enter for legit reasons.

Come on Gort, you know bailey doesn't speak for all Canadians...

I fundamentally believe that from a political perspective, American opinion (and American Government views) on Canadian border security is a valid concern.

I have previously argued that Canadians specifically, and foreigners generally do have a right to speak on US policy since we are so intimately affected by it on so many direct levels.

For example, the glorious Common Law legal tradition that was born in England some 800 years ago and forms the basis, structure and form of the law in the UK, USA, Canada and Australia (plus a couple other outposts) is an interconnected web in theory and practice. US Court decisions can and do get cited in Canadian law courts. They are not binding any more than Canadian cites in US law courts. But they can be influential in the tradition that the law improves through 'best practice' that such competitiveness of jurisprudence can produce.

Certainly in the academic literature on 'public policy and administration' (that I actually subscribe to!) - articles routinely compare case-studies draw from US States and Canadian Provinces as the differences and similarities are no more or no less than the range of differences and similarities between Texas and Maine (for example).

And of course, in taxes, customs, corporate law, border security, coastal control and national defense, there is an obvious and strong connection between Canada and the USA - by the simple rule of the market. This is similar to the national mutual-interest that is increasingly common in Europe - for exactly the same reasons: it is as necessary as it is beneficial. However, it is rarely popular on either side of the border (NA or Europe or wherever).

All that being said, I think it is quite valid for non-Americans to have opinions on American public policy proposals. If anything, competition and open dialogue is always a benefit - and the door goes both ways, certainly.