One of the most interesting things to me about my move to Canada is that a fairly large number of people assume that I am here escaping the evil Bush regime. These folks are often taken aback when I point out that I am, in general, a Bush supporter, although I think his take on illegal immigration and fiscal irresponsibility are both huge disgraces.
It is not at all unusual to have a completely random Canadian make some snide comment about the current White House administration - with the obvious assumption that I must agree with them. Why else would I be seeking safety in the welcoming busom of Canada if it wasn’t to get away from the neo-fascist regime of Bush? An equally interesting phenomenon is that these people invariably believe they know everything there is to know about the American political landscape - and are more than happy to share with me exactly what is wrong with America (hint: pretty much everything), how we need to go about fixing things, and especially how Canada is a “civil society” while America is peopled with ignorant savages relishing the death of anyone that stands in the way of our pursuit of empire. OK - perhaps that last bit smacks of hyperbole - but not by much.
My favorite encounter of this variety came during our first foray into Canada looking for housing- shortly after hurricanes Katrina and Rita had savaged southern Louisiana from east to west. We were in a store called Northern Exposure, trying to buy some clothes for my Canadian wife (yes, the real reason for my immigration) since our stuff was still missing/in storage post hurricane(s). The elderly salesperson who was assisting my wife struck up a conversation with me during a dressing room lull in the shopping action. When she found out that I was originally from Texas, and most recently from Louisiana - she immediately assumed that I was a political refugee from the horrors of Bush’s America (or is that Amerikkka?), escaping the bungled federal response to the hurricane emergencies. When I replied that no, in fact, I supported a lot of the President’s policies - she became absolutely incredulous and just a wee bit condescending. “Really?” she said, “I can’t stand the bastard”. At this point her supervisor came over, took her by the arm, and with a “That’s enough, Miriam”, gently but forcibly moved her to the back of the store.
The thing that perplexes me the most is that Canadians have a strong sense of national identity and take great pride in being Canadian - yet they somehow expect me to be apologetic, even ashamed, for being an American. I guess we’ll just have to see if an evil American can somehow integrate into polite Canadian society.
9 responses so far ↓
beloml // April 12, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Howdy from Aggieland! I just discovered your blog via Michelle Malkin’s. Thanks for such great posts!
Expat Texan // April 12, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Beloml,
Thanks for stopping by. I figure there are a lot of folks who won’t recognize the Aggie bonfire (taken during my sophomore year at A&M), or the muster photograph. But those who do, do - and I’m happy to have that connection.
Ed Darrell // April 15, 2008 at 8:08 am
You should listen more closely to your Canadian neighbors. God sends wisdom in many different ways. Don’t ignore every burning bush you see.
Expat Texan // April 15, 2008 at 10:36 pm
Thanks for the advice, Ed. If I encounter a burning bush that speaks to me, I may reconsider my thoughts on religion, and I will definitely listen to what it has to say. Until that life altering experience, I suppose I will just keep forming my own opinions. Rarely do I let random commentors on Al Gore’s interweb influence my moral, ethical, or social leanings.
Ed Darrell // April 15, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Oh, and then there is this: DDT wasn’t banned for its being a suspected human carcinogen. It was banned because it’s incredibly toxic to creatures smaller than humans. Let’s not stray too far from the facts.
Expat Texan // April 16, 2008 at 12:20 am
Mmmmmm, seems to me you are the one straying from facts. Your initial screed dealt with the horrible carcinogen, DDT. Now the goalposts are being moved since, it would seem, there is a fair bit of data that calls that relationship into question. In fact, when I read your original comment, the only issue you raise is that of carcinogenesis. Now, of course, we need to lay the blame elsewhere since the epidemiology is tenuous, at best.
Sort of like that global warming morphing into climate change phenomenon.
Ed, I can’t help but notice that your anti-DDT advocacy is fairly, um, robust. As near as I can tell, anyone who disagrees with you is a “partisan lunatic” or “liar”. Doesn’t seem to be a very productive way to engage those who you wish to influence. I’m assuming you have a signed poster of Tim Lambert hanging on your wall in a place of prominence?
J F Beck // April 16, 2008 at 3:13 am
ET,
Ed Darrell is indeed a Lambert wannabe. Check out the link below.
http://rwdb.blogspot.com/2007/08/ddt-misinformation-clearinghouse.html
Ed Darrell // April 17, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I don’t recall ever having used the term “partisan lunatic.” I try to be quite reserved. Anyone who lies may be called a liar, if they persist in the lie. For example, Steven Milloy knows that what he reports as eagle counts from the Audubon Society are not eagle counts from the Audubon Society. He knows when he says that some pheasants or quail had “normal hatch rates” after being fed DDT, that the chicks all died within a week, and he’s had to alter the researchers’ reports to make it say what Milloy wants it to say, instead of what the report says.
And if you’ve read the posts on my blog about DDT, you know your characterization is unfair and inaccurate.
Mr. Beck just can’t get over the fact that the American Cancer Society lists DDT as a probable human carcinogen. Mr. Beck wishes DDT were not so toxic, not so dangerous in the wild, and especially he wishes that DDT were not carcinogenic.
Don’t we all. If wishes were medical treatments, no one would suffer from malaria.
Expat Texan // April 17, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Ed,
It’s not difficult to find your leavings on the interwebs with regards to DDT. You do, in fact, refer to Dr. Ames as a “partisan lunatic”, hence the quotes.
Also, Ed, I’m an oncologic researcher by trade. Being on the list of “probable carcinogens” means there is no conclusive evidence that of causality. Period.
Finally, please move this to an appropriate post comment thread - I don’t really want it cluttering up one of my permanent pages at the top, although I’m sure that’s why you started the thread here.
Leave a Comment