Sadly, No presents the Medved Award to a sentence — a single sentence — that is such a perfect storm of wingnuttery and dumbfuckery that it really deserves a prize of some kind. The first one, of course, goes to Michael Medved for this: “Those who claim that the United States has become a rapacious, arrogant, destructive, domineering and imperialistic power must somehow explain the continued independent existence of the nation of Canada.”
Responds Sadly, No:
That’s a great argument and one with so many uses! For example, you say that Hitler was trying to take over Europe? Well, what about Switzerland? Huh? What about Switzerland??
People claim that Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal. But if he was, why didn’t he eat his next door neighbor, I ask you?
Fact is, we tried invading Canada twice and failed both times. I believe it’s a best out of three situation so The Rules prohibit taking a third crack at it. And, frankly, what the hell would we do with Quebec?
First, if Medved wants to break with his own wing of his own party and admit that rapacious, destructive imperialism is an undesirable trait, I say, “Welcome!”
Second, so far as I know we still can’t identify The Sponsor, the mysterious benefactor of Medved’s takeover of WTTW’s Sneak Previews (no, he didn’t win a talent search, difficult as that is to believe) and who, presumably, has been bankrolling him ever since. We can, however, wonder what in hell he thinks he gets for his money.
Finally–and I say that not because one runs out of ways to refute Medved, but because no one man has the necessary arm strength to type it all up alone–we can ignore all evidence to the contrary dating to the Adams administration, or Columbus’ genocide of the Arawaks, if you’d like, and simply note that in our present political climate, not having done something on ethical grounds is no guarantee that the likes of Michael Medved won’t be insisting we invade Canada tomorrow if it turns out there’s some partisan political advantage in it.
As for Quebec, I thought the plan was to cut it loose, tow it out to sea, and use it for naval gunfire practice.
I may have heard that wrong…maybe it was Massachusetts?
Come on, the first time we invaded Canada we hadn’t declared independence yet. That can’t count, it was just one British Colony invading another. And besides that, when we invaded Mexico we didn’t keep it all, just the parts we wanted. And when we took Hawaii we arranged first to have the government overthrown and an invitation issued. And finally, Quebec isn’t the problem with Canada. The problems are Newfoundland’s time zone situation and the fact that those stubborn farmers in Saskatchewan don’t observe DST.
A friend of mine married a woman from Newfoundland. She sang for me a song they have written specifiacally to address their half-hour difference with the rest of civilized North America.
I recall a joke that went something to the effect, “The world ends at 12 noon tomorrow, 3:15 p.m. in Newfoundland.”
So, um, you’re saying that the United States is a “rapacious, arrogant, destructive, domineering and imperialistic power”?
Scott,
By all means, lose no time in making your patriotic report to the anti-terrorist tip line!
Your loaded questions are all that stand between us and a Caliphate apocalypse!
No, I’m saying Michael Medved is borderline retarded; that we shouldn’t invade Canada; and Quebec is weird. Duh.
Where did he say we should invade Canada?
No, I said we shouldn’t invade Canada.
Medved is borderline retarded because he apparently thought that our failure to conquer Canada constituted convincing proof that the U.S. is not a rapacious, arrogant, destructive, domineering and imperialistic power.
There is other evidence that the U.S. is not those things – Canadian independence is a moronic choice.
I recall a Quebecker explaining Quebec as being the one place in Europe where the people aspire to drive Cadillacs. I’m still not sure if that was a subtle insight, simply an attempt to be obscure, some sort of insult, or all of the above.
There is other evidence that the U.S. is not those things…
Yeah, but Canada’s the only choice in the Western Hemisphere.
Oh, come on, there’s
Mexico,Cuba,Hawaii,Panama,Nicaragua,Haiti, . . . um, I need a little help.How about Saint Pierre and Miquelon?
I think we have a winner – they ARE a department of France, I believe.
Yes, an overseas department of France off the south coast of Newfoundland (and in yet another time zone one half hour ahead of Newfoundland).
Do you suppose we could get really picky here and point out that we haven’t invaded Canada since it became independent? The earlier invasions and threats to invade all came while Canada was legally a British possession. Prior to 1867 Canada was legally called British North America (though, as I recall, our Articles of Confederation called it Canada). After 1867 Canada became a dominion (British North American Acts), and remained such until about 1975 (I think, or maybe in was in 1982). As a dominion Canada couldn’t amend its own constitution but was required to refer changes to the British parliament.
Thus one could argue that Canada didn’t become fully independent until 1975.
Sorry, had to check up on that Canada thing. Britain gave up the right to amend the Canadian constitution in 1982, not 1975.
Doug, don’t forget
Guatemala, andChile. ;-)*sigh*