Again with the advertising.

Today A friend posted a video on Facebook - here it is.

Now what do you think the purpose of that was? Do you think it has a purpose? Most of the people I've met think it does not. (If you watch the credits, it's obvious but the way it's structured, with commentary from the people who watched it tacked on the to the end of the thing itself, most people don't watch it all the way to the end.)

If you were one of those people, you should know this is an ad for Trident's latest product, a layered fruit gum that comes in flavors like pineapple/granny smith apple. If you thought that was a fun, spontaneous moment in a supermarket, you were supposed to think that but you were wrong. (Just like you were supposed to think Ikea Heights was a spontaneous theatre project.)

I'm not saying the ad is bad or wrong or even that the approach is wrong, I'm just saying, we need to be aware of the difference between advertising and "spontaneous creativity."

I suppose it could be argued that all art has an agenda but not all art is designed to provoke a smile and hopefully a purchase once you reach the checkout. That is the realm of commercial art, propaganda and public persuasion.

More importantly, art isn't so ashamed of its agenda that it tries to conceal it. Neither is it so determined to play on your sense of happy coincidence and personal enchantment.

So, should we start making art that persuades while pretending to merely amuse? Or should we maybe be aware of who writes the score, directs the video, pays the singer and ultimately cashes the check?

and just in case you wondered if I'm being a paranoid spoilsport....

this is an excerpt from the FAQ section of Improv Everywhere's website:

"I work for a brand / marketing firm / advertising agency, can we hire you?

Maybe. We do not stage official Improv Everywhere missions that advertise a brand. However, we have in the past worked with companies as creative consultants helping to develop campaigns and as video producers creating content for a brand. We have also staged pranks at internal meetings and conventions for corporate clients. We do this work independent of Improv Everywhere, and will not use this site or its resources to promote it.

We also take on sponsorship from time to time. If a company wants to hire us to simply do a mission we already want to do (with their brand having nothing to do with the content,) we would consider sponsorship. We think this video is a good example of a brand sponsoring a project.

Why would you ever work with a brand? Isn’t that against the spirit of IE?

Taking on occasional corporate gigs helps us continue to do what we do. Doing a small amount of corporate work (while keeping it separate from Improv Everywhere,) allows us to pay our New York City rents and fund future Improv Everywhere events. In terms of taking on a sponsor, we see it as no different than a television show being supported by commercials. So long as our content is not influenced by the sponsor, we think it is a smart way to fund our work."

And here is the original video to which they are referring. Remember this? People posted it all over the place, turns out it was for Stride Gum - just like the new one is for Trident Layers.

http://urbanprankster.com/2008/06/where-the-hell-is-matt/

This is the meat of their pitch btw. It bears remembering that the idea of posting a "frequently asked questions" section on your website is useful because it frees you from quoting a source. Anyone could be asking this question. If you're the owner of the website you could even be asking it to yourself, and because it's a "frequently asked question" you don't have to quote a source, there is no source - you're paraphrasing something that has come up any number of times. (good way to get your point across without sounding pushy or even assertive - it wasn't IE that asked this question after all, it's just out there in the ether - the question of How do we make money on this? You have to admit, it's a pretty important question since we all need money to live.

The thing is this, advertising is always going to take new forms and because we tend to think of advertising as a bad thing those forms are likely to be more disguised as the public becomes more adept at recognizing the old ones. Because once we see an ad for what it is, we tend to disregard it.

I'm interested in why we are so intent on preserving the illusion of spontaneous, creative expression even at the expense of awareness of how we are being persuaded to act.

I'm also interested in the response that will make most people who read this post - is anyone does, pissed off that I even mentioned it. Why does knowing this is a profit-based activity change your view of it?

Facebook itself is an advertising medium - and I'm not talking about those irritating little squares that line the top of your screen when you're playing a game or the side of your page when you're engaged in other things. I'm talking about the people you choose to friend and what you decide goes up on your page and why.

Facebook is a consensual, community advertising forum. In a way, it's a variation on Second Life. Where Second Life creates consensual geography, FB creates preferential demographics or aspirational demographics. We choose the organizations and individuals that appeal to our sense of who we are on FB and through that choice we end up cobbling together an advertising demographic that relies on interest and self-identification rather than the usual physical factors of age, income bracket, gender, geography, profession and education.

It's also an advertising demographic that provides an audience that is genuinely interested in what you have to say. And if you can disguise your content to appear to be a quirky, amusing video posted by a friend - well, why wouldn't you pick up that packet of gum that just happens to be squished together fruit flavors (pineapple apple) at the checkout counter? After all, it reminds you of your FB friend and their cute little video, you haven't tried it before and it only costs a couple of bucks, in a way, it's a reminder of a good, shared joke. And that makes it worth its weight in gum.

Once more with feeling

Yes, here I go again.

I noticed in the Montreal Gazette this morning there was a story about the City of Montreal offering incentives, actually pretty big ones, to families who choose to move there.

$12,500 in addition to the $7 a day child care and the all-round much better quality of cultural life in a city that everyone knows is lovely beyond compare (in the Canadian context,) is nothing to sneeze at. It's cheaper to live in Montreal than it is in most major Canadian cities, the food is better the art is spectacular and the people are hipper than Conan (even the dull people.)

So why are they losing between 15 and 20 thousand families a year? At this rate the city will be emptied out by mid-century. Well, speaking as a member of one of the earliest groups of Montreal ex-pats, I can sum it up for you in one word: French.

See, as much as we diligently try to pretend Canada is a bilingual country, it's not. And like it or not Canada is going to have to accept that we are part of the rest of the world pretty soon. French is the 16th most widely spoken language in the world, right after Marathi and just before Korean. French is well behind German, Bengali, Portuguese and yes, even behind Javanese. Personally, I didn't know there was such a language as Javanese so I was pretty surprised at that.

You learn to speak French if you want to work in France or work in a bistro, a haute-couture house or as a translator. For those of you unfamiliar with Canada's major industries, let me assure you, going to France, French bistros, haute couture fashion houses and translation services do not number in the top 20 contributors to the GDP.

If you live in Quebec, unless you go to elaborate lengths, your kids will be educated in French. The idea is that English is easy to pick up whereas French is hard, I suppose. But English, used and spoken well, is not easy. If you're in Ottawa, call the federal government - any branch, any level, and try to speak to one of the "bilingual" Canadians employed there; as they cough out the broken English that passes for fluency in Quebec, and you'll see how easy English is.

I'm glad I live in a country where learning a second language in the public school system is a common thing but it should be a useful language not one that has been legislated into life. Teach kids Russian, Arabic or Spanish, Chinese or Hindi and they'll have more skills to market globally than if you teach them French. Seriously, what are we thinking?

The thing is this - it's fine for a government to say, "we have two official languages in this country, learn to speak one or the other and you're ok. If you speak one OR the other we will make sure you can get all services in your language." It's wrong to force one on people and exclude the other and plenty of people will tell you, if you live in BC bilingual means you speak Mandarin and English and who is to say that shouldn't be the way things are there?

Here we are, 2010, and Quebec is still trying to force people to act as though it were 1700. It's not. And we're not going to fix a thing by using bait to lure people into a broken, culturally exclusive system.

My father was not a great guy. Anyone can tell you, I didn't idolize him, not even close, but he did instil in me the idea that no matter what anyone pretends is right - whether its because it's popular or because the government says it's right - I needed to think it through for myself and if it did not stand up to scrutiny, it was not right. Canadian linguistic policy does not stand up to scrutiny, it defies common sense, it's not politically correct to say so but it's still true; Trudeau was wrong, we got it wrong.

Boundaries and the artificial perpetuation of an elitist culture (especially one that is straining to evolve) aren't working. Especially those that are based on some outdated ideal of a "founding nation." Unless you are First Nations, you're not a member of a founding nation in Canada. I'm tired of pretending there's something edifying about protecting the obsolete at all costs.

Montreal, here's what I think; if you have to pay people to come to your dinner party then maybe you should rethink the menu.

Pictures

In no particular order - cause I can never figure out how this blog organizes photos here are;

My perfect Sunday morning breakfast. Eggs Ontario - thick-cut, 7 grain toast, baked ham, baby spinach, poached eggs and 5 year-old white cheddar cheese sauce with onion puree and red pepper flakes.

Lime flavored shaved ice with strawberries from a little hut next to a convenience store on Cesar Chavez in Austin TX

A pretty disturbing sign that caught the corner of my eye (and viewfinder) on the road out of Boston Mass.

A sun column in Ottawa ON

Terrain around Kamloops BC

Two graffiti murals in Austin TX.

One little corner of the big Texas sky

First real sunset of 2010 from my Ottawa balcony.

I am trying to find the best in Ottawa - miss Austin an awful lot.

Working and Functioning

Looking at the news, one can't help but wonder if we've lost our understanding of what it means to "work." The Canadian government is out on a prolonged Christmas break. For the most part our officials seem to think preparing the public for the next election (their election - I am not misusing a word here, Canadians don't vote on legislation) makes up the main part of their job description, meanwhile the country ends up being governed by clerical process.

Listening to the news, it is difficult not to notice the tendency of Canadian business to blend into the American economic landscape and it is increasingly difficult to make any coherent argument against it.

This is a country with a population the size of Texas located on a land mass larger than any other in the world except for China and Russia - that's right we're bigger than Australia, by quite a bit. (and honestly, I'm not sure about China)

If it were populated like any other country in the world then economic and military autonomy might make some sense but we're not. Canada's population is declining and we weren't all that populated to begin with.

I've thought a lot about this. It puzzles me that on one side of the border we have the world's superpower, bustling along making huge strides and huge mistakes but in general being followed by the rest of the world and on the other we have a huge pile of natural resources and a country that most of the world considers benignly irrelevant.

There's no question that Canadians are a bit different from Americans - for one thing cars are not as important here as they are in the states. You'd think, given the weather, that would be reversed but it isn't. I've been in plenty of cities in both countries and Canadians drive less, think less about their cars and seem, in general, to see a car more as a means to an end than as a part of their identity.

Canadians organize differently, think about health care differently - it would never occur to a Canadian to choose a job based on health benefits but in the U.S. that is common.

But when it comes to something like TV, Canadians seem to want and expect to be treated like Americans. Of course, this is not really possible and the cracks in the Canadian broadcast industry really underscore this fact.

The engine of TV is not viewers, it's advertising. If your market is the size of Texas but it has to be spread out over stations that cover the same land mass as the continental United States, and then some - you've got problems.

International advertisers aren't likely to show the same kind of enthusiasm for that market as they would for the ten times larger market in the states. And who can blame them? (And when I say international advertisers, I mean American advertisers which is really not the same since the Canadian film and TV market is widely considered to be one domestic market.)

So high-revenue generators like the Superbowl, tend not to have the same quality of ads in Canada as the do in the U.S. This means Canadian TV is not as well funded as American TV which in turn means there are less $$$$ to try to reach more territory (but fewer people) with.

All of that is fine by your basic Canadian since most of us watch more American TV than Canadian anyhow. But what does it mean from an economic standpoint? And in turn, what does that mean culturally?

Are we working? As a country, do we understand what it means to function? Or are we just focused on getting from one decade to the next with everything pretty much the same as it was the decade before? Do we know the difference between doing a job and just keeping it?

Sometimes I wonder.

Even more random than usual.

This blog is all over the place - a poem here, a few pictures, a story there, some political frustrations vented and a few ideas mixed in. I think there might even be some recipes.

Today, that's a fair description of me.

I'm unhappy with my status as a Canadian citizen on so many levels. Of course it's absurd to complain about being a citizen of a developed nation but on the other hand, how many countries deliberately remain under such a demeaning system as an actual Monarchy?

I'm watching the Hamster in Chief rule Canada like a king and of course he can. He appointed the Governor General and he can haul her ass right out of there and because Canada is what it is - what she says, ultimately, goes. What this means is a man who should have no more power than any other MP is actually and effectively an absolute ruler of what was supposed to be an augmented democracy.

Then there is that fact in and of itself.

We are closer to the United States than any other country. We share a land mass, culture, values, traditions, holidays and realistically - a language. Many of us, myself included, have our roots on both sides of the border. In my case the division is pretty extreme being both Revolutionary (I am descended from Charles Carroll of Carrollton on one branch of my mother's family) and United Empire Loyalist. (not surprisingly, a close relative of Carroll's - my family tends to be polarized.)

That mixed descent and my scrutiny of both systems and the laws that form the structure of our lives in the broadest sense has given me a perspective that is both deeply personal and at the same time completely objective on the issue of nationhood and borders.

I look at these two countries, so very close together and I see two siblings who have a deep and unresolved wound between them. Literally, Canada abandoned the U.S. in order to side with the idea of Monarchy. That division remains. Canadians are subjects of the Queen and that reality has much more of an impact on our daily lives than people understand. SH could not prorogue parliament if that were not so - and that is only one example. Try saying no to a mining company that wants to tear up your farm and you'll soon see another even more disastrous after effect of that decision.

In my view, there's no dignity in living like this. I listen to what people say, read the news, watch people's actions and it seems apparent to me that most of them don't even know what it means to be Canadian as opposed to being American. There is this prevailing view that Canada is a gentler, quieter, less warlike version of the United States. It's not true. Americans talk and argue and often end up in places where they should not be, perhaps but they discuss these things. The dialogue is always open. There is no power in the United States that can shut the government down for a breather - not even the President has that power. That power belongs only to the people.

Canada is the younger sibling who just has to be contrary even if it costs them every common-sense benefit in the book. Originally, Canada didn't feel secure enough or real enough to have equality, instead we knelt to the Crown just in case we should ever have to draw on those resources. It was cowardly then and it is damaging now.

Canada removed itself from the discussion over 200 years ago. The country chose servitude over being "rude" and I think they were fools to do it. Worse, we hang on to it as though there were any reason at all to be this way. And then we're baffled when the U.S, treats us as though we are a secondary nation. We shouldn't be - we are.

I'm pretty sure most Canadians don't realize this. From what I've heard we, as a group, seem to think the powers of the Crown are a formality. I can say with absolute certainty - they're not. Those powers are the determining force that decides the fate of the country and everyone living in it.

If there were two siblings and one chose to educate herself, work to be independent, make her own decisions and learn to live in the world on her own while the other chose to stay at home, refused an education, insisted on being cared for, refused to participate in life in any but the most rudimentary, functional ways. One was perhaps too brash, too noisy but always sunny. That one cared about life and lived it to the fullest, often getting into trouble, exploring new places, trying new things and failing as often as not but getting out there, making things, talking to people, caring. While the other went along with everyone in public but sourly hated most of them in private, did not speak her mind, stayed in her hometown, focused on her looks and what she could get from her mother, was angry and narrow and bitter and although she often talked about making things or doing things never actually did - which one would you say had a more vital outlook on the world? Which one would you want to know? Which one would you want to be?

For me the answer is not always pleasant because I live that truth on every level but it is simple. There's no contest. Sour, bitter, inward and tied to your mother for life is no way to live, not as a person, not as a country.

How the U.S. deals with Canada is sometimes beyond my ability to comprehend. Canada rejected every sensible thing the Americans ever came up with; including democracy. Yet Canada still expects to be treated as an equal and included in every discussion. It is a mark of how civilized the Americans are that they can put aside the absolute rejection of every American value and the subsequent pretence that such a rejection never occurred well to treat Canada like a valued sister nation. It is something to learn from. It is good manners on a global scale. Personally, if I were the U.S. and I had to deal with such a wrong-headed sibling always tugging at my coat sleeve, I would not be so kind.

So today, I try to look forward. Try to parcel my life out into the personal and the political, the present and the past. I try to enjoy what is here, exactly where I am but in that moment, cannot and do not forget to consider the future in everything I do. It's a hard balance to live without regret in this moment, carry along the lessons of the past without crying over them and embrace an uncertain future as though it had any promise. I am trying to write out my greater demons in order to get there. It's not an easy thing.

night

In my mother's house there are blackout curtains.

She is blind now, or so she tells me, yet she sleeps with two night lights burning to guide her to her bathroom. I close my eyes and make my way in the dark.

The moon makes a webbed square of light on her textured bathroom window.

I open my eyes for that.

In Texas, there is the river running outside the bedroom.

The owls hoot at night.

Concrete floors are cool on the soles of bare feet, cool and smooth

and off the balcony, the street lights shine.

I can hear the refrigerator from the bedroom.

Sometimes there are bugs, big ones,

sometimes thunder.

I hate to say goodbye.

In Mystic, I sleep under starlight.

The sky so liquid and dark, the north star is as bright as the moon

the foghorn moans faint and high,

there are no streetlights. The night is uninterrupted.

but I sleep alone, and always will in Connecticut.

In Ottawa, if I remember,

sometimes there are voices.

There are the clouds over the hills in the distance

a few shop signs and some treetops that mark the passage southwest.

I leave all the windows open

and the lights off

listen to NPR and wake up as soon as the sun says so.

Apart from that, I am uninterrupted.

No matter what.

Radical Togetherness

I am a Canadian citizen. For most of my life I've tried to be patriotic about it. If I'm honest, I have to admit the patriotism was propped up by ignorance and a dose of fear.

Canadians are taught to think of the U.S. as some sort of overbearing older sibling. We are encouraged to resist doing anything it seems they might want us to do and although we have close ties to the states in virtually every way - we watch their TV shows, import their products, buy their cars, read their books and magazines, allow them to own our companies, are able to live there and have them live here, send them our food, eat their food, listen to their music, speak their language and more often than not ape their culture we are still supposed to resist "Americanization" wherever possible.

The big reason, the only one that made sense to me, for keeping our distance was health care. In the past, it was easy to believe Americans didn't have any. And it's true, medical bankruptcies are a huge problem but that is changing and there's the point.

Canadians think we have a monopoly on a compassionate society. We don't.

During my brief time in the U.S. I have seen as many if not more social aid agencies in full operation than we have in Canada. And something I've noticed is they make an effort to preserve people's dignity - that does not happen in Canada.

In the U.S. I have seen a society that is hitting on all four cylinders. People are poor sometimes, sure but so are Canadians. People here are equally concerned about social justice, maybe more so because you know what? They're all Citizens, all equally endowed with rights and responsibilities they don't have a Queen and they've never swallowed the idea that one person is any better than any other except by their actions, by merit.

I look at Canadian politics and what do I see? I see a country that has been treading water, at best for the last six years - maybe longer. We have no real leadership and as long as we are a Constitutional Monarchy and we have a PM who understands how to use that and apparently stay in power forever - we may as well be a dictatorship.

We're helpless about our natural resources, we don't own our own land and we are sitting on the sidelines while First Nations communities form independent countries that, while cooperative with Canada, are not actually Canadian. (whatever Canadian is.)

We have no national identity and most of us think we have the same rights as most American citizens do in their home country. We don't. Not even close.

We have embraced a system that keeps the incompetent in power as long as they are clever administrators and keeps the real blood and guts of the country down. We punish the poor, we reward elitism and we are smug about it.

We are United Empire Loyalists, faithful to the idea that some people are simply born better than others and that the rest of us should accept that and give them respect for it.

Meanwhile, our elder sibling to the south gets on with life, strikes trade deals with us, argues and learns and grows and we sit on our hands waiting for someone to tell us what to do and when they do, nine times out of ten, infuriatingly - we refuse to do it.

America is a democratic nation. The will of the people not the will of the Prime Minister, dictates the direction of the nation. In most states legislators have day jobs. Day jobs! They don't spend all their time trying to keep their position as an MPP or MLA or whatever you want to call it, they lead their daily lives and every now and then they get together to share the opinions of the people who asked them to do it. Then they go home and carry on. Sure there's corruption but if you don't think there's also corruption in Canada - well, that slow-learner gene must have bred true.

If Canada were part of the states I don't think there would be any mass exodus one way or the other. We could keep our health care system, plenty of states have their own health care system and if we were flooded by people moving north from south of the 49th? Good. Our population is not much larger than Texas. WTF do we need all this empty space for and what do we think we are going to do with such a huge share of the world's natural resources? Pledge them to that jug-eared git waiting for his mother to die in Buckingham Palace? Are we mad, carrying a grudge or just stupid?

Europe is a union now are they suffering for it? No they are not. We are not at war with the U.S. Frankly, if we were able to adopt a real North American security strategy we would be better off. Now that the Bush era is over, it wouldn't be a cartoon security system, together we might actually be able to come up with something that works.

Think of the money we spend maintaining this border - money that could be spent protecting the boundaries of the continent from the people who really do want to harm us.

OK, they have guns. Big deal. I've been in the states and have never once had to fear for my safety because of a gun. Criminals in Canada who want them can get them anyhow - who are we protecting?

What about "culture"? Well, our film industry is already part of the American domestic market. The only distinctively Canadian aspect of the film industry is funding and distribution.

Canadian directors face obstacles in distribution because of their nationality and because more funding comes from the government than anywhere else we end up with "quirky" national directors like Denys Arcand and Atom Egoyan. I ask you, do their films actually represent the Canadian viewpoint? Do we have a Canadian viewpoint?

It's embarrassing to me to think the best we can do is The Sweet Hereafter or The Red Violin truly. Think about it - is that who you are? God help you find yourself a real life if the answer is yes.

Saskatchewan, Alberta and Ontario would all benefit from being part of the U.S. It would open up the market and allow American productions to flourish wherever they needed to be. As a continent we have a hugely diverse geography and climate. If North America were an open field, filmmakers would benefit from that and maybe some production dollars would flow to the Canadian writers and filmakers who have more talent than connections.

Culture that has to be protected by government decree is nothing more than an affectation and poutine is not an identity, it is a health hazard.

We need to get over ourselves and start thinking about what would be smart. If we can't change the Canadian system and we are "overrun" with American interests, lets dismantle this leaky rowboat and get on the aircraft carrier. There are lots of things Canadians could contribute to a real democracy if only we'd wake the frig up.

Would they take us? Well, they'd be smart to say yes. Canada has more water, arable land and oil than the U.S. and while I don't think the oil is an asset from most perspectives, it does seem to be something the world respects. Forests need to be better managed all over North America, Canadians do dick all about anything in the west - levelling out the forestry playing field would make a lot of Americans happy and a lot of Canadians prosperous. And before you start rabbitting on about conservation - America is at least as advanced in green initiatives as Canada and probably a good deal more. And America is FREE - they don't have to memorize God save the queen and if some mining company wants to drill for samples on an American farmer's land, guess what? They have to pay the farmer. That's not true in Canada - why? Because the Crown owns the subsurface of the entire country.

American families have put their children through school on the sale of their mineral rights - Canadians have gone bankrupt over the loss of them to companies that made their land unliveable.

Canada's system of doling out rights to their indigenous people is notoriously racist and now that the First Nations have figured it all out, the country is about to get their comeuppance for that big time. Will the First Nations people benefit? Maybe, maybe not. They'll be functioning cooperatively side by side with a very hierarchical system and I would argue that such a system is not culturally nor spiritually appropriate for the people of this land, neither of native nor colonist descent. Hiving off land and pretending it is separate and distinct from the rest of the continent is not an indigenous principle, quite the contrary.

Native women are being crushed or ignored by land reforms, native children end up living as immigrants in their own country. It's a situation too ugly to contemplate and while some groups could reap a real advantage with autonomy, many others will not and there will be no way to protect those who suffer because under Canadian law we agreed to full autonomy within geographical borders essentially creating mini-states instead of more unity. I can't see how that benefits anyone except the men who constructed it and who will lay it all out to make it profitable for a select few. More hierarchy, more inequity - how very regal of us.

Canada has space - tons of it, and rocks, lots of them, all different kinds. We have land and land and land, we have the northwest passage, we have a market the size of Texas that has never really been given the chance to participate in capitalism. We have universities that need restructuring and some wisdom about how to manage health care - provided you don't talk to the Conservatives.

We have smart people, funny comedians, decent musicians and a limitless supply of ice cubes. We have a declining population.

In 1776, when the revolution came - I think it was cowardly for Canadians to run to the skirts of the Brits and boy are we paying for it now. Part of my family was here when the Europeans showed up, part stayed in Maryland and New England and part - the slow readers - went to Canada. I'm really tired of paying for that mistake. I don't want to be a subject of Her Majesty, I don't know any Canadians who do. Most of them don't even realize we still are.

Why can't we admit we made a mistake, cut our losses and get the hell on with our lives? This is not a game and there are no prizes given for remaining "independent." We're not independent anyway, economically we are dependent on the U.S. and politically we are officially submissive to a little old lady with a corgi fetish - really, how repugnant is that?

We are not at war, not at odds, not unhappy with Americans as a nation in any way. Why do we insist on pretending we are? What are we protecting? Our resources? When was the last time you cashed a check for oil royalties? Want more rocks? Take mine. I'm not using them.

This Epiphany I want to come out of the closet. I want to say once and for all - I'm finding it harder and harder to believe that borders protect anyone but the people who got rich off them in the first place. I like America, I think it's a force for good in the world. I don't get off on being contrary or living my life as the perpetual quirky outsider. The idea that the Canadian identity is rooted in the fact that we are "Not American" not mainstream, is idiotic. There's a helluva lot more to me than what I'm not and I want to live through that, not through some weird idea of empty opposition.

There would be one down side to Canada becoming an American state; MP's would be out of work. However, personally, I think seeing the Hamster in Chief knocked out on his blue fuzzy keester would be worth the shift all by itself.