Well, I'm wasn't commenting on the American dream, but the Republican party. Feel free to comment on Canadian politics, since I don't believe that just because you don't live in a place, it doesn't mean that you can't pay attention to the news and come to your own conclusions. Actually during the Canadian election, Canada heard from quite a number of Americans from both the right and left wing trying to encourage Canadians to vote one way or another. Also as Korvac has mentioned a good number of Canadians conservatives politicians are currently attending the RNC, swapping ideas as well as money.

Anyways, I should have went into more detail on why the Republican party doesn't represent those things that Arnold mentioned. Simply one liners don't make much of a political discussion, but it was late and I figured I would post more later. Anyways, it's been my experience is that conservative political parties make lousy conservatives, just as liberal political parties make lousy liberals. An example would be small government which is supposed to be conservative value, but rarely do any conservative politicians actually decrease government. Both conservative politicians and liberal politicians seem to be for more government, just different kinds of government. Another example is the so called fiscal conservatism, which I can't say with a straight face anymore. I think fiscal responsibility is a better term, since it doesn't seem to be something done by many conservative politicians. Most conservative politicians seem to want to increase spending while giving out tax cuts. They don't seem to understand that spending money that they don't have causes large debts and deficits.

Anyways, a lot of the things Arnold mentioned in his speech are not exactly things that the Republican party has a monopoly on. Some things are more in line with the Libertarian party than the Republican party, others the Democrats are just as likely to do and others I don't think either of the two major parties can make claims on. Anyways, I'll go into more detail later point by point when I get the chance.

That is actually a pretty damn good point Brent. Arnold actually is more representative of the aspiration of the American dream than an American born citizen.

Its members or its ideals? There is such a thing as trying to correct your party and the way I see it: the greater number of Arnold-like Republicans that self identify then the power of religion and intolerance is offset. Whether you like Clinton are not you have to admit he was a check on the extreme of his party by letting moderate Dems know that they still have a home and that only they could fix it. Unlike you Canadians third parties aren't as viable here as I am sure you know so fixing the way to go.

It should give Dems pause, if they can shake themselves out of the notion republicans are zombie Rush dittoheads, to see that given a choice between what is on offer that Bush, as imperfect as he is, is the choice of people like Arnold over what Kerry represents. That is why some find it funny that people who get to call themselves progressive are backing Kerry.

Hey, I agree with you. I just find it funny that a thread that starts by praising a foreigner for his opinions on America now finds the thread-starter telling a foreigner their opinions on America don't matter because they're a foreigner.

..and when is a foreigner not a foreigner? when they become a US citizen. I see your sense of irony is as defective as your politics M. Your cloak of diversity and tolerance is slipping.

Give me a fucking break.....


Lets all bow to your superior sense of irony and superb taste in "politics"


lighten up buddy.

EDIT: Oh, but your point about people calling themselves "Progressive" and yet still supporting Kerry was spot on.

We can trot out the fuck-upidness of every party and every politician. It is always a choice of the lesser of two evils because the poor bastards working at 7-11 and McDonalds are held to a higher standard of competancy and honesty than any/all politicians. When a human being has no fear of consequense for it's actions you're gonna get shitty results- republican or democrat won't figure into anything but the details. Those details exist in every elected official but the end result is going to be fucked up either way. Troting out the details without refuting my premise

Sums it up pretty well.

Gotten into one to many bullshit semantic arguments on this forum to hunker down for one when I point out something that makes me chuckle.

So, there's this hurricane that\'s about to hit Florida . It's supposed to be really bad, I guess.

My sister lives in Florida. I think I should call her.

Because Arnold isn't the one running for President, the guy who's in the back pocket of the extreme Christian right is. (An attorney General who has taxpayers pay to cover up naked statues? yeah, that's sane.) I'm aware that there are reasonable moderate Republicans, but their party has been hijacked by a bunch of religious ideological crackpots. (Barry Goldwater must be spinning in his grave.)

Arnold is supporting Bush because it's necessary for his currency in the party. His relationship with GW has not been all that great and he has been friendly with Kerry.