To: GMMAC
"Some believe the primary differing factor between Australia & Canada to be the former was settled by criminals & the latter by those at least smart enough not to get caught."
But I've always thought that the Aussies' managing to get that much more distance between themselves and old Limey should count for something.
27 posted on
03/22/2006 8:11:52 AM PST by
Unrepentant VN Vet
("Antique" MSM infers some remaining functionality; IMO they're the zombie media.)
To: Unrepentant VN Vet
"But I've always thought that the Aussies' managing to get that much more distance between themselves and old Limey should count for something."
I'd argue that both Australia & New Zealand's relative geographic isolation has made them far less inclined to shake off - for better & for worse - their original "British" traditions & attitudes.
While Canada's proximity to America influences us far more - both pro & con - in your direction.
Further, because "influence" - by definition - happens over an extended time-frame, there's generally & depending upon the issue about a 5-10 year lag time.
(e.g. Harper's election on January 23, 2006 may well have been yours of November 7, 2000 finally coming around)
There's also an issue of the biased nature of the "American" influence we receive:
Although the internet is slowly changing this, unlike you Yanks, we overwhelmingly receive your msm & Hollywood's point of view while hearing far less from decent, right-thinking American sources.
Combined with the afore mentioned lag time, it's no wonder that, for example, Bill Clinton likely remains more popular in Canada than he is Stateside.
30 posted on
03/22/2006 10:16:09 AM PST by
GMMAC
(paraphrasing Parrish: "damned Liberals, I hate those bastards!")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson