quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I love how one solitary event without a teleprompter will be forever used as a response to Obama's general inability to function without one.
I believe a single positive is required to disprove a negative. So yes, "one solitary event" is a perfectly acceptable rebuttal to the teleprompter thing. Sorry.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Lisa what exactly is wrong with using a teleprompter? Do you expect long speeches to be memorized? Would notecards or a paper text be more acceptable? Why?
What exactly is wrong with jotting down a couple of main topics on ones hand? Would a note card have been more acceptable? Why?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:DarkKnight, the reasons I think that people have been bringing up the hand thing are 1) as a counter to the teleprompter thing and 2) because it brings to mind cheating or crib notes particularly because she attempted to look at her hand surreptitiously - or at least it seemed that way. This adds to the idea that she doesn't have a grasp of the facts.
That said, I agree that it is a silly thing to focus on.
Also, a speech tends to be tougher to memorize than a few talking points.
Since I already answered the question maybe you could as well instead of dodging it?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: If Pres. Obama really pisses all of America in the next two years and Palin takes the 2012 election.... well english is my first language so living in the U.K. wont be so bad.
Don't embarrass yourself. I'm so tired of all the lefties who say "If Bush wins, I'm moving to another country. If Palin wins, I'm moving to another country." No one ever does it; it's just silly rhetoric.
The day after Bush got reelected my friends family made plans to move to Sweden. His father was a professor at a nearby college and decided he couldn't take what was happening to America.
Posts: 549 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Lisa what exactly is wrong with using a teleprompter? Do you expect long speeches to be memorized? Would notecards or a paper text be more acceptable? Why?
What exactly is wrong with jotting down a couple of main topics on ones hand? Would a note card have been more acceptable? Why?
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but putting it on her hand, where she attempts to surreptitiously take note of something suggests to me that she is trying to appear artificially smart. To me, this suggests that SHE believes people would look down on her for using a note card. Considering the scorn she has heaped on Obama in the past for using visual aides when addressing the public, this suggests hypocrisy to me.
I think it also says something about the demonization of intellectualism by the right against the left. But that's a tangential issue.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Lisa what exactly is wrong with using a teleprompter? Do you expect long speeches to be memorized? Would notecards or a paper text be more acceptable? Why?
What exactly is wrong with jotting down a couple of main topics on ones hand? Would a note card have been more acceptable? Why?
Well, for one, writing on yourself is something children do
It also generally lasts for longer than you need it. Showing your notes after a speech just seems weird.
There's not a lot of room for what's on a hand (or a notecard). Presumably if one can't remember five small words, one is just making up what she is saying as she goes. Which are what a lot of Palin's speeches seem to be like.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Lisa what exactly is wrong with using a teleprompter? Do you expect long speeches to be memorized? Would notecards or a paper text be more acceptable? Why?
What exactly is wrong with jotting down a couple of main topics on ones hand? Would a note card have been more acceptable? Why?
Sorry but I'd rather have my president treat his/her speeches like the national syndicated events they are rather than my 8th grade book report presentation.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't say very many anti-Palin things to me, but this story has her looking pretty silly. Especially the clip where she actually looks at her hand.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I guess this is just another part of the post-Brown-election aggressive return to campaign mode, but Gibbs making fun of Palin during a press conference seems like a disappointing return to the Limbaugh-baiting the White House engaged in last Spring. At the time, that narrative was easy, as many pundits were happily consigning the GOP to semi-permanent rump party status. It doesn't feel like that tactic will be as successful if they return to it now with the press more enamoured of the "wave election" narrative.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Well, for one, writing on yourself is something children do
It also generally lasts for longer than you need it. Showing your notes after a speech just seems weird.
There's not a lot of room for what's on a hand (or a notecard). Presumably if one can't remember five small words, one is just making up what she is saying as she goes. Which are what a lot of Palin's speeches seem to be like.
quote:Sorry but I'd rather have my president treat his/her speeches like the national syndicated events they are rather than my 8th grade book report presentation.
To me, it doesn't really matter that it is Palin. This behavior just strikes me as unbecoming a public official.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
I guess this is just another part of the post-Brown-election aggressive return to campaign mode, but Gibbs making fun of Palin during a press conference seems like a disappointing return to the Limbaugh-baiting the White House engaged in last Spring. At the time, that narrative was easy, as many pundits were happily consigning the GOP to semi-permanent rump party status. It doesn't feel like that tactic will be as successful if they return to it now with the press more enamoured of the "wave election" narrative.
This didn't strike me as particularly smart. Palin is probably someone they're better off ignoring. If she wants to continue to make extremely snide remarks about Obama, let her. Elevating her by having the Press Secretary mock her is a bad choice, and it's in poor taste. This isn't an issue they want right now.
Let Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert do your work for you. And trust me, they are. And they're doing it far better.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Are there countries which make it more difficult? Sure! Are there also many first world countries that make it far easier and less painful? HECK, yeah.
Meh. *points at Ace of Spades article*
quote:They are drawn to Canada by its liberal immigration and refugee policies
quote:All three were able to operate in Canada using the same method. They arrived and claimed to be refugees seeking political asylum. Under international law, a refugee is someone who has a well-founded fear of being persecuted in his native land, but Canada's interpretation is much more liberal.
quote:“The procedure is very simple. You have to fill the papers, pick up the--the fingerprints and the picture, and let the person go,” says Diaconescu, who says the whole process takes almost two hours.
Canadian authorities acknowledge that just 5 percent of the refugees coming into Canada are detained. The other 95 percent are released and told to show up for an immigration hearing that will be held sometime in the next year. Many, however, never bother to attend.
quote:And getting full benefits. In fact, Gallagher says that Canada is the only country where, when you arrive, you can work, and in addition, you can collect welfare and health benefits. You can also enroll your children in school.
Easiest? Probably not. But relatively easy? Yeah, I'd definitely say so, as well as simple and well, liberal.
I think its fair to lambast our immigration system for being too open (although I would respond that it is in Canada's interest to keep it that way, if only to give Ace of Spades the willies). But I don't think it is fair to complain that Canada's immigration system is too difficult.
And we could sit and trade anecdotes (for example, my office is like 80% immigrants of roughly 10 or less years. In the last two years we've had two spouses come over and multiple relatives), but as the article re-emphasizes, our immigration rate is twice that of the States and tops by some measures such as
quote:Canada is immigrant-friendly. It confers the most new citizenships per capita and per $ GDP, and the second-most new citizenships overall.
quote:But I don't think it is fair to complain that Canada's immigration system is too difficult.
Canada's immigration system is very difficult if you are not a refugee, married to a Canadian, or already working in Canada. And it's still pretty hard even if you're the latter. If you're a self-employed American without a master's degree, it's pretty much impossible to get into Canada.
Perhaps that's the way it should be; I certainly don't think Americans should be on the list of the needy. But it's not at all easy for Americans to get across the border nowadays.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Canada's immigration system is very difficult if you are not a refugee ...
See, that doesn't seem to jive with the either my experience or the numbers. IIRC, only 10% of the immigration numbers are refugees.
Also, let's not get too off-topic. I thought we were talking about predicting what Canada's immigration policy would be like in the event of a Sarah Palin presidency and major upheaval. That would be a refugee situation anyways and I'm sure we wouldn't go all Mexican border fence.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:See, that doesn't seem to jive with the either my experience or the numbers. IIRC, only 10% of the immigration numbers are refugees.
That number doesn't refute that at all. There are relatively few refugees. Though I suspect the immigration system might also be difficult if you are a refugee (in many cases).
Heck, one member of the community (who has posted extensively about the ordeal) has a Canadian spouse and is a medical professional with two upper graduate degrees, and had a lot of hassle immigrating to Canada.
What do you think makes Canadian immigration non-difficult, Mucus? The Canadian gov't publishes their criteria for someone even being considered, after all, and they certainly are pretty stringent (as in, most people won't come anywhere near qualifying).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
*shrug* I've already listed many of the reasons why, but I can reiterate. Most of my extended family immigrated to Canada, cousins, grandparents, many with no degrees (advanced or other) or visible means of support, with no real issues. My SO and her family immigrated as a family in one go, no problems, no prior job. The company at which I work is roughly 80% immigrants (as in within the last 10 years). Two of them have brought over wives in the last two years, one which married in a whirlwind romance in just two trips, the second of which was to actually bring her over. Multiple employees have brought over non-spouse, non-child relatives as well.
Of course, those are anecdotes. On the other hand, so is the CT case, but I would note that technically one doesn't evaluate the efficiency of say, a health-care system based on horror stories, so why would one evaluate an immigration system that way?
Our statistics on immigration are well above the average, and tops in areas such as immigration per capita/GDP as nationmaster points out.
Our immigration is so open that we regularly get flak from the States about how it should actually be more closed as Ace of Spades link to.
Plus, we often get positive and neutral praises such as from United Nations reports:
quote:"All Canadians can be proud of what the report says about Canada," says David Morrison, the executive secretary of the United Nations Capital Development Fund.
quote:"The report really singles out Canada as a model as a receiving country," Morrison said.
"Canada is historically a very open country. It is a country based on immigration to a very great extent. Today, Canada is one of the most open countries to migration in the world and accepts a large number of migrants each year, both on a permanent basis and as temporary workers. It also accepts a large number, per capita given Canada's population size, of asylum seekers," he said.
quote:"The report argues that migrants should have the same access to health and education -- if they arrive legally -- that citizens do. And Canada is again singled out in that regard for what it offers migrants once they arrive," Morrison said.
So I'm open to the idea that we're not perfect. Indeed, I never actually claimed that we are perfect. But we're definitely one of the best and not particularly difficult as claimed.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I pass as a "Skilled Worker" when I get my Master's Degree this December. Not sure if I pass before then. I ended up with a 76, which is just a little above passing.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I checked a couple of years ago, I wouold have passed if I had a job waiting for me there. Not likely. There doesn't seem to be an office manager/executive assistant shortage in Toronto.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nod* Without a Bachelor's degree, there is basically no way I qualify. Even if I had the promise of work.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
As it was explained to me, for many (maybe most?) jobs, it is illegal for a Canadian employer to offer the job to a non-Canadian until certain hoops have been jumped proving there isn't a Canadian willing to take the position. In my case, this meant doing a 6-month national jobsearch outreach within the profession, with careful documentation.
I don't know the details of any other given case, and I wouldn't presume to know. I do know there are a lot of people in Canada technically illegally, although that doesn't come up unless there is another formal process that gets put into play. I myself was in Canada in a grey zone of legality for awhile -- i.e., since I had applied for residence from within Canada, I was permitted to stay because I couldn't be deported on those grounds alone. But I wasn't there with legal status, so I wasn't eligible for certain things, either.
I don't know how many people are in similar grey zones. Most other Canadians didn't understand I was in a grey zone because they assumed as the wife of a citizen, I must be legal -- this includes other physicians, people at the driver's license bureau, etc. It was kind of funny.
Posts: 831 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
kmbboots: Without a Bachelor's degree, you shouldn't be applying under the Skilled worker's program. There are unskilled worker programmes like the foreign worker programme and in a case where compassion applies, there is the refugee program. Plus, if you have family, they can sponsor you.
And again, (kmbboots, I say this with no personal ill-will. And on a personal level, I want your efforts to succeed) if we're considering the issue on compassionate grounds, isn't this the way it should be? You're an American that isn't applying on hardship grounds that works in a managerial position.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
[added before seeing post immediately above]
Additionally, it can be difficult to interpret official statistics, because they do not always say what you think they say. For example, the CIC site presents an average application processing time, but that is not really indicative of the time it takes from start of application to receiving the landing visa. The application processing is just one step of a multistep process.
---
Edited to add: I harbor little ill-will toward Immigration Canada. What I do have is mostly because I now have to answer questions at border-crossings about why I left after obtaining Permanent Residence status almost immediately to work in New York (as if I were trying to get away with something). But, whatever.
I'd be happy to know that the process is much more straightforward for true refugees.
Posts: 831 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a Bachelor's; I don't have a Masters. My point was not that I couldn't immigrate. My point was that people much worse off that I am - and who would be considerably worse off with Republican leadership - would be even less able to immigrate.
At any rate, I find your gloating at our potential misfortune still pretty darn obnoxious.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Without a Bachelor's degree, you shouldn't be applying under the Skilled worker's program. There are unskilled worker programmes like the foreign worker programme and in a case where compassion applies, there is the refugee program.
I am a computer programmer without a Bachelor's degree. I'm actually pretty good at it. I am certainly not "unskilled labor." What would you recommend?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see the immigration thing could take a while, so I'm going to address one (maybe?) narrow point before getting back to work and addressing the rest later.
In response to:
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: At any rate, I find your gloating at our potential misfortune still pretty darn obnoxious.
I'd like to re-emphasize this from the previous page:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: ... Don't get me wrong, things would be much much better with a competent left-wing American leader. However, if the choice has to be between a "moderate" Republican and a Palin, I gotta say that a President Palin has many attractive benefits.
We're obviously working from different basic premises.
(And I can understand hostility from an American to the idea that a decline in the US would be a good thing. And I expect, no, welcome a debate on those grounds.)
But I would note that I've limited my mocking in this thread to Palin herself, not any actual posters, and I haven't called anyone an "ass" for example.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: The White House has an untypically unclassy response.
To be fair, "The White House" didn't respond at all. To my knowledge, anyway.
Robert Gibbs is the White House Press Secretary. He was speaking in his official capacity. I think it's pretty fair to call it a White House response.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, Mr. Gibbs should have passed on that joke. It was funny and almost as much poking fun at us than at her. Still, he would have been better of listening to MrSquicky.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: "You know, I don't have a read. I try not to make, or set opinions about people that I haven't had any substantive interaction with. I mean, I know what you see on TV and when-"
"Does it irk you when she criticizes?"
"You know, democracy is about critique. And the president is not immune to criticism."
Obama added, when pressed on Palin again, "I think it's wonderful to have strong female voices out there, but I don't know her."
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I am a computer programmer without a Bachelor's degree. I'm actually pretty good at it. I am certainly not "unskilled labor." What would you recommend?
I'm not sure, I guess it would depend on precisely where we're heading with this.
If we're talking about this on "future" compassionate grounds, then I agree that the policy is a bit hard on the subset of Americans that disagree with Palin and wish to immigrate in order to escape her. However, in the event of real trouble, I have every confidence that the immigration department would find a way to loosen the rules just like when they found a way to loosen the rules before the Hong Kong handover.
If we're talking about this on "I disagree with the definition of Skilled worker" grounds. Then <Insert debate between TomDavidson and TheRabbit on the value of degrees> here with a touch of a discussion on how reasonable it is for an immigration department to check references (as opposed to degrees).
If we're talking about on "I really have to get into Canada as an non-diploma American right now" grounds, then I suggest the applying as a foreign student and then getting a post-grad permit after graduation. This seems to be a decently common route for South Asians in the tech industry who supplement a foreign undergrad degree with a Canadian graduate degree.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
(On second thought, if the size of the problem is really large, it might be a better idea to skip the immigration route and go with the Jesusland approach. I'd vote for it)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: *nod* Without a Bachelor's degree, there is basically no way I qualify. Even if I had the promise of work.
Hmmmm, I simulated your hypothetical case. With high proficiency in English and no proficiency in French, if you had an offer of work, with a full work history, but zero points in education (high school drop out), no spouse, you can still pass precisely at 67 if you even remotely have have family in Canada.
Alternatively, if you trade family for a spouse with a secondary degree regardless of whether they've worked in Canada or not.
Alternatively, if you pass high school.
That seems fairly reasonable if we're evaluating skill.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My sister had no problems at all moving to Canada. Now she is an immigration lawyer and had a job with a large and prestigious firm, but still, very simple, especially compared to the craziness she dealt with getting people into the US.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
(Potential spoilers) I love it when the time-traveller (Tempus?) simply tears into her for not recognizing Clark as Superman, mocking the absurdity of the whole glasses thing.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Dear heaven, did that woman really try to draw an analogy between herself and George Washington on the basis of her dropping out of the governorship?
I despair of those who think this woman a role model...
I recently read Game Change, by Heilemann and Halperin. If you even believe *half* of what is said in that book, which is not presented with the much spin about Palin's motivations or character, you'd believe she is capable of virtually anything, and also very little of value.
The book describes marathon input sessions in which Palin showed a total lack of knowledge on nearly every key national and international issue, as well as most historical events, and a complete inability to absorb the information. She spent hours writing down every fact presented to her on index cards, which she then carried with her, demonstrating no recall of their contents. Later in the campaign aids found that she would simply stop talking, and sit motionless, like she was catatonic, when asked to demonstrate her knowledge of some important topic.
What I found interesting in this interview is that it becomes clear that despite his effusion for Palin, Beck gets sick of her as quickly as anybody naturally would.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
