April 05, 2006

Kindly define "friend"

Apr. 5 - The Globe and Mail headline shouts Brief Throne Speech hails U.S. as 'best friend' - death quotes theirs, as though that statement is a bad thing - which is why it continues to bewilder me that so many in the MSM express opposition to new regulations which require Canadians crossing the border to carry passports. Are we to suppose that the Globe and Mail thinks Canadians should have the kinds of consideration merited by long-standing ties of friendship between the two countries without the friendship part? (Actually, yes, but don't ask me to explain it.)

It seems below much of the media's radar up here that some decidedly unfriendly words and actions by columnists, activists and even members of the previous government have led many Americans to not count Canada as a friend and, too well aware that Canada was a member in good standing of the Axis of Weasels, regard this country as little better than France and deserving of the same disdain and treatment.

The formation of the Congressional Friends of Canada was widely hailed up here but should have been a huge warning flag. It was reactive, not pro-active: a reparative act in response to a woeful admission that relations between the two countries have deteriorated to the point that such an organization is needed, for why bother if there was no need to counteract the altered perception of Canadians by Americans?

Things have changed since Sept. 11. Before that day we tended to brush aside the slings and arrows thinking that we were "big enough to take it" but once we were attacked we took careful note of who were friends and who were foes and Canada came up sadly short. Blame Chretien, Parrish and Martin or applaud them, just don't overestimate our willingness to overlook or forgive because it's no longer about hurt feelings but about our very survival.

Also, for all the anti-Bush sentiment and professed preference for Democrats up here, please don't fail to note which party is increasingly becoming the party of protectionism and isolationism. Those who don't believe such sentiments will hurt trade are sadly mistaken.

The funny part is that the Globe and Mail is supposed to be business-oriented, yet the attitudes and policies they promulgate would have a devastating effect on the Canadian economy. Go figure.

Posted by: Debbye at 10:04 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 396 words, total size 3 kb.

1 The Democrats are economic isolationists, presumably in the interest of the working class. The Republicans are free traders in the interests of the business class. American policy will always serve american interests, period, no allowances for friendship. Canadians, save those obsequeous little twits that you probably admire, understand that. The startling difference between Canadians and americans is that our concerns extend beyond our national interests and if you require any proof simply examine our respective foreign policies.

Posted by: joebaloni at April 17, 2006 06:08 PM (htX6t)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
14kb generated in CPU 0.0535, elapsed 0.1055 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.0984 seconds, 143 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.