It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Canadian Politics: Boo Hoo USA

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 08:58 PM
This is just great. I love this article.

So many highlights to talk about, I do not even know where to begin !

The Bush administration issued a sharp, public rebuke Tuesday to
Prime Minister Paul Martin for dragging the Canada-U.S. relationship into federal electoral politics.

Ambassador David Wilkins' unprecedented, mid-campaign sortie drew an immediate, flag-waving riposte from Martin, who came to office in 2003 promising a more mature relationship with Washington. "I will defend the Canadian position and I will defend our values and I will defend our interests against anybody," the prime minister said on the campaign trail in Surrey, B.C.

Now on with the madness.

"It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and criticize your friend and your No. 1 trading partner constantly," Wilkins said in a speech to the Canadian Club at the historic Chateau Laurier Hotel, next door to Parliament Hill.

LOL ! What? You cannot handle a little pressure on your unfair trading policies? Boo Hoo.

The pity party continues.

"What if one of your best friends criticized you directly and indirectly almost relentlessly?" asked Wilkins.

Boo Hoo ! Oh the humanity...... Come one... Is it that bad Wilkins?

"What if that friend demanded respect, but offered little in return?"


The United States may be an easy target for "political expediency," he said.

"But the last time I looked, the United States was not on the ballot for the Jan. 23 election," Wilkins added to scattered applause.

Should it be? Would you be happier if you got your way and ran our country too?

It gets better....

Less than a week after Martin raised hackles in Washington by specifically citing the United States for lacking a global conscience on climate change, Wilkins threw the words back at the prime minister.

He pointed out that the U.S. record is far superior to Canada's on curbing greenhouse gas emissions.

Fantastic. Good bully job in saying how superior you are over your "friend". I thought we were the ones doing the criticizing ?

"I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a 'global conscience,' the United States is walking the walk," said the ambassador.

Alrighty then...

Wilkins also mentioned the softwood dispute, noting that the U.S.
Commerce Department cut the contentious tariffs on Canadian lumber in half last week.

Oh, the illegal ones?

This is the best part.

He defended the continuing American occupation of Iraq, saying "freedom is on the march."

And on looming passport requirements for Canada-U.S. travellers, Wilkins said the two countries can work together to mitigate the impact but that Canadians have to appreciate the new American mentality.

"Canada should understand that 9-11 forever changed my country," Wilkins said of the September 2001 terrorist attacks.

His blunt message got a muted reception.

Oh so we have to accept the war(s) and all the effects that go with it? Patriot acts and what not?

I thought the United States was not on our ballot? Im so confused.

So what do we think of this boob?

Wilkins' 20-minute speech was mostly greeted with silence.

Hilarious. I have an image of the guy standing in front of the crowd and the crickets chirping every few minutes. A slight cough in the background, maybe a golf clap at the end.

If we sat back and kept our mouths shut we would not have accomplished this.

A North American Free Trade Agreement panel has rejected a North Dakota Wheat Commission appeal over Canadian spring wheat imports, clearing the way for the U.S. government to lift tariffs on grain from north of the border.

The Canadian Wheat Board described the decision this week as the last hurdle to Canadian grain freely crossing the border again.


Or any of the softwood lumber hearings going in our favour.

So United States, I guess the message is that we are going to defend our values and interests.

Remember, you are not on our ballots.

It is nice to see our government throwing around a little weight.


posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 09:27 PM
Way above Dulcimer

I still don't understand why this guy is in Canada in the first place. At least we sent the U.S. a member of Carlyle Group to be the Ambassador.

Why was he even sent here? David Wilkins doesn't have a clue about Canada. He had only been here once before becoming the Ambassador. That was 30 years ago while he was in the Army Reserve. Wait I remember why he is here. He is Bush's buddy. I forgot.

Telling the Prime Minister not to criticize the US for issues that are affecting Canada is ridicules.

"But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship."

It is a little late for that. How many times has G.W. Bush visited Canada? How long was he in office before visiting Canada? Remember when he thanked all those countries for their help after 911 and left out Canada? Add on all the economic problems that are straining our 'relationship' and the long-term impact has already been done.

posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 09:42 PM
The funny thing is that it is stories like these that get attention in the United States.

That is from Notice how of course its the huge bold article.

Election watch is at the bottom in a small font.
Of course election watch also mentions the relations article.

LA Times
Boston Globe

So did they cover the Gomery stuff? Not really. That was huge.

Is it just me, or is the United States looking for excuses saying that we are the ones damaging relations?

posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 10:16 PM
I think that this statement is a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black:

"Just think about this. What if one of our best friends criticized you directly and incorrectly almost relentlessly? What if that friend's agenda was to highlight your perceived flaws while avoiding mentioning your successes? What if that friend demanded respect but offered little in return?"

The only time Canada is in the US news is when we do something to annoy them. Other than that, we're invisible. Between the last couple of Ambassadors, Walters oh-so-sweetly threatening us over drug laws and the not thanking us thing I would say the US government doesn't show us much respect either.

Martin's response:

"I have not made the United States a target in this campaign," he said, explaining that his disputed positions on softwood lumber and climate change were adopted "long before any election was contemplated."

"Let me simply say to anyone who wants to question what I have been saying, beginning with (Conservative Leader) Stephen Harper, that I am the prime minister of this country, that our position on climate change will be determined by the government of Canada, that the fact is that we do expect our partners to honour their agreements -- and I will defend Canada. Period."

Paul Martin shrugs off White House rebuke

posted on Dec, 13 2005 @ 11:10 PM
Did he hope to damage Martins hopes of re-election? The only way he could have done that was with an endorsement lol. This will have the opposite effect and will push more undecided towards the Liberals.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 12:48 AM
Now the story is on frontpage.

Of course it is.

The United States made an unprecedented foray into Canada's election campaign on Tuesday, warning politicians not to bash Washington in their bid to win the January 23 election.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:23 AM
The spin doctors are working over time?

This photo makes it appear that Martin is walking away from Wilkins after he "refutes U.S. warning to back off." But this photo was actually taken back in September.

The yahoo main page has the storey title as "Canada refutes U.S. warning to back off" but one you look at the article the title is a much softer "Canada shrugs off U.S. warning to back off."

But an unapologetic Liberal
Prime Minister Paul Martin
responded immediately by saying "c'est la vie" -- that's life -- if the United States did not like his remarks, and he would not accept anyone telling him he cannot defend his country.

Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin?
That is a funny way to word it. Paul Martin is the Liberal Party Leader but he nor the party are really "liberal". This sounds to me like "us versus them" speak. Remember last election Harper's Conservative party hired Americans to run their campaign ads? There could be a conspiracy in this.

Most people would read up to "c'est la vie" -- that's life" and go on a rant with out finishing the page.
The rest of the quote goes like this.

"That our friends do not like what we say -- well, c'est la vie. I'm going to defend Canada and I'm right on softwood lumber and I'm right on climate change and I won't let anybody tell me that I should not defend my country,"

c'est la vie doesn't even directly translate to "that's life." It is an expression used to play down some minor disappointment

"I have not made the United States or any country a target in this campaign," he said, noting that he had outlined Canada's stand on softwood lumber and climate change long before the election was called.

And it is true. He has talked about this long before the election was called.
Martin’s criticism of the US on Kyoto and other issues has nothing to do with the election campaign.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:33 AM
Ok, I believe I have found, possibly, the worst article of all time.

This is just amazing.

Yahoo Source

Its another article, basically stating the same stuff. But at the bottom........

Canada generally tilts more to the left than the United States and opinion polls show most Canadians dislike U.S. President George W. Bush.

What the hell.......

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:42 AM
Wow... Until today I've never seen or heard the phrase "Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin." Now I’ve heard it twice.

Wilkins didn't specify whom his remarks referred to, though they appear aimed at Liberal
Prime Minister Paul Martin, who has regularly attacked the United States over a bilateral dispute over softwood lumber exports.

You don't see them going around saying idiotic things like "Republican President George W. Bush."

This looks to me like the two articles are meant to rile up the American conservatives so they will rally against Canada.

Canada generally tilts more to the left than the United States and opinion polls show most Canadians dislike U.S. President George W. Bush.

Is this not the same world wide including in America? What is the point of this comment other than to force a divide between Canada and America? The very thing that Wilkins warns will happen.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:45 AM
Are we really anti-american?

Look at these quotes coming out of related articles.

The relationship has been damaged in recent years by a series of personal attacks by leading Canadians against President George W Bush.

A spokesman for Mr Martin's predecessor, Jean Chretien, was overheard telling reporters that Mr Bush was a moron and an MP from the ruling Liberal party once said: "Damn Americans, I hate the b*****ds."

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:55 AM
I think some may be mistaking anti-Bush with anti-American.

The relationship has been damaged in recent years by a series of personal attacks by leading Canadians against President George W Bush.

No it wasn't damaged by snubbing, bullying, and boarder closings. It was those darn "leading Canadians"

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 02:03 AM
I wonder what Wilkins would have to say about our friendship when neighbouring states were supporting protectionist actions by the group R-CALF to keep the Canadian border closed to cattle imports costing us billions.

Even though the product was deemed safe !

Is that friendship?

In that time George Bush was there for us. He said he would overturn rulings.

He is just one man, and any "hate" cannot be put on him alone. It would be silly.

We have the right to speak up when needed. The United States would do the same.

It is only fair.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 02:25 PM
Even more Martin madness.

An unrepentant Paul Martin said Wednesday he "will not be dictated to" by the United States as he stood his ground in an increasingly testy exchange with American officials.

"I am not going to be dictated to as to the subjects that I should raise," Martin said in Richmond, B.C., as he visited a sawmill. "I will make sure that Canada speaks with an independent voice now, tomorrow and always, and you should demand nothing less from your prime minister."

Martin's remarks were in response to questions, but there was no mistaking his determination to make his case to voters on Canada-U.S. relations.

He underscored his refusal to take dictation from Washington three times during his encounter with reporters.

You have to love the title of the article

Unrepentant Martin refused to take dictation from the United States

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 02:30 PM
Again I ask what did this guy hope to accomplish really? Hand the Liberals a majority or something? Yeesh.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 03:21 PM
The US Republicans are trying to influence the elections in the Conservatives favour. I recall about a year ago that when Bush visited Ottawa he unexpectedly criticised the Liberal stance on star wars. At the time I felt it was the same type of thing.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 03:29 PM

Originally posted by rizla
The US Republicans are trying to influence the elections in the Conservatives favour. I recall about a year ago that when Bush visited Ottawa he unexpectedly criticised the Liberal stance on star wars. At the time I felt it was the same type of thing.

Yeah I know but it has the opposite effect don't they know that? Stupid question really most American's know little of Canadian Political Culture.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 05:55 PM
The majority of Canadians will vote for the same party over and over again thinking nothing of the facts behind them except for one positive memory of the party in the past.

I wonder what the United States thinks about Stephen Harper though.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Dulcimer

I wonder what the United States thinks about Stephen Harper though.

That's a good question and I have no idea about what the answer is. But, I do know they like Ralph Klein.

I'm enjoying this round of finger pointing and one-upmanship, though. It's about time a prime minister caused a bit of a stir.

Pierre Trudeau is such a distant memory.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 10:15 PM
It just goes on and on.

The US ambassador meanwhile stressed that he had not been seeking to interfere in Canada's election.

"What I said yesterday was not in any way intended to affect an election. That's obviously Canada's business and Canadians will make that decision in January," Wilkins said.

Relations between the two neighbors chilled after Canada declined to support the 2003 US-led invasion of
Iraq. A November poll here found 38 percent of respondents thought US
President George W. Bush was the world's most dangerous figure.

However, other issues have tarnished US-Canadian relations, including a spat over Canadian softwood lumber exports and differences over environmental policies.

Martin is campaigning for re-election after his scandal-tainted Liberal Party minority government was ousted in a no-confidence vote.

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 10:57 PM
And now the counter spin.

U.S. officials spin Wilkins speech as affectionate request from White House

American officials are publicly portraying a rebuke from Ambassador David Wilkins as an open, even affectionate, request from the U.S. administration.

A day after Wilkins bluntly urged Prime Minister Paul Martin to stop criticizing the United States in a bid to get re-elected, there were attempts to put the best possible spin on escalating tensions.

He spoke "in the finest tradition of our relationship - frank, open and with clear affection for his Canadian host," State Department spokesman Noel Clay said Wednesday.

But what drove him to complain again mid-campaign, some say, was the prime minister's appearance last week with former Democratic president Bill Clinton at the climate change conference in Montreal.

The two attacked the American record on greenhouse gas emissions.

"It sent him over the edge," said a former U.S. envoy in Canada. "I don't think it was his intention to get into the campaign. But he's not there to be a potted plant."

Aside from the timing of his message, which could benefit the Liberals, many see the Wilkins move as largely unsurprising and not at all inappropriate.

So it looks like this whole thing may really be about Martin and Clinton "teaming up"
. extra DIV

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in