wanderings in my ponderings...
You know... i never thought it... but Bush really has done wonders for canada...
Let's all raise a glass to the toxic Texan
When even our free-trade negotiators -- always fair-minded in respect to the Americans -- are calling him a bully, you know that George W. Bush has reached a new low north of the border. His administration's decision on softwood lumber typifies his approach to international diplomacy: Neanderthal.
But there's another, antipodal perspective from which to look at Mr. Bush. Canadians can rank him as the worst U.S. president this country has ever known, and make a good case for doing so. Or they can look at the bright side. In many respects, you can argue that Mr. Bush has been a big plus for Canada. God's gift, even. As for our governing Grits, angered by the repudiation on trade, they shouldn't complain too loudly. The toxic Texan has been good for them, too.
How good? Let us count the ways.
For a country often insecure about its identity, who better than George Bush?
His time in office might well represent the longest defining moment that Canada has ever had. His simplistic warrior mentality, his treaty-breaking unilateralism and his rigid rightist mindset have all served to delineate the differences between this nation and the United States more graphically than any other president. In a sense, he has reforged the Canadian identity along classic Liberal lines.
For a country uneasy about unceasing continental integration and where it might end up, who better than this President?
Not so long ago, there was talk of moving beyond the free-trade regime to new bonds of partnership. Not now. Mr. Bush has served to stop integration in its tracks. Canadians have no appetite for new forms of union with a Bush-style America. The trend line for trade with the U.S. is downward, senior Ottawa officials confirm. The Bush era will force this country to diversify its commerce -- and that's a healthy development.
For a country that was supposedly losing its standing in the world -- not carrying our weight -- who better than George Bush?
The way his fabricated war in Iraq has gone, Ottawa's decision to say no has served to enhance Canada's reputation. Our multilateralism, as deficient as it may be, looks princely and inspired by comparison to the Bush administration's global-dominance muscle talk. Our rejection of his pro-nuclear policies on missile defence and India is surely progressive by comparison, as is our stand (tolerance versus intolerance) on gay rights and other social issues.
Remember the brain drain of a few years ago -- how so many Canadians, so despairing of their own country, were supposedly heading south to greener pastures? Who better than George Bush to take a sledgehammer to that thesis?
You don't hear brain-drain talk any more. Greener pastures? While Canada hauls in big surpluses, Mr. Bush, though posting good employment numbers, has taken his economy from deep in the black to massive debt and deficit. His plan to privatize social security is hardly something that will draw Canadians south.
When Mr. Bush was first elected, conservative forces to the north, pushed on by the Black media empire, appeared to be in position to pose a challenge to the old Canadian ways. Thanks, in part, to the model put up by Mr. Bush, it isn't happening.
For the Liberal Party, which sees itself as the keeper of the Canadian tradition, who better than George Bush? Opposition Leader Stephen Harper, whose party is closer to the American way, can hardly mention the President's name. Meantime, Paul Martin, who took office with the reputation of a Bay Street Liberal, has been served well by the President.
Mr. Bush has had the effect of pushing the Prime Minister back into the moderate Chrétien wing of the party and diminishing any right-left Liberal split. One look at polls in Quebec and elsewhere on Bush Republicanism and Mr. Martin had no choice. Jean Chrétien can give thanks to Mr. Bush, too; he has given him a big legacy item -- the decision on Iraq.
All in all, it's hard to discount the Bush value north of the border. Liberals at their annual caucus meeting in Regina this week should raise a glass to George. Maybe we all should. For all the foment, he's done us many a good deed.
Let's all raise a glass to the toxic Texan
When even our free-trade negotiators -- always fair-minded in respect to the Americans -- are calling him a bully, you know that George W. Bush has reached a new low north of the border. His administration's decision on softwood lumber typifies his approach to international diplomacy: Neanderthal.
But there's another, antipodal perspective from which to look at Mr. Bush. Canadians can rank him as the worst U.S. president this country has ever known, and make a good case for doing so. Or they can look at the bright side. In many respects, you can argue that Mr. Bush has been a big plus for Canada. God's gift, even. As for our governing Grits, angered by the repudiation on trade, they shouldn't complain too loudly. The toxic Texan has been good for them, too.
How good? Let us count the ways.
For a country often insecure about its identity, who better than George Bush?
His time in office might well represent the longest defining moment that Canada has ever had. His simplistic warrior mentality, his treaty-breaking unilateralism and his rigid rightist mindset have all served to delineate the differences between this nation and the United States more graphically than any other president. In a sense, he has reforged the Canadian identity along classic Liberal lines.
For a country uneasy about unceasing continental integration and where it might end up, who better than this President?
Not so long ago, there was talk of moving beyond the free-trade regime to new bonds of partnership. Not now. Mr. Bush has served to stop integration in its tracks. Canadians have no appetite for new forms of union with a Bush-style America. The trend line for trade with the U.S. is downward, senior Ottawa officials confirm. The Bush era will force this country to diversify its commerce -- and that's a healthy development.
For a country that was supposedly losing its standing in the world -- not carrying our weight -- who better than George Bush?
The way his fabricated war in Iraq has gone, Ottawa's decision to say no has served to enhance Canada's reputation. Our multilateralism, as deficient as it may be, looks princely and inspired by comparison to the Bush administration's global-dominance muscle talk. Our rejection of his pro-nuclear policies on missile defence and India is surely progressive by comparison, as is our stand (tolerance versus intolerance) on gay rights and other social issues.
Remember the brain drain of a few years ago -- how so many Canadians, so despairing of their own country, were supposedly heading south to greener pastures? Who better than George Bush to take a sledgehammer to that thesis?
You don't hear brain-drain talk any more. Greener pastures? While Canada hauls in big surpluses, Mr. Bush, though posting good employment numbers, has taken his economy from deep in the black to massive debt and deficit. His plan to privatize social security is hardly something that will draw Canadians south.
When Mr. Bush was first elected, conservative forces to the north, pushed on by the Black media empire, appeared to be in position to pose a challenge to the old Canadian ways. Thanks, in part, to the model put up by Mr. Bush, it isn't happening.
For the Liberal Party, which sees itself as the keeper of the Canadian tradition, who better than George Bush? Opposition Leader Stephen Harper, whose party is closer to the American way, can hardly mention the President's name. Meantime, Paul Martin, who took office with the reputation of a Bay Street Liberal, has been served well by the President.
Mr. Bush has had the effect of pushing the Prime Minister back into the moderate Chrétien wing of the party and diminishing any right-left Liberal split. One look at polls in Quebec and elsewhere on Bush Republicanism and Mr. Martin had no choice. Jean Chrétien can give thanks to Mr. Bush, too; he has given him a big legacy item -- the decision on Iraq.
All in all, it's hard to discount the Bush value north of the border. Liberals at their annual caucus meeting in Regina this week should raise a glass to George. Maybe we all should. For all the foment, he's done us many a good deed.