0
The Kiss of Death for Steven Harper
30 December 2005
[indent]I wonder how many Canadians would react in shock and horror if they heard the Americans tell them that Stephen Harper is George Dubya's best friend. Nope, not Tony Blair. Stevie-boy, the local guy. The guy with the immovable hair.
Poster boy for Georgie? That little piece comes from the Washington Times, a VERY conservative newspaper (and website) that is to the Republicans what Der Angriff was to Joseph Goebbels. It was written by Patrick Basham, from the Center for Representative Government at the Cato Institute.
For those in the dark, the Cato Institute promotes "traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, free markets and peace." I personally don't subscribe to most of their right-of-Atilla-the-Hun policies like abolishing gun control or invading small nations with alternate governmental structures, but that's because I'm obviously a pinko peacenik commie bastard socialist weenie.
During an election, Canadian candidates do a lot of chest thumping over how Canada should stand up to our neighbour, one of the few times Canadians can get enticed into a patriotic fervour. Being labelled a friend of the Americans during an election is the kiss of death. After the election, when eveything's calm, it's okay to be buddies with the Yanks (as long as you don't go off to war with them). Just not during the election.
Canadians are prone to define ourselves as "not American" (* see footnote). We never define ourselves as "not Nigerian" or "not Iraqi" or "not Finnish" probably because people from Nigeria, Iraq, Finland immigrate to Canada. In fact we have immigrants from dozens of countries here, but few from the US of A. Americans are the least likely to immigrate to Canada (except in times of the draft when they're like lemmings across the border), despite our obviously superior healthcare system. So maybe that's why we can say with some accuracy that we're "not American."
Canada in fact opens its arms to immigrants, inviting the tired, the poor, the cold huddled masses... but most prefer to take residence south of us. Canada is aggressively advertising in Mexico for people to move here, but few actually do. Maybe it's because of the tag line in the ads: "Come to Canada . We only have six months of winter (in most of the country)..." Okay, they don't say that. But how can we convince people to leave a climate where it never snows to live in the frigid north? Not by advertising we're the home of George Dubya's best friend - Mexicans share the same negative feelings towards Bush as most Canadians, and any friend of his AIN'T a friend of ours.
In fact, while events and activities in the USA have a great impact on Canada, Americans for the most part ignore what happens in Canada.
Inexpicably, poutine doesn't seem to have become a craze outside of this nation...
But back to Stephen Harper. The Liberals have not (yet) come out in their ad campaign smearing Harper with the brush of tainted Americanism (but the campaign is yet young...). But they haven't ignored the opportunity entirely. On the Team BC Liberal blog site, Jamie Elmhirst (the one who repeats the comment about Jack Layton's "boiled dog's head" smile...) likens the Conservative to the GOP website. Myself, I'm not convinced this is proof of a political cabal, as much as a sign of stylistic plagarism, given the limitations on Web design available. In fact, I don't really see any significant stylistic difference between Conservative and Liberal sites.
Nonetheless, Elmhirst links back to the Washington Times article that began this entry, the one that labels Harper as a "gift from Canada" to the US administration. The author of that piece predicts that if Harper wins, Since it is not generally the electorate's perception that our leaders should be cast in the role of the court jester to George Dubya, or in fact any American president, this further condemns Harper in many Canadian eyes. We may think our politicians are clowns, corrupt clowns at that, but they're our clowns. They can't moonlight out of the country as someone else's clown.
This isn't sudden, by the way. Back during the last American presidential campaign (the one when the vote actually counted, not the coup d'etat before that one...), Robbins' Research conducted a poll among Canadians asking which of our leaders ther felt would have the best relations with the candidates.
Over at one of the many "We're not Americans" websites, notacolony.ca, a page on Stephen Harper's relations with the USA includes this nugget
Sure, when US Ambassador David Wilkins blundered into the campaign and rebuked the Prime Minister for attacking US policies, warning it could have a serious effect on relations, Stephen Harper stepped up to the plate and said (mildly) that Wilkins' comments were inappropriate.
Of course he would: Wilkins had just handed Martin a big chunk of Canadian support by wading into the election fray. Most Canadians have a low opinion of George Dubya, and we satirize him mercilessly in editorial cartoons, TV comedy shows, jokes, online blogs... standing up to him and giving the raspberry has become a Canadian pastime, like eating doughnuts or watching hockey. But we don't take the posturing of politicians all that seriously - at least, that is, until the Ambassador joined the game. That made many Canadians take sides on Canada-US relations when otherwise they would have been too busy with Xmas shopping. MArtin was able to mount the righteous indignation podium and warn America, "Don't dictate to me."
But Harper didn't disagree with what Wilkins said. In fact, he reiterated it in his own comments, and even tightened the screws on Martin:
Over at vivelecanada, another "We're not American" sites, I found this quote from another story:
The right wingers down south aren't the only ones who think Harper would be good for Canada-US relations. Columnist Michael Taube, in the right-wing Toronto Sun, recently said, Given the source, it's understandable that the Sun would find Harper more appealing than Martin. The Sun hasn't quite gotten around to blaming the Liberals for the bad weather, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time...
Whether Harper wins or loses, Canadians aren't about to get over their suspicions and misgivings about Americans in a very short time. And even if he can heal some of the split, Canadians aren't going to be quick to jump into bed with the Americans until we see some signs of good faith and trust seeping back out of the south. (* see note below) In the interim, being perceived as a "friend" of george Dubya's will only hinder, not help, Harper's steep climb to the Prime Minister's residence.
----------
* A lot of this anger, by the way, revolves around the shoddy way America has failed to live up to its own NAFTA agreement with Canada, and slapped illegal and punitive tarriffs on our softwood lumber exports. Despite numerous tribunals that sided with Canada, numerous attempts at arbitration and resolution over many years, and many reports (even the Cato Institute was critical) and judgments that declared America is in the wrong, America has refused to undo the damage and refund the money - more than $5 billion - it has stolen through the tarriffs. That has created a lot of justifed anger and resentment in Canada, and helped shore up the ratings of Canadian politicians like Martin who reap the benefits of America-bashing. George Dubya's refusal to act in good faith on this issue is giving the Liberals a significant step up this election. [/indent]
Quote
Why does President Bush hope Christmas comes a little late this year? Because on Jan. 23, Canada may elect the most pro-American leader in the Western world. Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative. Move over Tony Blair: If elected, Mr. Harper will quickly become Mr. Bush's new best friend internationally and the poster boy for his ideal foreign leader.
Poster boy for Georgie? That little piece comes from the Washington Times, a VERY conservative newspaper (and website) that is to the Republicans what Der Angriff was to Joseph Goebbels. It was written by Patrick Basham, from the Center for Representative Government at the Cato Institute.
For those in the dark, the Cato Institute promotes "traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, free markets and peace." I personally don't subscribe to most of their right-of-Atilla-the-Hun policies like abolishing gun control or invading small nations with alternate governmental structures, but that's because I'm obviously a pinko peacenik commie bastard socialist weenie.
During an election, Canadian candidates do a lot of chest thumping over how Canada should stand up to our neighbour, one of the few times Canadians can get enticed into a patriotic fervour. Being labelled a friend of the Americans during an election is the kiss of death. After the election, when eveything's calm, it's okay to be buddies with the Yanks (as long as you don't go off to war with them). Just not during the election.
Canadians are prone to define ourselves as "not American" (* see footnote). We never define ourselves as "not Nigerian" or "not Iraqi" or "not Finnish" probably because people from Nigeria, Iraq, Finland immigrate to Canada. In fact we have immigrants from dozens of countries here, but few from the US of A. Americans are the least likely to immigrate to Canada (except in times of the draft when they're like lemmings across the border), despite our obviously superior healthcare system. So maybe that's why we can say with some accuracy that we're "not American."
Canada in fact opens its arms to immigrants, inviting the tired, the poor, the cold huddled masses... but most prefer to take residence south of us. Canada is aggressively advertising in Mexico for people to move here, but few actually do. Maybe it's because of the tag line in the ads: "Come to Canada . We only have six months of winter (in most of the country)..." Okay, they don't say that. But how can we convince people to leave a climate where it never snows to live in the frigid north? Not by advertising we're the home of George Dubya's best friend - Mexicans share the same negative feelings towards Bush as most Canadians, and any friend of his AIN'T a friend of ours.
In fact, while events and activities in the USA have a great impact on Canada, Americans for the most part ignore what happens in Canada.
Quote
...public developments in the USA are publicized in Canada and affect Canadians, if only emotionally. They very often influence Canadian activity, whether by rooting in some form in Canada or impinging upon Canadian thought and action in some other way. By comparison, public developments in Canada are most often ignored in the USA, do not affect people there, and do not spread to the US or influence US activity. The sale of poppies on Armistice Day is said to be one of the few Canadian customs, for instance, that has taken root in the US.
from www.ola.bc.ca
from www.ola.bc.ca
Inexpicably, poutine doesn't seem to have become a craze outside of this nation...
But back to Stephen Harper. The Liberals have not (yet) come out in their ad campaign smearing Harper with the brush of tainted Americanism (but the campaign is yet young...). But they haven't ignored the opportunity entirely. On the Team BC Liberal blog site, Jamie Elmhirst (the one who repeats the comment about Jack Layton's "boiled dog's head" smile...) likens the Conservative to the GOP website. Myself, I'm not convinced this is proof of a political cabal, as much as a sign of stylistic plagarism, given the limitations on Web design available. In fact, I don't really see any significant stylistic difference between Conservative and Liberal sites.
Nonetheless, Elmhirst links back to the Washington Times article that began this entry, the one that labels Harper as a "gift from Canada" to the US administration. The author of that piece predicts that if Harper wins,
Quote
A Harper victory may prove to be the exception to the international rule -- a rare foreign event that manages to put a smile on President George W. Bush's face.
This isn't sudden, by the way. Back during the last American presidential campaign (the one when the vote actually counted, not the coup d'etat before that one...), Robbins' Research conducted a poll among Canadians asking which of our leaders ther felt would have the best relations with the candidates.
Of the following leaders and their political parties, which in your opinion would be most likely to have 'best relations' with U.S. President George W. Bush? Jack Layton and NDP 20.5 % Stephen Harper and Conservative Party 52 % Paul Martin and federal Liberal party 25.8 %Canadians have long seen the Conservatives (not merely Harper) as closer to the Republicans. On the reverse side of that coin, Martin's Liberals were seen as more likely to be friends with John Kerry and the Democrats, should by some miracle he have won. There are some basic political similarities between Conservative-Republican and Liberal-Democrat, so no one should be surprised. But in general, since America started to swing Faaaaar Right over the last few decades, Canadians have downplayed the associations betwen their political structures while we quietly shuffled a little further to the left. We're kind of trying to balance the continent, politics-wise...
Over at one of the many "We're not Americans" websites, notacolony.ca, a page on Stephen Harper's relations with the USA includes this nugget
Quote
:"Thank you for saying to our friends in the United States of America, you are our ally, our neighbour, and our best friend in the whole wide world. And when your brave men and women give their lives for freedom and democracy we are not neutral. We do not stand on the sidelines; we're for the disarmament of Saddam and the liberation of the people of Iraq."
- Stephen Harper, Friends of America Rally, April 4, 2003.
- Stephen Harper, Friends of America Rally, April 4, 2003.
Sure, when US Ambassador David Wilkins blundered into the campaign and rebuked the Prime Minister for attacking US policies, warning it could have a serious effect on relations, Stephen Harper stepped up to the plate and said (mildly) that Wilkins' comments were inappropriate.
Of course he would: Wilkins had just handed Martin a big chunk of Canadian support by wading into the election fray. Most Canadians have a low opinion of George Dubya, and we satirize him mercilessly in editorial cartoons, TV comedy shows, jokes, online blogs... standing up to him and giving the raspberry has become a Canadian pastime, like eating doughnuts or watching hockey. But we don't take the posturing of politicians all that seriously - at least, that is, until the Ambassador joined the game. That made many Canadians take sides on Canada-US relations when otherwise they would have been too busy with Xmas shopping. MArtin was able to mount the righteous indignation podium and warn America, "Don't dictate to me."
But Harper didn't disagree with what Wilkins said. In fact, he reiterated it in his own comments, and even tightened the screws on Martin:
Quote
"I don't think foreign ambassadors should be expressing their views or intervening in an election," Harper said.
Harper, who appears to be trying to distance himself from the Bush administration, suggested Martin has been neither effective nor tough enough with Washington. He said he couldn't understand why Wilkins intervened, saying that in terms of Canada-U.S. relations, nothing Martin says can be taken seriously.
Harper compared Martin to a sneaky schoolboy.
Harper, who appears to be trying to distance himself from the Bush administration, suggested Martin has been neither effective nor tough enough with Washington. He said he couldn't understand why Wilkins intervened, saying that in terms of Canada-U.S. relations, nothing Martin says can be taken seriously.
Harper compared Martin to a sneaky schoolboy.
Over at vivelecanada, another "We're not American" sites, I found this quote from another story:
Quote
Officially, U.S. President George W. Bush and his inner circle have voiced no view about their preference in the campaign. But no one would be surprised if the congratulatory telephone call will be warmer and more enthusiastic if Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals lose.
The right wingers down south aren't the only ones who think Harper would be good for Canada-US relations. Columnist Michael Taube, in the right-wing Toronto Sun, recently said,
Quote
Stephen Harper and the Conservatives lean toward healing Canada-U.S. relations. Harper's plan will improve our relationship with our greatest ally, friend and trading partner, and defend Canada's rights at the same time.
Whether Harper wins or loses, Canadians aren't about to get over their suspicions and misgivings about Americans in a very short time. And even if he can heal some of the split, Canadians aren't going to be quick to jump into bed with the Americans until we see some signs of good faith and trust seeping back out of the south. (* see note below) In the interim, being perceived as a "friend" of george Dubya's will only hinder, not help, Harper's steep climb to the Prime Minister's residence.
----------
* A lot of this anger, by the way, revolves around the shoddy way America has failed to live up to its own NAFTA agreement with Canada, and slapped illegal and punitive tarriffs on our softwood lumber exports. Despite numerous tribunals that sided with Canada, numerous attempts at arbitration and resolution over many years, and many reports (even the Cato Institute was critical) and judgments that declared America is in the wrong, America has refused to undo the damage and refund the money - more than $5 billion - it has stolen through the tarriffs. That has created a lot of justifed anger and resentment in Canada, and helped shore up the ratings of Canadian politicians like Martin who reap the benefits of America-bashing. George Dubya's refusal to act in good faith on this issue is giving the Liberals a significant step up this election. [/indent]
"...Canada is not a bilingual country. It is a country with two languages. And there is a big difference."