Quote:When it comes to border controls, North American perimeter security, the war on terrorism, or other issues, Bush would rather hear substantive Canadian contributions than gripes about perceived slights, such as the PMO's assertion that Bush was "hijacking" the NATO summit in Prague to promote his Iraq strategy. Clearly, what Bush would prefer is irrelevant to Canada.
If Canadians insist on poking a thumb in Uncle Sam's eye then they should not expect any consideration from us.
1 posted on
11/29/2002 12:28:02 PM PST by
quidnunc
To: quidnunc
They had their chance to throw in their lot with the other American colonists and make a difference. But they decided to observe history instead of make it.
Bitching and moaning about the consequences of their decision is rather silly now.
2 posted on
11/29/2002 12:34:22 PM PST by
wideawake
To: quidnunc
Canada is viewed inside the Bush White House as a minor irritation; a nation with little credibility on major issues such as the war on terrorism that nonetheless still "cries out" occasionally like a child angered with its parents. Well, maybe if our stupid delusional Prime Minister wasn't such a small minded self important moron who thinks that taking shots at the best neighbor a country could ever hope for and a President that dwarfs him in terms of intellect makes him seem "sophisticated" this situation wouldn't exist. Ya think so? Hmm, Jean?
BTW, for anyone who isn't aware of it the Toronto Star is a complete Liberal mouthpiece. Believe it or not, next to The Star the NYT seems positively right wing.
3 posted on
11/29/2002 12:40:01 PM PST by
mitchbert
To: quidnunc
The power structures in Canada have been taken over by socialists, radical feminists, and homosexuals. Unfortunately for the ordinary people of Canada, its legal foundations do not do as good a job as our Constitution of protecting individuals rights. Canada's legal structure makes it easier for groups such as the aforementioned to take over.
To: quidnunc
We're talking about the snotty Canadian govt, not the citizens. Besides, molly ivens still sides with Canada over the USA.
To: quidnunc
(from the article)
Unless Canada steps up to the plate, it risks being steamrolled under a new North American and world order that this Bush administration intends to establish. Interesting use of the "new world order" term, usually used to refer to the Socialist Clinton vision. I think Bush regards the rest of the world as how it relates to the US instead of the other way around.
As far as Canada goes, they have marginalized themselves with increasingly Socialist policies in addition to sniping at the US seemingly every chance they get. Too bad, Canada has a lot to offer.
7 posted on
11/29/2002 12:50:15 PM PST by
Randjuke
To: quidnunc
My Dear Friends,
As FDR said When your neighbors house is on fire, you run to get a hose! You don.t stop to debate (Paraphrased, I forget the exact quote)
The Canadian response to America.s dilemma is not representative of the Canadian people. It is representative of the leftist pigs that have taken over her political leadership.
In time the Canadians will throw these enemies of democracy out of office the same way that 95% of the civilizes nations have been doing in recent election.
Leftist Pigs act like Pigs, because they are Pigs
Love,
Pliny the Younger
To: quidnunc
they were good to us during 9-11 when we needed a place to land all those planes,they are not all that bad.
10 posted on
11/29/2002 1:17:44 PM PST by
linn37
To: quidnunc
Do you know what the Italians call Canada?
Uppa U S!!
15 posted on
11/29/2002 2:04:07 PM PST by
Nitro
To: quidnunc
I always thought that calling someone a "cowbow" was a compliment. Chretien probably doesn't like John Wayne movies.
To: quidnunc
You have this raging hardon to stick it to Canada everyday on FR.Your not content to post lies such as the Liberals got over 60% of the vote in 2000 (!!!) or the one that 85% of Canadians think the US deserved 9/11.You have quite the agenda and since you post obvious lies, none of your shrill complaints can be taken seriously.What's your game, pal?
To: quidnunc
"Look, as far as this White House is concerned," he told the Star at the time, "the U.S.-Canada relationship is defined by Canada. If they want to trade with us, fine. If they want to co-operate on bilateral security issues, fine. If they want to bitch and complain, fine. We're doing our thing." As much as I agree with this, and I am glad we have the power to take this approach...I can also see where other countries see it as arrogance.
41 posted on
11/29/2002 6:01:18 PM PST by
Jorge
To: quidnunc
I for one apologize for our dippy Prime Muddler.
Hopefully you can see he's senile. Most Canadians I know are embarrassed by him.
45 posted on
11/30/2002 1:24:25 PM PST by
adanaC
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson