December 16, 2005

THAT WOULD BE THE SMALLER QUESTION:

Oh, no, Canada (Douglas MacKinnon, December 16, 2005 , Washington Times)

In what some in Canada are saying is a desperate bid to win reelection, Mr. Martin has decided that slandering the United States will win him the most votes among the millions in his country who have a strong dislike of our nation, George W. Bush, the war in Iraq, sensible immigration policies and the rule of law. Having grown weary of the prime minister's insults, as well as the vile and juvenile insults thrown at our country by other liberal Canadian politicians, Mr. Wilkins decided enough was enough.

After the prime minister said the United States lacked a "global conscience" for not ratifying the seriously flawed Kyoto accord, Mr. Wilkins decided it was time to speak up. If that had been the first insult, he more than likely would have let it go. [...]

Insulting and verbally attacking the United States has become such a national sport among liberal Canadian politicians that one conservative member of parliament said they displayed "a consistent attitude of anti-Americanism." As Mr. Wilkins stressed, "It may be smart election-year politics to thump your chest and constantly criticize your friend and your number one trading partner. But it is a slippery slope, and all of us should hope that it doesn't have a long-term impact on the relationship."

The ambassador's point raises a larger question: Can Canada really be considered our "friend" anymore?

When were they? They took our traitors in during Vietnam; were no help in Nicaragua; and aren't helping in Iraq.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 16, 2005 4:35 PM
Comments

Well, they did shelter and smuggle out some diplomats in the Iran Hostage Crisis.

Posted by: Bob at December 16, 2005 5:19 PM

They helped out during WWII. And, during prohibition, significant portions of the counry would have run completely dry of whisky if not for them.

Posted by: Twn at December 16, 2005 5:24 PM

We helped them in WWII.

Posted by: oj at December 16, 2005 5:30 PM

That's all okay. But we in the US are getting our revenge. Or I should say, our Leftists are doing it for us. They are turning the Canadian flag into the internationally recognized symbol for appeasement, surrender and cowardice by the way the proudly display it so they can hide what they really are, Americans. I mean, when the 15th season of The Simpsons notices, you know it's not a new trend.


Posted by: Raoul Ortega at December 16, 2005 5:38 PM

I am realy most serious about not giving a flying flip about Canuckistan.

I used to think that this was just a matter of husbanding my valuable time, time better spent on, well, anything else. On reflection, it now appears that militant apathy is indeed the most charitable course of action.

Reacting in any way to this outpost of the vacuum of outer space in enabling their continued delusion that they matter in any way or that anyone cares what they might think or say.

Posted by: Lou Gots at December 16, 2005 7:16 PM

one day there will be a reckoning and then look out as the tears come tumbling down. the cretins don't realize that even if there remarks are not widely distributed today they are on the record, and like acid will eat away at the minimal good will Americans feel towards the benighted dump.

Posted by: toe of doom at December 16, 2005 7:31 PM

Snow fleas.

Posted by: Genecis at December 16, 2005 8:32 PM

Ontario was a great place to visit after Michigan raised its drinking age to 21 (their's was 18).

Ontario...your's to discover!

Posted by: Dave W at December 16, 2005 8:32 PM

The Canadian Ballet is quite popular with those who live near border crossings.

Posted by: JAB at December 16, 2005 10:43 PM

We can solve this problem. I was all for conquering the whole thing, but I am beginning to think we would be better off just taking Alberta and BC. The former for the oil, the later for location.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 17, 2005 12:33 AM

OJ,

They took our traitors in during Vietnam

What's not helping about that? We certainly didn't want them!

Robert,

The problem with BC (not only do I love the place, I have ancestry up there) is all those folks in Vancouver who are politically to the left of the average Seattleite. I'm not sure we could safely absorb them.

Maybe we should just annex AB and the rural parts of BC, and grant Vancouver city-state status. It seems to work for Singapore...

Posted by: Kirk Parker at December 17, 2005 1:33 AM

Robert:

No way, man, we come as a package. Leave the rest of us out and we'll attack New Hampshire. Then you'll have no choice but to take Quebec and Newfoundland too.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

But enough about us. Let's talk about Latvia.

Posted by: Peter B at December 17, 2005 6:18 AM

They only hate the Red States and the rural parts of the Blue States that trend red. The Canadian elites really do want to be liked and treated as equals by the elites in the big cities of the costal Blue States, and think parroting their off-the-deep-end remarks about Bush and his policies are the way to earn that respect.

Posted by: John at December 17, 2005 10:31 AM

My long standing proposal is to send the part of Washington west of the Cascade Mountains and BC south of the 45'5' parallel off on its its own, as, "Pacifikstan", and bring the balance of BC into the union w/Yukon.

I can't wait until the new year comes so we can get this war of northern liberation going!

Posted by: Dave W at December 17, 2005 11:34 AM

Peter:
Westario and Ontario can join the union, and maybe NB, NS & PEI, but the Newfies must go w/Quebec or stay w/the crown.

Posted by: Dave W at December 17, 2005 11:38 AM

re: Western Washington

While we're at it, let's reattach Vermont and Maine to Quebec and New Brunswick/Maritimes, respectively, where they both belong. Then set New Hampshire free to act as a Poland between the two new empires we''ll have just created.

Then there's that Buffalo problems...

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at December 17, 2005 1:42 PM

Raoul:

Your plan would leave our vital Strategic Lobster Reserve in hostile Canuckosocialist hands. That is unacceptable.

Posted by: Mike Morley at December 17, 2005 1:46 PM

They aren't kosher anyway.

Posted by: oj at December 17, 2005 1:53 PM

OJ, neither am I kosher. Extra buttery sauce, anyone?

Posted by: Joshua Chamberlain at December 17, 2005 5:41 PM

Robert - Like the Palestinians, we need a contiguous state. It's unthinkable that Alaska should remain disconnected. Also, the Canucks continue to unlawfully occupy Alberta, in violation of UN resolution 1242 (I think).

Posted by: pj at December 17, 2005 8:27 PM

Ouch! You people are waaaaay too quick to consign the entirety of Western Washington to eternity in Pacificstan, but in fact it's only because Seattle dominates the population so much that we're even borderline blue-state in the first place. In my state legislative district (just outside Tacoma) the state reps and senator have been almost exclusively held by Republicans--for decades. Same with King County's East Side.

As I said above, carve out Seattle from the rest of the state, call it "Emeraldistan", and give it its walking papers.

Posted by: Kirk Parker at December 17, 2005 9:40 PM
« CHOICES HAVE COSTS: | Main | A QUICK QUESTION: »