White House looks for positive shift in Canada

[CHIMO]

WASHINGTON (CP) — The White House offered congratulations to Stephen Harper and the Conservatives on Tuesday as the U.S. administration looked for a positive shift in dealings with Canada.

"We look forward to working with the new government to strengthen our relations even more," said spokesman Scott McClellan, who expected President George W. Bush to call Harper soon.

Republicans have been quietly hoping for a Conservative win after years of increasingly tense ties under the Liberals that reached new lows with their anti-American election campaign.

McClellan, asked Tuesday if the softwood dispute stood a better chance of getting solved with Harper, repeated that the U.S. is committed to a solution.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&pubid=968163964505&cid=1138143046885&col=968705899037&call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News

[Manix]

1. This honeymoon with BushCo will be short if Harper wants

to keep his job. It will be interesting to see how Harper and his handlers deal
with Dubya, since he is so detested by the Canadian public.

[Darth_Kitten]

2. Serving rich extreme repug backers or the Canadian public.......

What's a Conservative Prime Minister to do? :shrug:

[glarius]

3. Even the U.S. media is saying how bad relations between the two countries

have been and now things will probably get better with Harper...Has everyone forgotten how close a relationship there was between the Chretien government and Clinton's government? I'm sick of hearing about the current state of affairs. For God's sake. Who says it's Canada's fault there's a coolness now? Bush doesn't have a close relationship with anyone, except perhaps Blair. Even Fox of Mexico, (who Bush claimed was his dear buddy in the beginning) is barely on speaking terms with him now.

[best left blank]

4. Heh

'Even the US media.'

Even them? Wow.

Sorry, but that's funny.

[glarius]

7. Okay....so leave out "even"

Is that better?....Believe me I'm aware of the kowtowing to Bush the U.S. media has been guilty of.

[AX10]

15. I am too.

I am telling you, keep a close eye on your media. If they start to kiss Harpy's ass, then a real problem may occur.

[Mother Jones]

5. Just heard Bush called to congratulate his lapdog

Leaves me with the feeling of Jackie Kennedy ala November 1963, in her pillbox hat, blood-stained pink chanel suit....."let them see what they've done"

[SixStrings]

6. Yes, because of course he would of NEVER called Sir Paul

had he won..

[Mother Jones]

9. You should just felate Harper already, and let us all off the hook

With hundreds of "Harper is a lunatic" posts, you inevitably comment on mine.

[SixStrings]

13. Geez, why the personal attacks?

Seems to be a trend...What did I say that offended you so much as to attack me in this way?

What are you suggesting?

[Monkeybumper]

8. 1000s of people back to work ?

I think a lot of people would be glad to see Harper get the soft wood lumber dispute resolved

[Mother Jones]

10. We all want the s/w lumber dispute resolved

and I hope you aren't implying that bush co has been giving it to us in the ass over s/w because we've had a Liberal govt instead of a conservative one.

[canuckforpeace]

11. Yes, this is exactly what the Bush/Harper administration have planned

Harper will continue with his phoney "moderate" act, Bush will suddenly capitulate on the softwood lumber dispute after years of defying WTO/NAFTA rulings because Harper is just so wonderful. The electorate will be duped, "Wow, Harper's great!". An election is called, Harper gets his majority and then they start to implement the policies they really want.

I didn't want to rain on the parade. Many here have been hopeful that this minority gov't will be kept in check, but they are being coached by the slimeballs down south who know how to be patient and bide their time.

The above scenario was suggested to me by someone yesterday and I feel sick thinking about it.

[Spazito]

12. The only way Harper can 'solve' the softwood lumber dispute

is if he sells us out and agrees to the bush cabal's demands. Hmmmm, guess we are screwed,,,,oh,,,wait,,,the bush wanna-be only received a VERY SHAKY minority government that, if seen as kissing bush's ass, will fall and be defeated in the next election.

[SixStrings]

14. How long did Martin have to 'solve ' this dispute??? n/t

[Spazito]

16. What solving was needed on Martin's part???

on Canada's part??? The US lost their case at NAFTA, at WTO, etc. I am astonished, no, really, that you would not find it more honest to question why the US won't live up to their signed agreements? Why the US refuses to adhere to their own laws re adhering to the rules? Instead, you intimate Canada, Martin is at fault for standing up for our rights. Wow, just wow!

[iverglas]

19. worse

Instead, you intimate Canada, Martin is at fault for standing up for our rights.

At fault for getting screwed, actually. (Maybe you meant "for *not* standing up for our rights, i.e. allegedly not standing up for our rights, where allegedly would be the operative word of course.)

I'll blame Liberals in general and Martin in particular for any number of things, but this probably isn't one of them.

Check out Mexico and cross-border trucking for another example of the US screwing a different orifice of the world in violation of the same pact.

Sometimes, one really is a blameless victim and simply doesn't have the capacity to fight back. Being the weaker party isn't shameful, and acknowledging it makes more sense than beating one's self (or one's government) over the head.

[Monkeybumper]

23. Mexico cross border trucking

Is a topic I am very well versed on . This is a very different issue then the S/W problem and involves safety and security . Have you ever seen the trucks the Mexicans are trying to send across the border , i have and it is very scary .

[iverglas]

26. gee

I kinda think I might have heard that line before ... could it have been emanating from Washington DC?

You might want to look up "non-tariff barriers to trade".

Sometimes health and safety is a genuine reason to bar imports/activities (like when Canada tries to force France to admit asbestos). Sometimes they're smokescreens.

[Spazito]

29. Actually, I meant it to read exactly the way I posted it

From the way in the post I responded to was written, Martin (Canada) was at fault for standing up for our rights and demanding the US honour their agreements rather than bending over for bush in order to 'solve' the dispute.

[iverglas]

31. okay, I get it

We/Martin didn't cave in the initial instance, i.e. we/he stood up for our rights, i.e. kept doing what it was that was the bug up Washington's bum that caused the illegal tariffs in the first place.

I was thinking of the subsequent stage -- not "demanding the US honour their agreements", as you'd said, but expecting them to abide by binding decisions that they have not honoured their agreement and must do so. In that instance, we didn't have much rights to be standing up for, we were just plain getting screwed.

I still don't blame Martin or his party. ;)

[Spazito]

33. LOL, I appreciate that and agree, there is much I, too, would blame

Martin for but this is not one of them for sure.

[SixStrings]

24. That's kind of what I was saying...I took from your post

about Harper and s/w as meaning it is now up to him to get this resolved when, as stated, it has been resolved...
Why no punitive actions from Canada, re s/w ? Why not sell our petroleum products to China or India instead of the US? Why let the US get away with such blatant disregard?
Not that I'm saying Harper will do these things - of course not. It would of been nice if we would of fought back a little though, but that just isn't in our collective blood, so to speak.

[Spazito]

30. Actually, I would take issue with the opinion we did not fight back

Canada was and is actively pursuing contracts with China, India in order to broaden our export market and become less dependent on the US for trade.

Where I would agree is that we didn't fight back hard enough. We should just serve notice to withdraw from NAFTA an negotiate a separate agreement with Mexico given the US has no intention of honouring it anyway. NAFTA is a joke, a joke on Canadians.

[SixStrings]

61. I'm in the distribution business. I can't lie - Free trade has

been good for certain elements of our economy - but definitely a horrible thing for manufacturing jobs in this country. I lost a very lucrative job when our plant moved from Ontario to Mexico almost 5 yrs ago. You've got to laugh because we had an entire second shift put on just to handle the product being shipped from this plant in Mexico, back to our Ontario plant to re-work and fix their unbelievable mistakes...yet it was still more economically feasible to move the operations down south. We were making a nice wage - but could not compete with Mexico's $2-3 per day wages.
The stories were unbelievable. I heard this plant was PACKED with workers doing nothing, absolutely nothing. The reasoning behind this was that there were so many companies looking to relocate to Mexico that the vast majority of available, LITERATE, people was going to be drained, drastically, and companies were doing whatever they could to lock up the available, 'good' employees. Just sad, and totally exploitive.
But back to your reply - Canada would be smart to investigate relations with India and China. (Although, I personally feel that dealing with China is very unfortunate, considering their terrible human rights record) As I stated earlier, I am in the distribution business and the volume of goods coming from India has EXPLODED. Take this for what it's worth - there is no possible way a North American based manufacturing plant/company can compete with India on anything - you name it, and they will be able to produce it for an eye-popping lower cost. For example, I just completed a deal with a company in India for $100,000 worth of fasteners. These fasteners, had we decided to buy domestically would of cost in the area of $800,000. Its just very unfortunate - that's really the only word to describe it. To compete in todays economic climate it has to be done, but morally, ethically, I am torn on these issues. I see nothing but hardship and the complete destruction of the middle class should these trends continue...
Wow - sorry for the long post...but I needed to kill some time...

[Spazito]

64. I appreciate your post, it is well thought out with some very good

points being made. Outsourcing is part and parcel of the larger issue of imports and exports, trade agreements, etc. One way to limit outsourcing is to prohibit any tax incentives to companies that outsource their production to countries that do not pay a living wage or take advantage of the lack of environmental and safety concerns.

The only reason, imo, corporations are outsourcing is to increase their profits at the expense of their own country's citizens yet they want to feed at any tax incentives they may be able to receive from those same taxpayers they have just put out of work.

Citizens have a duty as well, imo, to buy Canadian and refuse cheap imports that are produced to the detriment of the export country's citizens' health, safety and environment.

Again, I much appreciated your post, it caused me to think about other issues related to trade.

[canuckforpeace]

17. Yes, he will sell out

AFTER he gets his majority. That will be the deal.

I hope and pray I'm wrong.

[Monkeybumper]

18. I am not implying anything MJ

I don't think that the 1000s of people who are out of work care who settles the S/W dispute they just want their jobs back . If Harper can settle it great we saw that Martin could not.

[iverglas]

20. a word of advice

Try to hit the "reply" link immediately below the post you actually want to respond to, rather than the last "reply" link at the bottom of all of the posts. That way you won't risk saying things to people you didn't mean to say them to.

[Monkeybumper]

21. OK

Thank you for the advice

[Mother Jones]

22. I think you've missed the point

This isn't an issue that is Canada's to solve.....the U.S govt has a problem that we have more resources than they do and we want to sell them cheaper.

See, free trade is only fair when it benefits THEM.

[Monkeybumper]

25. All disputes

take both sides to settle . If both sides have a dislike for each other as was the case it just makes it harder . If Harper can work out a favorable deal for Canada I am all for it , are you ?

[Mother Jones]

27. I can appreciate that you are trying to be bi-partisan

I really do.....but on this issue, I do believe that Bush co will say and/or do everything they can to prop up Harper and his govt.


But make no mistake, I don't believe most Canadians will be fooled into thinking that only a conservative govt can resolve issues with the U.S.

[canuckforpeace]

32. They will try to fool Canadians

And if the press helps them who knows how many will believe it.

If I sound pessimistic it's because I am. We've seen what they've done down south. We have to be very vigilant.

[glarius]

28. I believe you will see a "solution" soon now that Harper is in because

of something I heard David Frum, the ex-Bush speech writer say. Last night he was on CBC Newsworld and said that his fellow members of the American Enterprise Institute (an influential right-wing think tank) had voted to persuade the Bush government to comply with the rulings and pay Canada the billions of dollars owing, now that Harper was in. The little worm Frum, a Canadian by birth, and son of the late Barbara Frum is often on our TV screens, pretending he has Canada's welfare at heart while he promotes U.S.A right-wing crap.

[Monkeybumper]

34. Thats a good thing

I don't care if the Marxists Leninist solve the problem as long as it gets resolved . Lets take half of those billions and put it into the education system . Then take 25% of it and put it into the environment , reforestation and the like and the rest into health care and other services that are under funded .
The goodwill that may exist between these two governments should be exploited to our benefit .

[glarius]

35. Do you seriously think that by cosying up to Bush, Harper is going to

bring any lasting benefits to Canada?....Puleeze!

[Monkeybumper]

37. Billions

into education the environment and health care your against ?

[glarius]

38. I said any "lasting" benefits!

I'm thinking of the future....and that's YOU designating the money for education and the environment etc....NOT HARPER!

[Spazito]

40. The fact is those billions came from the Canadian lumber producers,

big and small, in the form of duties and tariffs and should be returned to them if the bush cabal ever does return their ill-gotten gains. The only restriction I would put on that is the money only go to lumber companies who's ownership is Canadian, at least to the 51% ownership mark.

That would never happen but it should.

[Spazito]

36. ROFL, "exploited to our benefit", yeah, right, the bush cabal is

known far and wide to play fair and open doors, adhere to agreements, etc, etc, etc.

[Monkeybumper]

39. I do this all the time

As i have said I run a small business and i have to do business with people i don't like very much all the time . The trick to being successful is negotiating a deal that will benefit you . This is no different then countries .
A wise man told me a long time ago the art of diplomacy is letting other people have your way .

[glarius]

41. Are you really serious?

Canada negotiating with the Bush cabal is comparable to you negotiating a business deal?....Tell me, if the person you are negotiating with is dishonest, ruthless, ignorant and a phony religious extremist, how do you think you would make out?

[Monkeybumper]

43. I always make out great

I keep my eye on the objective . What is the alternative insult and argue , that will get you nothing as we have seen . the fact that the AEI is now taking our side is a positive and we must take advantage of it .

[glarius]

45. You're hopeless......dream on......

:banghead:

[Manix]

44. Exactly! How do you negotiate with people that don't

..honour any agreements. Besides, a top Bush insider from the first term was on TV last night and said
that there is no way Bush will give an inch on this just because we have a CON in Ottawa.

[iverglas]

66. my thoughts exactly

The negotiations took place, the deal was done, and they won't honour it. The success of any negotiation depends *first* on the integrity of the parties. Without that, you can negotiate til the mad cows come home, and you may as well have stayed home yourself.

Bush will "give an inch" if he gets more out of it than he gets by giving nothing. Having Harper in office in Canada amounts to pretty much nothing.

Now, Harper might have something a little more concrete to offer him ... and hell, it might even be interesting to take a shot. What could one offer the present US govt that would get us something worthwhile? I doubt that even our first-born sons in desert camouflage would work; the US doesn't really need anything from us at the moment that would be worth giving much in return for. And "future goodwill" isn't something I'd be willing to trade much for when it comes to a bargaining partner devoid of integrity.

We're not long on bargaining power with the US, at least not without cutting off part of our own noses in the medium term, anyhow. Sleeping with elephants and all that. An ideological handshake across the border really isn't likely to buy much.

[Spazito]

42. LOL, apples and oranges, imo

You are dealing with the 'average joe' US business person, client which is a whole different deal than dealing with an out-of-control federal government. Another wise man said diplomacy is a two-way street.

[Monkeybumper]

46. OK Spaz

You don't like my solution and what I think would be the benefits I would like to hear your solution .

[glarius]

47. You just said "your solution"...exactly...who says it's Harper's solution?

again :banghead:

[Monkeybumper]

48. Still you don't offer a solution

Do you think repeating ...i hate Bush over and over and over will get you anything ?

[glarius]

49. I don't HAVE to offer a solution...that's for the government to do, but

it's obvious to any thinking person that toadying up to a dictator (Bush) is not going to solve anything.

[Monkeybumper]

50. WOW

I don't have to offer a solution ?

I thought this was a forum of ideas . We are just speaking about how to resolve the S/W dispute and what should be done with the billions we look like we will receive if we negotiate a resolution to the problem .
If all you have is I hate Bush that will not go very far with most Canadians . Remember Bush will be gone in just 2 yrs and you will have to come up with a different mantra .

[glarius]

51. I DON'T KNOW how to solve it and as I said that's the job of the

government. I have not really delved into the softwood lumber situation and don't claim to be an expert, but I DO KNOW that we don't succeed by ass-kissing dictators. There's plenty of precedent for that!

[Spazito]

52. Mine is posted previously, serve notice to withdraw from NAFTA

negotiate a separate agreement with Mexico. We then can charge OUR price for our natural gas, oil and electricity which is essential to the US while not having to charge Canadians the US price for our own resources.

There are and have been no benefits to Canada since the bush admin and that will not change. The US lobbyists control trade issues and we KNOW how influential they are, don't we.

[Monkeybumper]

53. Spaz try to stay on topic

We are discussing the S/W dispute and the fact that a resolution in our favor seems soon and likely .
I don't understand people that think its the governments job to come up with all the ideas I was always taught that was the responsibility of the people and the governments to implement them.

[glarius]

54. Who appointed you to choose the topic?

:shrug:

[Monkeybumper]

55. I didn't

CHIMO did i am responding to his thread

[glarius]

56. Well when you are on this forum for a longer period you will notice that

topics often get changed and rechanged during the course of a thread....just as they do in conversation....See?

[Spazito]

57. LOL, you don't seem to understand the soft wood lumber dispute

is the epitome of NAFTA and is part and parcel of the discussion. We withdraw from NAFTA there is NO softwood lumber dispute. We do not have to kowtow to the US dictates and their crass ignoring of their own signed treaties. To even attempt to suggest that NAFTA and the softwood lumber dispute are separate issues is ridiculous.

There will not be a 'resolution in our favour' and to even suggest that the AEI supports us is also ludicrous. The AEI is a neocon organization who's sole purpose is to spread the neocon ideology. You would think one would be concerned when the AEI pretends to support us to prop up Harper, hmmmm, could it be because they see 'their kind of guy' in him. I suggest yes.

The softwood lumber dispute has been going on for many years, during the Clinton and Chretien terms where there was no animosity, perceived or otherwise. The US lumber companies lobby outweighs any attempt to settle this on a fair basis.

[Monkeybumper]

58. My final post on this subject . ...maybe

I don't think rechange is a word

Your thought on getting out of NAFTA and trading with Mexico is ludicrous . Mexico is an exporter not an importer . To even think that Mexico could import 1/10 of the S/W America does from us is ignorant .
I think my idea to strike a deal with the US and use the money for education , the environment and health care is far and away the best for Canadians .
I respect your opinions but I see no reasonable ideas on your part , but I do look forward to hearing them .

I would also be interested in knowing what line of work you are in . I have told you what I do and I think that goes a long way in understanding in where a person is coming from .

[Spazito]

59. We can agree to disagree, that is the art of debate

I think your contention we should just bend over for the bush cabal and pretend we are getting the best of the deal is ridiculous. We do trade with Mexico, you might want to look it up, they import as well as export as we do. NAFTA has not benefited the average Canadian, only the corporations and we are seeing that more clearly every day. A recent example of that is the massive auto manufacturing plant closures and 'downsizing' that will severely affect Ontario yet NAFTA came about in part to protect that industry.

What my line of work is has nothing to do with this debate, imo. I may or may not be in business, I may or may not be in government dealing directly with this. The interesting aspect of the net is that one can say they do/are anything to make their point and that often happens.

What the US imports from us includes, to a great degree, is our oil, gas and electricity which is ESSENTIAL to them. With or without NAFTA we would still be selling our products to the US but at our prices NOT theirs.

[Monkeybumper]

60. I respect you opinion

I have never said we should bend over , I feel the opposite . We should be shrewd negotiators .
We export 1/30th to Mexico to what we import from Mexico
I dispute that NAFTA has not benefited the average Canadian . It has benefited my family

I do think what you do for a living has a bearing on your opinion as I learned the most about civil rights from a 99 yr old black man that grew watermelons in Ocala Florida . If you don't care to say what line of work you are in that is your privilege .
I tend to listen to people that have walked in the shoes if you know what i mean.

[Spazito]

62. Interesting

"I tend to listen to people that have walked in the shoes if you know what i mean." So you only listen to business people? Wow, that is a very narrow group from which to draw one's opinions, beliefs and upon which you would act.

I listen to many, from all walks of life, because a specific action has many different consequences depending on where, in society, those persons 'reside'. Take for example, a tax cut for the rich. Business people would see this more favourable than those who are not rich. Would it not be wise to listen to both sides of an issue if one wants to actually understand the underlying consequences? I believe it would and it is.

[Monkeybumper]

63. I don't know when you quit listening

But you did . Good luck to you

[daleo]

65. The solution will be Harper caving in

And the media claiming he is a genius for doing so. The Americans will not part with any money. Frum doesn't understand his employers if he thinks otherwise.

[Monkeybumper]

67. Still no solutions

If you hope the left will ever take power again . hating people is the wrong strategy .

[daleo]

68. You are being irrational

Nobody said anything hateful.