So the American ambassador Pete Hoekstra described Canadians as "nasty" on Monday, at the annual Pacific NorthWest Economic Region Foundation summit in Bellevue Washington:
Nasty? Mean? B-b-b-baby, you just ain't seen nothing yet....
The premiers and Prime Minister Carney are meeting in Muskoka and I get the impression that they're not intending to just knuckle under to whatever Trump wants - if he even knows what he wants, which is more garbled every day.
And no, Canada doesn't want Carney to "sell the farm" just to get a deal with The Great Orange Shitgibbon:
The ambassador made the remarks in answer to a question from a conference moderator about what could be done to get people travelling again as Vancouver and Seattle prepare to host games as part of next year’s FIFA World Cup.Hmmm....
“Canadians staying home, that’s their business, you know. I don’t like it, but if that’s what they want to do, it’s fine. They want to ban American alcohol. That’s fine,” he said
“There are reasons why the president and some of his team referred to Canada as being mean and nasty to deal with, OK, because of some of those steps.” ...
Nasty? Mean? B-b-b-baby, you just ain't seen nothing yet....
We've been called worse by better.
— Canada's National Observer (@nationalobserver.com) July 22, 2025 at 6:08 PM
[image or embed]
Campbell Clark / The Globe and Mail (gift link)www.cbc.ca/news/politic... "Do they think Canadians are not going to respond when the president says, 'I want to turn you into the 51st state & begger you economically unless you bow to the US?” "Obviously, Canadians are outraged." Outraged is putting it mildly My #BoycottUSA is forever #NastyUSA
— 🇨🇦🇨🇦 Proud Canadian 🇨🇦🇨🇦 (@beppil007.bsky.social) July 21, 2025 at 9:31 PM
[image or embed]
Keep it up, nasty CanadiansAnd we're not travelling to the US anytime soon, either:
...Donald Trump’s ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, said Canadians are “mean and nasty” because they took U.S. liquor off store shelves and cancelled vacations south of the border.
...The U.S. President likes to brag that he’s holding the cards, and there is truth to that, especially when it comes to government-to-government negotiations. The U.S. has the bigger market and an economy less dependent on trade.
...Yet the premiers – and Mr. Carney – did encourage the consumer boycotts: “Keep it up,” British Columbia Premier David Eby said.
Good advice. And there is still zeal for it among Canadians.
“We’re not getting as much coverage in the Canadian media, but I keep my eyes on what the U.S. press is saying, and they are starting to really notice massive drops,” said former New Democratic MP Charlie Angus, now a “Resistance” ringleader who writes Substack essays and speaks at boycott rallies.
U.S. alcohol sales have been hit. American exports of food to Canada amounted to US$28-billion in 2024, but Mr. Angus noted that some grocery stores pulled many U.S. products from their shelves. He argued that ordinary Canadians have more tools to pressure the U.S. than political leaders....
“This is where the power of the boycott is a unique political lever, because Mark Carney or Doug Ford or Daniel Smith can’t tell people to stop the boycott,” Mr. Angus said.
The senators who met Mr. Carney on Monday – three Democrats and Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski, a moderate swing vote in the U.S. Senate – declared their friendship and conceded that the boycott has had an impact.
“We are seeing a decrease in the travel from Canadians to Nevada,” Nevada Senator Catherine Cortez Masto said. New Hampshire Senator Maggie Hassan even said, “We miss you.”
That’s nice. The senators had suggestions on how to settle the issue, such as Canada permanently rescinding the DST. But they didn’t seem to include living up to past U.S. trade commitments – or stopping aggressive U.S. attacks on Canada’s economy.
Mr. Trump, after all, has said he wants the U.S. to imposes tariffs on Canadian autos so that it becomes uneconomical to make them in this country. That’s pretty nasty.
It isn’t easy for Canadian political leaders to counter that kind of strong-arming. But Canadian consumers can have an impact as long as they keep being nasty.
Pipelines, pipelines, pipelines........ concentrate on clean tech.... www.cbc.ca/news/politic...
— JeffTrnka (@jefftrnka.bsky.social) July 22, 2025 at 10:58 AM
[image or embed]
Some critics call supply management outdated, but when a crisis hits, it’s hard to argue with a system that keeps shelves stocked and farms afloat. Journalist @solarina.ca takes a closer look at Canada’s agricultural safety net: thewalrus.ca/egg-prices/
— The Walrus (@thewalrus.ca) July 21, 2025 at 4:00 PM
[image or embed]
This pretty well sums it up:Canadians say to keep supply management
— Polling Canada (@canadianpolling.bsky.social) July 14, 2025 at 10:19 PM
[image or embed]
Canada would be better off with no deal than with a bad deal:So long as US tariffs remain a threat — which is to say so long as the US remains an unreliable partner, tariff agreement or no — AND so long as our trade treaty contains a renegotiation clause, the US will keep pressuring Canada to change whichever of our laws they don’t like.
— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) July 15, 2025 at 5:54 AM
[image or embed]
Jim Stanford / Toronto Star (gift link)
Why a bad deal on tariffs with Donald Trump is worse than no dealI think Canada agrees with Jon Stewart's memorable song:
...Any agreement that preserves Trump’s illegal tariffs would lock Canada into a subservient role for many years to come. And there’s no assurance that Trump would even live up to his end (given his regular violations of more comprehensive binding deals, like the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement).
... It would unilaterally disarm Canada’s ability to respond to U.S. actions with counter-tariffs or nontariff measures. It would cement U.S. tariffs as a “new normal” — and thus unleash a flood of capital away from Canada, as firms give up hope that Trump’s tariffs are just a temporary bargaining ploy. It would sabotage nascent efforts with other countries to build a co-ordinated global response to Trump, by surrendering before a united front can take shape.
It would also squander the potential of growing political, economic, and financial turmoil in America to finally stay Trump’s hand. This is the most vulnerable moment of his presidency. He faces protests over health-care cuts, immigration raids, and Jeffrey Epstein. Giving him a big trade win now would buttress his authority at home — but for Canada would constitute an own goal of historic proportions.
We all wish Trump’s trade war could be defused through friendly negotiation. It’s not going to happen. But even if tariffs are inevitable in the short run, our ability to resist and survive them in the long run is undermined if we codify those attacks in the form of a lopsided, damaging “deal.”
A bad deal with Trump is worse than no deal. Canadians know that standing up to our suddenly-hostile neighbour is daunting. But voters affirmed their readiness for that challenge just months ago. The federal government needs to take confidence from Canadians’ capacity to fight for a sovereign economy — and ratify that courage by rejecting Trump’s ultimatums and continuing to strive for something better.
Jon Stewart responded to CBS bowing down to Trump and canceling Colbert
— WuTangIsForTheChildren (@wutangforchildren.bsky.social) July 21, 2025 at 10:14 PM
[image or embed]
No comments:
Post a Comment