Latest Posts
- Notice to “Spectator” readers
- So Long. Farewell. Auf wiedersehen. Goodbye.
- Magazine maven Bonnie Fuller poised to market her toughest brand yet: Herself
- John Macfarlane grabs The Walrus’s tiller
Tools
Categories
- General
- Bay Street
- Black Watch
- Television
- Radio
- Internet
- Newspapers
- Gossip Hound
- Egos
- Across the Ocean
- Over the Border
- Books
- Magazines
- American Election
- New York Times vs Wall Street Journal
- Gaffe of the Week
- Livent Trial
Postings by date
John Ibbitson flaunts knowledge of NAFTA, human condition
Posted on February 29, 2008 by Douglas Bell
In this the most compelling political season in recent American history, the powers that be at The Globe and Mail have as their man in Washington (and further afield) the hard-working and, for the most part, balanced John Ibbitson. He is the quintessential “Globe man”: fiscally conservative and progressive on social issues. Another quality he shares with the Globe is rampaging self-importance. Wednesday, Ibbitson chastised The New York Times’ lead political columnist, David Brooks, for failing to grasp the central importance of Barack Obama’s campaign. Details, such as they are, after the jump.
Commentators and pundits, and more than a few Globe readers, are bewildered by the uncritical enthusiasm with which so many voters greet Mr. Obama’s candidacy… ‘His Hopeness tells rallies that we are the change we have been waiting for,’ wrote David Brooks in The New York Times, ‘but if we are the change we have been waiting for, then why have we been waiting since we’ve been here all along?’
But these critical critics know—and it drives them crazy—that the growing voter enthusiasm for Mr. Obama is based on reasoning that goes beyond facts. People just like the guy. They recognize the strength of the mind behind the oratory, his seriousness of purpose, his level-headedness. These are just impressions, of course, but voters judge, as they should, on impressions.
Well it’s one thing for those pundits to be all wrong-headed and confused, but “Globe readers”? Well, we can’t have that, now can we?
I’m sure Times editor Bill Keller called a meeting this very day encouraging Brooks et al. to stop blotting their worksheets and get with the program. After all, “people just like the guy.” And yesterday, with that admonition ringing in our ears, Ibbitson further encouraged “Globe readers” and other Canadians (the same thing, really) to think about renegotiating NAFTA in light of Obama’s populist, protectionist economic concerns.
Twenty years ago…faced with growing protectionism in the United States, Canada proposed a free-trade agreement to protect and enhance the flow of goods across the border.
The challenge today is the same; the answer is the same. Prime Minister Stephen Harper should propose a second round of Canada-U.S. trade negotiations.
The Democrats want new environmental regulations? Then let’s propose a bilateral carbon market based on a cap-and-trade agreement aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The Democrats want new rules to protect American workers? Then how about dismantling barriers to labour mobility between Canada and the United States? This would increase productivity, promote the harmonization of wages and working conditions and help people in each country to get to know the other country better.
Sure, let’s unilaterally dismantle NAFTA before the election. I mean, it’s not like the Republicans, were they to somehow eke out a victory, would take our willingness to negotiate for abject surrender. I mean fair’s fair. Even “Globe readers” know that.
• Obama would put a new face on America [Globe and Mail]
• Time to revitalize U.S.-Canada relations [Globe and Mail]
- Back to Spectator Home
- Categories: Newspapers, Egos, Over the Border, American Election
- Permalink





Comments
Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy
You must register to post comments. Please register here.
Pen1 February 29, 2008 at 12:14 p.m.
Spectator eh? who cares?
Even in the follow up to this lousy blog Bell can't help his copycat nature, didn't Black have a publication called the Spectator? You are a creep Bell and you have no mind of your own. Black is a victim not a thief, he may be an arrogant peacocking idiot at times Black but he never stole, defrauded or corrupted anything. I hope your new blog fails miserably Doug Bell, because you're a miserable loser. Drop dead all of you, I pray that the ABB burns in hell.
Long live Lord Black!!!
jade_lee February 29, 2008 at 12:18 p.m.
With me being both a Globe reader and a Canadian (I somehow think you mock Globe readers here Doug Bell), I know NAFTA is the end result of years and years of disputes between Canada and USA business operaters, who want to make more money than one another and will go the extra mile to do so even at a cost to the citizenry they claim to have in mind in each nation. Such is capitalism. Fairness be damned!
If NAFTA means giving back 1 Billion Canadian Dollars (beating the AD scam liberal cash give away to slim buckets) to the elite softwood lumber families in the USA as this current minority government has done, where the American people paid the legal fees of the elite families and the Canadian softwood industry fails in the environmental damage area and blames the expense of NAFTA they have to carry on their collective greedy shoulders, I say NAFTA should be tosses. It doesn't change the gripes and rip offs or calm the greedy exploitation towards reason.
If NAFTA means our oil feeds the American needs before ours here in Canada in the event of a shortage, NAFTA should be tossed.
I am all for fairness. I am all for easy exchange of goods. I am all for open markets at our disposal to trade, to exploit...yes I said exploit. But the deal has to satisfy individuals and lets face it everyone has their own agenda. Local trade agreements will not work in a global economy. Let the fights begin!
GravityLevity2 February 29, 2008 at 1:40 p.m.
NAFTA is a farce, especially post 2001. I recall Mulroney's government telling us way back when that soon we individual Canadians would be able to move freely across the border and never pay duty. Hah!
Post a comment