Posted on 12/02/2004 5:50:14 PM PST by quidnunc
The Washington Post’s always imaginative White House correspondent Dana Milbank and its dour front-page caption writers would have you believe that President Bush’s Canadian visit occurred in an atmosphere of tight-lipped circumspection. “During his two-day visit to Canada,” the caption writer opined, “Bush outlined a second-term foreign policy that would make international cooperation his administration’s top priority, but the president made clear that such cooperation must occur on his terms.”
Meanwhile, I spent yesterday afternoon fielding calls from Canadians and especially Canadian journalists by no means friendly to the president who just could not stop enthusing about the wit, charm, warmth, and understanding of the president’speech.
Bush’s visit was a diplomatic triumph, from the failure of Canada’s small but vociferous anti-American minority to turn out in the cold streets of Ottawa to the new tone taken by prime minister Paul Martin — and perhaps above all to the laughter and cheers of the president’s audiences.
-snip-
Some critics of the president have in recent years endorsed the strange conceit that the United States is responsible for everything that happens in the Western alliance. If things go well, it’s solely to America’s credit; if things go ill — as they have often done since 9/11 — then it is America’s fault. But other countries have motives and purposes too. France for example has chosen bad relations with the United States for ideological purposes of its own. Germany’s Gerhard Schroeder chose a bad relationship for short-term electoral advantage. And Canada’s Jean Chretien chose a bad relationship in order to appease left-wing members of his governing Liberal party affronted by his relatively non-left economic policies.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Great article! Good to hear.
Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion...
Great post. I never gave up on our buddies up north.
GREAT ending line... "If the Washington Post were less eager to score points off this president, they might even have printed it." Oh, and here is the text and you don't even have to give the WP a hit on their sitemeter...http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/12/20041201-4.html
I beg to differ. If things go well, it's only to America's credit when Bill Clinton is in office because he is a master at stealing the limelight, and therefore the credit. In fact, he's one of the very few who believably pretend things are wonderful even when they're REALLY BAD. There were FIVE MAJOR TERRORIST ATTACKS against this country and a major economic downturn during his watch and most of the world STILL thinks everything was great.
NORMALLY when things are going well, America is largely ignored, unless there's a Republican president. Then he's portrayed as a drooling cavemen with his finger on the "red button".
When the president spoke here, I was amazed at how his spirit seemed to spread. I believe even the media people seemed to be enjoying this wonderful man, in spite of themselves. I think they were wondering why they had such hate for him.
I believe President Bush managed to work his way into many hearts here in Canada. He did something very deep and moving. I felt it and I saw it. I believe attitudes will change.
Below is what I posted the other day regarding his speech.
President Bush's speech was EXCELLENT.
He is so clear, so firm in his beliefs, and so bold to say what he knows to be right, regardless of how it could be received. He is a leader.
His delivery is so genuine and passionate that he could change minds just with his confidence.
His comments were far more gracious than the liberal government of Canada deserved. I believe he won over many people yesterday and today. He was truly a gentleman, showing sincere appreciation to those very kind and generous Canadians who were there to help Americans in need.
He truly makes his opponents look so small, because he is so big.
When he gets those stupid "Why do they hate you" questions, I wish he would just respond with "Because they don't know me." Then flash that big Texan smile.
Milbank got his start as the AP reporter from LITTLE ROCK during when Clinton was the governor. Amazingly, when Clinton was elected president, he was moved to Washington and eventually hired by the Washington Post.
As far as I am concerned, he is a Clintonista mole at the Post. He should be covering Europe or something, and NOT be the White House reporter.
Bill Sammon of the Washington Times had a discussion in his book Fighting Back about Milbank's contempt for the president. It is my goal to see Milbank relegated to obscurity.
The EUrotrash and EUrotrash wannabes were not amused by this witty reparte by the president, but it's one of my favorite lines
"When he gets those stupid "Why do they hate you" questions, I wish he would just respond with "Because they don't know me." Then flash that big Texan smile."
Nothing succeeds like success.
The Canadians have been subjected to so much propaganda about the President. But once they met him, they saw the good, authentic and unpretentious man he is.
God bless GW.
Are you aware that Dana Milbank is a graduate of Yale, and a member of Skull and Bones?
Thank you for your kind words, as well as the help on 9/11/01. People like you are the real reason the United States will never abandon Canada. I believe governments of Canada and the US will have a much more friendly and productive relationship now that Martin's in charge.
Great article and great thread you've started.
The Skull and Bones connection is not important to me, any more than membership in the Rotary.
Milbank is a poisonous dweeb. Read Sammon's book about his behavior prior to 9/11. Read Milbank's numerous "news" articles about the president.
He is a Clintonista, no doubt about it.
The president had had enough that day and shot back [paraphrasing] "Which sixteen words? Can you tell me the quote?"
Dana stammered that no he didn't but he could go back and look them up.
It was a typical touché by President Bush, which was typically ignored by the media.
Re: Milbank. I don't disagree. Not at all. He's a POS.
Yes, it was. The President stayed the course...his goals were on display with humor, humility and conviction.
After witnessing the President in Canada, I am---once again---grateful that this man leads America and the free world.
Quid, it looks like I have to eat my words from the other thread - this article looks pretty positive towards Canada as well as your president. Thanks for posting it.
BTW, the prez's visit here was a real class act and I really appreciate his thanks to my countrymen who helped yours following 9/11, including a few I know in my old home town of Halifax/Dartmouth.
While our countries will always have their differences of opinion on some things, we also have many things in common. I hope we will sign on to the missile defence plan and do whatever we can in Iraq now.
Big deal. So was President Bush. So was John Kerry, except that he didn't graduate from Yale.
http://www.cbc.ca/clips/rm-lo/hunter_bush041201.rm RealVideo of CBC report
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.