No, not Paul Martin. Paul Wells.
Wells points to the second example in a week in which Frank McKenna, our newly minted ambassador to the United States, has shot his mouth off and the Prime Minister has immediately had to state in public that McKenna's remarks don't reflect Canada's position. So, as Wells said, (and to repeat the link because I agree that strongly), "Frank McKenna should hand in his resignation."
You'd think we would have learned from the example of Paul Cellucci that ex-politicians don't necessarily make good diplomats.
As you know, pogge. I agree whole heartedly.
Maybe Frank McKenna is just what this relationship needs: a truth-teller who's not afraid to say what he's thinking. Diplomacy is important but it's getting Canada nowhere right now and hasn't gotten us anywhere in a while. So maybe we need to grab the attention of the United States - difficult to do while their attention is on the Middle East - but it's got to be done for a variety of reasons.
Or, they could just turn around and squash Canada.
Grabbing the attention of the U.S. by having our ambassador make a public statement which our Prime Minister immediately repudiates doesn't make us look stronger or get us the attention we want. It makes us look disorganized and weak.
Besides, Martin's official policy is not to link missile defence and trade and on this I think his policy is the correct one. We shouldn't be trading one off against the other. We should be seeing a resolution on trade disputes because we're right and because we're supposed to have a "free trade" agreement with these people.
Whooee! Yer on the money, PoogieBoy. I seen ol' Inky Wells's piece an' I'm right along side the both o' you. That FrankFeller is 'bout as useful as dried spit. Has he done anything right? Sendin' that idjit t' Washington was like puttin' a tuxedo on a catfish. You can dress'm up nice but he still can't do nothin' but flippety-flop.
Yores trooly,
JimBobby