Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Canada: back

by Paul Wells on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:53pm - 23 Comments

Gordon Brown to address joint session of US Congress.

Bookmark and Share
  • archangel

    Erfolgtraurigkeit

    • Critical Reasoning

      I thought archangel’s post was gibberish, but it’s not! “Erfolgtraurigkeit” really is the opposite of shadenfreude (enjoyment obtained from the troubles of others).

      “Erfolgtraurigkeit” was coined by British author David Baddiel in a very entertaining 2005 article:

      “The success of others throws the desolation of your life into relief’

      http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article561517.ece

      • Paul Wells

        It’s words like that, and the fact that German allows them to be confected, that makes me wish I had taken the time to improve my very rudimentary German at some point.

      • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

        I, too, thought Erfolgtraurigkeit was gibberish and that archangel feel asleep on his keyboard. Every day is a school day, as my mom says. Thanks for the new word archangel and CR.

      • http://macleans.ca kc

        Relief is all you could feel after pronoucing that one. Only the German’s could define it in quite those terms.

      • http://www.jackmitchell.ca J@ck Mitchell

        Cf Gore Vidal’s line: “Every time a friend succeeds, a little part of me dies.”

        • http://macleans.ca kc

          LOL!

  • Critical Reasoning

    Gordon Brown’s successful statesmanship is all the more remarkable considering his lukewarm popularity in the UK and the tepid reviews of his first months in office.

    I’m not sure if the title “Canada: back” is meant to imply that GB’s address somehow reflects poorly on Canada’s recent relationship building efforts with the United States.

    • http://macleans.ca kc

      I’ll take irony for three hundred!

  • Riley

    I know it’s now general wisdom that Harper was the person who coined “Canada is Back”, but actually, Harper just stole this line from the Liberal communication strategy for the roll-out of the International Policy Statement in 2005.

    In the fall of that year, DFAIT dispatched plenty of people to give presentations on the IPS throughout Canada’s unversities, and I was fortunate enough to attend one such session at Dalhousie University. It was entitled “Canada is Back: Canada’s 2005 International Policy Statement” and you can find proof of this at http://centreforforeignpolicystudies.dal.ca/seminarseries.php on the entry for September 28, 2005.

    I also found this Embassy magazine article where Michael Pearson, an advisor to DFAIT Minister Pierre Pettigrew, uses similar language and says that “Canada is “back in the game.” Coincidently Paul Wells was interviewed for that same article. http://embassymag.ca/page/view/.2005.may.4.spin

    I know I heard this repeated in several media interviews and I’d probably place money that someone could find a quote with Paul Martin saying it as well.

    None of this is to say that “Canada is Back” is not a silly statement – because it is. It also doesn’t mean that great pundits like Paul Wells shouldn’t be using it to beat the Harperites over the head. My only point is that it wasn’t Harper that first coined the phrase.. he’s a thief.

    • sf

      Yes, we know, only Liberals have ideas. Only they can claim Canada is back.

      BTW, you yourself are not the first person to use the words “great pundits like Paul Wells”. You are also a thief.

      • http://www.jackmitchell.ca J@ck Mitchell

        Shockingly, he is. It’s like Eden in here.

  • Andrew (not Potter or Coyne)

    I think it’s meant to put our relationship with the US in perspective. Do we have such a special relationship when GB’s GB addresses Congress?

    • Critical Reasoning

      Do we have such a special relationship when GB’s GB addresses Congress?

      Bilateral relations are not the same thing as dating. You seem to be suggesting that Canada’s relationship with the US is only “special” if it is also monogamous…. a notion that is insanely out to lunch.

      • http://macleans.ca kc

        Not really It’s a lot like dating
        . As a Brit i can assure you they think their relationship to the yanks [ so to speak ] is special too! They guard it jealously. [ or did ]The problem is in the inferences in the word special. No biggie, just a little childish that’s all.

      • http://prairiewrangler.wordpress.com/ Olaf

        Bilateral relations are not the same thing as dating.

        Imagine if it was though. I’d ask out Brazil. She sounds hot.

        • Chuck VS Macleans

          I agree brazil is hot..

        • http://macleans.ca kc

          Yeah, i move we change our special relationship.

    • TobyornotToby

      Yes we do have a special relationship, but only when the US gets horny for something Canada has. Doesn’t mean US will call later.

  • http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

    “The invitation represents a considerable coup for Brown, who will become only the fifth British prime minister to deliver a speech to a joint sitting of both Houses of the US legislature.

    The speech – almost certain to focus on the global financial crisis – will bolster his claim to be a world leader in economic affairs.”

    It’s a coup for Blair or UK as a whole, not Brown. From what I’ve read, many in US government have come to loathe Brown and his typically Scots dour demeanour. Brown is a terrible public speaker, maybe even worse than Harper, and his speech will be forgotten a few minutes after he’s done talking.

    And even tho Congress is Dem at the moment, I don’t believe they will be that receptive to Brown’s message which is likely to be that a global body is needed to regulate financial systems around the world. Brown doesn’t have much credibility in financial affairs either because he was Chancellor for a decade and it’s many of his policies that have led to UK being one of the most adversely affected countries by global recession.

  • Ian

    Maybe Paul is just suggesting a contrast between the profile Brown’s visit and that of Harper’s. But I’m sure Brown won’t be on Fox Business so probably it all evens out.

  • richardperegrino

    Can we assume that Michael Ignatieff will fly to Dulles International, give a speech to everyone who happens to be at Gate C1 and C2, then pay to have a pic of his “Joint Address” beamed to unrelated metropolitan centres in the lower 48?

  • Wascally Wabbit

    I don’t know who will be more ticked by this announcement – Harper or Martin!
    Probably Harper – because he’s still trying to get over (and submarine) the GG’s apparent invitation to meet with Obama in Washington!

From Macleans