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

Snubwatch II: Obama's stealth op-ed

by Paul Wells on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 12:28pm - 24 Comments

We are shocked to discover that Barack Obama actually did have an op-ed in a Canadian newspaper (well, it was the National Post) and the Huffington Post didn’t even notice!

Bookmark and Share
  • Stewart Smith

    Do we have the timelines on this? Maybe the NP cut and paste the article after seeing Snubwatch I.

  • dB

    You missed a dandy Snubwatch opportunity last night, when Obama cited support from Kevin Rudd and Gordon Brown when challenged about centre-left governments that weren’t engaging in stimulus spending. Support from the right-leaning Canadian government would no doubt have been mentioned, if only Canada was truly Back. Snubbage!

    • Critical Reasoning

      We are being snubjected to snubbery at every turn.

      Obama visits a country that isn’t Canada? Snub!
      Obama makes a positive reference to a non-Harper head of government? Double Snub!

  • CAPS

    I was thinking maybe it was Steve who suggested the National Post to Obama.

    • Wayne

      Now this is almost machiavellian : Stevie would be proud!

  • Critical Reasoning

    I’m starting to question the wisdom of making the “Snubwatch” a regular feature.

  • http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

    If an op-ed appears in the National Post and nobody reads it, does it make a point?

  • http://www.wernerpatels.com Werner Patels

    The article was in the National Post (the printed, paper version!!!!!) this morning.

  • Miles Jenkins

    Take a bow, Paul – you managed to be both factually and grammatically incorrect in one three-word sentence! (s/b “None is Canadian.”)

  • oompus boompus

    Better pay pretty close attention to what Obama is saying, because if he’s wrong then you and your children are going to be deeply impoverished, maybe for decades.

    banks have stopped lending

    No they haven’t. But they’ve slowed down the amount they’re lending to people and companies who have no realistic prospect of paying back the loans.

    If people in other countries cannot spend, markets dry up.

    In his fairytale Keynesian world, spending equals wealth. He thinks that savings have no purpose because governments can simply print money and shower it on deserving businesses (as determined by politicians). But the truth is, if nobody saves then wealth dries up. If he keeps printing money and then telling people what to do with the money then nobody will bother to save a dime. Too much trouble.

    And if we continue to let financial institutions around the world act recklessly and irresponsibly

    Er, what was the complaint again, about “banks have stopped lending” ?

    we call upon our partners to join us with a sense of urgency and common purpose.

    Sounds like socialist nonsense to me. A new ComIntern? A Greater World Co-Prosperity Sphere? Besides the usual objections to central economic planning (e.g.. it kills millions of people), it’s un-American to say the least – America became the richest and freest nation on earth by keeping as much power as possible out of the President’s hands and avoiding foreign entanglements, such as military treaties, managed trade and monetary agreements. But don’t worry. The new rules are not going to be dictated by the world’s biggest debtors. They’re going to be laid down by the biggest creditors. By the people with savings, in other words.

    Our leadership is grounded in a simple premise

    “Our” leadership? Queen Victoria would not be amused.

    the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – the most dramatic effort to jump-start job creation and lay a foundation for growth in a generation

    I think the national pork and new welfare entitlement act has been dealt with already elsewhere, no need to poke its stinking carcass at this time.

    restoring the flow of credit that is the lifeblood of a growing global economy

    Dear Barack … “Credit” is not the lifeblood of the economy. Private property and free trade are its lifeblood. And don’t confuse government-inflated currency and credit created out of thin air with savings. Savings are what result when free trade and private property are respected, and they are the foundation of wealth.

    we have an obligation to extend a hand to countries and people who face the greatest risk. If we turn our backs on them, the suffering caused by this crisis will be enlarged, and our own recovery will be delayed because markets for our goods will shrink further.

    IMF basket cases have never been a particularly good market for anyone’s exports, which is the same as saying that they’ve never been a very good source of imports. Ix-nay on the global elfare-way. “It’s a trap!”

    We must put an end to the reckless speculation and spending beyond our means

    Hey I just noticed that around every other sentence he decries the lack of spending and credit, then the next sentence he complains about the problems caused by reckless spending and credit. Do we look that stupid? Hello? Can he see or hear anything beyond his teleprompter and his ear bud?

    I know that America bears our share of responsibility for the mess that we all face.

    More of the “we” stuff. Ah, no, “America” didn’t create the mess, “American politicians” and the large corporations who control them bear most of the responsibility. That means Bush, Obama, Pelosi, the Clintons, Barney Frank, and their pals. It’s a reckless credit and spending thing.

    we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy.

    Actually we do have to choose. Looks like “we” chose ‘B’.

    Google “flying sharks”.

    • http://coyne kc

      Guess you don’t like Obama’s ties either?

  • oompus boompus

    Here’s the anti-Obama. Daniel Hannan speaking to some British git who thinks that money grows on trees. I didn’t notice his tie either.

    youtube.com 94lW6Y4tBXs

    Who do you think is more trustworthy? Obama or Daniel Hannan? The one who wants you trust him and give him all your money to control and who contradicts himself every other sentence, or the other one who says that he and his buddies are completely full of it and that you should keep your own money?

    A:

    “You cannot borrow and spend your way out of debt … you sound like a Brezhnev era apparatchik giving the party line. You know, and we know, and you know that we know, that it’s nonsense.”

    B:

    “We’ve uh, got to get credit and spending going again … we’ve got to stop, uh, reckless spending and credit … we must get people spending and uh, borrowing again … uh … we must stop reckless borrowing and spending …” (etc., until bankrupt with a worthless currency and you have to threaten people with aircraft carriers to make them trade with you)

    • http://www.jackmitchell.ca Jack Mitchell

      Hmm, POTUS vs. random (albeit eloquent) MEP. Certain difference there. One leads the free world; the other has a viral YouTube video.

      • sf

        Yeah, just like George Bush and Cindy Sheehan.

        • James Connors

          Cindy Sheehan! George Bush!

          ?

          You are being held captive in a licence plate factory!

          Where?

          Tap out another message and we’ll send Lassie to help you out.

  • sf

    This is not a snub, it’s an honour to be ignored by the Huffington Post.

    • Chuck VS Macleans

      Bang on.

      But this is macleans.ca, they want to be the Canadian version of HP.

  • Critical Reasoning

    Poles feel snubbed by West in multinational organizations

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/25/europe/poland.php

    • Dot

      Their argument needs a bit of polish – they forgot to mention giving the west the Pope, and Solidarity’s efforts to force a crack in the USSR control of Eastern Europe.

      • Critical Reasoning

        As an uninteresting aside, ‘polish’ is considered by some to be the only word in the English language that is pronounced differently when it is capitalized.

        • Dot

          Are you citing yourself? Are you one of the “some”? Ward claims it’s ok if you are.

          • Critical Reasoning

            By “some” I was referring to the venerable Martin Gardner, who is still alive at the age of 94 and who published that claim 40 years ago in a book. However, the “polish” claim actually originated with someone else, which is why I used the word “some”. Thanks for asking.

            By the way, do you suppose “Dr. Freedom” is Ward himself? Andrew Potter’s article turns up as a highly visible second link on Google news, which is how the legend that is Ward Churchill could have stumbled across it.

          • glak from planet zork

            Boffo! but a simple Dot might suffice.

  • glak from planet zork

    Hopey-changy refers to”unforgiving capitalism”.
    Wonder if he’s talking about the contracts his basketball buddies get.

From Macleans