It's been coming for some time now. Prime Minister Mark Carney has been playing Tariff Chicken with the Trump Administration, preferring to focus on what Canada has over what Canada could gain by bending to the Trump Administration's demands. He's making overtures to become a co-signee of the Rearm Europe project and has narrowed the list of potential suppliers for those North of the Wall to either South Korea or Germany.
You want to bet against the Canadian purchase of F-35s from America? Good. Prescription drugs are expensive up here, too. I could use the money. Yesterday, he dared to announce that Canada is the first G20 country to recognize the State of Palestine. In the hours since Carney dropped the mic on that one, Great Britain, Australia, and Portugal have followed suit. No one likes to be first, unless it's for pancakes. But screw it, he did it anyway, opening the door for France, Luxembourg, Malta, and San Marino, all of which plan on declaring for Palestine before the end of the year.
Today, Prime Minister Carney threw down. And I suspect that Canada's southern neighbour may want to pick it up in the days to come:
In comments to the Council on Foreign Relations, a U.S. think tank, Mr. Carney talked about his efforts to build more economic opportunities for Canada outside the increasingly protectionist U.S.
"Canadians understand the need to, as we put it, to be masters in our own house," Mr. Carney told the council in an interview Monday.
"The country does not want to wake up and look on, with due respect, on Truth Social or X.com to see what the latest change is in U.S. policy, but wants to get on with what we can control, and that's a big part of the government strategy."
Twist that calm, demur knife, baby!
In all seriousness, this isn't an attempt to provoke a thin-skinned orange turd baby. It's a nation that's saying no to a thin-skinned orange turd baby who has, in the past few months, threatened its sovereignty, insinuated violence, and attempted to beat it down with tariffs, which have been declared illegal multiple times in American courts. But, as we've all seen, taking a stand against anything Trump says, does, or—I can't bring myself to use the word thinks— believes provokes him no matter the circumstances, is all but a guarantee. With this being the case, where's the harm in poking him with a stick?
