Some Americans seem to think so, if last Friday’s edition of the New York Times is anything to judge by.

The cover of the paper’s January 30^th Fashion and Style section was devoted to an in-depth and largely flattering look at the new Liberal leader. Early on, the article compared Ignatieff to former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.

There are also Canadians who see Ignatieff as someone who can bring about change. Last Sunday, CBCNews.ca ran a piece covering the Times’ story and comparing Ignatieff to President Barack Obama.

Both articles noted how Ignatieff has reinvigorated and reorganized the Liberal party since taking over from Stéphane Dion in December. Both articles also carried an underlying sense of excitement that Ignatieff may become the next Liberal prime minister, and soon.

The media and the opposition parties – especially the Liberals - have a tendency to portray Prime Minister Stephen Harper as former President George W. Bush’s “yes man.” With many Americans excited to put the Bush years behind them, it’s not surprising that some are looking ahead to having a new prime minister on Parliament Hill.

Harper is a constant reminder that moving forward isn’t as easy as electing a new leader.

For better or for worse, Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin and Harper are all part of Bush’s legacy. In the future, only Harper will have to campaign under the weight of that legacy. That might not be an easy thing to do.

As a Toronto Star piece from early January noted, “whatever Harper was doing up here, Bush was doing more of it down there… For a federal government with a more or less parallel US agenda, political cover that broad is priceless.” The column concluded what some Canadians have already realized: “Obama makes Harper look bad.”  

Whether or not Canada needs change is open for debate. So is Ignatieff’s ability and willingness to break with Harper’s policies, like the New York Times seems convinced he would.

Being compared to leaders who inspired the terms “Trudeau-mania” and “Obama-mania” to describe their followings among voters is a lot to live up to. But if Ignatieff is even half the leader the New York Times believes him to be, he just might pull it off.

The American government’s economic stimulus package has come under fire over provisions that would stimulate the domestic economy at the expense of many of America’s foreign trading partners, including Canada.

Under the “buy American” rules, all equipment used in the US’s economic stimulus program would have to be American-made. Some exceptions would be allowed in cases where “buying American” would be “inconsistent with the public interest.”

In Canada, government officials and industry lobbyists aren’t waiting to see if the provisions are signed into law before voicing their concerns. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has made it clear that American protectionist impulses – and their consequences – will be on the agenda when President Barack Obama visits on February 19^th.

In the meantime, media outlets rush to interview economists and trade experts. Anyone willing to sit down and talk about “tit for tat” trade policies that might be implemented in retaliation for American protectionism is in high demand.

But the truth is that if “buy American” is signed into law, Canada will be hard-pressed to retaliate in a way that really hurts the United States.

In 2006, the United States purchased 79% of Canadian exports (approximately $303.4 billion US), while Canada purchased only 22% of American exports (approximately $230.3 billion US).

In other words, Canada would have a hard time inflicting much retaliatory damage on the American economy.

Canada’s options aren’t limited to a messy, self-harming trade war. The Canadian government could choose to work through North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or World Trade Organization (WTO) frameworks to redress its trade grievances.

But resolving trade disputes through NAFTA and the WTO can be a long, drawn out process. Case in point: NAFTA took five years to resolve the most recent softwood lumber dispute.

With any luck, the situation won’t come to NAFTA-style dispute resolution because the “buy American” clauses won’t be signed into law.

Industry lobbyists south of the border are making noise about how protectionism would actually hurt them. With big names like General Electric taking a stand against “buy American” provisions, their passage into law is far from being a sure thing.

Domestic discontent, when coupled with criticism from abroad, will probably be sufficient to keep “buy American” from becoming official government policy. If it’s not, Obama might find that his approval ratings drop considerably around the country and around the world.

Last week, MPs Mario Silva (Liberal) and Olivia Chow (NDP) pledged that a Liberal-NDP coalition government would stop the deportation of American war resisters. But now that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s minority government isn’t going anywhere, war resisters hiding out north of the border are facing an uncertain future.

Five Iraq War resisters, all facing jail time for desertion, were scheduled for deportation within two weeks of the Liberal-NDP announcement. Since then, Kimberly Rivera – a mother of three who was slated for deportation on Tuesday – has been granted a temporary stay of removal. So far, the other four haven’t been so lucky.

The Conservatives have made it clear that their government will not harbour war resisters. Earlier this month, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney went so far as to call war resisters living in Canada “bogus refugee claimants.”

The number of war resisters actually living in Canada is unknown. Given the Conservative government’s outspoken position on harbouring resisters, it’s not surprising that many never file refugee claims, bogus or otherwise.

When a refugee claim is denied, the individual must leave Canada within 30 days. If they don’t, a deportation order is issued, which any peace officer may carry out at any time. 

For many resisters, deportation would result in arrest and a prison sentence.

However, President Barack Obama has the power to change that. Just as Gerald Ford did in 1974 for Vietnam War resisters, Obama could grant amnesty to Iraq War resisters living abroad.

Harper too could follow historical precedent. Pierre Trudeau offered amnesty to Vietnam-era draft dodgers hiding out in Canada. Removing the risk from coming forward and filing the appropriate paperwork eventually allowed these men to become landed immigrants.

All things considered, both Obama and Harper might do well to follow in the footsteps of their predecessors.

The Iraq War is a mess the Bush administration had no justification for creating. What’s more, key members of the administration may wind up facing war crime charges for their invasion of Iraq and, some international law experts have argued, even Afghanistan.

Given the questionable legality of the Iraq War, both Harper and Obama may find it increasingly difficult to justify treating war resisters as criminals. Instead of prosecuting, deporting and even jailing resisters, why not put both countries’ limited resources to better use, and let resisters – and their families – get on with their lives on whichever side of the border they choose?

Last week, President Barack Obama ordered prosecutors in all Guantanamo Bay detainee trials to request that proceedings be halted immediately.

In Ottawa, the lines of communication between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defense Minister Peter MacKay seem to have gotten crossed in the hours after the Obama administration’s announcement.

Speaking to the media after word of the 120-day pause on all Guantanamo detainee proceedings, MacKay conceded that the American move would force everyone involved to re-evaluate their positions on the detainees, their trials and their possible repatriation.

Not long after MacKay hinted at a shift in the Conservative government’s position on the question of bringing Omar Khadr back to Canada, a Harper spokesman reiterated the government’s familiar refrain: Khadr faces serious charges and it must be a judicial process, not a political one, that determines his fate.

But if Obama makes good on his promise to close Guantanamo Bay, the already highly politicized judicial process involving Khadr might become purely political.

Although it appears less and less likely to ever happen, Harper continues to insist that Khadr be tried under American law. Being forced to accept his repatriation would be an embarrassment to Harper and the Conservative party. It would also allow the American government to dictate Canadian policy.

Neither is likely to sit well with Harper, who has the ability to complicate Obama’s agenda in key areas, such as energy and the economy. Harper may not be able to block Khadr from returning home, but he can make forcing repatriation on Canada a costly move.

For his part, Obama has high expectations to live up to. He campaigned on lofty promises of dramatic change. Now, people around the world are hoping to see that change during his time in office. But change that simply shifts responsibility for cleaning up the messes left behind by the Bush administration on to other nations isn’t likely to play well, especially abroad.

The challenge for Obama is to deliver real, substantive change. Passing Khadr off to Canada and allowing the US to wash its hands of the Guantanamo mess won’t make Obama or his country any friends.

All things considered, it might have been best for Harper’s spokesman to let MacKay’s statement stand. With every day that passes, the likelihood of Khadr being returned to Canada increases. Softening his position on the issue now may allow Harper to save some face if Khadr is returned to Canada in the future. 

Grant Hooker, founder and co-owner of BeaverTails Canada Inc., will be in Washington on Tuesday, serving up his company’s signature treat at the Canadian embassy’s “invitation only” inauguration tailgate party.

In honour of the occasion, Hooker invented the “Obama Tail”: a deep-fried pastry coated in cinnamon and sugar, then topped off with an “O” made out of chocolate and maple syrup.

It’s corny and it’s gimmicky, but unlike most business owners cashing in on “Obama-mania,” Hooker’s giving his Obama-themed merchandise away. Since Barack Obama launched his presidential bid, the market for Obama memorabilia has exploded. Stores can’t keep Obama merchandise in stock and hundreds of websites have sprung up online, selling Obama t-shirts, sweatshirts, bumper stickers, messenger bags, fridge magnets and coffee mugs.

To quote some of the TV ads selling various Obama paraphernalia, “but wait – there’s more!”

You can own your very own coaster proclaiming that Obama is the “head brotha in charge”, or you can purchase a “Barack around the clock” wall clock. You can even cuddle up with an Obama-themed throw pillow knock-off of Grant Wood’s painting, American Gothic.

There’s no end to the things people will try to market as “Obama-bilia” (case in point: the “Yes We Can” opener), and it’s not just enterprising Americans cashing in on the trend. Obama-mania has spilled over the border, and so has Obama merchandise.

Canadians can dress their babies in “Barack-a-bye-baby” onesies to match mom’s “Obama Mama” t-shirt. They can even get their hands in a pair of Obama oven mitts, if they can find them.

Just like Grant Hooker with his Obama Tail, lots of business owners are trying anything they can think of to attract customers, and it’s working.

Americans have already spent almost $200 million on Obama-bilia. That number is expected to edge even higher on inauguration day.

There’s no telling how much Canadians have forked over for Obama-bilia, but anecdotal evidence suggests it’s more than just a handful of loonies and toonies. Stores like Toronto’s Peach Berserk have reported that they just can’t keep up with the demand for all things Obama.

The main motivation driving the Obama-bilia boom may have been corporate greed, but that boom has come to serve a useful purpose, helping some businesses survive the onset of a global financial crisis. Obama’s inauguration is a historic event, and even people strapped for cash are willing to open their wallets to mark the occasion. This so-called “one-man stimulus” isn’t a long-term solution to the economic crisis, but in the short-term, it’s bought some businesses a little more time to consider their options.

At the end of the day, the positive impact of the Obama-bilia craze doesn’t make some of the merchandise any less corny or gimmicky, but it does make items like the Obama Tail a little easier to swallow.

Dallaire is known at home and abroad for his humanitarian work. He has a long history of speaking out for what he believes in, even when his position is an unpopular one, as it was during the Rwandan genocide. But in this case, he may have gone too far.

Whether he likes it or not, Dallaire was in Washington acting as both a concerned citizen and a senator. Convention and courtesy require that Dallaire’s title precede his name whenever he is introduced. As a result, it’s hard to separate the individual from the government official.

The media doesn’t make it any easier. Journalists like to mention that Senator Dallaire is also a retired Canadian Forces Lieutenant-General. However, citing his rank is a double-edged sword: it can lend to Dallaire’s credibility but it can also reinforce the perception that he’s acting as a representative of the Canadian government, even when he’s not.

Considering that Dallaire’s position on Khadr is in stark contrast to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s view, this is problematic. Dallaire has argued that Khadr should be repatriated to Canada and that his status as a child soldier should be taken into account during his trial. Meanwhile Harper has consistently supported the Bush administration’s plan to try Khadr as an adult at Guantanamo.

This isn’t the first time that Dallaire has taken his campaign to free Khadr across the border. Last August, he journeyed to Washington to try and convince Congress to extradite Khadr to Canada.

But with the future of Canada’s Conservative government uncertain, and a new American administration set to take office next week, the timing of Dallaire’s latest visit could have been better. A Liberal senator traveling to Washington to make demands of a president-in-waiting, especially when those demands run counter to our Conservative prime minister’s own foreign policy goals, puts all three men in awkward positions.

Dallaire has left himself open to criticism that he’s more interested in playing politics and undermining the government than bringing Khadr home. This makes him the story and diverts attention from Khadr.

For his part, Harper is being forced to pick up the “hot potato” of Canadian politics – no politician wants to touch the Khadr issue for long in case they get burned by it. A recent poll conducted by Angus Reid and the Toronto Star found that, if Guantanamo Bay were closed, 47% of Canadians would want Khadr repatriated to Canada to face trial, while 38% would want him to remain in the US to face trial; 16% of Canadians were undecided. With his minority government already on shaky ground, now is not when Harper wants to be dealing with such a divisive issue.

South of the border, Obama must tread carefully. He and his advisors are already under pressure to make good on his pledge to shut down Guantanamo Bay. If heated debate between Dallaire and Harper flares up again, Obama may be forced into very publicly siding with either an elected prime minister or an appointed senator. Either way, his decision will impact the Canadian-American relationship.

All things considered, Khadr’s cause might be best served if Dallaire keeps his campaigning for the young man’s freedom out of the public eye. Allowing foreign policy makers and legal experts on both sides of the border to do their jobs without exacerbating existing tensions may do more good than stirring up heated debates. After all, debates haven’t made much difference in the last six years.

It isn’t just any iPod, though. It’s a tool to help the 44^th President of the United States better understand his northern neighbour and oddly enough, it just might help us Canadians better understand ourselves.

Earlier this month, CBC Radio 2 asked Canadians to nominate 49 Songs from North of the 49th Parallel that best define the country. Nominations closed on January 9^th, and the folks at Radio 2 spent the weekend narrowing the field to a shortlist of just 100 songs.

Today through Friday, Canadians can visit http://www.cbc.ca/radio2/obamasplaylist/theplaylist.html to vote for their favourites. The top 49 songs will be uploaded onto an iPod and presented to Obama in order to help him learn about Canada.

Some of the nominees are classics that represent Canadiana in its purest form. k.d. lang’s cover of Hallelujah, Stompin’ Tom Connors’ The Hockey Song and Bachman-Turner Overdrive’s Takin’ Care of Business were all nominated. Regardless of which of these songs, if any, make the final cut, looking over the list of nominees is a reminder that Canada boasts a wealth of homegrown talent.

Other nominees offer insight into how Canadians view the two countries and their relationship with one another.

Neil Young’s Rockin’ In The Free World and Bruce Cockburn’s Democracy are indictments against American, and to a lesser extent Canadian, third world policies of the past. For a newly inaugurated president, the lyrics are a poignant reminder of his office’s ability to affect sweeping change at home and abroad.

Both songs also warn of Canadians’ quickness to blame the US for the wrongs in the world, while overlooking our own government’s role in creating and perpetuating them. In the past, Canadian fingers have been quick to point to Washington when assigning blame for everything from long delays at the border to increasing gun violence in Canada.

Though dropped from the shortlist, Blue Rodeo’s Lost Together captures the nature of our relationship with the US. For better or for worse, history, geography and simple economics have tied Canada’s fortunes to our southern neighbour. Obama must remember that when Washington makes a decision about a domestic issue, such as bailing out the big three American automakers, consequences are often felt on this side of the border too.

When all is said and done, it doesn’t really matter whether the Oscar Peterson Trio’s Hymn to Freedom beats out Feist’s I Feel It All or Jully Black’s Seven Day Fool for a spot on Obama’s playlist. What matters is that Radio 2 has gotten Canadians thinking about our relationship with the US in terms of what it is and what it could be.