Among the more troublesome elements of Canada's chattering class is the species homo anti anti-Americanus. Led by the likes of Robert Fulford, Mark Steyn, Barbara Amiel and Jack Granatstein, its watching brief is to take any opportunity to pillory Canadians who defend our sovereignty at the expense of the United States. The Victoria Day edition of the Globe featured a typical example of this genre, written by the aforementioned Granatstein. It's an odd moment for it. Lately Canada seems to be renewing its love affair with Lady Liberty and her subjects. We adore Obama and he loves us right back. Our banking system is a model for their forthcoming reform. Even Jim Balsillie is occasionally conciliatory. (Okay, maybe that's a stretch.). For all that, Granatstein says, just you wait - it won't last: "The Canadian left sees the U.S. as the Great Satan…Maude Barlow, Jack Layton and Naomi Klein will denounce the policies, whatever they may be, as either inadequate or too much, and point to a clause or two that, they will say, shows the Americans are trying to steal Canada's water or jobs or money or independence. Ms. Barlow has already suggested the United States will some day be involved in wars over water, so no one should be surprised when she paints Mr. Obama as a puppet of corporate forces. She will. Mr. Layton, who made Harper-Bush into almost a single word in our recent election will, by the next one, likely find himself using Harper-Obama in the same way. Ms. Klein has already denounced Mr. Obama as a corporatist/imperialist. She will continue to do so. In other words, nothing much will change." What's so weird about this line of thinking is the way Granatstein and his ilk lump apples and oranges into one mass, undifferentiated "left." Layton's a pol. Barlow's an advocate. Klein's a free floating one-woman talk-a-thon who's gone so far as to say that she simply doesn't care any more about Canadian party politics left, right or middle. In the end, it's easier for continentalists to paint their adversaries with one broad brush. It certainly beats having to come to grips with the complications of understanding a free and sovereign nation whose interests are from time to time at variance with "the greatest nation on the face of the earth."