Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 13, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

GLOBAL ATTITUDES....Here are the latest Pew numbers about how we're viewed in other countries. There's not much good news here, though I suppose it's nice to see that even though our favorable ratings in Jordan have dropped since last year, at least they've bounced back from their all-time low of 1% in 2003. Overall, there were big drops in Spain, Russia, India and Turkey, and small gains in China and Pakistan.

However, the news from Pakistan continues to be mostly bad. Pakistanis favor Iran getting nuclear weapons by a margin of 52%-15% and support the Hamas victory in Palestine by a margin of 87%-4%.

In other findings, Germany and France increasingly sympathize with Israel, negative views of France are on the rise, and Turks are "turning away from the war on terror." Make of all this what you will.

Kevin Drum 1:42 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (204)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Does this matter? What's the point. Making progress is the point. After loosing CA50, I just can't help asking what is the point?

Posted by: the fake Fake Al on June 13, 2006 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

This is further proof of the geostrategic brilliance of the greatest political genius of all time, George W. Bush and the failure of liberalism and the death of Europe as they are overtaken by the relentlessly breeding brown Islamic immigrant hordes while America's GDP skyrockets and the signatories to Kyoto are stupid while all Americans enjoy their God-given birthright of suburban sprawl and giant SUVs in every garage.

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

I think it's because so many of the rides at Disney World are out of order these days. These folks travel 20 hours to hit a theme park expecting "the good old days", and then get let down like that (??). Hateful rage.

Posted by: wishIwuz2 on June 13, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

Totally off topic, a Peak Oil post: here's a Rand study about Western US oil shale that I've just finished the Introduction to, and am getting ready to dive into the body of the report.

The quick summary: we've got a shitload of potentially recoverable petroleum - between 0.5 and 1.1 trillion barrels of it - locked up in the oil shales of the Green River formation in western Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Extraction has for a long time seemed kinda pointless, because with current technology, each barrel of oil would cost us $70-95 a barrel. But $70/barrel oil is clearly here to stay, so it's getting another look.

But given the speed at which these things move, we're probably 20 years from producing 1 million barrels a day, and 30 years from 3 million barrels a day. Plus the recovery process needs 3 barrels of water in for every barrel of oil out - this in the arid West, where every drop of water in the Colorado River basin (where the oil shale is) is long since spoken for. (Do they need fresh water? Could we pump in sea water from California? I don't know.) Also, the process would unlock toxic metals and salts from the rock, which is hazardous, plus the process produces a hell of a lot of chewed-up rock that would need to be dumped somewhere.

Still, I'd think research into this would be a high governmental priority. Anything happening?

Posted by: RT on June 13, 2006 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

All those bank account numbers we've been sending to Nigeria have started paying off. Don't mess this up for us William Jefferson.

Posted by: gub on June 13, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

Charlie posting as "Cheney" wrote: I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.

"History" will show what we already know: that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell and other principals of the Bush administration LIED -- deliberately, repeatedly, elaborately and sickeningly LIED -- to the American people, the United States Congress, the United Nations Security Council and the entire world about what they knew to be nonexistent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in order to mislead America into an illegal war of unprovoked aggression against Iraq, which has directly caused the deaths of many hundreds of Americans and many tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and has maimed and impoverished many tens of thousands more.

Further, history will show that -- as we already know -- that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with establishing "democracy" in Iraq or in the Middle East or anywhere else. It had to do with an attempt to establish permanent and unchallengeable US military domination of Middle Eastern oil supplies, beginning with the installation of Chalabi as the "new improved Saddam" -- an obedient puppet dictator of Iraq -- and the "privatization" of all of Iraq's resources and wealth into the hands of US corporations.

With the enrichment of Bush / Cheney cronies in the military-industrial-petroleum complex (e.g Halliburton) through blatant corruption and fraud as the icing on the cake.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 13, 2006 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK

Charlie posting as "Cheney" wrote: I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.

"History" will show what we already know: that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell and other principals of the Bush administration LIED -- deliberately, repeatedly, elaborately and sickeningly LIED -- to the American people, the United States Congress, the United Nations Security Council and the entire world about what they knew to be nonexistent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in order to mislead America into an illegal war of unprovoked aggression against Iraq, which has directly caused the deaths of many hundreds of Americans and many tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and has maimed and impoverished many tens of thousands more.

Further, history will show that -- as we already know -- that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with establishing "democracy" in Iraq or in the Middle East or anywhere else. It had to do with an attempt to establish permanent and unchallengeable US military domination of Middle Eastern oil supplies, beginning with the installation of Chalabi as the "new improved Saddam" -- an obedient puppet dictator of Iraq -- and the "privatization" of all of Iraq's resources and wealth into the hands of US corporations.

With the enrichment of Bush / Cheney cronies in the military-industrial-petroleum complex (e.g Halliburton) through blatant corruption and fraud as the icing on the cake.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 13, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

Totally off topic, a Peak Oil post: here's a Rand study about Western US oil shale that I've just finished the Introduction to, and am getting ready to dive into the body of the report.

The quick summary: we've got a shitload of potentially recoverable petroleum - between 0.5 and 1.1 trillion barrels of it - locked up in the oil shales of the Green River formation in western Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Extraction has for a long time seemed kinda pointless, because with current technology, each barrel of oil would cost us $70-95 a barrel. But $70/barrel oil is clearly here to stay, so it's getting another look.

But given the speed at which these things move, we're probably 20 years from producing 1 million barrels a day, and 30 years from 3 million barrels a day. Plus the recovery process needs 3 barrels of water in for every barrel of oil out - this in the arid West, where every drop of water in the Colorado River basin (where the oil shale is) is long since spoken for. (Do they need fresh water? Could we pump in sea water from California? I don't know.) Also, the process would unlock toxic metals and salts from the rock, which is hazardous, plus the process produces a hell of a lot of chewed-up rock that would need to be dumped somewhere.

Still, I'd think research into this would be a high governmental priority. But we sure haven't heard much about it.

Posted by: RT on June 13, 2006 at 2:08 PM | PERMALINK

"geostrategic brilliance"

I know you are probably being satricial here, but geostratefic brilliance is just plain funny.

Posted by: the fake Fake Al on June 13, 2006 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK

The double post from me above was some sort of glitch related to a server timeout ... sorry about that.

RT wrote about shale oil: Still, I'd think research into this would be a high governmental priority. Anything happening?

Hopefully not, and hopefully the "oil shales" of the Green River formation will be left alone.

We need to stop burning fossil fuels as quickly as possible, not find billions more barrels of the stuff to burn. Perhaps you've heard about global warming?

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 13, 2006 at 2:12 PM | PERMALINK

It is silly and mindless for Americans to focus on our own daily presidential job approval and other opinion polls. It is idiotic to attempt to find meaning in polling of small samples in foreign countries about whether they have a favorable opinion of U.S.

Two points: (1) I once asked a Pakistani American whether people in Pakistani (where he regularly returned to visit family) did not like us -- he said, "yeah, all the ones who can't get visas," (2) if anyone thinks presidential approval ratings are a valid judge of presidential achievement, think of Presdient Truman and his approval ratings in the 20's (someday, there will be jokes about Clinton's 60% approval rating while he had sex in the White House and slept on the terrorism issue while focusing on school uniforms).

Posted by: brian on June 13, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

this survey was taken on first two weeks of May. What's the opinion in Jordan like today?

Posted by: bill on June 13, 2006 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK

Bomb Pakistan.

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

Pakistanis favor Iran getting nuclear weapons by a margin of 52%-15%...

Now see, that's just f***ing crazy. (Pakistan in general is f***ing crazy, too.)

Iran is right next door to Pakistan. I know they're upset with the West, and there's the whole Islamic unity thing (although Pakistan is mostly Sunni), but what kind of lunatic wants nuclear weapons in a nearby country? I think Canada's great, but a non-nuclear Canada is definitely preferable, if you ask me.

Posted by: dj moonbat on June 13, 2006 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

RT re: Oil Shale

There are tremendous problems with oil shale extraction, as you indicate, but I understand that the big oil companies are testing a thermal extraction in situ process whereby there isn' a lot of digging/stripping.

Naturally, a more benign method such as this will not be what is put forth and any proposals will involve the raping of the earth/destruction of the western basin. Just as with coal extraction the call will be for huge strip mines and deregulation to allow arsenic, mercury, and other toxins to just be dumped into rivers and streams.

Be that as it may, there is at least some examination of a non-mining-based option.

Posted by: Praedor Atrebates on June 13, 2006 at 2:19 PM | PERMALINK

Never has there been more telling documentary evidence of the victory of Osama Bin Laden.

Thanks Dubya!

Posted by: GOPNemsis on June 13, 2006 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINK

In my home Bush is negative 200%. Only two of us live there but we despise him enough for four.

Posted by: steve duncan on June 13, 2006 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINK

but what kind of lunatic wants nuclear weapons in a nearby country?

I'm okay with Americans having nukes, and I'm not a lunatic.

Posted by: Canadian guy on June 13, 2006 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

In my home Bush is negative 200%. Only two of us live there but we despise him enough for four.

That's pretty funny. I once said to my 6-year-old, "Stop lying. That's what George Bush does."

At which point she burst into tears and said "Daddy, you know we hate Bush!"

I hadta laugh...

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 2:26 PM | PERMALINK

Gee I thought moving all our jobs into sweatshops in "developing" countries was supposed to make them love us. Didn;t I used to read that on this blog? Wonder what happened?

Posted by: la on June 13, 2006 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

Terrorism does not exist in a vaccum, this data is another piece of evidence showing that Bush's policies are not making the world more secure for America but less secure.

Bush fulfilled his own warnings by doing exactly what he promised he would not do:

"I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, we do it this way, so should you."
- George W. Bush Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000
Q: Should the people of the world fear us, or see us as a friend?
BUSH: They ought to look at us as a country that understands freedom where it doesnt matter who you are or where youre from that you can succeed. I dont think they ought to look at us with envy. It really depends upon how [our] nation conducts itself in foreign policy. If were an arrogant nation, theyll resent us. If were a humble nation, but strong, theyll welcome us. Our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power. And thats why weve got to be humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom. Were a freedom-loving nation. If were an arrogant nation, theyll view us that way, but if were humble nation, theyll respect us.

Ours should not be the paternalistic leadership of an arrogant big brother, but the inviting and welcoming leadership of a great & noble nation.

Posted by: Catch22 on June 13, 2006 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.

This is undoubtedly true. 50,000 to 100,000 years from now, the Middle East will definitely be a placid, peaceful place. Mark my words!

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

Gee I thought moving all our jobs into sweatshops in "developing" countries was supposed to make them love us.

Well, we just haven't built enough sweatshops yet.

Posted by: dj moonbat on June 13, 2006 at 2:44 PM | PERMALINK

Bush: "I think one way for us to end up being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, we do it this way, so should you."

Does that include unionizing workshops?

Posted by: rob on June 13, 2006 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINK

brian: It is silly and mindless for Americans to focus on our own daily presidential job approval and other opinion polls. It is idiotic to attempt to find meaning in polling of small samples in foreign countries about whether they have a favorable opinion of U.S.

Two points: (1) I once asked a Pakistani American whether people in Pakistani (where he regularly returned to visit family) did not like us -- he said, "yeah, all the ones who can't get visas," (2) if anyone thinks presidential approval ratings are a valid judge of presidential achievement, think of Presdient Truman and his approval ratings in the 20's (someday, there will be jokes about Clinton's 60% approval rating while he had sex in the White House and slept on the terrorism issue while focusing on school uniforms).

1) Good point, Bri! That polling sample was too small to have meaning, but from your conversation with one Pakistani we can extrapolate boatloads of useful data!
2) I know contributions to the GOP are down, but surely the RNC can come up with more and better talking points to explain the hatred of the American people for Bush. C'mon, we're through laughing at this one and now we're bored!

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 3:00 PM | PERMALINK

However, the news from Pakistan continues to be mostly bad. Pakistanis favor Iran getting nuclear weapons by a margin of 52%-15% and support the Hamas victory in Palestine by a margin of 87%-4%.

Thank God they're our allies. Imagine how much they'd hate us if they were our enemies....

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

Brian, youre totally right!

Who cares about "small" opinion polls in "foreign" countries when you give the perfect counter example.
Why, theyre just polling a few thousand people there while you...
just asked a SINGLE Pakistani American guy!

Posted by: Detlef on June 13, 2006 at 3:09 PM | PERMALINK

That's pretty funny. I once said to my 6-year-old, "Stop lying. That's what George Bush does."

A six-year-old. Because they're never too young for political indoctrination.

Bet you can't wait for those rebellious teenage years.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

Geez, I missed that Brian's "example" wasn't even living in Pakistan. Brian, your post was even dumber than I previously thought!

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 3:11 PM | PERMALINK

GOP, I taught my son Republicans are the spawn of Satan. You're right, they're never too young. He rightfully knows them as the despicable, pathetic examples of humanity gone wrong that they are. Unfortunately they don't wear armbands or other identifying marks so you'd know which ones to bypass were lifesaving measures needed for some reason.

Posted by: steve duncan on June 13, 2006 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

Gee I thought moving all our jobs into sweatshops in "developing" countries was supposed to make them love us. Didn;t I used to read that on this blog? Wonder what happened?

I don't know who told you that. They do seem to love getting the jobs, though.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 3:22 PM | PERMALINK

I notice Russia's opinion of the U.S. has increased since the Clinton years. Fitting for a country that's supposedly becoming disillusioned with democracy.

Posted by: Chris on June 13, 2006 at 3:24 PM | PERMALINK

all this talk about whether history will or will not vindicate bush rests upon the assumption that, despite bush's policies, historians will be around to debate the topic.

Posted by: Thinker on June 13, 2006 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

Two points: (1) I once asked a Pakistani American whether people in Pakistani (where he regularly returned to visit family) did not like us -- he said, "yeah, all the ones who can't get visas,"

Huh. I once asked a Pakistani who lives in Pakistan whether Pakistanis did not like America, and he said "yes." So I'll see your Pakistani-American and raise you one Pakistani!

(2) if anyone thinks presidential approval ratings are a valid judge of presidential achievement, think of Presdient Truman and his approval ratings in the 20's (someday, there will be jokes about Clinton's 60% approval rating while he had sex in the White House and slept on the terrorism issue while focusing on school uniforms).

Shorter brian: Look! Over there! It's Bill Clinton! Following Stefan's Law, my new corollary to Godwin's Law, the first wingnut to bring up President Clinton in a feeble effort to distract from one of Bush's many failures loses.

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

steve duncan

GOP, I taught my son Republicans are the spawn of Satan. You're right, they're never too young. He rightfully knows them as the despicable, pathetic examples of humanity gone wrong that they are. Unfortunately they don't wear armbands or other identifying marks so you'd know which ones to bypass were lifesaving measures needed for some reason.

Do you have any Republicans in your family? Any Republican friends, or colleagues at work? Any Republican neighbors? Have you told them you consider them despicable, pathetic examples of humanity and that you think they should wear armbands or other identifying marks?--just like the Jews in Nazi Germany.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

A six-year-old. Because they're never too young for political indoctrination.

You mean like this?

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

A six-year-old. Because they're never too young for political indoctrination.

You mean like this?

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 3:36 PM | PERMALINK

Leaders never worry what others think of them, only followers do.

Guess which one of the two the liberals are?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 3:44 PM | PERMALINK

Leaders never worry what others think of them, only followers do.

Guess which one of the two the liberals are?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 3:46 PM | PERMALINK

Does this matter?

It matters to some degree, but not all that much. They need us at least as much as we need them, and if push comes to shove they'll swallow their pride and do what's in their own best interests. Europeans are increasingly aware of their own diminishing influence in the world, so it's not surprising that many of them resent the United States.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

You mean like this?

Yes.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 3:49 PM | PERMALINK

You mean like this?

C'mon, nut, of course it's OK if you're Rape-ublican!

Posted by: MeLoseBrain? on June 13, 2006 at 3:56 PM | PERMALINK

Good old Don P., as humorless as ever.

Posted by: Alek Hidell on June 13, 2006 at 3:57 PM | PERMALINK

This explains the existence of all the trolls on this board.

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

troll: Leaders never worry what others think of them, only followers do.

Aside from the inherent ridiculousness of the statement, apparently it means that Bush is not a leader: The Other War Room

Posted by: S Ra on June 13, 2006 at 4:02 PM | PERMALINK

craggie,

Your home must be like the homes where they teach their children to hate Israelis and America then strap a bomb on their backs and send them the kill.

Posted by: Clinton Era on June 13, 2006 at 4:03 PM | PERMALINK

Interesting that the largest trading partner of the US is not listed (canada). I'm not sure if I should be thankfull or insulted. Either way, I still like americans with their small brains.

Posted by: qingl78 on June 13, 2006 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

Hey Clinton Era.

Do you tell your children that it's OK to go and kill off them brownies based upon falsified evidence?

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINK

"Leaders never worry what others think of them, only followers do."

Actually that is a false statement on its face since sometimes its very appropriate to consider what voters think of how you are doing especially in a Democracy. Only totalitarian dictators try to get away without ever considering what the people think about the job they are doing.

Odd, but in the 2000 Presidential campaign Bush promoised to keep in mind what others thought about the US and stressed the importance that the US not be viewed as an arrogant nation.

Between US Germany France Japan AND China, the US consistently had the lowest favorability ratings overall. In the 14 countries polled the US's favorability was dead last in 9, second to last in 3 more, and in no country other than in the US itself did the US have the highest rating of the 5.

In a world that the US wants to move towards Democracy, the fact that most people prefer countries like China does not bode well for international diplomacy.

Posted by: Catch22 on June 13, 2006 at 4:12 PM | PERMALINK

Ah yes, Canada. The future 51st, 52nd and 53rd states of the union.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

No, most liberals prefer countries like China.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin

I think you owe it your readers to find out if your blogs (and comments therein) too are being monitored by these guys.

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

Keep in mind that, according to right-wingers, we're not supposed to care about "world opinion," but what "the terrorists" think of us and how they perceive us is of paramount importance and must be taken into account regarding every action we take, especially with Iraq and whether we should start pulling out of the country.

Posted by: Constantine on June 13, 2006 at 4:20 PM | PERMALINK

Watching the left become more and more desperate as their agenda unravels is pure entertainment. They're reduced now to saying "oh yeah, well the Uzbekistani's don't like us!"

This may be the best year yet.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 4:21 PM | PERMALINK

Watching the left become more and more desperate as their agenda unravels is pure entertainment.

Funniest post of the day.

Good job.

Posted by: lib on June 13, 2006 at 4:24 PM | PERMALINK

Bomb Pakistan
My pakistani girlfriend will appreciate this comment SO much. Thanks, douche nozzle.

Posted by: someOtherClown on June 13, 2006 at 4:26 PM | PERMALINK

Watching the left become more and more desperate as their agenda unravels is pure entertainment.

It's more fun to watch the king of Kafiristan being mobbed by his own subjects.

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 4:28 PM | PERMALINK

What is amazing is that any foreigners like Americans at all! From Ike overthrowing Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, to the Kennedy administration authorizing terrorist acts by the CIA in Cuba in the early 1960s, to the coup in Argentina on September 11th, 1973 (the other 9-11) where the CIA helped start a reign of terror where over 50,000 people were slaughtered, to supporting Suharto in Indonesia in 1965 when he slaughtered hundreds of thousands, to Reagan and his nitwit Administration supporting the bloodthirsty mujahadeen in Afghanistan and death squads in El Salvador the U.S. has been the largest state sponsor of terror since the Third Reich. Seems to me that we get what we deserve

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on June 13, 2006 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

Kriz, you're the only that doesn't like America. Oh wait, I would include Howard Dean too. Good company huh?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 4:33 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, we wouldn't want to offend your girlfriend.

That's priceless.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 4:34 PM | PERMALINK

Bomb Pakistan

We don't have to.

All we have to do is turn a blind eye while India builds up its nuclear arsenal, and let nature take its course in the region.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on June 13, 2006 at 4:35 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, we wouldn't want to offend your girlfriend.

That's priceless.
Posted by: Jay
don't worry about offending anyone, your little pigeyed god will "forgive" you.

Posted by: someOtherClown on June 13, 2006 at 4:44 PM | PERMALINK

Bush on poll numbers: "Karen Hughes is doing a heckuva job!"

Posted by: Friend of Labor on June 13, 2006 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

jay: Leaders never worry what others think of them, only followers do.

If An "Aide Looks Nervous, The President Will Think There's Something To Be Nervous About. So You Look Calm Even When Everything Is Going Wrong"

-- 26-year-old Blake Gottesman, aide to President Bush

Posted by: thisspaceavailable on June 13, 2006 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK

I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.

Posted by: Cheney on June 13, 2006 at 1:52 PM | PERMALINK

How could there be any possible vindication. It will be pure accident if any good at all comes out of this misadventure.

His Israel-Palestine policy is weak and one-sided. He has never shown any inclination to provide any initiative since his roadmap to peace (which is rejected by Israel) or in changing circumstances.

He's shown a willingness to disrupt Syria in the same way as Iraq (if only his hands were free) but significant oil producers are tolerated.

He screwed up the Iran diplomacy from the start and has recently shown that he has learned nothing in 5 years.

The reasons for war with Iraq were either lies (WMD) or misguided (PNAC). The strategy has been illconceived and poorly executed (if at all). The assumptions have proven to be fallacious, the adopted policies have misguided and failures, and the outcomes have been overwhelmingly worse than predicted and have yet to show any measurable improvement. The administration has shown itself remarkably inflexible and unable to change policies to gain control. Indeed unable to admit (atleast publicly) any failure or lack of control although in plain view.

Nothing good that comes out of the Middle East will be because of anyting under W's control.

And I'd make the same argument for his misconceived "War on Terra". In both senses.

Posted by: notthere on June 13, 2006 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK

No, most liberals prefer countries like China.

Uhh...wrong. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch aren't exactly conservative bastions and they routinely bash China. Next talking point please (and while I'm at it, smarter trolls too).

Posted by: Edo on June 13, 2006 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

Ah yes, Canada. The future 51st, 52nd and 53rd states of the union.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

You know, You guys have been saying that for about 175 years now. Up here, we are begining to think that you aren't serious.

But I still like you guys.

Posted by: qingl78 on June 13, 2006 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK

"Global attitudes" don't matter any more than John Kerry's "global test". The only attitudes that matter are the attitudes of well-off, jingoistic, xenophobic racist right-wing Republican white males in the USA, who fawningly worship ultra-rich right-wing Republican white males. In other words, people like me.

Posted by: rdw on June 13, 2006 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK

I believe history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East.Posted by: Cheney

Of course you do - bless your heart. You also believe the Earth is 3000 years old. Correct?

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

They just hate us for our freedom.

Posted by: Rush Limppaw on June 13, 2006 at 5:19 PM | PERMALINK

I think Canada's great, but a non-nuclear Canada is definitely preferable, if you ask me.

I think the US is great, but a non-nuclear US is definitely preferable, if you ask me.

Posted by: Bob M on June 13, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

If only Bush could have been reading the History of the World instead of My pey goat on 9/11.Oh well,My pet goat was easier to read.

Posted by: NOW on June 13, 2006 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

You know, You guys have been saying that for about 175 years now.

Nah, we let the British have you back then. That was their consolation prize. This time, you'll come running. NAFTA was a good first step.

And we like you guys, too. Especially your maple syrup.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK

Do I know any Republicans? Let me tell you Mister I just got out of Prison,The place is full of them,and because of them I will never go back to prison again,Even in Prison they can,t tell the diffrence between a Penis and a French Fry.

Posted by: NOW on June 13, 2006 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK

Your home must be like the homes where they teach their children to hate Israelis and America then strap a bomb on their backs and send them the kill.

Yep, that's exactly what my home is like. It's like a tiny little madrassa, right here in the heart of red-state America! How'd you guess?

It's uncanny the way you and Jay keep identifying us America-haters to a T. Your insight and sophisticated analysis are truly a wonder to behold. But come the revolution, you and your fellow imperialists will die like the running dogs you are!

Posted by: Alek Hidell on June 13, 2006 at 5:26 PM | PERMALINK

Compare this item with the post a few down. Jordan has been helping the US in the WoT despite the fact that only 15% of Jordanians have a favorable opinion of us. To me, that suggests that a county's percentage favorable toward the US may not be that important.

BTW I'd like the see the question that was asked to obtain these ratings.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK

Fidel, is that you?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 5:38 PM | PERMALINK

someday, there will be jokes about Clinton's 60% approval rating while he had sex in the White House and slept on the terrorism issue while focusing on school uniforms)..


Is this before or after history will vindicate Bush re: Middle East?

You guys are hilarious.

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 5:40 PM | PERMALINK

Nah, we let the British have you back then.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 5:25 PM | PERMALINK

Yea, I forgot, considering that my family was UEL, I forgot the differentiation. Lets call it 140 years more or less then.

Warmest Regards,

Posted by: qingl78 on June 13, 2006 at 5:41 PM | PERMALINK

Why how Ann Coulterish of you.And if Grandpa Bush where still alive Germany would like us better.Oh wait that was Nazis Germany Sorry.

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 5:43 PM | PERMALINK

Jordan has been helping the US in the WoT despite the fact that only 15% of Jordanians have a favorable opinion of us. To me, that suggests that a county's percentage favorable toward the US may not be that important.

Other countries have an interest in stopping terrorism because it could harm them - not because they're feeling so gosh-darned altruistic toward the U.S. I know Jordan is a U.S. ally, but to the extent they're helping us, it's surely to help themselves first and any benefits that come our way are coincidental.

Incidentally, just out of curiosity, why are you an "ex-liberal"?

Posted by: Alek Hidell on June 13, 2006 at 5:45 PM | PERMALINK

Although a trend may seem discernable among this data, there can be little doubt that its veracity is highly suspect. Scientific polling simply is not possible in quite a few of the countries listed; and to the extent that it is possible in some of them, you can bet the circumstances will vary dramatically. For that reason it is probably not valid even to compare these results side-by-side.

Posted by: SmartGuy on June 13, 2006 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK

You know what you call a trucker hauling sheep through Texas? a PIMP!!

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

Under the current Democratic foreign policy platform, we should have never been involved in WWII. Hitler never attacked the US and was not an imminent threat. FDR lied us into that war and I am offended at how insensitive NOW's comments were re: that conflict where tens of thousands of innocent people were killed and injured. We occupied Europe for far too long and that's why people don't like us.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK
Jordan has been helping the US in the WoT despite the fact that only 15% of Jordanians have a favorable opinion of us. To me, that suggests that a county's percentage favorable toward the US may not be that important.

To me, that suggests that Jordan isn't exactly a country where popular sovereignty has much practical expression, and it suggests further that the current administration's stated policy of promoting democracy in the Middle East does not align well with the administration's demonstrated policies in pursuing the so-called "War on Terror".

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 5:49 PM | PERMALINK

You know how you can tell a Texas repulican.Head up his ass and dollars flowing from his back pockets.

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

Under the current Democratic foreign policy platform...[Insert idiotic strawman statements here]
Posted by: Jay

Posted by: ckelly on June 13, 2006 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

Regardless of whether foreigners say they like or dislike us in opinion polls, they are decreasingly willing to accept our dollars in return for various goods and services.

That means that either the United States must boost its capacity to produce goods and services that foreigners will buy or prepare to do without the imports of goods and services it now enjoys.

In any event, business as usual cannot continue and future standards will to some significant degree be dictated from abroad.

Posted by: Thinker on June 13, 2006 at 5:55 PM | PERMALINK

oh I am just fucking with you ckelly. The left really needs to lighten up, these are the golden years afterall.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 5:55 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

How does it suggest that "the current administration's stated policy of promoting democracy in the Middle East does not align well with the administration's demonstrated policies in pursuing the so-called 'War on Terror'?"

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 5:56 PM | PERMALINK

Under the current Democratic foreign policy platform, we should have never been involved in WWII. Hitler never attacked the US and was not an imminent threat.

Right again, Shaver! Boy, you're good!

When a sovereign nation makes a formal declaration of war on us, we'll sit back and let it happen. Better not respond!

By the way, under the current Republican foreign policy platform, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was completely justified. After all, it was a preemptive strike on a country that posed an imminent danger to them.

Posted by: Alek Hidell on June 13, 2006 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK

Old granpa Bush was a millionaire,Kept the Nazis fed oh what a pair,Then one day grandpa Bush bought them a war,Then ole Hilter said Granpa Bush I need some toxic air,So they packed up the jews and moved to Where? Death Camps that's where.

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 6:00 PM | PERMALINK
How does it suggest that "the current administration's stated policy of promoting democracy in the Middle East does not align well with the administration's demonstrated policies in pursuing the so-called 'War on Terror'?"

Because the demonstrated policy in pursuing the so-called "War on Terror" relies on encouraging various existing regimes to act undemocratically.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 6:02 PM | PERMALINK

Anybody know how to tell the diffrence between Ann Coulter and a Turd? Yea ,I am at a loss also.

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 6:04 PM | PERMALINK

So if Grandpa Bush was a Nazis would that not make his Children spawns of Satan?

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 6:06 PM | PERMALINK

A lot of angry defensive liberals today. Fitzmas was cancelled, the DNC spokesperson in Iraq, Zarqawi was killed, Bilbray won in CA.......

What is a liberal to do?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 6:07 PM | PERMALINK

Anybody know how to tell the difference between a drunk driver and a Kennedy? One of them goes to jail.

Posted by: Orwell on June 13, 2006 at 6:07 PM | PERMALINK

There is a simple way to win the War on Terror. Saturate the Earth's atmosphere with aerosols of psychoactive drugs that induce a permanent state of mildly disassociative euphoric hilarity in all humans exposed to them. No one will ever experience "terror" again. No matter what happens to them, they will just laugh and laugh.

Posted by: A Logic Named Joe on June 13, 2006 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Regardless of whether foreigners say they like or dislike us in opinion polls, they are decreasingly willing to accept our dollars in return for various goods and services.

Huh? U.S. imports increased from $1.763 trillion in 2004 to $1.992 trillion in 2005. For January through April of this year (April is the latest month for which figures are available), U.S. imports were $714 billion. Imports for the corresponding period last year were $637 billion.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Orwell wrote: Anybody know how to tell the difference between a drunk driver and a Kennedy? One of them goes to jail.

So does that mean that Bush and Cheney are Kennedys? Both of them were arrested for drunk driving, and neither one went to jail.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 13, 2006 at 6:11 PM | PERMALINK

A lot of angry defensive liberals today.

What? I've just read through this thread and laughed out loud at a lot of it. Seems to me that the libs are whacking you humorless righties all over the place. Sorry, I guess "humorless righties" is redundant.

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 6:15 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

Because the demonstrated policy in pursuing the so-called "War on Terror" relies on encouraging various existing regimes to act undemocratically.

How? Even if only a minority of Jordanians have a "favorable view" of the U.S. overall, that obviously doesn't mean only a minority favor assisting the U.S. in the WoT, either in general, or in terms of specific acts and policies such as extraditing known terrorists or sharing intelligence information on terrorist activities.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:16 PM | PERMALINK

It's that reality based thing craigie.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 6:17 PM | PERMALINK

'Kriz, you're the only that doesn't like America.'
--jay

An infantile response, but I wouldn't expect much more from you. My comment has nothing to do with my "liking" America. I love America and I am glad that I live here. I am also ashamed of the things that have been done by the American government in my name (and yours). Both political parties have committed atrocities against foreigners that have brought shame to this country. If you knew anything about his history, you would understand that. That is why these poll numbers are so abysmal.

Never forget - The Founding Fathers wanted the government to be afraid of the American people, not the other way around...

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on June 13, 2006 at 6:18 PM | PERMALINK

Reality based community. Just keep saying that to yourself Kriz.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

(2) if anyone thinks presidential approval ratings are a valid judge of presidential achievement, think of Presdient Truman and his approval ratings in the 20's

I bet money that these guys didn't even know who Truman was until Bush got down into everybody-hates-him territory. Now suddenly Truman is their only hope for salvaging the worst presidency in the history of the known universe.

Oh yeah, and all of a sudden opinion polls don't matter. Whatever happened to "you're all out of touch with the rest of the country"? Guess now that you guys don't have chairs after the music has stopped, it's time to change the rules.

Tragedy, farce, it's all going according to plan...

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 6:21 PM | PERMALINK
How?

A wide number of weighs, from quietly subverting legal/constitutional processes in Bosnia-Hercegovina, Nigeria, and elsewhere to secure "suspects" (in quotes because they were never subjected to criminal process here and we subverted the extradition process there) in the war on terror without process, to openly praising and radically expanidng support for select totalitarian, terrorist supporting regimes (Pakistan particularly), and so forth.

Sure, Jordan is, in the grand scale, a minor and debatable example, a reminder rather than the central focus.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 6:27 PM | PERMALINK

Stephen Kriz,

So, according to you, you "love" the "largest state sponsor of terror since the Third Reich," and you're glad you live in it.

This blog is just a goldmine for quotes of far-left looniness.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:27 PM | PERMALINK

Tragedy, farce..


Or, for your pleasure, a tragic farce.

Posted by: nut on June 13, 2006 at 6:27 PM | PERMALINK

This is one of the more troll-heavy threads in a good long time, with Jay working overtime. What is it about this self-obvious topic -- the world opinion of the USA is very low -- that's gotten them riled up into a crazed frenzy?

As I've said, I think it's pathological insanity brought on by being forced to constantly argue that the slightest opinion about the USA on the part of muslim fundamentalists is of paramount importance when it comes to deciding what the USA should do while at the same arguing that "what the rest of the world thinks doesn't matter." Advocating for the Bush agenda, frankly, drives people insane.

Posted by: Constantine on June 13, 2006 at 6:29 PM | PERMALINK

Advocating for the Bush agenda, frankly, drives people insane.

From the samples available here, it would appear that the ones trolling here did not have to be driven to insanity-they had arrived there by themselves a long time ago.

Posted by: lib on June 13, 2006 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

A wide number of weighs, from quietly subverting legal/constitutional processes in Bosnia-Hercegovina, Nigeria,

The Pew study finding that you claimed "suggests" your conclusion concerns Jordan, not Bosnia, Nigeria or any other country.

Even if only a minority of Jordanians have a "favorable view" of the U.S. overall, that obviously doesn't mean that only a minority of Jordanians favor assisting the U.S. in the WoT, either in general, or in terms of specific acts and policies such as extraditing known terrorists or sharing intelligence information on terrorist activities.

So, again, how does the finding "suggest" your conclusion?

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

This blog is just a goldmine for quotes of far-left looniness.

For a loser such as yourself who really has nothing better to do with his time, feel free to catalog as many quotes as you'd like. What a way to spend your life.

Posted by: Silence is Deafening on June 13, 2006 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK
The Pew study finding that you claimed "suggests" your conclusion concerns Jordan

It suggests it in the context of the universe of other available information.

Certainly not so much from a tabular rasa position.

Even if only a minority of Jordanians have a "favorable view" of the U.S. overall, that obviously doesn't mean that only a minority of Jordanians favor assisting the U.S. in the WoT, either in general, or in terms of specific acts and policies such as extraditing known terrorists or sharing intelligence information on terrorist activities.

If it did mean that, I would say "demonstrates clearly" rather than "suggests"; the two words have, after all, very different meanings.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 6:48 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

It suggests it in the context of the universe of other available information.

You claim that the premise:

"Jordan has been helping the US in the WoT despite the fact that only 15% of Jordanians have a favorable opinion of us"

"suggests" that:

"the current [U.S.] administration's stated policy of promoting democracy in the Middle East does not align well with the administration's demonstrated policies in pursuing the so-called 'War on Terror.'"

Still waiting for your explanation of how the premise you cited "suggests" your stated conclusion.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

What? I've just read through this thread and laughed out loud at a lot of it. Seems to me that the libs are whacking you humorless righties all over the place.

Have to agree that this thread has been a goldmine of whack-a-troll humor. Hint to trolls: It's still funny even if you don't get it! Extra Crackerjacks for Alek, who's been on fire all day.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 7:05 PM | PERMALINK

GOP:

That's because I can differentiate between the American government (which at present, is an open sewer) and the American people, who by and large are decent, hard-working people. Not so hard, when you have the ability to reason and think, skills lost on most of the conservatives who post here.

Peace,

Stephen Kriz

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on June 13, 2006 at 7:10 PM | PERMALINK

I am waiting for Kevin to post something on the financial markets so the trolls have the opportunity to enlighen us on how well the things are going in that domain.

Posted by: lib on June 13, 2006 at 7:12 PM | PERMALINK

Extra Crackerjacks for Alek, who's been on fire all day.

Well, if we're patting people on the back, I also appreciated steve duncan's and nut's contributions immensely.

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

What a rotten 10 days for the Democrats!

Rove cleared, Patrick Kennedy pleads to a misdemeanor, Francine Busby loses the election to Cunningham's seat, Al Zarquari gets offed, and Bush visits Baghdad to offer support and encouragement to the new Iraqi government.

And all the Dems can do is whine!

Posted by: Frequency Kenneth on June 13, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Do they do anything else?

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK

A European speaking. I had US flags flying in my room. I considered myself a virtual American. No longer. US exceptionalism is dead, but most Americans have not yet noted it. "Land of the free, home of the brave" is deeply tarnished by images of Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. US media have been cleaned from blood (not a good ad environment), foreigners mostly see the ghastly truth.

The US has become a sad (and for some darker-skinned people brutal) joke. It started with vote counting and currently ends with grave human right violations. The US continues not to play by the rules and shows no decent respect for the opinions of mankind, a phrase that had some importance in the past in some document.

I am sick of the double standards your government applies, such as:

1. From Europeans, they require a biometric passport and finger prints (treating guests like criminals). Americans themselves, however, have only crappy identification.

2. Spying and recording Americans is no-no, listening to and recording foreign communications is ok?

3. You proclaim human rights but prevent an International Court of Justice.

4. You are the world's largest polluter, but demand from still poor India and China that they also adhere to Kyoto before you lift a finger.

Sadly, Europeans can currently no longer count on their American allies to make the world a better place (And please do not trouble the World Wars -- or if you do, ask yourself when the Americans did finally shed their first blood abroad. Remember, the first started in 1914, the second in 1939.).

And please fix your economy. An Argentina on a global scale would be horrible. Your currency, deficits, savings etc are going south. For most Europeans, it is deeply troubling in being affected by US actions without having a say -- just like sitting in the passenger seat of a drunk driver, which brings us back to why you are not good company anymore.

Posted by: jaywalker on June 13, 2006 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

Alek Hidell - the first blow to my liberalism came at age 20 when I visited Berlin in 1963. I had been taught to believe that communism and capitalism both had virtues, with an amalgam of the two being desirable. The contrast between the excitement and prosperity of WB vs. the drabness of EB astounded me. EB still had unrepaired WWII damage! I still remember tightly holding my American passport so that I could leave EB when I felt like, whereas the people on the street around me would be shot if they tried to leave.

Later, after I left graduate school in Berkeley for the business world, my opinions gradually changed, due to discovering that people in business weren't demons and thanks to powerful editorials in the Wall Street Journal. Maybe having children affected me.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK

OK enough laughing at you worthless righties.Have a nice Coulter and see you another day.What a Bush!!!

Posted by: Now on June 13, 2006 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal: BTW I'd like the see the question that was asked to obtain these ratings.

Read the report; see Pew Global Attitudes Project.

Posted by: has407 on June 13, 2006 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK
the first blow to my liberalism came at age 20 when I visited Berlin in 1963. I had been taught to believe that communism and capitalism both had virtues, with an amalgam of the two being desirable. The contrast between the excitement and prosperity of WB vs. the drabness of EB astounded me.

The Eastern Bloc consisted of Communist countries. The Western Bloc without exception consisted of countries that were mixed economies.

How could the relative prosperity of the latter compared to the former challenge the idea that mixed economies were better than either extreme capitalist systems -- virtually none of which are to be found in large, developed countries -- or extreme communist systems, which were found in the Soviet sphere, among other places?

Posted by: cmdicely on June 13, 2006 at 7:39 PM | PERMALINK

jaywalker has that victim, and racist thing down. Well done. BTW, anyone who points to skin color to identify another is, by definition racist. Just FYI.

And please don't consider yourself a virtual American, we don't want you. We have enough losers like you already.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:43 PM | PERMALINK

Just say it ex-lib, you became an adult and therefore a conservative.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:46 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely asks, "How could the relative prosperity of the latter compared to the former challenge the idea that mixed economies were better than either extreme capitalist systems -- virtually none of which are to be found in large, developed countries -- or extreme communist systems, which were found in the Soviet sphere, among other places?"

It's not that I was sold on extreme capitalism. Rather, it's that I saw with my own eyes that communism worked dreadfully, which caused me to question my belief system.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 7:48 PM | PERMALINK

And just in case anyone was wondering, doctors have determined that I have an IQ of 45, and am what is known by definition as "retarded".

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK


EX-LIBERAL: the first blow to my liberalism came at age 20 when I visited Berlin in 1963. I had been taught to believe that communism and capitalism both had virtues, with an amalgam of the two being desirable.

Very odd that you would compare liberal West Berlin with communist East Berlin and come away condemning liberalism for being too similar to communism. Too bad you weren't able to visit Berlin about twenty years earlier so that you could come away condemning conservatism for its resemblance to fascism. Still, you are now getting a strong taste of what you would have seen then, as are we all.


Posted by: jayarbee on June 13, 2006 at 7:52 PM | PERMALINK

Just to clarify--by "become an adult" I mean "suffer severe head trauma".

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:52 PM | PERMALINK

Stephen Kriz,

That's because I can differentiate between the American government ...and the American people,

Well, perhaps you can do that, but you didn't do it. You said that you believe America is the "largest state sponsor of terror since the Third Reich" and then declared that you "love" it anyway and that you're glad you live in it.

And your attempt to extricate yourself from this absurd position by pretending that you accused only particular "American governments" of these terrible acts rather than the American people or America as a nation doesn't work even if we go along with that pretense. In a democracy, the government reflects the will of the people, and if "American governments" have been the "largest state sponsor of terror since the Third Reich" it is only because the American people told them or allowed them to do so. So you're ultimately accusing the American people of these terrible crimes, people you now say are "by and large ... decent, hard-working people."

So, according to Stephen Kriz, the American people are "decent, hard-working people," but they're also responsible for the "largest state sponsor of terror since the Third Reich," but you love them anyway, and you're glad you live amoung them.

I'm used to seeing lots of absurd loony-left statements on this blog, but today really has been an especially rich source of them.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK

You need to hang out a little more often GOP, this is just fare today. Glad to have you on board.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

Standard fare that is.

Posted by: Jay on June 13, 2006 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK


GOP: I'm used to seeing lots of absurd loony-left statements on this blog, but today really has been an especially rich source of them.

Luckily, you really, really like absurd loony-left statements a whole lot, though, don't you? Or do you come here to win souls? The warm welcome? Cruising for sex? Lost?


Posted by: jayarbee on June 13, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

Sure, GOP and Jay, you guys deserve each other.

Posted by: Jay Blows GOP nightly on June 13, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

You know, You guys have been saying that for about 175 years now.

Nah, we let the British have you back then.

More accurate would be that the British let you have your independence. The Revolutionary War has hugely unpopular among the thinking class in Britain. Had the UK truly wanted to win...

And I've got a bullet for GOP's forehead should he ever think of arriving in Canada as anything other than a tourist. But as tourist, peace.

I may like (some of) you guys. But American? No how. No way. No never. Please keep your failing experiment to yourselves. I'd sooner federate with France or New Zealand.

Re. the Pew results, some solace. Americans remain the most popular people in...
.
.
.
.
America.

Interestingly, France, Japan and Germany ranked other countries ahead of themselves but China joined the States in this overwhelming self-love.


And you're just a tad behind Japan in Nigeria. But Britain has the accursed French !?!? ahead of you.

Posted by: another Canadian guy on June 13, 2006 at 8:10 PM | PERMALINK

A bit late to the party, but this poll isn't all that suprising. It's quite clear to everyone who travels, works and/or lives outside of the United States that attitudes towards our country are growing rapidly more negative, perhaps even towards a tipping point beyond which it will take a generation to repair.

While there were of course many critiques of America during the Cold War era, there was still an underlying consensus around the globe that, whatever its faults, the US was deep down on the side of "good," of free speech, fair play, human rights, freedom of the press and of movement. There is no such feeling these days.

Quite the contrary -- the US has become a sort of shorthand for intolerance and the crushing of dissent, an illustration of the path other nations don't want to take. I've had more than one conversation with a European, Asian, etc. in which that person has said something along the lines of "oh, we don't spy on our people, we respect privacy -- we're not the US, you know" or "in our country we don't lock people up without trial, not like you do in America." I can't tell you how depressing it is to hear my country's name invoked as a byword for oppression and, even worse, not be able to argue because they're right. People used to make those sorts of comments about the USSR, or Latin American banana republicans -- now they make them about the United States. How far we've fallen....

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 8:14 PM | PERMALINK

jaywalker: 2. Spying and recording Americans is no-no, listening to and recording foreign communications is ok?

Sadly, jaywalker, you can no longer accuse us of hypocrisy there -- now the Bush regime is spying on everyone, American and non-American alike.

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

ex-liberal: the first blow to my liberalism came at age 20 when I visited Berlin in 1963. I had been taught to believe that communism and capitalism both had virtues, with an amalgam of the two being desirable.

This makes no sense at all, since it was West Berlin that was liberal and East Berlin that was not. So you came away from that visit favoring East Berlin, I suppose?

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 8:20 PM | PERMALINK

Later, after I left graduate school in Berkeley for the business world, my opinions gradually changed, due to discovering that people in business weren't demons and thanks to powerful editorials in the Wall Street Journal.

That right there says it all, doesn't it....?

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 8:23 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan: "While there were of course many critiques of America during the Cold War era, there was still an underlying consensus around the globe that, whatever its faults, the US was deep down on the side of "good," of free speech, fair play, human rights, freedom of the press and of movement. There is no such feeling these days."

Travelling in the early 1970s with an American passport was like having the silvery protection of a kiss by Glinda, the Good witch of the north, on your brow. Nowadays, not so much.

I keep wondering how and when our reputation began to erode.

Posted by: PTate in FR (as it happens) on June 13, 2006 at 8:29 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan -- in 1963, many liberals had a soft spot for communism. In fact, that's still true today. E.g., many liberals don't want to admit to themselves that Communism slaughtered about as many people as fascism. Another example is the back-of-the-hand treatment given to Edward Teller, perhaps America's greatest scientist, because of his staunch anti-Communism.

In 1963, I, too, had a soft spot for communism. When I saw how bad things actually were in East Berlin, I had less confidence in liberalism because I had less confidence in liberals.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 8:31 PM | PERMALINK

craigie: Well, if we're patting people on the back, I also appreciated steve duncan's and nut's contributions immensely.

Of course! Here's a toy surprise for each of them, and another for you. And another for mr. jayarbee, who's cracking me up.

Posted by: shortstop on June 13, 2006 at 8:33 PM | PERMALINK

canadian,

More accurate would be that the British let you have your independence.

Tee hee hee. Yeah, that's right. All that history of the British fighting to retain control of their American colonies is of course a complete fabrication.

And I've got a bullet for GOP's forehead should he ever think of arriving in Canada as anything other than a tourist.

Do you? What are you going to do with it without a gun to fire it with? Throw it at me? Anyway, I've got a nice American cruise missile with your name on it....

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 8:41 PM | PERMALINK

"Tee hee hee."

Do men in the U.S. really say this? I thought this was pretty much reserved for little girls worldwide.

"Do you? What are you going to do with it without a gun to fire it with? Throw it at me?"

You may want to look into Canadian gun ownership statistics. It seems you may have no idea what you're talking about. Again.

Posted by: canadien on June 13, 2006 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINK

One way to fix this!

http://www.go08.org/

Posted by: cap'n freud on June 13, 2006 at 9:03 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan,

I've had more than one conversation with a European, Asian, etc. in which that person has said something along the lines of "oh, we don't spy on our people, we respect privacy -- we're not the US, you know" or "in our country we don't lock people up without trial, not like you do in America."

And you just believe them, do you? It is especially ridiculous for the citizens of Asian countries to criticize the United States for alleged rights violations considering the appalling record of Asian nations on human rights. And the idea that European nations are in a position to lecture the U.S. on rights issues is almost as absurd, given their own long and continuing records of abuse and mistreatment. When Britain, France, Spain, the Netherlands and other colonial European powers finally get around to clearing up the messes they have created around the world from their former occupations of other countries they might be in a position to lecture the U.S. about imperialism. When France begins to show signs that it is willing to treat its Algerian and Islamic immigrants with respect, it might be in a position to lecture the U.S. about immigration and the rights of minorities. When Britain starts to dismantle the huge and growing video surveillance network that it has built to spy on its own citizens, and when it provides them with any sort of basic constitutional protection against having their phones tapped or their mail intercepted by the government, then it might be in a position to lecture the U.S. on domestic security laws. And so on and so forth. The stench of hypocrisy in European critiques of American policy in these areas is overwhelming.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 9:18 PM | PERMALINK

Ex-liberal reveals himself as the long-missing Tbrosz:

"in 1963, many liberals had a soft spot for communism. In fact, that's still true today."

"In 1963, I, too, had a soft spot for communism. When I saw how bad things actually were in East Berlin, I had less confidence in liberalism because I had less confidence in liberals."

Okay "ex-liberal": name 3 prominent American liberal politicians who, in 1963, could honestly be described as having a "soft spot for communism."

Remember, this is 1963, some months after Kennedy stood down Soviet missiles in Cuba and Stevenson kicked ass at the UN. Remember "ich bin ein Berliner" and all that?

Consider this an open-book quiz.

Posted by: Tbrosz Watch on June 13, 2006 at 9:21 PM | PERMALINK

Tbroz watch -- yes, JFK and Adlai Stevenson deserve credit for resisting communism. Even more credit goes to people like Harry Truman, Hubert Humphrey and many other Democratic politicans and union leaders who actively resisted communism in the 1950's.

However, the liberal pundits, professors, and opinion leaders who I learned politics from didn't consider the communist system to be as bad as it actually was. A popular slogan was "coexistance or no existance." It's not that these opinion leaders actively supported communism or were secret members of the Communist Party (well, Pete Seger was). It's that they didn't fully recognize just how bad Communism was. When I saw the situation with my own eyes, I lost some confidence in liberal opinion leaders.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 10:01 PM | PERMALINK

Heh, so it is your recollection that 42 years ago liberal opinion leaders didn't consider communism to be quite as bad as it was that explains why you are not a liberal in 2006.

Have you ever considered that the right through its great fear of communism demonstrated an at least equally inflated opinion of how well communism worked?

"coexistance or no existance"

Read that slogan again. It is basically the strategy we followed. Sure now and then we would fight a smallish war and win, lose, or draw but generally we just waited for thier dystopia to collapse on its own and tried to avoid nuclear war.

Posted by: jefff on June 13, 2006 at 10:20 PM | PERMALINK


EX-LIBERAL: When I saw the situation with my own eyes, I lost some confidence in liberal opinion leaders.

If you saw a lion mauling a big game hunter, would you lose confidence in your housecat?

By the way, I was around in 1963 also, but I don't go around calling myself an ex-first grader. After forty-three years, whatever perspective your former liberalism may have brought you has long since expired. Maybe it's time to become an ex-sucker.


Posted by: jayarbee on June 13, 2006 at 10:27 PM | PERMALINK

Well, most of us won't admit it publicly, but there are secret meetings on alternate Thursdays, where we get together and talk about how great things would be if the US had not intervened in WWII, and allowed the communists to defeat Hitler and take over all of Europe, and from there, the US and the rest of the world. Then we sing the Soviet National Anthem to the hammer and sickle flag, and kiss our photos of chairman mao and fidel castro.

Then we go onto blogs and say things like: "don't be silly, liberals aren't communists" or "liberals don't support communism".

Posted by: Liberal Strawman on June 13, 2006 at 10:43 PM | PERMALINK

jefff -- The people who won the cold war while avoiding cacaclysmic nuclear war did a lot. Don't forget that the Soviets were trying to expand, both militarily and by internal subversion.

There was the Marshall Plan. There was support for countries and governments who helped resist Soviets. Troops and arms in Europe. Arms research and manufacturing to stay ahead in the arms race. De-stabilization of unfriendly governments. Supporting friendly governments, even bad ones. And, yes, wars in Korea, Vietnam, Angola, etc.

I wouldn't necessarilly defend all these steps, but in total they succeeded. The governments of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and Reagan deserve a lot of credit.

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 10:44 PM | PERMALINK

So you can't name a single prominent American liberal politician circa 1963 who had a soft spot for communism.

Now you shift to "the liberal pundits, professors, and opinion leaders who I learned politics from."

Note, by the way, the typical Tbrosz shuffle - make one set of claims, when confronted shift the terms; never revise the original position.

Okay, lets play along. Can you name 3 prominent "liberal pundits, professors, and opinion leaders" - in 1963 - who had "a soft spot for communism"?

Ex-liberal, the count is no balls and one strike. You've got two more to go.

Posted by: Tbrosz Watch on June 13, 2006 at 10:48 PM | PERMALINK

and tried to avoid nuclear war.

hands up everyone who wishes we had gone through the Cuban Missile Crisis with either Reagan or Shrub as president.

yeah, me neither. we'd all be dead now.

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 10:56 PM | PERMALINK

hands up everyone who wishes we had gone through the Cuban Missile Crisis with either Reagan or Shrub as president.

Me, me, me, me, me.

we'd all be dead now.

Right. Also, the world would now be populated by superintelligent mutant squirrels.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 11:04 PM | PERMALINK

In 1963, I, too [a "liberal"], had a soft spot for communism

It's my consistent experience that people with rather immature and shallow attitudes towards their politics, if they are "liberal," end up remaining immature and shallow in their attitudes when they decide to become "conservatives" -- eg, David Horowitz.

Posted by: Constantine on June 13, 2006 at 11:05 PM | PERMALINK

Right. Also, the world would now be populated by superintelligent mutant squirrels.

Not yet. In about another million years though, watch out.

And thanks for proving what I have always thought - global thermonuclear war is always a better option, because it's manly and er, completely insane. Who cares if we can win without killing anybody, eh? Much better to lose in a big manly mushroom cloud!

Posted by: craigie on June 13, 2006 at 11:06 PM | PERMALINK

As I'm sure someone has said before...
   ...there's none so unbearable as a reformed *cough* sinner.

Posted by: has407 on June 13, 2006 at 11:10 PM | PERMALINK

And thanks for proving what I have always thought - global thermonuclear war is always a better option

Er, I'm not sure how you think I proved that, but your opinion on the merits of global thermonuclear war is noted and I'll just add it to the long list of other insane beliefs you have expressed in these here parts.

Make sure your bunker is superintelligent mutant squirrel-proof

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 11:21 PM | PERMALINK

Did somebody say reformed sinner?

Posted by: Flippety GOP on June 13, 2006 at 11:25 PM | PERMALINK

Constantine, a clarification. David Horowitz was never a liberal, and would probably laugh at you for suggesting such. Doesn't disprove your point - his parents were in the Communist Party and he became an immature and shallow member of the New Left who fairly quickly became an immature and shallow conservative.

Ex-Liberal: time is running out...

Posted by: Tbrosz Watch on June 13, 2006 at 11:37 PM | PERMALINK

In his liberal incarnation, David Horowitz resembled many of the regular liberal commenters here. He's equally nutty now.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 11:44 PM | PERMALINK

I wouldn't necessarilly defend all these steps, but in total they succeeded. The governments of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter and Reagan deserve a lot of credit.

Ah, so the governments of the liberals Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter deserve a lot of credit for resisting communism. So just who are these "liberals" who had a soft spot for Communism again?

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 11:45 PM | PERMALINK

However, the liberal pundits, professors, and opinion leaders who I learned politics from didn't consider the communist system to be as bad as it actually was.

Note the subtle shift. First it was "liberals" who had a soft spot for communism, then, when forced to concede that virtually every major liberal politician opposed communism, suddenly it's unnamed liberal "pundits, professors and opinion leaders" -- i.e unelected people with no power -- who had this "soft spot."

Well, I can think of conservative pundits, professors and opinion leaders who don't consider the fascist system to as bad as it actually was. They didn't fully recognize just how bad fascism really was. Ever since then I've lost some confidence in conservative opinion makers....

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 11:50 PM | PERMALINK

Ah, so the governments of the liberals Truman, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter deserve a lot of credit for resisting communism. So just who are these "liberals" who had a soft spot for Communism again?

I don't know about "prominent" liberals, but there's little doubt that the U.S. federal government was heavily infiltrated with spies for the Soviet Union in the Truman era.

Posted by: GOP on June 13, 2006 at 11:54 PM | PERMALINK

And you just believe them, do you?

Well, there's that, and there's the fact that I've spent a large proportion of my life living and working overseas....

It is especially ridiculous for the citizens of Asian countries to criticize the United States for alleged rights violations considering the appalling record of Asian nations on human rights blah blah blah blah.....

Shorter GOOP: as long as someone somewhere does something wrong America must never be criticized!

Posted by: Stefan on June 13, 2006 at 11:55 PM | PERMALINK

Stefan,

Well, there's that, ...

So you do just believe them. That's your first problem.

... and there's the fact that I've spent a large proportion of my life living and working overseas....

Then one would think you'd be better informed about the abuses and violations perpetrated by other countries.

Shorter GOP: as long as someone somewhere does something wrong America must never be criticized!

No, more like: Your criticism is so one-sided and unbalanced it can only be the product of gross ignorance or willful misrepresentation.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 12:05 AM | PERMALINK

GOP, I've been reading these comments a long time, and believe me, Stefan can piss higher than you.

Posted by: craigie on June 14, 2006 at 12:16 AM | PERMALINK

No, more like: Your criticism is so one-sided and unbalanced it can only be the product of gross ignorance or willful misrepresentation.

And you just believe the Bush regime, do you? It is especially ridiculous for the citizens of the United States to criticize other countries for alleged rights violations considering the appalling record of America on human rights and its genocide of its Native American, and enslavement of its African-American, populations in the past. And the idea that America is in a position to lecture the rest of the world on rights issues is almost as absurd, given its own long and continuing records of abuse and mistreatment and its propping up of dictatorial and authoritarian regimes around the globe. When the U.S. finally gets around to clearing up the messes it has created around the world from its former occupations and invasions of other countries such as the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Mexico, Panama, Nicaragua, Cuba, Cambodia, etc. it might be in a position to lecture Europe about imperialism. When America begins to show signs that it is willing to treat its Arabic and Islamic immigrants with respect, it might be in a position to lecture France about immigration and the rights of minorities. When America starts to dismantle the huge and growing video surveillance network that it has built to spy on its own citizens, and when it provides them with any sort of basic constitutional protection against having their phones tapped or their mail intercepted by the Bush government, then it might be in a position to lecture Britain on domestic security laws. And so on and so forth. The stench of hypocrisy in American critiques of European policy in these areas is overwhelming.

Posted by: Stefan on June 14, 2006 at 12:22 AM | PERMALINK

I don't know about "prominent" liberals, but there's little doubt that the U.S. federal government was heavily infiltrated with spies for the Soviet Union in the Truman era.

Joe McCarthy? Is that you?

Posted by: Stefan on June 14, 2006 at 12:24 AM | PERMALINK

- the first blow to my liberalism came at age 20 when I visited Berlin in 1963. I had been taught to believe that communism and capitalism both had virtues, with an amalgam of the two being desirable. The contrast between the excitement and prosperity of WB vs. the drabness of EB astounded me. EB still had unrepaired WWII damage! I still remember tightly holding my American passport so that I could leave EB when I felt like, whereas the people on the street around me would be shot if they tried to leave.

Later, after I left graduate school in Berkeley for the business world, my opinions gradually changed, due to discovering that people in business weren't demons and thanks to powerful editorials in the Wall Street Journal. Maybe having children affected me.
Posted by: ex-liberal on June 13, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINKM/

What a fictional load of crap.

Posted by: the atom bomb of courteous debate on June 14, 2006 at 12:25 AM | PERMALINK

Stefan,

It is especially ridiculous for the citizens of the United States to criticize other countries for alleged rights violations considering the appalling record of America on human rights and its genocide of its Native American...

Have to stop you right there, chum. I'm afraid most of that was done by Europeans, too, long before there was a United States, or even the original 13 colonies. But don't let facts get in the way. You never have before...

As for the rest of your post, the point you still don't seem to understand, or are just wilfully ignoring, is that violations and abuses of rights are not limited to the United States. So get off your Hate-America-First moral highhorse and try approaching the issue with a modicum of balance and perspective.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 12:34 AM | PERMALINK

Joe McCarthy? Is that you?

Yes, Fidel. How is your Socialist Workers' Paradise doing today?

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 12:36 AM | PERMALINK

"What a fictional load of crap."

What makes you think so, tabocd?

Posted by: ex-liberal on June 14, 2006 at 12:39 AM | PERMALINK

So get off your Hate-America-First moral highhorse

I resent that. I hate everybody equally.

Posted by: craigie on June 14, 2006 at 12:42 AM | PERMALINK

GOP: As for the rest of your post, the point you still don't seem to understand, or are just wilfully ignoring, is that violations and abuses of rights are not limited to the United States.

Yes, much of the criticism of the US may be hypocritical.

However, in discussions that I can speak personally of with many individuals in Asia, and a few in Europe, there is an undeniable sadness. I hesitate to try and describe it, as I cannot do justice to the nuances of those conversations, but it goes something like...

What happened to the world's hope? What happened to the heart of America? If America is driven to this, what of the rest of us?

If there is one thing many in the US do not understand, it is in how high a regard we have been held, how high the world's expectations have been of us, and how far we have fallen.

That is not to say we have not done ill or made mistakes, and maybe those were unrealistic expectations, but it is still a bitter pill to swallow; to have look them in the eye and say, "I have no answer. Fend for yourselves."

Posted by: has407 on June 14, 2006 at 1:29 AM | PERMALINK

Have to stop you right there, chum. I'm afraid most of that was done by Europeans, too, long before there was a United States, or even the original 13 colonies.

Not in North America. The US exterminated its own Indians, mainly in the 19th century.

Posted by: brooksfoe on June 14, 2006 at 1:53 AM | PERMALINK

Indeed. I think that many people outside the US gave us the benefit of the doubt until the 2004 elections - they were willing to consider that an impure result.

But when Shrub got elected in 2004, non-Americans I know started saying "well, I guess this is how you guys want things to be." And that's when we really lost face.

The numbers on the chart bear this out, at least as regards Western Europe. And Europe is where I get my anecdotal data from.

Posted by: craigie on June 14, 2006 at 1:56 AM | PERMALINK

Since we are talking about personal experiences, I came to this country in 1970 at the age of 20. The Watergate hearings opened my eyes to what a democracy is really like. But they also led me to make a promise to myself that if I ever became a citizen, which I later did, I would never vote for a Republican. All the subsequent events, especially of the last fourteen years, have confirmed for me the prescience of my youth.

Fortunately, my daughters, who went to Berkeley and UCLA, have come to the same conclusion regarding their political affiliation without the benefit of any prompting from me.

Posted by: lib on June 14, 2006 at 2:19 AM | PERMALINK

The numbers on the chart bear this out, at least as regards Western Europe. And Europe is where I get my anecdotal data from.

Weill, I can add anecdotal data from Canada and Japan. And yes, Craigie, as per usual, you're spot on.

Posted by: snicker-snack on June 14, 2006 at 3:43 AM | PERMALINK

another canadian: More accurate would be that the British let you have your independence.

GOP: Tee hee hee. Yeah, that's right. All that history of the British fighting to retain control of their American colonies is of course a complete fabrication.

More like it was their Vietnam, a half-heartedly fought war. A very large chunk of British opinion makers felt they had no business making war on their colonial cousins.

Posted by: snicker-snack on June 14, 2006 at 4:16 AM | PERMALINK

"I don't know about "prominent" liberals, but there's little doubt that the U.S. federal government was heavily infiltrated with spies for the Soviet Union in the Truman era."

Oh, yeah. Everyone in the world just knows that Truman, who shares some of the credit for starting the red scare, was a commie symp.

So, friends. What do you think it is, home schooling? "christian" school or one of David Horowitz' tiny band of drooling cultists?

Have I ever called David Horowitz the world's oldest student leader yet? His sugar daddy gave him what his years of trying to become a leader of the left couldn't. He's finally a youth leader.

Posted by: olvlzl on June 14, 2006 at 4:58 AM | PERMALINK

Stefan: It is especially ridiculous for the citizens of the United States to criticize other countries for alleged rights violations considering the appalling record of America on human rights and its genocide of its Native American...

GOP: Have to stop you right there, chum. I'm afraid most of that was done by Europeans, too, long before there was a United States, or even the original 13 colonies. But don't let facts get in the way. You never have before...

You do realize that the thing that got folks most het up in places like western virginia in the early 1770's was the Quebec Act of 1774 which basically put all of the lands west of the Appalachians off limits to the colonists, that is named it as Indian Land (this was not altruism on the Brits part just a reluctance to pay the cost of policing a long border). And that the folks in the border regions were far more enthusiastic for the war than were the citizens of Loyalist-full lands like Massacheusetts.

You could almost argue that you founded a nation because you were being held back from committing genocide. But you largely went on to achieve your Manifest Destiny.

(no prizes for Canada though. we'd have done the same - witness Newfoundland; merely that the economics of fur-trading made the First Nations more of a partner than did the economics of the agriculture possible in your more clement clime).

Posted by: snicker-snack on June 14, 2006 at 9:01 AM | PERMALINK

It's official.

WE ARE LOSING HEARTS AND MINDS.

That doesn't make people less likely to attack us.

Good job Mister Prez.

Posted by: Youknow on June 14, 2006 at 9:18 AM | PERMALINK

Snicker-snack -
Be advised that by 1774 the Brit Colonial Governor of Massachusetts had very little control of the colony outside of Boston (which at the time did not even include Cambridge). All the "loyalists" had refused to seat his appointees as Court officers in the outlying towns, and many Crown Loyalists had been ... encouraged to relocate closer to his Majesty's garrisons in Beantown.


And for ex-liberal - I suggest you try finding out what Emma Goldman had to say about the Bolshevik Revolution, when she returned from Russia to the US in December of 1917. In case you didn't know, Ms Goldman was one of the leading intellectual proponents of communist-anarchism in the U.S.

Posted by: kenga on June 14, 2006 at 9:39 AM | PERMALINK

Once again we see a Bush strategically allying the US with a dictatorship whose people are filled with hatred for the US and giving that dictatorship the military means to attack US interersts.

Why does the Bush family hate America?

Why do they arm our enemies?

If Sun Tzu is right and the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then the friend of my enemy must be my enemy and since the Bush family is the friend of America's enemies (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, etc.) it only stands to reason that the Bush family is an enemy of American and me.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 14, 2006 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK

GOP: I don't know about "prominent" liberals, but there's little doubt that the U.S. federal government was heavily infiltrated with spies for the Soviet Union in the Truman era.

Little doubt in the non-mind of someone who lives in a fantasy world.

But it has been proven that the GOP was recently infiltrated by an agent of communist China and was a big fundraiser for them.

Now we know why rdw/Orwell/Charlie/Cheney/GOP/Republicrat/Jay are so gung-ho about China.

They've been bought by the Reds.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 14, 2006 at 11:20 AM | PERMALINK
More like it was their Vietnam, a half-heartedly fought war. A very large chunk of British opinion makers felt they had no business making war on their colonial cousins.

ISTR reading somewhere that there was a considerable movement to simply let the colonies have their independence which was short-circuited by the eruption of violence, though it was years ago and I can't recall the source or vouch for its reliability.

Posted by: cmdicely on June 14, 2006 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINK

has407,

Yes, much of the criticism of the US may be hypocritical.

It is. And much of the criticism of the U.S. by Americans themselves, especially criticisms that involve claims that the U.S. compares unfavorably to other countries, is uninformed and unbalanced.

What happened to the world's hope? What happened to the heart of America?

They seem to be alive and well. Democracy is spreading. The world is getting richer. The number of people in desperate poverty is falling. Population growth is stabilizing. The cold war is over. Yes, there are still many serious global problems, but overall the state of the world is improving.

If there is one thing many in the US do not understand, it is in how high a regard we have been held, how high the world's expectations have been of us, and how far we have fallen.

I really doubt that is this true, but if people in other countries previously had unreasonably high opinions or expectations of the U.S., then this is a useful corrective.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 12:49 PM | PERMALINK

brooksfoe,

Not in North America. The US exterminated its own Indians, mainly in the 19th century.

Yes in North America. Most of the "extermination" of the indigenous population of North (and South) America was perpetrated by European invaders and settlers hundreds of years before the United States even came into existence.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Congratulations to our Home Work Trolls!

You have completed the "Muddy The Waters" project phase for target site "Political Animal."

Mission Accomplished!

Please report your hours to homeworker-hours@rendongroup.com and you will be reimbured within 60 days.

You may register for the next project after June 12, 2006 by logging on to https://homeworkproject.rr.sspet.gov with your assigned username.

Judy Whitehouse, Home Work Project Manager
Rendon Group

p.s. - you may bill additional hours at half rate for the next 6 months.


Posted by: Judy Whitehouse on June 14, 2006 at 12:56 PM | PERMALINK

GOP:

I hope that the claims you are making are true.

But this material you appear to have transcribed from a BushCheney 2004 campaign leaflet really needs some backup if you intend to use it here:

The number of people in desperate poverty is falling
Population growth is stabilizing
Overall the state of the world is improving

A few sources?

Posted by: Tbrosz Watch on June 14, 2006 at 1:02 PM | PERMALINK

Advocate,

Little doubt in the non-mind of someone who lives in a fantasy world.

No, little doubt in light of substantial evidence of infiltration of the U.S. federal government by spies for the Soviet Union.

Of course, you might know that if you had the faintest clue of what you were talking about, but as usual you're just firing on all cylinders without any gas.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

A few sources?

On the decline in global poverty, see, for example,
this document
from the World Bank.

On the stabilization of population growth, see, for example, the entry on world population from Wikipedia.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: thanks for the information on poverty - I truly did not know that. On world population, less compelling.

But overall a good effort.

Posted by: Tbrosz Watch on June 14, 2006 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINK

On world population, less compelling.

From the Wikipedia entry:

"Over the last 10 years, the UN has consistently revised its world population projections downward."

The primary reason for this is that the global fertility rate has been falling faster than was previously projected.

Posted by: GOP on June 14, 2006 at 3:43 PM | PERMALINK

With China and India representing somewhere near 40% of the world's population (and assuming not everybody in these polls offered a "favorable" or "unfavorable" opinion, doesn't that mean the US's favorability in the world is roughly 50% (or higher) of those who have an opinion?

Just sayin'...

Posted by: Birkel on June 14, 2006 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

All that history of the British fighting to retain control of their American colonies is of course a complete fabrication.

Don't you wingnuts say that the US would have won in Vietnam if it wasn't for the naysayers at home? By that metric, the 30% or so separatist insurgents in British America would have been defeated if the political will had existed back in London. In fact, it's a much more valid argument for the 1770s than the 1970s.

Posted by: ahem on June 14, 2006 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

GOP: . . . if you had the faintest clue of what you were talking about.

Then again, you not only haven't the faintest clue as to what you are talking about, but constantly lie to boot.

Your posts prove why it is such a hoot to have rdw claim that liberals are self-proclaimed know-it-alls while conservatives like you, GOP, are self-effacing.

Hardee har har.

GOP: the pot calling the kettle black.

Posted by: Advocate for God on June 14, 2006 at 5:57 PM | PERMALINK

Interesting that the data goes back only to 1999. Anyone have poll data from prior? I imagine the level of anti-American feeling has been pretty consistent since De Gaulle was in power.

Posted by: x on June 15, 2006 at 8:02 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly