I’m so glad that you have traveled around to see so much of the world, and that you also agree that the world has taken a much harder stance against the U.S. since Bush has taken office.

Even if a few governments support us these days, the overwhelming majority of global citizens are furious with U.S. foreign policy (now, more than ever before).

I never claimed that the rest of the world all saw us as the “good guys” before Bush took office. However, world opinion has taken a HUGE nosedive towards the U.S. because of the Bush doctrine, our new foreign policies which demand obediance to the U.S. given in many obnoxious manners, and our loss of even attempting to use diplomacy any longer.

Perhaps, you fall into the category of people where I say that those that have had the luxury to be exposed to the rest of the world and STILL support this administration (and enable it by voting Republican) are consumed with their money and wealth. (Not that I’d expect many to ever admit to that).

You even admit that the rest of the world have become more upset with the U.S. due to Bush’s global policy failures. How can anyone that sees that continue to support this administration? I’m not quite sure how we’re going to regain the moral standing we once held in the world community, but we can begin by putting a check on the Bush Administration. They have had ZERO oversight for far too long. I shudder to think what might be revealed, but it must.

These days, to vote (R) you have to close your eyes, plug your ears, hum loudly OR when the abundance of facts that have been spilling out that completely shatter any competence within this administration, one can scream “liberal media bias” (biggest joke ever) OR one could simply sell out for more money OR one could be a one issue voter (anti-choice, stop the bad, gay people, etc.) OR simply not pay attention to any of the important things that are happening all around us and brand oneself an (R) for life. None of the above are admirable, imo.

I am NOT a democrat, but an independent. I WILL be voting and encouraging people to vote straight line Democrat until we can get this Administration under some type of control.

Thank God, some (R)s realize we must put a check on this Administration. We must vote straight line (D) down the ballot this year. Regardless. We need (D) chairpersons in Congress to put a stop to the continuing consolidation of power under the “unitary executive theory”. No President should ever be knighted king. Ever.

:-)

The country is Switzerland. What’s their military strength like?

You’re advocating a false choice Paul; we spend more than the rest of the world combined on defense. Is it too much? Not if we intend to be the world’s policeman. But since conservatives have said time and again that “America isn’t the world’s police force, just what is all the extra military stuff for, other than payback to campaign contributors?

The main reason there is anger at the U.S. is; we currently have a disproportionate amount of power in comparasion to the rest of the world. Sometime in the future, U.S. power will wane , then most progs will begin to feel more equitable and less guilty.

Perhaps you could be more specific. Since we spend more on defense than the rest of the world combined (and we will continue to do so for the forseeable future), it seems highly illogical that we would ever be on the “wane” militarily, unless the Chinese start massively selling off their US stocks and bonds, and we have another depression.

If you want the U.S. to abdicate it’s military strength and leave it’s defense in the hands of the good nature of the rest of the world, then divert those funds to social programs; I will admit, you could raise the standard of living here.
Comment by paul — October 8, 2006 @ 5:05 pm

We just wish the Bush administration would attack countries that actually pose a threat to America.

Europe has rendered itself virtually powerless with poor economic policies and neglect for its own self defense. Europe has no stomach to address serious security issues and this is much of the division between us and them.
Comment by paul — October 8, 2006 @ 3:08 pm

This comment is complete bunk because the only country Europeans are powerless against in a conventional war is the U.S.

So all the crowds of europeans that mobbed Clinton every where he went was –what?

Refresh my memory Paul, which country has the highest standard of living? Hint: it was one of the counties you claim to have visited.

“Try reading newspapers from around the world someday (maybe even weekly). It’s no coincidence that progressives seem to be better traveled and more exposed to other parts of the world outside of our country.”

Travel for me since Bush took office: Santiago, Buenos Aires, Sao Paulo, Bogota, Mexico City, San Jose, Aruba, Dublin, Limerick, Manchester, London, Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, Amsterdam, Munich, Stuttgart, Frankfurt, Zurich, Rome, Milan, Mumbai, etc.

Before that Austrailia, Canada, Central America, Turkey, Europe, etc.

I’m sure you have been well exposed also. So, you can agree with me that Europeans (and the rest of the world) are increasingly more upset with the U.S. But it is fantasy to believe that the relations we’re good before Bush took office. Europe is no utopia, as liberals and the media would have you believe. Bush has alienated people around the world with his ham fisted diplomacy. But Europeans bare responsiblity also. Europe has rendered itself virtually powerless with poor economic policies and neglect for its own self defense. Europe has no stomach to address serious security issues and this is much of the division between us and them. Blinded by their distain for U.S. power, they are oblivious to the real threat to their western lifestyle, an Islamic immigration that is unwilling to assimilate and more interested with replacing western values with Islamic law. (Pope, Danish cartoons, German play, etc, etc, etc.) Before this is over, Europeans will recognize the problems they have with us are the least of their problems.

If it makes you feel better, you can believe this is a republican talking point.

and they ARE… i heard that – and waited for rahm to counter that statement, but it got jumbled and then george changed the subject (if i remember, something like that)…

we all knew that would happen… EVERTHING the righties do has some ulterior motive… they had no desire to raise min.wage – but figured the dems would vote FOR the tax bill with that in there… a good day when they didn’t…
.

And the talking point about the economy, how great it is. Well, if I were to take out a loan on my house and spend the money on partying, eventually the money would run out, and I would have to begin paying off that loan. Everything would seem great while I was enjoying the party. But when the debt comes due? The Republicans are enjoying the party. Sadly, it will take the Democrats coming into power to reign in the rampant spending and exert the fiscal controls necessary to pay off the debts incurred by the “party of fiscal responsibility.”

And there’s the Republican talking point about the minimum wage vote. Remember that? If I recall correctly, the Republicans tied it into making the repeal of the Estate Tax permanent. The Democrats didn’t go for that, and wanted the minimum wage bill to stand on its own. Hence the Democrats voted against the Republican ploy. But now the Republicans can say the Democrats voted against raising the minimum wage.

I do not usually watch Fox News but I was serfing through the channels and there was a debate their also. The democrat was from MA – hd never heard of him. They started bringing Studds up and he totally went on the offensive by citing that a republican was involved in that scandal also – Crane. Whenever he would speak about this he would refer to the republican and democrat who were caught up in this. And it was because of the republican and democrat that they set up the committee to oversee the pages. And that it was the republicans on the committee who had knowledge of Foley and did not come forward. Wallace kept trying to help out the republican, but the honorable Rep from MA kick the pants out of the mealy mouthed, weasly repugnut!!

GO TEAM!!!

Foley puts a whole new meaning to “No Child Left Behind.”

Putnam argues GOP leadership acted swiftly on Foley page scandal
From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Brushing aside critics, Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Florida, argued Sunday that House GOP leaders moved quickly when it was revealed then-Rep. Mark Foley, R-Florida, had sexually explicit e-mail and IM conversations with House pages.

“Based on the information we have today, the speaker’s office acted proactively, they acted aggressively, and within hours, within hours of the explicit e-mails coming to light, they demanded Foley’s resignation,” Putnam said in an interview on ABC’S “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”…

However, see: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/06/foley-lie/#comments

So now Republicans are taking credit for doing something they did NOT do. And trying to deflect the blame by: finding any examples they can of Democrats having done similar acts (one Democrat in the past 20+ years); trying to investigate and blame whomever blew the whistle on their cover-up; trying to blame the victim, etc., etc., etc.

IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO ELSE MAY HAVE DONE SOMETHING SIMILAR. At most, that fact puts Republicans and Democrats alike on notice NOT TO COVER UP for predatory behavior!

Republicans ran on a moral high ground, family values, pro-personal responsibility platform. This scandle reduces those platituted to mere talking points, something to say to get elected, but not something by which they were willing to live by when it came to the test.

Foley puts a whole new meaning to “No Child Left Behind.”