The Left constantly whines about Bush driving away European allies, yet, at nearly every turn in the past several years, those more closely aligned with the principles of limited government, lower taxes, open markets, and a defense of liberty abroad have won. Now if we could only get Bush to live up to his own rhetoric this country would be in much better shape.
The hand wringing has already begun by Leftist European elites and are spinning the stunning defeat of the ruling Leftist party in the best possible light.
So, according to this logic, you lose 167 seats in parliament and this is a victory because, you know,
.
What is extremely good news for the U.S. is that the ex-communist government that has been ousted from power was a supporter of the Iraq war. The two incoming right-of-center parties that are expected to rule also support the Iraq war and are Western in orientation. That is to say, alliance with the U.S. is not on the table in Poland, all major parties agree to that--Left and Right.
You mean, the right-wing party that garnered more votes is skeptical of the Germans--the country within the EU that most vehemently opposed the Iraq war for ideological reasons?
So how come ex-commies in Germany hate the U.S. but ex-commies in Poland love the U.S.? The only logic that I see is the ex-commies in Germany have strong connections to communist parties in Western Germany. Western communist parties always had a single agenda: anti-americanism at all turns. The old communists from Western Germany never really experienced Soviet oppression. Their discourse is shaped by Western anti-capitalism and anti-Americanism.
In Poland, in contrast, there was never any doubt as to where oppression came from: Moscow. The Polish Left was never privy to the kind of anti-Americanism that prevails among the Western elite. They were anti-American because their masters in the USSR commanded them to be.
But, maybe there is a better theory floating around out there.
1
Yeah I wast listening to NPR this am and they ahd the usuall Cokie Robeberts commentary. She as asked so is this low Bush approval rating great for dems. To which Cokie replied "No pollsters I talk to say no one knows who they are or what they are about. Maybe if the dissatisfaction gets high enough it might help them a bit but I doubt it."
I say Cokie hit it right on the head dissatisfaction is all they have and they have no one no plan except to bithch and moan and bitching and moaning don't get votes. Plans and policies get votes and the Dems have neither right now. Well except the plan to whine and moan and whip up dissatisfication in the hopes it might get them in office.
Posted by: Howie at September 26, 2005 08:52 AM (D3+20)
2
This is good news. A Europe completely dominated by Germany and France is bad for the continent and worse for freedom loving people, whether in Poland or the rest of the World. The Polish people rock!
Long live the memory of Sobieski!
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 26, 2005 08:56 AM (rUyw4)
3
But, maybe there is a better theory floating around out there.
No, that's about it. Anti-Americanism in the West is an auto-immune disorder. Hitchens makes fun of it by pointing out [satire] the tremendous risk taken by those who oppose Halliburton, compared with the modest risk shouldered by the Kurdish Workers Party[/satire].
Cokie hit it right on the head dissatisfaction is all they have...
I've had my doubts about Bush from the beginning, and most of those centered around whether or not he and his "group" could make adjustments to their tactical plan in order to keep their strategic plan on track. For the most part I can't say that his performance has been very good, but he's been bailed out by two factors: 1. The tremendous professionalism and talent of the US military; and 2. The creative intensity of thet blogosphere. In the long run Bush will get some credit for apprehending the right long range strategy and sticking to it, but he won't get many points for management or leadership. Most of the country is still perplexed about what we're doing, and why.
I'd also say that Bush got a lot of support from people like me by default. There were no other options. As the 2008 race starts to heat up, however, he may not shine so much by comparison with other lights. Right now I'm a Gingrich guy (although his his speaking voice needs some coaching).
Posted by: Demosophist at September 26, 2005 09:08 AM (zg801)
4
Demosophist,
You're point is valid, and it is not that Bush can't lead, it's that he doesn't have the polish to lead in the media driven world. He's not particularly charismatic like Clinton is, but he is stubborn and loyal, which are two qualities a President needs.
I completely agree with your assessment of the internet. Were it not for the internet and alternative media, the President would never have won reelection. This is why I believe that the powers in the MSM and their allies on the Left will do everything possible to censor free speech on the internet. For instance, the rights of pornographers and child molesters will be expanded while the right to political(how can you define what is political) speech will be curtailed dramatically.
We are in a period of grave danger for our freedoms, and right now do not have a leader who has come forward. I doubt whether Newt can beat Hilary. I noticed that she came out against the IFC at Ground Zero. This is just another sign that she is moving to the right in her bid to win the Presidency.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 26, 2005 09:58 AM (rUyw4)
5
"So, according to this logic, you lose 167 seats in parliament and this is a victory because, you know, it could have been much worse." Sounds like the left's euphoria over recent near losses here in the states.
Demosophist: I'm also with Gingrich. I saw him speak last week. I went in with an open mind and was not disappointed. He was concise and clear. I was definately impressed. So I did more research. This is a man who got much good done in a very hostile environment when he was House Speaker. His no nonsense approach is hard to oppose.
Posted by: Oyster at September 26, 2005 10:02 AM (fl6E1)
6
Yeah, but Gingrich can't win--the number one criteria for any president. His Q is too low. People just don't like him--fair or no.
Posted by: Rusty at September 26, 2005 10:04 AM (JQjhA)
7
I wish the political atmosphere wasn't so polarized or poisoned. God knows there are a lot of "questions & reservations" about Bush etc. among conservatives and the right. BUT WE KNOW THE LEFT! So we hold our tongues and opinions in light of this and act accordingly. Amazingly, the left doesn't have a clue.
Posted by: hondo at September 26, 2005 10:15 AM (4Gtyc)
8
Rusty, you're right. I don't think he can win either. I have a feeling it will be McCain vs Clinton on the ballot and I'll have to hold my nose while I mark mine. I don't like McCain. I don't trust him, but I trust Clinton far less. If it's Guiliani in stead of McCain, I'll feel slightly better. Maybe I'll just hold one nostril ;-)
Posted by: Oyster at September 26, 2005 10:45 AM (fl6E1)
9
Oyster,
I'm tired of a lose/lose situation. I pray that someone will step forward from the conservative ranks before the next election. I don't have a name, but hope springs eternal from the human breast.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 26, 2005 11:11 AM (rUyw4)
10
Newt does have the rep of cutting spending. He might be OK as a VP. I agree his negatives are high he's not real likeable but if cutting spending is your plan he is the man. A McCain /Gingrich will win in a heartbeat even though I was upset by some of the stuff I found out about McCain on the blogs last week. Running him out of the nomination might hand Hillary the election like you pointed out Oyster. I wonder why Clinton gets credit when if not for the Republicans blocking the healthcare the Clinton years would have been just tax and spend not tax and cut spending. Newt does not turn me off on the ticket but he might fly better as no 2, he can't beat McCain the nomination. But hillary can't beat a can of pork and beans here in the midwest. Clinton was a likeable guy but hillary comes off as a beotch here in the midwest. I don't think she can pull it off although she does look a lot better in person. That rumor is true TV does her no justice in person she was a hottie but I would not vote for her in a million years.
Posted by: Howie at September 26, 2005 11:29 AM (D3+20)
11
Howie,
I lived in Arkansas during Clinton's second term, and I caution you not to take Ms. Clinton lightly. She has always been the brains for the Clintons and I found her to be much more politically astute than what you might imagine.
I saw her push a liberal education bill through the Arkansas Legislature that I would have thought had no more chance than a snowball in hell. Please do not underestimate Ms. Clinton.
She has already positioned herself to the right of the Republicans on illegal immigration, and she has come out against the IRC at Ground Zero, which shifts her further toward the center. I beg everyone not to take her lightly.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 26, 2005 12:36 PM (rUyw4)
12
I think Poland will need some help from United States
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=2454877&PageNum=0
MOSCOW, September 26 (Itar-Tass) - Anti-Russian sentiments will grow in Poland with a new rightist government in place, said Konstantin Kosachyov, the chief of the State DumaÂ’s international affairs committee.
Commenting on results of Poland’s parliamentary elections, he told Itar-Tass on Monday that the outcome of voting was not unexpected – “positions of the previous centre left government were weak, and this weakness was determined first of all by economic problems of Poland”.
Poland’s government is likely to prove “very heterogeneous”, as the two winner parties are not partners.
The party Law and Justice is conservative and the Civil Platform rightist liberal, Kosachyov explained.
Just for this reason they have “few points of contact, and their alliance will be tactical rather than strategic”.
The rightist government is likely to run into serious internal contradictions and conflicts, Kosachyov said.
As for the Russia-Polish relations, he said “they were not simple earlier with the centre left government in place; Poland was one of the most unsuccessful international partners for Russia”.
In his opinion, anti-Russian sentiments will be only growing in Poland.
“Regrettably, anti-Russian sentiments are a uniting factor for Polish society,” Kosachyov said.
He added that Russophobe tendencies in Poland were not a result of propaganda by rightist parties.
“Poland is doubtlessly a great European state. However, because of historical causes, it has been unable to fully implement its political ambitions”, and just for this reason the Polish nation has developed a “certain national complex”, Kosachyov said.
In his opinion, Polish authorities will continue their “rigid resistance to Russia’s coming closer with European states, such as Germany, Italy and France”.
He also expressed a misgiving that new Polish authorities will help “fanning” the differences existing between Russia and the Baltic republics.
However, Russia should “adhere to the policy of tolerance in the relations with the new Polish authorities,” Kosachyov stressed.
Posted by: Martin at September 26, 2005 01:42 PM (rq4TV)
13
OUT OF THE NIGHT WHEN THE FULL MOON IS BRIGHT COMES AHORSEMAN KNOWS AS ZORRO THIS BOLD RENEGEDE CARVES A Z WITH HIS BLADE A Z THAT STANDS FOR ZORRO
Posted by: sandpiper at September 26, 2005 01:51 PM (bTjmD)
14
Hmm...one wonders why Poland would be suspicious of Germany and/or Russia. Let me see if I can think of anything..there was that Nazi/Soviet Friendship Pact signed by Hitler and Stalin in 1939 just before Poland was annilated by the armies of the Nazis and Stalinists. That might cause just a wee bit of suspicion.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 26, 2005 02:06 PM (rUyw4)
15
Quothe jj:"I'm tired of a lose/lose situation. I pray that someone will step forward from the conservative ranks before the next election. I don't have a name, but hope springs eternal from the human breast."
BEHOLD! Ask, and ye shall receive: Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. I saw him speak on C-SPAN last night, and he's got what it takes. All we have to do is get people to speaking his name.
http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Series&Code=RWH&ShowVidNum=6&Rot_Cat_CD=RWH&Rot_HT=205&Rot_WD=
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 26, 2005 07:48 PM (0yYS2)
16
Polish people will never go into the Katyan forest with a communist from Russia.
Russophobe behavior like this is not the result of propaganda by rightist parties.
Posted by: Brad at September 26, 2005 07:54 PM (6mUkl)
17
Maximus,
He might just be our man. Being from East Texas, I do know a little bit about him, and just happen to know that he is from Hope, Ar. Wow, that is a strange coincidence, but he is a Baptist preacher, and I figured that would put him out of a presidential run.
I know he is well-liked by hispanics in Arkansas, but he has had some bad publicity because of his stand on illegal immigration. He has balanced the budget in Arkansas, but that is required by law, and he is a social conservative.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 27, 2005 10:29 AM (rUyw4)
18
Quothe jj:"Long live the memory of Sobieski!"
Leelee Sobieski's dead? Damn, she was cute too.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at September 27, 2005 06:10 PM (0yYS2)
19
Maximus,
Not that Sobieski. The one that kicked the Turkish Muslims butt and relieved Vienna from the siege of 1683.
Posted by: jesusland joe at September 27, 2005 08:44 PM (rUyw4)
20
POLAND is going conservative unlike the rest of the Eurweenie Union
Posted by: sandpiper at September 28, 2005 08:32 PM (as4nC)
21
Huckabee might be a good choice. He lost 100lbs while in office. Does that mean he was working hard? Or was he losing weight like Clinton by screwing every thing that would listen to his BS while his lesbian wife Hilary watched?
Posted by: greyrooster at September 29, 2005 10:54 PM (ywZa8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment