« In past years the British state rolled out the red carpet for Ceausescu and Mobutu; it's King Abdullah's turn today |
| America's most influential conservatives »
October 31, 2007 at 10:46 AM in Democrat nomination race, Iran | Permalink
This is why the Democrats are perceived as weak on national security: they have borrowed from the Neville Chamberlain playbook of appeasement.
Kucinich is an idiot... yikes.
October 31, 2007 at 02:52 PM
The Dems lost. Full stop. Hillary is dead in the water. She always was even though she is the last to realize it. She just wants to be in power. That's it. It's obvious, and people are disgusted.
And BORIS JOHNSON came out today dreaming about a sHrill Hill win: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=URQBFNW1HCAIBQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/opinion/2007/11/01/do0101.xml
I gotta tell you Brits that it's very difficult to like you these days. It has been for a long time. Even though you think the average Yank is a dimwit, they have finally realized that you're not worth dying for any longer. Those days are gone, kiddos.
It's time to decide where you stand.
November 01, 2007 at 09:27 PM
It is hard to swallow. I know there are a lot of good Brits, I see them here and at other forums. Tim Montgomery who has given us this outlet is a good man and a friend to America.
And they're not dummies, they do possess intelligence but a lot of their knowledge has been wrought through filtered bias and what they think they know, especially concerning America, they don't. Simply put they have learned to eat up what their media has spoon fed, not wanting anything else. It is a huge ego thing even if factual evidence to the contrary stares them in the face. They gather amongst themselves and reaffirm typical 'realities'.
And they live in contradiction being their own worst enemy so to speak. For those concerned over sovereignty; fear the power of the EU, PC multiculturalism, dillusion of heritage and rights - for this side of the ocean they can claim in blind stupidity a desire for Hillary. No depth, no sense of judgment, only bottled up ill feelings over Bush's America.
November 02, 2007 at 07:35 AM
'... but a lot of their knowledge has been wrought through filtered bias and what they think they know...'
British or American, what we think we know of the other is shaped by the media.
The question for either group is how much do you trust the media?
'Even though you think the average Yank is a dimwit, they have finally realized that you're not worth dying for any longer. Those days are gone, kiddos'
Umm, Ok and you'd obviously be content with the converse?
Which days are you referring to for curiosity?
November 02, 2007 at 11:13 AM
If I want to know about real conservative America I go beyond Fox News and the MSM. The single best place for thoughtful writing is 'The American Conservative' magazine. For independent thought 'Taki's Top Drawer' website is excellent, as is 'Chronicles' magazine for Catholic & Old South writers.
Simon Newman |
November 02, 2007 at 04:45 PM
"The question for either group is how much do you trust the media?"
The question is Jeff, trust what media. We have choices like never before. Most of what I've read in these past number of years with your BBC, Guardian, Independent and others has been just about 100% negative toward my country: discrediting and derogatory and not just with Hitler Bush. I don't see that with our major media toward the UK even tho there's a lot in ours that sucks. Lets face it, when 71% of Brits want more distant relations with America there's something wrong and its not on this side of the ocean; unless of course you believe George W Bush is that powerful to shape your minds and hearts. There's not that much difference with Brit and Europe proper mentality here and I normally don't consider Brits, at least many too close to mainland Euros. Regardless of your denial, prejudice has been, by and large, against Americans for being American. The typical angles of misinformation have been pounded on and most of you (I don't know you so I'm not speaking personally) have bought it. As we say, hook, line and sinker.
If you wanna know about Iraq for example start reading those who've lived there off donations with the troops and citizens at the Forward Operating Bases. Michael Yon, Bill Roggio, Pat Dollard, Michael Totten, Jeff Emanuel and a handful of others. And even tho your guys are coming home you won't find more indepth info about their feelings and accomplishments than from Yon. I bet I know more about your soldiers there than you.
If you wanna know about Hillary (the other side) with a load of facts you will not get from typical media you can try some of the sites Simon said for starters. Or, even more cutting with the rawest of facts not only about Hillary but our miserable Democrat party in general and some rather pathetic Republicans, go to Gateway Pundit, Michelle Malkin, Instapundit, or the notorious Littlegreenfootballs for a daily smack of hard evidence reality. There is so much the Left and Islamic fanaticism is about that your major media and ours will not touch.
November 02, 2007 at 10:31 PM
I'm with Fox (the Mulder variety)...Trust no one.
My point is that the perception that 71% of the British want 'more distant' relations with the US comes to us from the very same media that I'd distrust in every other case.
So, why should I give any credence to that number?
Besides, what the hell does it mean? More distant, how?
In every practical sense (except Iraq and I'll come back to that) the US-UK relationship is doing just fine.
Trade is ticking along and the Brits actually have a trade balance with us in their favor...it's not just the Chinese :), they (and the French and Germans) are more with us than against us over Iran, their tourists descend on Orlando in great numbers and why not with Sterling at $2.08, they continue participation in the JSF project, BAE have pretty much abandoned Airbus in favor of expanding operations in the US, we still refurbish their missiles at King's Bay...
The list goes on.
Where are they 'more distant'?
Iraq and maybe Afghanistan.
Afganistan first because I think it's simpler. The British seem to have persuaded themselves of the 'correctness' of that mission even to the extent of accepting ground force casualties. They appear to be about to dispatch the entirety of their Parachute Regiment to the place. That's hardly what I'd call a more distant relationship.
Iraq the British aren't happy about. However they'll be gone from there soon to the extent of about a year more perhaps.
After that? Well the UK MSM and the US MSM will continue their barrage. Why would they change but on the other hand even they may find it difficult to argue against a surge that seems to be working.
In any case, after the British withdraw I suspect the antipathy will reduce, assuming that the antipathy is real that is.
Oh btw, I've been reading LGF, Michael Yon and Michelle Malkin for years...:)
Equally I read the BBC news and even managed to have two commentss posted which slightly amazed me as they weren't particularly PC. Then there's the Huffington Post because you may as well know what the Left 'think' and if you haven't seen it, have a look at moonbattery.com.
I like the Internet, it's steam-rollered the MSM I think....so many different views available nowadays that the era of big media as 'thought leaders' is well and truly sunk.
Jeff - US permanent resident, British citizen and in 2 years an US citizen too...whatever else I'm not more distant.:)
November 03, 2007 at 04:40 PM
Well to me Jeff it was obvious enough what more distant relations meant. Even if the "71%" is off some, however you make of it its not unreasonable to conclude from a basic premise Brits want less of America. That's not the case here toward the UK. If you wanna somehow believe there has not been significant negative sentiment and bias in your former land toward us than believe it. I think you're in denial. A lot of folks understand this and not just Americans. Also, I haven't judged you like the many Brits I've been in discussion with over the years who've expressed the balled up egotistical resentment. I also know you're not alone.
As far as trade, well its for money. Its not an indicator of personal feelings.
As far as the UK agreeing to dispatch troops to Afghanistan and people "seem to have persuaded themselves of the 'correctness' of that mission", that's good. I'm glad, truly. But that's in the interest of the UK as much as the US. If you think its a favor you've missed the point or, I've missed yours.
Glad you're in the US Jeff. We'll see what happens in the coming few years. I think matters are slowly on the mend.
November 03, 2007 at 08:17 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.