European Airs - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
European Airs

Re: George H. Wittman’s Don’t Tread on Me:

Couldn’t we discourage these Europeans who think they have a say in our election? Say, by sending them some IRS forms and billing them for back taxes? If they want a say, they’ve got to live up to their obligations…
Robert Nowall
Cape Coral, Florida

Bravo, Mr. Wittman! Right on the money!

On recent visit to the UK, I was part of a dinner conversation when the inevitable subject of Obama came up.

When one speaker suggested that racism was behind any and all opposition to his Presidency, I innocently inquired why it was that In the UK and Europe, with their large immigrant populations all these years, the governments were composed of 99.9% white males?

The silence that followed was indeed golden.
Martin Owens
Sacramento, California

I too have noticed the increasingly strident tone of Europe in this election. And they are correct: by electing John McCain and eschewing Barack Obama, we Americans are rightly sending a message to the world: We don’t care about your esteem, and we do not wish to model ourselves after you.

Thomas Jefferson was correct when he stated:

“I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people.” –Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1823. ME: 15:436.

And this holds true to date.

Europeans want to see a weak America. Their lust for power has never abated over the centuries — it has just morphed into a powergrab by proxy. To that end, this American says: ODERINT DUM METUANT.
Catherine Alling

I have spent a lot of time in Britain (have been there more than 20 times, not usually as a tourist) and have many British friends; as well, I have friends in the old Commonwealth, including New Zealand, with the same busybody attitude toward telling America her business.

A British friend quoted, from what source I do not know, the following explanation of why Britain in particular and what they call the EUnuchs hate America and Americans so much:

The British walk around as if they own the Earth. The Americans walk around as if they don’t give a F*** WHO owns the Earth.

They hate us because we do not care that they own the Earth.
Kate Shaw

From the beginning of our New World experience, Europe, and most particularly Britain, have always treated America and Americans with rude contempt. For an eye-opening example, read about John Adams’ experiences in London. That attitude has never diminished over time. Even when we were saving their country in two world wars, they mocked us, our ways, and our strengths.

They have always believed that they know better than we do about everything. A feeling of superiority breeds contempt, even — perhaps especially — when the superiority is imagined rather then real, as it is in this case.

They are also suffering from the relative success of American democracy and capitalism, as well as our military strength, since and beginning with the Revolutionary War.

Finally, they believe the far left media and blogs partly because that’s mostly what they are fed, and partly because that’s exactly what they want to believe.

Barack Obama as President would provide vindication for their beliefs economic and political, and restore their notion that they are, or should be, co-equal partners with the U.S. — or better, our masters with us as puppets.

If they couldn’t have Jean Francois Kerry, they’ll happily take an even more malleable stooge — Barack Francois Obama.
A. C. Santore

“Europe presumes.” That head rolled in 1776.
David Govett
Davis, California

Re: Lawrence Henry’s Both Sides of the Financial Crisis:

Just a note to say how much I enjoy your articles. I met my wife while she was waiting for her second kidney transplant-and immediately proposed. Our 3rd anniversary was in August. Best wishes.
Dennis Morris

I am sorry to have to say this, but there is only one side to the current financial crisis. That is total government incompetence bordering on, if not in fact, criminal negligence. There is no one else to blame. Government policies created the situation that led to the credit meltdown. It was political influence and protectionism that allowed it to continue to the point that literally trillions of dollars in investment have been lost in the private sector. And now governmental corruption continues as the Congress and the administration strive mightily to cover-up their incompetence, negligence and possible criminal behavior. And in so doing, they are going to cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars directly and an unknown amount indirectly as their actions deepen and perpetuate the recession that we are entering.

Who do you vote for to represent your interests? How do the people protect themselves from their protectors? When we look to Washington, we are akin to Diogenes. And lo, there is not an honest man to be seen. This is just another failure of government in a long list of failures in the last three decades. And there are no strong leaders on the horizon to look to. So let’s go to the polls and vote. There may be some conservatives running for Congress who are, as yet, uncorrupted. If you can find one vote for him, or her. As for the Presidency, we have the choice between an aging liberal populist and a young Marxist-Leninist. I suppose one is better than the other, but not very much. If the citizens do not take control of this country, then we will all be working for minimum wage; except for the politicians and a few of their good friends. But, at least we will have free housing.
Michael Tobias

Mr. Henry tells us Wall St. got snookered by their own computer models. Those damn computer models, why, next thing you know, they’ll be predicting that global warming is man made! Mr. Henry is correct, this stampede over the cliff of fiscal irresponsibility was started and promoted by those congressional cowboys in chaps, (think Barney Frank & Chris Dodd, talk about the Village People) who now seek to place blame elsewhere. The New York Times has one of the greatest financial scandals under its nose, but writes nothing because it will land at the feet of Democrats who created the monsters Fannie & Freddie. Henry Waxman is set to hold hearings in October (imagine that) but you can bet all of Al Gore’s carbon credits that neither members of Congress nor Messrs. Raines, Johnson and Mudd will be placed under oath.

The McCain campaign is genetically incapable of blaming Congress. His membership in Club Senate precludes blame upon the political class. Just as he did after the Keating 5, when McCain blamed the system for corrupting pure and innocent public servants rather than their own greed and avarice, McCain & Co. look everywhere else but in the mirror. In the debate, Gov. Palin made five references to greedy Wall St. and only at the end, an oblique reference to Washington and Fannie & Freddie. Despite her outstanding performance, standing toe to toe with professional pol, numero uno, Joe Biden, McCain will likely lose this election because the “maverick” won’t admit that Congress is corrupted by the disease of incumbency. If McCain/Palin lose, she needs to get back to the clean air of Alaska ASAP before toxic Washington gets into her system.
A. DiPentima

Lawrence Henry fails to state two important things: one, as long as the media remain in the tank for Barack Obama, Americans will never learn the truth about the scope of the Democrats’ involvement in this mess; two, in a country where half the people pay no income taxes at all, “free” houses are a “natural” extension of the entitlement mentality.

If Ann Coulter is accurate regarding the Clinton administration’s decision to use welfare payments and unemployment insurance as income sources, why isn’t such insanity front page news? See numbers one and two above.
Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida

Re: Anita Crane’s The Woman Behind “An American Carol”:

I went to see this Saturday afternoon in a theater located in Constant Friendship, Maryland, which is a community just off I-95 in Harford County near Bel Air and about 25 miles northeast of Baltimore.

Now one has to realize the only paper of major impact around here due to circulation (and certainly not content) is the Baltimore Sun, which traditionally reviews movies every Friday. They did not review this film, made no comments about it, but true to their NYT “wannabe” roots gave a long and glowing review to the Bill Maher pseudo-documentary “Religulous” which they called masterful, funny, etc. And why not — for that lot anything which bashes Christians and Christianity HAS to be witty, funny, literate, incisive, etc. etc, ad nauseam.

And as for “An American Carol”? It was in the smallest theater in the cineplex where it was being shown, but had a totally packed house. At the end of the film, the audience gave it a standing ovation, something I have not seen in a theater in years. And boy, do I agree with them!

I hope that Ms. Sokoloff and Mr. Zucker, as well as those actors who decided to stick their fingers in the collective eyes of Hollywood both make a profit and do very, very well with this film.
Cookie Sewell
P.S. MY dream is the ghosts of John Ford, John Huston, and Frank Capra (who all did “Why We Fight” series documentaries during WWII) come back and show one each Michael Moore what documentaries really are — and why you don’t fake footage to make a point which reality does not support.

Caught a matinee Sunday with my brother and nephew.

Hilarious and like all good humor, the element of truth, concerning the idiocy of the Left comes through loud and clear. A total smackdown. The ACLU piece in Dennis Hopper’s courtroom is priceless.

Go see it, take a bunch of friends.
Jim Woodward
Midvale, Utah

Re: Christopher Orlet’s The Campaign in a Word:

I believe it must be noted, Mr. Orlet, that where McCain has a “Bushlike” problem, apart from mere party identity, it is due to the failure of Mr. Bush (for reasons unknown, other than his lack of communication skills) to adequately defend his administration. The Democrats have so successfully exploited this failure and filled the void with their gibberish, they have convinced a significant portion of the electorate that George W. Bush is not only Satan, but that Satan is actually on the ballot. This is how insane this election has become. Of course, those voters are only potential and may be unreliable when it comes to making an appearance at the polls on election day, but I’m sure ObamACORN will find a way to have his stooges, er, volunteers cast their vote for them.

McCain’s age, and Obama’s inexperience, are another matter. Chesterton put it this way, “I believe what really happens in history is this: the old man is always wrong; and the young people are always wrong about what is wrong with him. The practical form it takes is this: that, while the old man may stand by some stupid custom, the young man always attacks it with some theory that turns out to be equally stupid.” And, this, which in some cases, may actually apply to both of them, but applies to Obama with certainty, “The reformer is always right about what is wrong. He is generally wrong about what is right.”

Why so many people in the country today don’t understand the wisdom in these words is the tragedy. Ah, public education.
Mike Showalter
Austin, Texas

Is it better for a president to be old or inexperienced?

David Govett
Davis, California

Re: Jay D. Homnick’s Palin Gets Last Laugh at Joke Line:

Governor Palin got in a not-too-subtle dig at the media in her final comments, a dig that I am sure most of them missed or ignored. While making her final comment, she let it be known that she is aware of the dreadful, underhanded treatment heaped on her by the MSM when she said how glad she had been able to participate in the debate and how much she enjoyed being able to speak directly to the people without being filtered (read devious editing) by the media.
Tom Bullock
West Covina, California

Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell’s Championing Obama:

It is called a Basic Assumption and was first identified by Wilfred Bion in the late 1930s early 1940s when asked to treat British soldiers suffering what was then called shell shock.

It has three levels. The highest level and the one to which you refer is the most dangerous. It is manifested by the sufferer putting their total being into that of the “champion.”

It only will cease on the total destruction or even death of said champion. To wit, Princess Diana, Adolph Hitler, John Lennon. Every country or locality has their “champion.”

The worry about that, is just how many people cannot think for themselves and thus end up distraught and deluded.

Re: Quin Hillyer’s Maddening for Madisonians:

Not long ago, on these very pages, the question was asked, “what’s the worst that can happen with an Obama presidency?” A plethora of answers were offered, and while the list was terrifying, it was far from exhaustive. At that time America was not facing a financial meltdown along with a Congress that was wildly out of control. Mr. Hillyer finds comfort in that “new generation of conservative leaders” are starting “to come of age,” but the will there be a future in which these leaders can take their place? Will America continue to be an America that we can recognize? We are watching, often passively, the transfer of power from the people to the government that may prove to be unprecedented in any democratic country or possibly the history of the world itself.

The Federalist and other writers of the Constitution were fearful of an overly aggressive central government. They included provisions for the people to take back their government from tyrannical leadership. But as Benjamin Franklin wrote over 200 years ago, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” The American citizenry must make its voice heard now. The message is a simple one: no bailout. We are willing to suffer a recession but we are not willing to be servants to an overreaching and unconstitutional government. Governments are to serve the people and not the other way around.
Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York

Re: Mike Roush’s letter (under “Roush Hearts Conservatives”) in Reader Mail’s No Questions Asked:

As I wrote in my earlier letter, it is nice to have Mr. Roush back again. Alas, it seems that his little vacation has dulled his sense of humor — even if only a little bit. Be that as it may, I seem to have hurt his feelings at the suggestion that the comity between he and his “friends and acquaintances who are conservative” might be somewhat illusory: “Has it ever occurred to you that most conservatives and liberals are people of good will who, confident in their philosophical positions, acknowledge areas of agreement, while vigorously and civilly debating their differences in the pursuit of greater understanding?”

I ask for Mr. Roush’s indulgence on this point. Whenever Liberals start telling us what swell people they are and how groovy things are between them and those they disagree with, all sorts of caution lights and warning bells go off. I have no doubt that Mr. Roush believes all is just ducky between himself and his unlike-minded company. But self-deception being what it is, rather than having Mr. Roush telling us how his Conservative friends think about the matter, it would be edifying to hear what they themselves have to say.

Why? In contrast to their own self-image, Liberals are as narrow-minded, bigoted and vindictive a folk you could find — perhaps a little more so when one takes into account their propensity for self-righteousness. As most Conservatives have experienced, when sharing a social occasion with a Liberal, one has to choose one’s words carefully or all hell breaks out. When in a Liberal’s presence, his outrage and indignation are always just a silly, little syllable away.

Is it possible Liberals and Conservatives can get together and have a profitable conversation? Sure. Is it possible for Mr. Roush, Clay Aiken and I to get together and pass a joint at a Pink Floyd concert? Sure.

There is one man who by all accounts who had the most catholic acceptance of those different from himself. William F. Buckley was known to be a charming host and warm friend to Conservative and Liberal alike. He had a personal loyalty for his friends that didn’t end at ideological fences. He was a fine and rare human being. You, Mr. Roush, may be a lot of good things; but, even you have to admit, you are no William F. Buckley.
Mike Dooley

Re: Edward Sisson’s Obama in the Tank for Pritzker:

Your excellent article with downloadable documents by Edward Sisson, dated 9/26/2008, on Barack Obama’s association with Penny Pritzker as his Finance Chair, needs to get mainstream media attention so more Americans know about it. The financial debt to this country is now so great with the passing of the 700 billion dollar bill, and Obama is playing the blame game.

Please get this out so everyone knows Obama is in the thick of it, has been and America needs to know it. Great journalism!
Mary G.

Re: William Finley’s letter (under “Alaskans on Palin”) in Reader Mail’s No Questions Asked and James P. Lucier’s Alaskan Foreign Policy:

In his rush to tear down James Lucier’s article “Alaskan Foreign Policy” William Finley accuses Mr. Lucier of not getting “Some keep points right.” I would suggest that Mr. Finley review his own work. In contrast to Mr. Finley’s claim, Mr. Lucier never said that the National Guard intercepted the Russian bomber; he said “US military planes scramble from Elmendorf AFB,” and “US military planes based in Alaska.” Mr. Lucier’s only reference to the National Guard was its giving the governor security briefings.

Similarly, the Russian bomber, contrary to Mr. Finley’s claim, did violate US airspace. Whenever an aircraft not on a properly filed and approved flight plan or without Air Traffic control clearance enters the United States’ Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) it is violating our sovereign airspace. The ADIZ is located miles beyond our coasts. Crossing the coasts or overflying the US land mass is not required before a violation has occurred. Indeed, Mr. Lucier specifically said they violated our airspace over Alaskan waters. For Mr. Finley to say “Russian jets have not actually entered US airspace” indicates a lack of understanding of the issue.
Paul M. DeSisto, USAF (Ret.)
Cedar Grove, New Jersey

Mr. Lucier’s article was brilliant. His points must be pushed hard in the media in the next 30 days. Sadly, I don’t hear McCain advertising Gov. Palin’s foreign policy experience.
Joe Nawrocki

(For today’s special Reader Mail section on J. Peter Freire’s “The Barracuda Bites Back,” click here.)

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!