Isolation or integration?

by hamilcarr 7 Replies latest jw friends

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr

    The world wants change

    An international poll confirms what the US's Pilgrim founders first recognised - that the eyes of the world are on America

    So, after eight years of Blair and Brown toadying up to Bush, 65% of Brits want Barack Obama to win the presidential election, according to the Guardian's international poll published today, and only 15% are rooting for the McCain/Palin ticket – and one suspects that some of those would be voting for the racist BNP given half a chance, not least when the numbers indicate that Obama is only supported by the 54% of the lowest socio-economic class, whose neglect by New Labour has left many of them clutching at racist straws.

    In every country, opinions of the US have declined to record levels over George Bush's two terms as president. One can understand why 75% of the French would think so, but what do you make of the Swiss, 86% of whom think so, even though not even the Republicans boycotted Helvetian cheese or cuckoo clocks?

    The world is showing what it thinks of Sarah Palin and the Bushite know-nothings who have usurped McCain's campaign. So should Americans care? Of course, they should, but more pertinent is whether it could be a factor in the election. At this stage, it could well be important.

    Except in times of war, when American foreign policy happens to the citizenry rather than to others, it is often assumed that presidential politics is all local. In fact, the president, as head of state, symbolises their country, and it is important for Americans how he (or, heaven help us at this present juncture, she) represents them.

    While it would be easy to dismiss French gall as a natural, well Gallic, prejudice against the Anglo-Saxons, the opinions of close allies like Britain, Canada and the rest are certainly worth broadcasting, subtly, by the Obama campaign. After all, even John McCain has invoked the world's low regard for the US as an important issue.

    An earlier poll this August showed that 78% of American voters also believe the United States is less respected by other countries than it has been in the past and that 80% of voters believe that working with major allies, and through international organizations, is a wiser strategy for achieving the US's international affairs goals.

    The high international regard for Barack Obama is only a surprise for six-packing evangelist hockey moms like Sarah Palin. She keeps referring to the "City on a Hill" as her vision of America – a phrase she attributes to the Prophet Reagan. And her version is indeed Reaganesque: one of the reasons people used to build cities on hills was because their sewage would fall on the people downhill. The rich usually lived at the top and the poor at the bottom.

    But of course the original was from a more distinguished prophet in his Sermon on the Mount, and its American form came through the Puritan divine John Winthrop. Now one may, with justice, consider the Pilgrims to be a dangerously bigoted cult, but they had "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind proper regard for the opinions of mankind."

    Winthrop went on to say (somewhat optimistically, with the self-importance of a cult leader) that "the eies of all people are upon us; soe that if wee shall deale falsely with our god in this worke wee have undertaken and soe cause him to withdrawe his present help from us, wee shall be made a story and a byword through the world."

    So, far from being a declaration of isolation and disregard for where the city's sewage flowed, Winthrop had a deep regard for the opinions of the rest of the world. The attitude of the freedom-frying Republicans flies not only in the face of their forgotten and erased history, but, happily, runs against the American voters, who do care what other people think about them and their leaders.

    And for its part, the rest of the world will little note nor long remember what the candidates said in the debates, here. But it will never forget what the electorate does on November 4.

    Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/17/presidency-obama-bush-poll

  • snowbird
    snowbird

    LOL. Wow.

    The writer dissed the French and Republicans (Sarah Palin, notably), hailed Jesus of Nazareth, John Winthrop, and Abe Lincoln all in one fell swoop.

    I tell you, the eyes of the world - universe - are on this election.

    I'm glad that I've lived to see this day.

    Sylvia

  • talley
    talley

    Why certainly "the world wants change".

    Especially the world of: Islam and its radicals, communism and socialism and their radicals like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, among many other groups found around the world, including the UN.

    Here is a very tantalizing list of Obama endorsements: http://www.politicallyincorrectfacts.com/Barack%20Obama/Endorsements.htm Please take a look at this link, it is fascinating.

    And these are all friends of the USA and only wish us the best - NOT!

    Believe it that if the "triangle of evil" (Obama, Pelosi, Reed) gain unobstructed control of the USA, not only we will suffer, but so will the rest of the "free world" suffer; well, whatever currently remains of the so called "free world", which is not much....

  • mrsjones5
    mrsjones5

    The world didn't end when Clinton was president and it won't come to an end if Obama wins the White House.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    Believe it that if the "triangle of evil" (Obama, Pelosi, Reed) gain unobstructed control of the USA, not only we will suffer, but so will the rest of the "free world" suffer

    Many don't realize this, but a weak US is going to leave them very exposed. They have already abdicated way too much responsibility for their own security. We've been subsidizing the defense of Europe for many decades.

    Incidentally, this is what a consolidated government in the hands of Obama Pelosi and Reed will look like on domestic issues:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

    BTS

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr

    Them their they.

    We.

    Us.

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr
    Especially the world of: Islam and its radicals, communism and socialism and their radicals like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, among many other groups found around the world, including the UN.

    What would Al Qaeda do? Mere speculation. Opinions differ.

    Islamic terrorists want war. They want suffering - among others and their own people alike.

    They would surely surmise that McCain will give them what they want. Bin Laden himself intervened with what many thought was the effect of keeping President Bush in power in 2004 with that weird tape just before the poll.

    I think al-Qaeda would back McCain - that is not an argument for or against America backing him, but it seems to me that the vague assumption that the terrorists would back a lefty is lazy thinking...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/02/alqaedas_choice_1.html

    On the other hand, if they don't long for western suffering though, there's no ground to fear them (and some, consequently, may be challenged to alter their stereotyped leaning).

    communism and socialism and their radicals like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez

    So, what does it imply? Of course they will because he's on the left of the political spectre. In my country, the extreme right skinheads back McCain. I don't think it has any significance.

  • snowbird
    snowbird

    Triangle of evil?

    Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi.

    President----------Senate Majority Leader----------Speaker of the House...

    Whatever are you talking about, Talley?

    Sylvia

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit