« Not so Easy to Criticize Joschka Fischer in Germany... | Main | Why We Blog: A Parisian Perspective and a Lost Soul »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c42969e200d83421bb2953ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SPIEGEL ONLINE’s Ironic Falling Out with Michael Moore:

» Moore Shockers from Hud's Blog-O-Rama
Looks like Michael ("Mendacious Mediocrity") Moore has been caught in another lie. This time by using a fake newspaper front page in his latest crockumentary Scareandhate Fahrenheit 9/11, to make a so called argument that Gore "won" the Florida electio... [Read More]

» Is it a bad thing from Random Nuclear Strikes
when the Lebanese Daily Star and Der Spiegel are more critical of Michael Moore than our on media or the DNC?   Funny how the Germans, who know a bit about Nazi-era propaganda, see through Moore's antics better than our Bush-hating friends here at... [Read More]

» Restoring My Faith In Humanity from Dean's World

Thank you, Democratic Leadership Council. Than you, [Read More]

» Moore Shockers from Hud's Blog-O-Rama
Looks like Michael ("Mendacious Mediocrity") Moore has been caught in another lie. This time by using a fake newspaper front page in his latest crockumentary Scareandhate Fahrenheit 9/11, to make a so called argument that Gore "won" the Florida electio... [Read More]

» Michael Moore: Even the Liberal German Press Sees Through Him from Patterico's Pontifications
Even the liberal German press can't defend Michael Moore's serial lies.... [Read More]

Comments

Sag mal, David, möchtest Du Deine Seite nicht doch lieber in "Davids SPIEGEL-Kritik" umbenennen? Irgendwie empfinde ich den derzeitigen Titel doch als einen ziemlichen Etikettenschwindel.

Klar, es braucht hierzulande eine deutliche, intelligente und eloquente Medienkritik aus einer Ecke, die man weder links noch rechts sonder eher "vernünftig" nennen kann. Da sind wir uns vermutlich einig.

Aber kann Deine Seite das wirklich leisten? Mit SPIEGEL-bashing und der Entdeckung von "antiamerikanismus" hinter jedem Busch im Blätterwald allein ist's halt noch nicht getan. Ich rege mich auch häufiger über Tendenzen vom SPIEGEL auf... aber bei Dir wird's langsam albern.

Irgendwie scheinen Dir die Objekte Deiner Kritik zum "Feindbild" geworden zu sein... für eine intelligente, scharfe Analyse/Kritik ist das m.E. kein guter Ausgangspunkt.

Ich werde Deine Seite weiter beobachten, hoffe aber auf Verbesserung (oder halt auf eine andere, etwas breiter, entspannter (und daher um so schärfer schauende) "Medienkritik"-Seite für die deutschsprachige Presse/TV).

Davo 245

Hallo David,
ich hoffe, Sie machen weiter so wie bisher. Ohne "Verbesserungen" im Sinne von Davo und Konsorten. Typisch wieder: Nörgeln, nörgeln, nörgeln. Wir alle haben unsere Berufe und versuchen unser Bestes, unsere niveaulose Medienlandschaft zu durchforsten und 0,0001 % Einfluß zu nehmen. Dies hier ist doch nur ein winzig kleiner Schritt. Nur ein Tropfen, aber ein Schritt. Sie, Davo, sind wieder nur ein typischer Vertreter dieser typischen Haltung, alles mies zu machen statt selbst besser. Machen Sie doch mal neben Ihrem Job und Familie einen weblog. Und dann kommen Sie wieder und berichten, wieviel Zeit dies in Anspruch nimmt. Helfen Sie doch einfach. Suchen Sie mal stundenlang heraus, was einen Davo 245 befriedigen würde. Und dann sind da noch die vielen anderen. Wenn es nicht gefällt, einfach wegbleiben. Die intelligente scharfe Analyse, die Sie hier einfordern, könnten Sie doch auch einmal selbst in einem posting leisten, statt diesen Negativ-Quark abzulassen. Wenn hier einige Male die Woche ein Artikel vorgestellt wird und es des öfteren der Spiegel ist, dann kommen Sie mit dem Vorwurf, David würde ein Feindbild aufbauen. Es gibt weblogs, die beschäftigen sich ausschließlich mit BBC. Bauen die ein Feindbild BBC auf? Merkwürdige Logik. Nicht nur plappern, Davo, leisten Sie was. Das nächste Thema sollten Sie bestimmen. Suchen Sie mal übers Wochenende ein Thema raus. Vielleicht bekommen Sie mal das Gefühl, wieviel Zeit dies kostet. Ein bißchen lockerer, Davo. Positiv denken. Ob David es postet, weiß ich natürlich nicht. War nur eine Idee, Ihre negative Energie in etwas Positives umzulenken.

Some sentences of Kerry:


Home where my parents showed me the values of family, faith, and country.


I saw the gratitude of people toward the United States for all that we had done. I felt goose bumps as I got off a military train and heard the Army band strike up "Stars and Stripes Forever." I learned what it meant to be America at our best. I learned the pride of our freedom. And I am determined now to restore that pride to all who look to America.

I will have a Secretary of Defense who will listen to the best advice of our military leaders.
My fellow Americans, this is the most important election of our lifetime. The stakes are high. We are a nation at war — a global War on Terror against an enemy unlike any we have ever known before.

I know what we have to do in Iraq. We need a President who has the credibility to bring our allies to our side and share the burden, reduce the cost to American taxpayers, and reduce the risk to American soldiers. That's the right way to get the job done and bring our troops home.

Here is the reality: that won't happen until we have a president who restores America's respect and leadership — so we don't have to go it alone in the world.

And we need to rebuild our alliances, so we can get the terrorists before they get us.

....

-------------------------

Many Germans won't like these sentences, Kerry made. He wants the NATO in Iraq to share the burden. Kerry does not realize that German won't be part of this burden.


David Cohen??? debunks a lot of what Mickey shows. So do others. The truth is out there if you want to find it.

Hope you guys have enough bandwith when W wins. Can't wait to see what pics your papers publish.

I'll save some pennies and hit the jar next month.

Hallo Gabi (Hallo David, again),

hoppla, da habe ich ja ganz schön einen "vor den Bug geschossen" bekommen... vielleicht war mein Beitrag ja auch etwas zu "scharfzüngig".

Selbverständlich betreibe ich selbst kein Blog, das die deutschsprachige Medienlandschaft beobachtet... meine Güte - wenn ich das täte würde ich ja hier wohl nicht kommentieren (außer vielleicht um mein eigenes Blog zu "promoten").

Darf ich trotzdem "Nörgeln, Nörgeln, Nörgeln"? Natürlich: Das ist mir sogar (als Kommentator) aufgegeben! Leute wie ich müssen immer alles schlecht machen und in den Dreck ziehen!

[Achtung: Ironie! Gabi: bitte nicht ernst, böse (oder persönlich) nehmen - ich plappere doch nur!]

Was ich in meinem ursprünglichen Beitrag eigentlich sagen wollte (und was offensichtlich mißverständlich war):

- Ich schätze den Dienst, den David leistet.
- Ich halte Davids "Medienkritik" i.A. für wichtig, berechtigt und notwendig.

Aber (there is always a "but"):

Gerade das Beispiel von Gabi (die BBC-Seiten) beschreibt ziemlich genau das, was ich hoffe, was "Davids Medienkritik" nie wird: eine Partikulärkritik, die sich an einem bestimmten Objekt festbeißt... und nicht mehr davon lassen kann.

davo 245

P.S.: Wie allerdings eine Kritik mit "Positiv denken" zu heilen sein soll - das ist mir allerdings ein Rätsel. Braucht man nicht eher Argumente? Oder muß ich Medikamente nehmen?

P.P.S. Und (um das nochmal ganz klar zu sagen): Bei einem geht mir allerdings "die Hutschnur hoch" - wenn Kritik an der derzeitigen amerikanischen Regierung grundsätzlich mit "antiamerikanismus" gleichgesetzt wird. So etwas zu tun ist seinerseits extrem undemokratisch (und unamerikanisch)! Und das passiert mir hier leider auch viel zu schnell. Ja, das kritisiere ich.

Davo, that's true. Spiegel has enjoyed lately a lot of attention here. As long as this attention is based on facts, I see no problem with it. As long as Spiegel tirelessly promotes anti-americanism in Germany, I don't see any reason to give them a break. I see you use the word anti-americanism between two little signs: this one " and this one ". Is this your way of telling David that there is no such thing as anti-americanism in the Spiegel and that he is engaged in a witch hunt ?

If you don't see the anti-americanism in the Spiegel than I do understand why you are somewhat upset with this site. So, for you, a sharp, intelligent analysis goes around the subject of anti-americanism. That's the same way as the anti-semitism discussions: how do we talk about it without mentioning facts and perpetrators.

But you are right in one way, and I have also thought about it. There is a lot of negativity about the US in the German media in general. You could come up with many examples. Any political commentary about the US on TV, if it's not openly criticizing the US, it is "informing" with interpretations and half-truths. Another aspect that the German media is very good at is failing to report on new important developments, which contradict the editorial opinion. (I guess you know by now, that there is only ONE editorial opinion in Germany).

Withholding information that doesn't fit ideologically is something that the German media does cold-blooded. The consumer be damned, they don't need to know this ! It is true that not only Spiegel does this, ALL the German media does it. Here on this forum Gabi comes up often with amazing pieces of "journalism" from other papers. Maybe some of them could be posted here as well. The German media, not only the Spiegel, supplies constantly solid material for this site.

In Germany, the words "amerikanische Verhältnisse" (loosely translated as "american conditions") have become mainstream. Of course, courtesy of media and of course, with a negative conotation. Those words are used in any situations, not only in politics. (Recently on a more obscure TV channel there was a casual discussion on the economy. One idea mentioned was the Germany doesn't need "amerikanische Verhältnisse". Now, discussing the differences between the US and German economies would be a whole new subject, but I wondered sincerely why would it be so bad if Germany had the US level of unemployment and economical growth ...? Well, I guess it's bad because it's... "amerikanische Verhältnisse") Examples like that are countless in the German media...

There are of course also other problems in the media(not only in Germany, see Jason Blair), which have nothing to do with the bias in commenting the current political developments. The problem is that life on earth is decided by politics, not Jason Blair affairs and everything else, no matter how important, is usually overshadowed by this.

The damage done by the anti-american postion of the Spiegel (sorry to pick on them) is much worse for Germany than a Jason Blair type of scandal. That's the truth, and I think that's what this site is focused on. In the future, when and IF the situation calms down, we can have academical discussions about the "lesser" sins of the media. Right now, there are life and death issues going on, and we will concentrate on them. I know, I know, the German media told me this: if Bush goes there will be everlasting peace on earth.

Davo,
Kritik und Nörgeln sind zweierlei. Da wollen Sie doch nicht mit mir streiten. Sie erinnern sich sicher an diese Diskussion hier, was Lüge sei. Daran erinnern Sie mich stark. Damals war es eine Person mit Namen Oberlehrer, später dann Klink und noch einige andere Namen. Und jetzt sind Sie eben da und nörgeln. Sie nennen das Kritik. Ich nenne es nörgeln. Dem Nörgler sage ich: Positiv denken, machen Sie sich nützlich, suchen Sie mal einen Beitrag raus, dann werden Sie erkennen, wieviel Zeit das kostet. Und wenn 1000mal der Spiegel aufs Korn genommen wird, wo ist da Kritik, wenn Sie sich hier hinstellen und nörgeln, immer Spiegel, wie langweilig. Das nennen Sie dann scharfsinnige Kritik. Sie gehen unscharf mit Begriffen um. Kritik ist was Geistreiches, nörgeln ist destruktiv. Zeigen Sie mir mal Ihre Kritik, die unter den Begriff fällt. Aber regen Sie sich doch nicht so auf. Ist doch nicht so schlimm, wenn ich Sie für einen Nörgler halte. Das können Sie sicher aushalten. Ich halte diesen Weblog für enorm wichtig. Das wollte ich allen sagen, die hierherkommen und Ihnen, der nur nörgelt.

Gabi: "He wants the NATO in Iraq to share the burden. Kerry does not realize that German won't be part of this burden."

Do you know something we don't? Or ist that just conceited punditry?

I give you a different scenario:

Remember what (Secretary of State) Powell said re. Iraq: "you [meaning: we] break it, you [meaning we] own it". Implicit: It's our responsibilyty to fix it, too. Well, broken it is. Owned, too. Problem is: the ones who broke it obviously can't fix it alone.

However, the only hope the U.S. has for getting (major) outside help is a new administration - one that is not tainted by giving everyone who wouldn't play to their rules the (metaphorical) finger.

If you care for the U.S.-troops in Iraq you should pray for a Kerry-victory. It's the only (even remotely likley) scenario in which the rest of NATO might even consider helping the U.S. with the burden of Iraq.

If Bush gets a 2nd term... well, of course, there's always conscription.

Dear "WhatDoIKnow",

(well - what do i know, really ;-) ),

"Spiegel has enjoyed lately a lot of attention here. As long as this attention is based on facts, I see no problem with it."

I disagree. In fact i actually do see a major problem here. It's not that the attention DER SPIEGEL is getting here isn't based on facts - it's the way these facts are spun. As i wrote (above): Criticism of the current american administration does not an anti-american make. Neither at home nor abroad. I agree: DER SPIEGEL is "lefty"; very critical of Mr. Bush's government, too. However: whether you agree with this view or not: it is (in my opinion) a perversion of the democratic discourse to summarily label such views as "anti-american". Many american citizens do not agree with the policies of their current government - would you call them "anti-american"?

davo

@ davo 245

Hey, Davo.
1: The Dems are the ones talking about reinstating the Draft. Re-enlistments are at an all time high.

2: Are you so naive to believe that if Kerry wins the Germans and French are going to suddenly jump on the bandwagon and send troops to Iraq.
Maybe I´m wrong here, but i don´t think for one second that Gerd or Jacques are going to put their asses on the line for anyone or any reason.
You don´t see them even talking about taking action in Chad. If they start crying "Do something!!" Then maybe some one will say "do something yourself!". And that´ll be the situation in Iraq if Kerry wins. The Germans and French (not all of them of course) have no idea how to put up or shut up. They wil do neither.

That's OK, davo. You want Kerry to win (which is perfectly OK) and imply that there is no anti-americanism in the German media (which is a blatant lie). There is only strong (but fair!) criticism of Mr. Bush's government.

Just like there is no anti-semitism, only Sharon critique. Now, when I follow this logic, I understand why the Arab countries don't like the idea of the UN condamning anti-semitsm. It would degrade their well-meant Sharon criticism to anti-semitism. And we all know they aren't anti-semite, aren't they ? Just like there is no anti-americanism in the German media. Nosir, just friendly criticism...

DAVO, Sie argumentieren auf dem Niveau, daß ein Jude keine antisemitischen Argumente haben kann. Ist ja ein Jude. Hören Sie auf mit Ihrem niveaulosen Unsinn. Sie können es gerne scharfsinnige Kritik nennen. Das ist jetzt sogar schlimmer als Ihre vorherige Nörgelei.

Im Moment können wir wunderbar erleben, was eine schwache USA in der UN bewirken kann. Mit Deutschland, Europa zusammen wollten sie der sudanesischen Regierung Sanktionen androhen. Sie konnten sich nicht durchsetzen. Gut, dann sehen wir dem Sterben im Sudan weiter zu und hoffen das Beste. Ich bin eigentlich kein Freund der humanitären Friedensmissionen, aber dies ist nun einmal UN-Regel einzugreifen, wenn Menschen massenweise sterben so wie jetzt im Sudan. Die UN messe ich an ihren eigenen Regeln, wenn ich jetzt und hier schreibe, daß die USA und Europa daran gehindert werden, diese Regeln anzuwenden.

Europa hat die USA im Irak in Stich gelassen. Auch Kerry wird erfahren, was Multilateralismus heißt, wenn Europa nicht will (Keine deutschen Truppen in den Irak, basta). Dann kann Kerry nur noch Europa folgen und es dann Multilateralismus nennen.

Man lese doch mal die Rede von Kerry und nicht nur deutsche Berichte darüber, daß er die Welt wieder einen will (unter der Führung der USA). Europa wird nicht spuren, nur weil Kerry als Diplomatensohn in Berlin war, weil er eine elitäre Ausbildung in der Schweiz genossen hat und eine blumenreichere Sprache als Bush hat. Machen wir Politik danach, wer schönere Worte hat?
Was, wenn Kerry deutsche Truppen sehen will und die deutsche Masse auch dies nicht will und Schröder an sein Basta erinnern wird?


"John Kerry schwitzt. Tropfen sammeln sich auf seiner Stirn, vereinen sich zu Gerinseln, graben sich durchs Wangen-Rouge hinunter zum Hemdkragen, bis sein ganzes Gesicht eine glänzende, klebrige Masse ist. Seine gemeißelte Fönfrisur löst sich auf, eine Strähne senkt sich in die Stirn wie ein schwerer Zweig im Regen. Selbst die Fingerspitze, mit der er sich vergeblich die Nase trocken tupft, ist nass."

Ich habe ja einiges über Kerry gelesen. Aber das ist wirklich die Krönung der Blödheit. Spiegel mit Pitzke ist eben das Allerdümmste, was Deutschland im Moment zu bieten hat. Darüber muß berichtet werden.

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,310938,00.html


Hallo Davo,

ich denke, die Frage, ob ein Amerikaner, der die amerikanische Regierung kritisiert, anti-amerikanisch ist, ist sehr interessant. Für mich war bisher immer derjenige anti-amerikanisch, der gegen das gesamte Volk der Amerikaner negativ eingestellt war. Aber man könnte das auch anders betrachten:
Die amerikanischen Errungenschaften wurden durch die jeweiligen Regierungen erzielt (bzw. durch die Verfassung als Grundlage). Die Regierungen wurden wiederum von den Bürgern gewählt. Wenn nun jemand generell negativ gegenüber der Regierung eingestellt ist (die dabei ist, etwas positives zu tun - die Werte der amerikanischen Gesellschaft zuerhalten, etc.), dann ist er damit auch negativ den amerikanischen Werten gegenüber im allgemeinen eingestellt und kann somit auch als anti-amerikanisch eingestuft werden. Das kann dann natürlich auch ein Amerikaner sein.
Nun ist die Frage, ist die betreffende Person nun einfach kritisch gegenüber der amerikanischen Regierung oder ist er generell gegen sie und sucht nur nach Neuigkeiten, die diese Einstellung bestätigen?

Ich muss zugeben, dass mir diese Betrachtungsweise erst kürzlich in den Sinn gekommen ist und ich noch nicht detailliert darüber nachgedacht habe bzw. mich mit anderen ausgetauscht habe. Vielleicht kann das ja hier passieren.

@ Doug: which part of "might even consider helping the U.S." sounded like "suddenly jump[ing] on the bandwagon"? All i wrote was that the odds might marginally be pushed in favor of helping the U.S. out if Kerry was elected. But i'm not holding my breath.

@ WhatDoIknow: "You want [... to] imply that there is no anti-americanism in the German media". No. I don't want to imply this at all. In fact, let me state this: there may well be publications in germany that have a basically anti-american sentiment/bias, regardless of whatever the current american government is. Some left-wing, some right-wing. These publications are in my opinion idiotic, ignorant and wrong.Yet i still do not believe that DER SPIEGEL (whatever flaws it may have) is such a publication (remember? this is where this discussion started).

As for:

WhatDoIknow: "Just like there is no anti-semitism, only Sharon critique."
and
Gabi:"Sie argumentieren auf dem Niveau, daß ein Jude keine antisemitischen Argumente haben kann.

Now you have me seriously freaked out. Please read again what you wrote, and consider the possibillity that you both just used monstrously inappropriate comparisons. Sorry, but i don't want to continue the discussion beyond this point. I may be sarcastic, ignorant and nasty, but not completely shameless.

Davo, Sie sollten nicht aufhören, über Antisemtismus und Antiamerikanismus nachzudenken. Gehen Sie in sich, auch wenn es wehtut. Was Sie anderen vorwerfen, machen Sie selbst, deshalb können Sie ja auch leichtfertig mit Vorwürfen um sich schmeißen. Was Sie da oben gerade über Antiamerikanismus geschrieben haben, sagen, schreiben so viele Deutsche, und es ist so falsch. Seien Sie nicht gleich beleidigt. Kommen Sie denn nur hierher, um Bestätigung Ihrer Plattitüden zu erhalten. Ist es nicht hilfreicher, mal diesen Dschungel von Falschinformationen und Vorurteilen zu durchschauen und zu durchbrechen, den uns deutsche Medien präsentieren und offensichtlich erfolgreich, sonst könnten Sie hier nicht Derartiges über Antiamerikanismus behaupten. Seien Sie doch mal neugierig und offen dafür, daß Sie vielleicht irren. Zu diesem Problem gibt es ganz viel Material. Mehr gibt es zum Antisemitismus, aber das ist vergleichbar. Es sind leider Geschwister.

Lieber Chris,

"Wenn nun jemand generell negativ gegenüber der Regierung eingestellt ist (die dabei ist, etwas positives zu tun - die Werte der amerikanischen Gesellschaft zuerhalten, etc.), dann ist er damit auch negativ den amerikanischen Werten gegenüber im allgemeinen eingestellt und kann somit auch als anti-amerikanisch eingestuft werden."

Das ist ja ganz hübsch gedacht, aber es impliziert, daß

a) jemand (eine Regierung/Gruppierung) ein Monopol auf "die Werte der amerikanischen Gesellschaft" haben könnte (oder auch jeder anderen Gesellschaft) und

b) daß so etwas wie ein demokratische Prozeß (Du weißt schon... Diskusionen, verschiedene Meinungen darüber was denn nun eigentlich "das positive" für den einzelnen Bürger oder das Land ansich wäre) nicht existiert.

Ziemlich blöde Idee wie ich finde. Das einzige Land, das mir spontan einfällt, wo's akkurat so läuft ist Nord-Korea. Ansonsten hört man solche kranken Ideen eigentlich nur von Islamo-Faschistischen Mullahs. Auch keine besonders guten Vorbilder.

there may well be publications in germany that have a basically anti-american sentiment/bias ... i still do not believe that DER SPIEGEL (whatever flaws it may have) is such a publication

Oh, there may well be. We're not so sure yet, right ... And IF there are such publications, they are only 3rd class rags, not big names. So, basically, there is no anti-americanism in Germany's main stream media. OK, I got that one.

Now you have me seriously freaked out
Ooops, did I accidentally touch some sore point ? Sorry, it was unintentional.

i don't want to continue the discussion beyond this point

Now, THIS is the first sentence that finally makes sense. I'll take you at your word.

Hallo Davo,

>>Das ist ja ganz hübsch gedacht, aber es impliziert, daß

Vielen Dank für Deine liebenswürdige Anerkennung meiner zugegeben etwas unreifen Gedankengänge. Ein ehrlich gemeintes Lob ist immer ein guter Einstieg ;)

>>a) jemand (eine Regierung/Gruppierung) ein Monopol auf "die Werte der amerikanischen Gesellschaft" haben könnte (oder auch jeder anderen Gesellschaft) und

Dazu eine Frage:
Wenn nun die gegenwärtige amerikanische Regierung für die amerikanischen Werte eintreten würde und diese vorbildhaft vorleben würde, hätte sie dann Deiner Ansicht nach ein Monopol auf diese Werte?

>>b) daß so etwas wie ein demokratische Prozeß (Du weißt schon... Diskusionen, verschiedene Meinungen darüber was denn nun eigentlich "das positive" für den einzelnen Bürger oder das Land ansich wäre) nicht existiert.

Wieso das? Nimmt jemand, der nach meiner oben genannten Definition anti-amerikanisch ist, nicht an diesem demokratischen Prozeß teil? Werden anti-amerikanisch eingestellte Amerikaner in den USA unterdrückt?

"Es geht darum, dass man zu uns aufschaut, und nicht darum, dass man Angst vor uns hat", betonte Kerry!!!

Wir stehen doch nicht Gewehr bei Fuß, wenn die Amis rufen, hat schon Schröder so schön gesagt. Und jetzt sollen wir auch noch aufschauen??? Kerry hat die Situation auf dieser Welt wohl noch nicht begriffen. Er denkt, er wird der Liebling der Welt werden. Schon gestern wurden Flaggen mit ihm und Bush zusammen verbrannt. In Boston. Niemand in Deutschland, Europa, weltweit, wird die Amerikaner BEWUNDERN. Es wird nur darum gehen, ob die USA militärisch stark genug sind, daß andere sie fürchten, daß sie führen können. In Zeiten des Terrors kann nur die Abschreckung wirken, die Einigkeit in der Terrorbekämpfung, aber Bewunderung einzufordern, ist doch lächerlich.

Deutschland war immer schon Partner und hatte Einfluß. Wir waren ein kleines, aber zuverlässiges Land, wir waren berechenbar und sind nicht Freunden in den Rücken gefallen und nannten das dann Freundesdienst. Wir waren dankbar und konnten dies zum Ausdruck bringen, ohne uns zum Affen zu machen.

Man muß schon blind und taub sein, um die Abneigung gegen Amerika nicht überall zu spüren. Nur solange Kerry Bush angreift, unterstützen ihn die Deutschen im Sinne von gemeinsamer Feindschaft. Aber er wird genauso wie Bush auf taube Ohren stoßen, wenn Kerry Truppen einfordern wird. Gemeinsam Kosovo erorbern ohne UN-Mandat, das war nur möglich, weil Schröder/Fischer glückselig vor Macht noch nicht zur Besinnung gekommen waren. Deutschland ist durch den Irakkrieg dermaßen antimilitärisch geworden, daß es schwer sein wird, mit der Unterstützung der deutschen Bevölkerung je weder deutsche Truppen in Gefahr zu bringen. Deutsche KFOR-Truppen auf dem Balkan sind weggerannt, haben sich versteckt. In Afghanistan haben sie sich den ungefährlichsten Ort ausgesucht und sitzen dort eingeigelt und isoliert von der Bevölkerung hinter hohen Schutzzäunen und -mauern. Tote deutsche Soldaten in Afghanistan werden die deutsche Bevölkerung aktivieren, deshalb vermeidet man es krampfhaft in gefährliche Situationen zu kommen. So kann Deutschland wenigstens sagen, WIR sind sogar in Afghanistan, wir machen was, wir riskieren was. Ist es denn tatsächlich so? Überall, wo es wirklich gefährlich ist, sind ausländische Truppen und nicht deutsche.

Von den arabischen Staaten kann Kerry erst recht keine Bewunderung einfordern. Ein Großteil der Welt haßt die USA. Danutzt es nicht, den Kopf in den Sand zu stecken, sondern das muß realisiert und aufgearbeitet werden. In Deutschland äußert sich dieser Haß nur verbal, aber in anderen Ländern bringt man gerade aus Haß auf die USA Menschen um.

Im übrigen ist Osama Bin Ladens Kriegserklärung an die USA aus dem Jahre 1998. Damit sollte Kerry sich mal auseinandersetzen.

Mich wundert, daß die deutschen Medien, diese Sätze alle schlucken. Bewunderung, Truppen in den Irak. Warum kommt da kein Protest?

OK, once more...

"Oh, there may well be. We're not so sure yet, right ... And IF there are such publications, they are only 3rd class rags, not big names. So, basically, there is no anti-americanism in Germany's main stream media. OK, I got that one."

Please, "WhatDoIKnow", help me out here - i really am stumped. As for the right-wing rags the "Nationalzeitung" and "Junge Freiheit" come to mind. On the left... "Junge Welt" and "Neues Deutschland" maybe?

But "mainstream media"? I really don't know.

"Now you have me seriously freaked out
Ooops, did I accidentally touch some sore point ? Sorry, it was unintentional.

Well, we both know it was neither accidental nor unintentional, and yes, you did touch a sore point. But you obviously don't understand what you did.

But "mainstream media"? I really don't know

OK, we clarified this for good. No anti-americanism in the German main stream media (of course, except for friendly criticism). No need to bring this up anymore.

I don't mean this to sound offending in any way, but I wonder often what is it about the German mind that makes it so ripe for propaganda and take it for the truth. This is just a rethorical question, and I know it doesn't apply to ALL Germans, only to the majority...

Sorry for the sore point. The point I made was that anti-americanism and anti-semitism go hand in hand. I stand to what I said earlier: anti-semites diguise their feelings behind Sharon critique. Same is valid for anti-americanism, it is hidden behing Bush critique. OF COURSE there should be justified Bush and US critique. The problem is that for the German main stream media the term "justified" is extended indefinitely.

i don't want to continue the discussion beyond this point
But the urge was stronger than you will...

Moore is an idiot, but the way he is doing his "propaganda" is great.
anyone interested in his strategy should read:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/columns/grove_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000556834

@Davo 245

Remember what (Secretary of State) Powell said re. Iraq: "you [meaning: we] break it, you [meaning we] own it". Implicit: It's our responsibility to fix it, too. Well, broken it is. Owned, too. Problem is: the ones who broke it obviously can't fix it alone.

You were making a reference to Bob Woodward's book "Plan of Action." Page 150 reports that Secretary of State Powell alluded to what he terms "the Pottery Barn rule" when he warned President Bush that we would "own" Iraq and all its problems after Saddam Hussein was deposed. Maybe he had the foresight of the [un]willingness of Germany and France's ability to participate.

I would like for you to understand that Iraq was already broken BEFORE the US led invasions of 1991 and 2003. Saddam was a killer, a sadist, a liar and a thief. He brutalized his people for his own demented agenda and personal pleasure. But you knew that already, right? But apparently this didn't bother you sufficiently to take action to help these people, favoring instead, the farcical "another way." For the many months that I've been contributing to this Blog sight, I have asked many people that opposed the war to provide what should have been the alternative to the US led invasion. To this day, no one has ever taken up the challenge. Give it shot Davo!

Furthermore, it did not bother the German government sufficiently enough watching the murder of 300,000 unarmed civilians in Bosnia to take action. It did not bother them in Somalia, Haiti, Liberia, East Timor either. In fact, Eastern Europe lived under communism that filled the vacuum left by the retreating Germans. Is not Poland entitled to reparations?

Didn't Germany break Europe for the last 50 years? What have you done/did you do to fix it?

Put it this way, Germany broke Europe for 50 years and the allies, primarily the US, had to fix it.

@ whatdoiknow:

you wrote
"i don't mean this to sound offending in any way, but I wonder often what is it about the German mind that makes it so ripe for propaganda and take it for the truth. This is just a rethorical question, and I know it doesn't apply to ALL Germans, only to the majority..."

- when i read this i had to laugh out loud. propaganda -as a concept- may have been invented by germans ( i´d say it was invented by the nazis, but the word may have existed beforehand), but i doubt that germans are the only ones to easily fall for propaganda. actually, you might want to take a close look at FoxNews or Michael Moore, and then tell me if not also the american mind is "ripe for propaganda". i guess so is the french mind, the arab mind, the christian mind, the jewish mind..

anyways, you are right by saying that anti-americanism hides behind bush-critique, and we get a lot of bush-critique in germany and france, often beyond a justified point. i think it was different during the clinton administration, at that time anti-americanism in the media was easier to identify, or at least i had the impression it was.

James, you know you won't get an articulate answer from the peace loving people, do you ? How was that line, now fortunately not so much used anymore ? "They hold the moral highground". Whatever that might mean... Usually it meant letting dictators have their way, without carrying for the people.

One deranged regular reader of this site said that, eventually, time would have taken care of Saddam. The fact that until then, countless people would have been murdered by him was lost on him. After all, he was the elected president and the "international law" allowed him to do whatever he wanted. Bad luck... Furthermore, the fact that after Saddam another sadistical thug would have followed, probably one of his sons, was lost on our contributor.

The suffering of ordinary people in dictatorial countries is never on the mind of "those" people. It is only on their tongue, and it serves only as long as they can obstruct the US. I have never seen anything remotely so appaling, but we all know how largely it was used.

I don't know how davo thinks about this. He sounds very much like former poster Klink, who, despite all of his weird opinions never argued using the "moral highground" line.

"They" say that freedom for the Iraqis was never the main reason to go to war. That's true, even though I would have supported it only for that reason alone. There is absolutely no way to give terrorists the chance of working together with another state, after the Afghanistan experience. So Saddam was taken out. The other lame line, "AQ would never work together with the secular Baathists" is being contradicted constantly in Iraq today. In spite of their religious differences, AQ and the Baathists have a common enemy and have no problem finding a common ground. Anyone claiming that AQ and Saddam hated each other more than they hated the US is delusional. Nevertheless, many people still make this claim.

We all know those things, they are getting boring. They have been told countless times on forums all over the world. The ones who are against the US position will simply never consider the arguments. I don't know how it feels to ignore facts regularly, but here it is... The facts don't matter, as long as you hold the "moral highground".

joaninho

You are right, propaganda exists and is believed in every country, not only in Germany. But as you know, this site is in Germany. There is also this German pecularity: not only do they believe propaganda, Germans also know better and feel the need to spread "their" truth. Reminds me of: "Und bist du nicht willig, so brauch' ich..." (You said propaganda was invented by the Nazis, not the Germans. Funny, I heard all along theories that the Nazis came from outer space and settled down in Germany by accident. I guess it's true)

Comparing Fox News with MMoore is more than a little exagerated, but I get you point. You know what the difference is ? When I read frontpage.com, I know what I get. Conservative, righ-wing. Same for opinionjounal.com. Another conservative voice. I do not always agree with what I read, but I always know what I read: personal opinions of conservatives. OTOH, when I watch the Tagesschau, Auslandsjournal etc I am deliverd progressive opinions dressed up as objectivity. Sorry, but I won't put up with this !

Do you realize that if ALL main stream media openly admitted their bias, this site probably wouldn't exist? Same for BBC bias, CBC bias etc. There wouldn't be a need for them. You would know what you get. The offending thing is that the media considers us all to be jo's, who swallow the bias without chewing it. They are wrong !

Fascist Hollywood spans the globe. Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 in D-land. Just wait until Hollywood rolls out "Manchurian Candidate".

Fascist Hollywood says: Citizens we want you to spend all your money and time sitting silently stupified in a darkened room while we dictate to you what to think, say, feel and believe. This is our political right. Fortunately for us actors, writers, producers and directors, the public is too numb to refuse.

Heil Moore!!! you ignorant pions.

Folks, That's Show Biz!


@ whatdoiknow:

I agree. But it would be fun to listen to them fumble with their own arguments. It's really just to easy and tempting to criticize the US then to take action, read, travel and hold intelligent discussions. Isn't a lot easier to shower the world with perfunctory remarks? As a side note, such "passive" belivers who thought Saddam would eventually have the law catch up with him are the de facto accolytes that Saddam preferred: the majority who will not do anything to rise up and fight for justice.

On a similar note, It's really unbelievable just how many times I've heard from German colleagues of mine : "how many wars the US has started."

????

Germany
Japan
Soviet Union
UK
France
Spain
China
North Korea
Iraq
Egypt

It's all there in the history books. Read. If you can't watch TV and be "fed" the truth.

If anything, the US is the most powerful country in the history of the world who has shown the most restraint when excising its power. But what annoys me is the amount of commitment that we showed these people (the Euros) and they feel that a Joska Fischer temper tantrum is appropriate?

I think that to be German is to be born with a form of original sin and self hate stemming from the crimes of the twentieth century. Seeing as how generous and forgiving we were of them, and knowing what the world would have been like had the Germans succeeded in WWII, they are in disbelief.

Such charity and generosity has never existed in Europe: colleagues contest: "yeah fine, the Marshall plan, but that was really there to help you." ??? I've never understood that argument. But, as a German, if you really felt that way, then why not be like Norway, and just pay it back? Btw, Norway is no way near as critical of America as Germany...

@ Klink…hoopla…I mean Davo 245

If you are tired of reading our modest critiques of SPON you can only imagine how tired we are of having to have read the biased trash that passes for journalism every day (year in and year out) at SPIEGEL ONLINE. Bluntly put, we make absolutely no apologies for our criticism of SPON and we aren’t in the business of allowing others to prescribe to us the number of articles we can or cannot write on a particular topic. SPON is the most widely read and influential left wing magazine in Germany. If we failed to extensively cover it, we wouldn’t be doing our jobs.

Your claim that anti-Americanism is misused to criticize anyone who attacks Bush is absurd. Anti-Americanism has a long and storied history in Europe (particularly in the media) that far predates Bush. If you don’t believe me just read Jimmy Carter’s memoirs for example:

"Helmut Schmidt seemed to be torn between the conflicting political forces in his country. In private conversations he was very tough in dealing with the Soviet threat, often the leader among Europeans in proposing strong action. But in German political debates, he emphasized the opposite facet of the same question and seemed reluctant to do anything which might be interpreted as anti-Soviet. At times this conflict made it difficult for Americans to understand him and was the reason for some of our problems. There were many reports from news reporters and others in Europe and in the United States concerning his critical comments about me, Secretaries Vance and Muskie, Dr. Brzezinski, and other officials in our government. These persistent criticisms, often highly publicized, helped to legitimize anti-American sentiments in Germany. Perhaps to compensate for these reports, Schmidt would publicly deplore any negative comments from others in Germany about the United States or its leaders." (Pages 537-538, "Keeping Faith" by Jimmy Carter, published 1982.)

We just don't buy the simplistic "blame Bush!" argument that so many use to explain all the world's problems these days.

Hier ist eine sehr interessante Analyse der transatlantischen Beziehungen. Die USA haben sehr wohl den Haß in Deutschland erkannt. Er wird nicht ohne Folgen bleiben. Ich finde das sehr beänstigend.


http://www.kas.de/upload/dokumente/trans_portal/baks_transatlantischebez_hans.pdf

Die Zukunft der transatlantischen Beziehungen
Hans Schmid, Major
(Zentrums für Analysen und Studien der Bundeswehr,
Bereich Sicherheitspolitik und Militärstrategie)
Am 03.06.2004 veranstaltete die Bundesakademie für Sicherheitspolitik (BAKS) ein
Zwiegespräch mit Publikum über "die Zukunft der transatlantischen Beziehungen". Die ca. 50
Teilnehmer kamen überwiegend aus den Bereichen Wissenschaft, Politik (insbesondere den
Ministerien), Streitkräfte und Medien. Im Zentrum der Betrachtung, die durch kurze
Statements der beiden Referenten eingeleitet wurde und sich dann in Dialogform, mit der
Möglichkeit Fragen zu stellen, fortsetzte, standen strategische Interessen sowie Impuls und
Richtung der politischen Entwicklung auf beiden Seiten des Atlantiks. Fragen zur
Neugestaltung der transatlantischen Kooperation im 21. Jahrhundert, nach gemeinsamen
Visionen und möglichen Handlungsfeldern wurden dabei intensiv von Karsten Voigt, dem
Koordinator für die deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen und dem Dean Rusk Professor und
Direktor International Affairs an der Universität von Georgia (USA), Howard J. Wiarda
II. Kurzzusammenfassung:
Karsten Voigt vertrat im Wesentlichen die Meinung, dass sich das Verhältnis zwischen
Europa und den USA zwar verändere, beide Seiten aber, wegen vielfältiger wechselseitiger
Verflechtungen und Abhängigkeiten, letztendlich nicht auseinanderdriften würden.
Demgegenüber konstatierte Professor Wiarda eine komplette Zerrüttung der transatlantischen
Beziehungen und machte deutlich, dass eine Partnerschaft auf ganz neuer Basis erforderlich
sei. Die Deutlichkeit und Offenheit seiner Worte und die Härte seines Urteils waren dabei
ebenso bemerkenswert wie ungewöhnlich und können, gerade weil sie aus dem Munde eines
Insiders der amerikanischen Gesellschaft und Kenners der dortigen politischen Szene
kommen, sehr nachdenklich stimmen. Im Folgenden sollen daher die wichtigsten Aussagen
und Statements von Professor Wiarda aufgezeigt werden.
III. Stichworte / Statements:...

My best friend is a young student at the University of Cologne, and has a tendency repeat back things that sound a lot like propaganda to me (I am an American). In fact, we often fight about politics, because he thinks that -I- am the one that is a mindless victim of propaganda, even though I am actually struggling over who to vote for in this election and spend a lot of time thinking about these things. Last night he announced that he was going to see Farenheit 9/11. I tried to get him to understand that even people that hate Bush think the movie is a load of bull, but he kept parroting the "it's not as bad as the lies Bush told the American people" meme. The difficult thing is that he is really quite smart and openminded and wise about many things...just not this.

I'm going to try sending him the links of Der Spiegel articles you posted (I don't read enoough German to know for sure they are critical of the movie, so I am taking your word for it :) With luck, he'll at least be thinking about these things before he lays down his Euros (hard earned money that Moore has no right to, IMO) to watch that movie.

It's not that I don't understand how people can have questions about Bush. I have them myself. But this smug self assurance is what puzzles and hurts me. It's almost a religous kind of fervor, a faith that cannot be penetrated with opposing facts. The UN and the EU are the saviors, and Bush is Satan. Bush can't possibly even be a well meaning person who might have made tragic mistakes. Meanwhile, the UN food for oil scandals aren't as bad as the Iraq war, so we don't even have to think about those things. How can intelligent, good hearted people be like this? And I know they are intelligent, good hearted people. I don't think all Germans are stupid, or hate spewing Nazis. But I just don't understand it.

Maybe one of the German posters here who are not entirely unsympathetic towards Americans and Bush supporters could give me a little advice on how to talk to my friend, and how to act when I visit Cologne this October (which I confess being a huge mistake on my part when I booked the tickets, but they are paid for, so I think I kind of have to go). Should I just pretend to be an unabashed supporter of Kerry/Edwards? Say the Bush is worse that Hitler, and that the Iraq war was only about oil? Or is it okay in German society to say that you don't like to talk about politics?

Or should I just eat the cost of the tickets?

joaninho wrote - you might want to take a close look at FoxNews or Michael Moore,

Obviously joaninho hasn't taken a close look at FoxNews. You're just using it like garlic and a cross to ward off vampires.

lost one - just ask him if W gets say 53% of the vote or more, is he going to start asking himself why Americans hate Europeans? Is he going to look to "root causes?"

Or what do the Americans see or get that he doesn't?

It won't be a pleasant visit, but there are many, many Americans who are starting to stand up to their european friends. No more taking it to be nice, pleasant or liked. Get yourself educated on the issues, start reading American blogs. Give them the links so they can start reading themselves.

And remember one thing - "the world" wants us to "get along" and "play nice." To do that we must give up a certain 18th century document which doesn't work in the modern world. The question for you is, which of your inalienable and enumerated rights are you willing to give up to get along? Read the Dec of Independence, read The Constitution and decide how badly you want to be liked and get along. Hopefully you'll come to the grown up conclusion that you're not going to be liked by everyone and while it is much more lonely, you'll be able to look yourself in the face and live w/yourself. It's very liberating, that. And start visiting more American blogs to validate yourself. Remember, they're projecting.


Or, if he has a computer and internet, suggest he start surfing the American blogosphere to figure out what's going on over here. Start w/the blogfather, Instapundit. Chock full of bloggy goodness!

--

davo had to leave before his head exploded. Can't have those grey cells start working.

--

Geez, are they STILL talking about how the can't adopt US bus practices because they're not American???

I was reading that nonsense in the 90s business sections in the US.

And lostone - this might also help, written by an American in Europe:

It's called "Hating America" and it was recently published and sent around the blogosphere.


http://www.hudsonreview.com/BawerSp04.html

lost one,

I hope, it's not going to be a mistake for you to go to Cologne and that you'll enjoy your trip. Germans are actually nice people even though - being American - you'll probably consider them rude. It's just a different definition of kindness.

You should not pretend you support Kerry even though you don't. Just tell them you're on vacation and you don't feel like talking about politics. Or tell them, you'd like to hear everything about EU-politics instead. They'll soon shut up because they don't know much about it. And don't say Bush is worse than Hitler because you shouldn't be talking to people endorsing this view in the first place.

Have fun in Germany!

I second Jo's opinion.. (hi jo!) ask them about EU politics.. very few Europeans know much about it.
www.eursoc.com is a good website to do research
Go and have a good time...
As long as you don't come across as some flag waving, God is an American type (and you already have indicated you aren't), you will be fine.
I live here, and when I am traveling here as a tourist, I am rarely bothered.
Just be curious, unpretentious. If you do run into some asshole who acts as if you are the representative of the US govt (and they are here), say:
OK, Bush is arrogant, dishonest, stupid and incompetent - I agree..
Let us now look at Helmut Kohl, the chancellor of unity:
1. Arrogant? Ask them about Besserwessis!!
2. Dishonest? The man was involved in a huge scandalous bribery affair! Plus his Stasi files are STILL unopened!! what secrets lurk THERE?
3. Stupid? Every German I have ever met laughs about the intelligence of Kohl, but he still was somehow elected FOUR times and was Chancellor 16 years!!! and yet the Germans are supposed to be so much more intelligent than Americans?
4. Incompetent? ask them about the blühende Landschaft in the former East, the failing welfare state, scandalous levels of unemployment and economic growth (they make Bush look like a STAR), the bankrupt public pension system (which makes Social Security look absolutely solvent by comparison), etc.
If you want to be polite, say:
I am not the secretary of State, the US ambassador to Germany or a member of the Bush government. They have email addresses and you may write to them with your concerns.
If you want I will help you write the letters.
That is what democracy is all about!
then smile and don't say anything more about politics.
Have a great time! I work in Cologne, so if you are interested in meeting up (I know Germany like the back of my hand, so I could give you alot of tips), drop a line on the blog, and I will leave my email address on the next entry.

@ WhatDoIKnow:

You said propaganda was invented by the Nazis, not the Germans. Funny, I heard all along theories that the Nazis came from outer space and settled down in Germany by accident. I guess it's true

- It seems that "modern propaganda" was first used by the UK and the US during WWI (says wikipedia).

Concerning your theory about the Nazis coming from out of space - I never heard that one before, must be some kind of urban myth. But I will check on that, maybe it really is true. By the way, I didn´t write "it was the Nazis, not the Germans" - because that would be a stupid thing to say. Just as stupid as "all Germans were Nazis" or "only Germans fall for propaganda". With "Nazis" I meant Goebbels and Hitler, and they of course were German.

About the "biased media" issue: you make a good point when saying that most of the mainstream media doesn´t openly admit to where they stand politically (David doesn´t do so either, although he obviously he supports Bush). Since media = business, I´m afraid they will do so right after hell freezes over. In that sense it is good to have blogs as an alternative way to obtain information - you read frontpage, I read dailykos, we both are happy because we know what we get.

@ lost one

But this smug self assurance is what puzzles and hurts me. It's almost a religous kind of fervor, a faith that cannot be penetrated with opposing facts. The UN and the EU are the saviors, and Bush is Satan. Bush can't possibly even be a well meaning person who might have made tragic mistakes. Meanwhile, the UN food for oil scandals aren't as bad as the Iraq war, so we don't even have to think about those things.

Outstanding comment. I think you put your finger directly on what bothers so many thoughtful Americans (both Democrats and Republicans) about what is going on in Germany and Europe today. The fact that you have found this blog indicates that you have already begun the search for a solution to this problem. In fact, we, here at this website and elsewhere simply have to work together to break through the smug self-assurance and religious like fervor by arguing with facts and by pointing out the bias day for day.

I believe that Germans and Americans alike are fundamentally reasonable people and that they will return to reason if presented with sound arguments. The problem right now is that a lot of people have been emotionalized and heated-up by the likes of Moore and SPIEGEL and it will take time to cut through that. But we have to be firm and stand up for our beliefs. Good luck and don't be afraid to speak your mind, otherwise nothing will change. Don't be afraid to put people off, if they are put off, it is their problem, not yours. Just don't allow yourself to be drawn into a shouting match.


@joaninho

..."I meant Goebbels and Hitler, and they of course were German."

Um. Hitler was Austrian.

You're going to loose your argument quite quickly if you don't get even the smallest of facts correct...

Sorry to be so pedantic.

The lost one writes: "But this smug self assurance is what puzzles and hurts me...How can intelligent, good hearted people be like this?"

The short answer: intellectual laziness and complacency, combined with indoctrination.

By the way, I just saw the Moore film. Not surprisingly, I thought it was crap. That this muddle-headed and dishonest film won the main prize at Cannes and got a ten-minute long ovation is just shameful. Shameful and ridiculous.

According to the Pantagraph newspaper in Bloomington, Illinois, Michael Moore’s movie Fahrenheit 9/11 contains a scene in which Moore altered their front page: Newspaper: Michael Moore Faked Front Page.

Bruce Bawer, “Hating America" is no longer available. Did anybody save it and could send it to me? Thank you.

Kerry will not win in November, of that you can be sure.

Michael Moore is like an angel of death to every cause/political cadidate he has ever supported. Take a look at his record-he is the kiss of death.

The cynic in me wonders if Spiegel is turning on His Moore-ishness because he's doing the one thing that seems to annoy the heck out of the world about Americans: he's making tons of money! He's obviously not a selfless "activist" or "intellectual," creating works for the higher glory or humanity, while only asking for a chance to suck at the government teat at some institute, or merely consenting to being a talking-head on someone else's show. He's making megabux by cranking out trash - how much more American can you get!

(Also, like any good dope-dealer that opposes legalization, he's also firmly hoping that Bush wins. If he's seen as Supporting the Establishment as opposed to the vastly more profitable position of being an Independent Voice in the Wilderness, he may have to actually move out of Manhattan and "return" to Flint, Mich. Not much nightlife in Flint, and it gets mighty cold there in the winter...)

Gabi,

Try this link for the article you are looking for.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1173557/posts

Thank you, Joe!

@Joe

Great essay. Thank you!

--------------

Aus der "WamS" habe ich auch noch einen wunderbaren Artikel aufgefischt:


Bush tut Europa gut

Jeff Bergner fragt sich, warum John Kerry hier zu Lande so beliebt ist - obwohl seine Politik den Europäern eher schaden würde
von Jeff Bergner

In Europa gehört es nicht zum guten Ton, freundlich über George W. Bush zu sprechen. Das bestätigt eine kürzlich vom German Marshall Fund veröffentliche Umfrage. Während die Amerikaner zu gleichen Teilen in Anhänger und Gegner Bushs gespalten sind, geben die Deutschen Kerry mit 77 Prozent gegenüber Bush mit zehn Prozent den Vorzug. Worauf gründet sich diese europäische Sichtweise? Hat sich die Politik der ersten Amtsperiode George W. Bushs etwa nachteilig auf Europa ausgewirkt? Ganz im Gegenteil. In der Wirtschafts-, Handels- und Außenpolitik wäre auch eine zweite Amtsperiode Bushs sicherlich viel vorteilhafter für Europa als eine Regierung unter John Kerry.


http://www.wams.de/data/2004/08/01/312934.html

Und hier noch ein Leckerbissen, von Kagan:

The Kerry Doctrine

By Robert Kagan
Sunday, August 1, 2004; Page B07


Someday, when the passions of this election have subsided, historians and analysts of American foreign policy may fasten on a remarkable passage in John Kerry's nomination speech. "As president," Kerry declared, "I will bring back this nation's time-honored tradition: The United States of America never goes to war because we want to; we only go to war because we have to. That is the standard of our nation." The statement received thunderous applause at the convention and, no doubt, the nodding approval of many Americans of all political leanings who watched on television.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29204-2004Jul30.html

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

February 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28