« Democrats and Republicans in Germany | Main | General Discussion Thread »


Also wenn ich im Bush-Wahlkampf-Team wäre, hätte ich dieses Foto in den nächsten Werbeclip mit einbezogen.

SPON macht sich unterdessen wieder einmal selbst zum Affen:

Kerry konnte auf Parteitag kaum punkten

Der Wahlkongress der Demokraten in Boston hat John Kerry nicht den erhofften Durchbruch in der Wählergunst gebracht. Der Präsidentschaftskandidat liefert sich weiter ein Kopf-an-Kopf-Rennen mit Amtsinhaber Bush.


In einer Woche lesen wir dann wieder Pitzke: Aus heiterem Himmel liegt Bush wieder bei 50%! Übernächste Woche bei 60%! Und wenn Spörl wieder da ist: 25%!

"The fact is that I'm not going to negotiate in public today without the presidency, without the power."

Uh Senator. Don't realize campaigning is negotiating with the American public?

Grr. Typo.

"Don't you realize..."

Does DER SPIEGEL really follow U.S. politics?

(1) It is rare for a U.S. Senator to win the presidency. Even John F. Kennedy barely got in the White House, and he didn't have the 20-year Senate career (and thus long voting record that can be used against him) that John Kerry has. Americans prefer those who have governed, not legislated. Heck, even a military general has a better shot at the White House than a Senator does.

(2) Americans rarely change leadership midstream, in a wartime presidency.

(3) If Kerry has a 75% chance of winning the presidency, shouldn't his poll numbers be way higher? There are folks - liberal, moderate, and conservative - who are disenchanted with Bush, yet Kerry has been unable to really win them over.

The one thing hurting Bush is the economy. History shows that if there ain't a stock market rally of 15% or more in the incumbent's final year, the incumbent is tossed out. We haven't had it yet.

If DER SPIEGEL is gonna discuss U.S. politics, it should at least know more about it.

Do they actually explain the basis of their Bush meter? Obviously they aren't using polls that *I* have seen. Or are they merely counting on the 'sheep factor', where in Kerry gets elected because they keep telling Americans that the Europeans "all" want it so badly and would make them happy?

Molotov, fire that argument up! 'Splain to Speigel where they lost it.
Things lookin' better every day. BTW,economy's heading up, no problem there.
Mike H.

75 percent! Man, that's a side splitter!
Someone hose me down - i cant stop laughing!

In that Stephanopoulos interview did Kerry mention going to Chirac, who would tell him what to do?

Here's a leg wetter written by Mark Steyn for the London Telegraph:

www.telegraph.co.uk/opininin/main. click arrow back to previous, Aug 3, 2003, "Could Kerry slum it in the White House?

This article is written for an English audience and is set up for Europeans who do not know what Wendy's is.

Remember when George Bush Sr. was running for reelection in 1992 and he went shopping at the supermarket. He didn't know what a bar code was. He was declared aloof and out of touch by the liberal media.

This week, the Kerrys go with the Edwards to celebrate the Edwards wedding anniversary at Wendy's. (It is an Edwards annual event....they were too poor to go to a regular restaurant when they first got married.)

Terresa Hines Kerry, despite being a hieress to a giant food processing company, was totally unfamiliar with the Wendy's menue. She did not know what chilli was.

Disgusted with the food, the Kerrys order take out from the local yacht club.

Also check out "W's" separated at birth comparison of Kerry in the sperm suit and The London Sun's "Chirac est un ver" headline from last year at Non Parasan.

@ Niko,

Not only are you right that Kerry does not give generously to charity, but he is a stingy tipper.

Kerry has stiffed many restuarants in the Boston area. He assumes that if he eats at your restaurant, Michelen is going to automatically rate the restuarant five stars.

Another Kerry trick....he carries only $100 bills. When its time to pay the waitress a tip, he take out the $100 and ask "do you have any change for this?" Most waitress do not carry change for a $100 bill.

"Den meisten Spott gossen die Bolschewiki über die bigotten USA aus, die vorgaben, für nichts als das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Völker, die Freiheit der Seewege und die Verbreitung der Demokratie ins Feld zu ziehen. Ausgerechnet die Kriegsprofiteure, die in aller Neutralität die englisch-französische Kampagne mit Munition und Krediten versorgten, in Mexiko, Kuba, Haiti, Panama nach Gusto intervenierten, kleideten ihr Interesse in den Umhang von Demokratie und Völkerrecht!"


"Der Krieg ist eigentlich gewonnen!"
Heute vor 90 Jahren begannen mit dem Einmarsch der deutschen Truppen in Belgien die Kampfhandlungen des Ersten Weltkriegs, der 8,8 Millionen Soldaten das Leben kostete. Warum fand die Politik dennoch keinen Ausweg aus dem Massensterben?
von Jörg Friedrich

--Disgusted with the food, the Kerrys order take out from the local yacht club.--

Not exactly, they ordered the food the night before. 19 of them.

A member of the Kerry advance team called Nikola’s Restaurant at the Newburgh Yacht Club the night before and ordered 19 five-star lunches to go that would be picked up at noon Friday. Management at the restaurant, which is operated by CIA graduate chef Michael Dederick, was told the meals would be for the Kerry and Edwards families and actor Ben Affleck who was with them on the tour.

The gourmet meals to go included shrimp vindallo, grilled diver sea scallops, prosciutto, wrapped stuffed chicken, and steak salad. The meals came to about $200.


If I were John and Elizabeth Edwards I think I'd feel slightly used at this point. This is an important ritual of their marriage, and if the Kerry campaign wanted to use it the least they could have done is actually eat that skanky middle-class food.

George M.,
"Another Kerry trick....he carries only $100 bills[...]"

Have you ever tried this "trick"? Did it work? I didn't think so. But nice little urban legend. At which bogus website did you find this crap? Or did you come up with it yourself?

I don't know how you guys come up with all that crap about the Kerry/Edwards visit at Wendy's. Here's what the Washington Post has to say about it. Sounds more realistic to me.


sorry I didn't fact check your charity allegations but I'm not very confident that they're true after hearing the 100$ bill crap.

I would be happy if you could give me a link to an official website like the IRS or the Senate. If they (or the NYT, WP, or some other credible source) confirm your numbers, I'll shut up.

National Review is not exactly what I would call a credible source. It's like me telling you this source is credible. I already named a few sources that I find credible. If these tax records are such a secret then how did your source come up with these numbers? The original sources must be to find somewhere.

It's entertaining, Niko, to see you struggle. Isn't it frustrating to only have the National Review on your side to make your case?

BTW. I did read the article. When it comes to Bush "published reports at that time did not list charitable contributions", but when it comes to Kerry it's $0. Very unbiased.

So, ich klatsch den einfach hier mal rein, weil ich ihn gerade von einem Kollegen bekommen habe, und ich ihn darüber hinaus gut finde. Das "Wall Street Journal" fällt mir allgemein außerordentlich positiv auf:

Europe's Choice

August 4, 2004; Page A12

"Kerry must win, you see, so we can be friends again." You hear things like this these days in Europe. George Bush's campaign staffers may tease about John Kerry's French connections, his Europhile mannerisms, and his unguarded boasts that the Continent is pulling for him, but such caricatures are closer to the truth than even the Republican operatives suspect.

Europeans casually talk of the Kerry rapprochement to come, as if in their magnanimity they have given us one last chance to return to sobriety. They exude a bold confidence, even to strangers, that the brightened prospects of the Democratic challenger are proof that America has seen the European light and therefore, of course, Mr. Kerry must win. Never has Europe been so emotionally involved in an American election -- and never to their peril have they read us so wrong.

Michael Moore is offered up as proof of grassroots American unhappiness with the president. Was he not perched in an exalted seat at the Democratic convention? Completely lost on Europeans is that Mr. Moore, for all his notoriety, is still a cult figure. An icon among the Moveon.org crowd, and when used gingerly a good weapon of the Democratic Party, he is still otherwise a polarizing figure disliked by the majority of America that votes. As the list of cinematic distortions in his recent film grows, "Fahrenheit 9/11" increasingly will be relegated to the genre of crass propaganda once mastered by the far more gifted Leni Riefenstahl in her similarly slanted "political documentary," "Triumph of Will."

More serious Europeans point out that the anger of our seasoned ex-diplomats and retired generals is further evidence that Americans are tired of Mr. Bush's unilateralism. Of course, out-of-work diplomats are keen to find fault with their successors. And few American administrations have proved as controversial in refashioning American foreign policy as have the blunt-speaking George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld. All are fat targets after radically altering America's prior relationships with Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Libya, dividing Europe into Old and New, questioning the role of American troops in NATO and in South Korea, and parting with Yasser Arafat. Yet all these sensationalized developments were long overdue, and precisely for that reason they may well become institutionalized, so much so that even a Kerry victory can do little to overturn them.

Maria Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry is a big hit in Europe, as if a native of colonial Mozambique has unique insight into the pathologies of the American experience. But as the summer wears on, fairly or unfairly, this force-multiplier of her husband's Europeanism is beginning to grate like some character out of a Henry James novel -- reflecting our own unease with the predictable mixture of acquired fortune, haute culture and aristocratic disdain. The private luxury jet and save-the-planet environmentalism go down in Fresno about as well as "Shove it" buttresses her sermon on the need for a new "civility." Ms. Kerry's gratuitous use of "un-American," both on "60 Minutes" and again to a persistent journalist, reflects a complete ignorance of the considerable baggage that such a cheap epithet carries in the collective American memory.

Despite the lectures, Americans find Europe itself a vast sea of contradictions. The French write and talk obsessively about Anglo-American adventurism in Iraq. Yet with an easy two-day drive an American can visit more than 50,000 British and American dead soldiers, resting at places like Hamm, St. Avold, Epinal, Omaha Beach, Ranville and Bayeux. The irony seems lost that the recently much-maligned Anglo-Saxon muscularity that ended Baathist Iraq is the logical successor to the same unapologetic partnership of Churchill and Roosevelt that once interfered in continental Europe to save it from its own indigenous fascism.

In this regard, blinkered European Union utopianism is thematic in its post-1960s World War II museums. Guides, videos and brochures remonstrate, often in self-righteous indignation, about the follies of war, violence and racism. Only at American and British cemeteries, in contrast, does one receive a different view of what the SS Panzers were really up to -- and how they were stopped. Words like courage, sacrifice and duty are chiseled on the architraves of granite pavilions. Like mute stone totems, they look out over thousands of white crosses. In this context, the well-meaning, but entirely impotent European efforts at curbing genocide in the Sudan or the nuclearization of Iran make one doubt the vaunted new efficacy of "soft power" -- triangulation always predicated on the threat of real American hard force in the shadows.

Europeans talk of the Kerrys' environmentalism in tired references to the American reluctance to sign the Kyoto accords, a flawed treaty that no Democratic president could defend and few Democratic senators would ratify. In the meantime, one sees an occasional train rush alongside the Rhine spewing from its lavatories raw human waste onto the tracks. Mammoth nuclear plants dot the French countryside. Restaurants are so smoke-filled that the pâté takes on the flavor of Gauloise, and tipsy afternoon drivers emerge from upscale restaurants with three or four glasses of wine under their belts to swerve on antiquated roads. Tourists take cheap shots that they fear being cooked alive in an August Paris flat or being buried in rubble at de Gaulle airport.

McDonald's is prominent among the stylish cafés of Luxembourg. Dubbed-in "Friends" and "Jerry Springer" blare from hotel televisions. Bare navels, Ray-Bans, pierced everything, and baggy jeans suggest a studied effort to emulate the look of Venice Beach. For a bewildered American, the key in squaring the anti-American rhetoric with the Valley Girl reality is simply to understand Western Europeans as elite Americans. Their upscale leisured culture is not much different from Malibu, Austin and Dupont Circle, that likewise excuse their crass submission to popular American tastes through the de rigueur slurs about the "corporations," "Bush-Cheney," and "Halliburton." Perhaps this notion that Europe itself has become a cultural appendage of the U.S. explains why it views our upcoming election as a referendum on its own future as well.

None of these paradoxes is new. Yet the European meddling in this particular presidential election is. Less talked about is that the image of an allied Europe has been shattered here at home. And all the retired NATO brass and Council on Foreign Relations grandees are finding it hard to put the pieces back together again. The American public now wants to be told exactly why thousands in their undermanned military are stationed in a continent larger and richer than our own without conventional enemies on its borders. If Europeans think it is nonsensical to connect Iraq with our own post 9/11 security, then Americans believe it is far more absurd to envision an American-led NATO patrolling their skies and roads 15 years after a nearby hostile empire collapsed -- especially when NATO turns out to be as isolationist as America is expected to be engaged abroad.

The election of John Kerry would probably not reverse either the current policy in Iraq or the ongoing reappraisal of our foreign relations. The European fixation with the upcoming election and rabid hatred of George Bush instead may backfire here at home; indeed, even now European animus acerbates our own growing unease with what we read and see abroad. As never before the Europeans have unabashedly called for the defeat of an incumbent American president in the next election.

They better hope that George Bush loses.

Mr. Hanson, a military historian, is a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.


"Mr. Hanson is a regular contributor to NRO, therefore he's not credible."


"I predict Bush will sweep as many as 40 states. Wanna hold the bet?"

Sure, I do! I predict Bush won't get more than 30 states.

"Have you ever tried this "trick"? Did it work? I didn't think so. But nice little urban legend. At which bogus website did you find this crap? Or did you come up with it yourself?"


Every time you go at it with me, you get your clock cleaned! When are you ever going to learn.

The last time you lost the argument that your urban panhandlers, who are netting over $800 a month in SSI were worse off than an average American that earns $35,000 per year and must pay taxes and mortgages.

Well here goes. Log on to Howiecarr.com. Howie is a fantastic Boston journalist who has been a thorn to the Kennedys and "Live shot" Kerry for years. He writes for the Boston Herald and the New York Post. Send him an E-mail and he will come up with examples from Boston's Loch Ober restuarant, where Boston's elite dine. Or go through the Herald's or the Post's archives.

PS. Log on to Kerry Korner at the above mentioned website....It has plenty of Kerry ditties for a hoot.

W's going to win, Jo, 53ish % or more.

Jo, your elitism is showing, you'd better start reading Hanson.

He's telling you like it is and it isn't pretty.

Get your head out of your neather region.


And neither is he' I'm afraid.

If the shoe fits, Jo.

...John Kerry is not a bad man. He probably wouldn't make a bad President. But he is a bad candidate in a terrible situation. He represents the wing of the Democratic Party that is imbued with a sense of its own moral, intellectual, cultural and social superiority. In short, he is the standard bearer for the unbearable....

When W wins, are you going to look to "root causes?" Are you going to ask yourself why the Amis voted this way? Why they hate you/the world so much that they decided to inflict another 4 years of W on them/you?

Charity as % of income: 0.7%

WHAT ???

I personally always considered arguments like "Kery doesn't tip in a restaurant" quite irrelevant. But 0.7% ???

Gee, even I give more than that, and I'm not a millionaire. My wife isn't a billionaire either. Looks like those people might as well live on Mars. I don't know what Bush's percentage looks like, but it's hard to top Kerry.

George M.

"The last time you lost the argument..."

I wasn't aware that I lost this argument but if it make you happy...

"Send him an E-mail"

So I did. I'll let you know what he says.

A link from Howie Carr's website to 1996 Globe article. I wonder what his charitable deduction was for 2003?


Link to Kerry's 1 million dollar yacht, the Scaramouche.


Cabana Boy doesn't have to tip, don't you know who he is??

Besides, Mama T Tereayza doles out all the money taken from the poor oppressed downtrodden who buy the ketchup.

Swift Veterans against Kerry ad:


And they served w/him.

Being from Boston, I would like to alert our readers of the Omnibus Transportation bill of 1987.

Full of pork, Kennedy and Kerry pushed for 2.7 billion dollars of "Federal Financing" for the construction of the Central Artery and Third Harbor Tunnel. Reagan vetoed it, but it eventually passed.

Far from completion and far over budget, the Federal government halted any further financial assistance. Massachusetts was on it's own and had to raise tolls on the mass turnpike.

Why people in Pittsfield, MA taking the turnpike must pay for Kerry's pet-project mess is beyond me.

Kerry seems to carry a rather cavalier, Brahman, know-it-all, never really having had worked attitude with him. Having played pork politics in the Senate, I hold him responsible once the project started and financial crisis ensued.

Having never earned money, I can understand animus towards money: smug, cavalier and haughty. Like a true politician he gave Bostonians the image that he was helping them with money. When the goverment stopped financing, he shrugged it off and let Massachusetts (daddy) pay for it...

George M.,

Howie Carr never replied to my email. Looks like he can't confirm your $100 bill story. Nice try though.


The comments to this entry are closed.


The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

February 2021

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