If we could put aside our political and partisan biases (..I know, I know, its difficult to do), we should objectively look as to the "reasons" why 200,000 Germans, in the hot July heat, would stand and listen to a guy speaking in English, representing a country that has been at political odds with them for almost a decade.

Why would that be; what makes these folks anxious to see world policies change; why do European polls favor so much a fervert desire to see the American administration take a different course ?

We can dig in our heels and state.."Who cares about the Germans, the French, the Brits, the Italians; the Spaniards..", but we should know better.

I'm not at all surprised that Barack Obama would receive a warm reception in Europe. By and large Western Europeans are politically to the left of the United States, generally speaking.

I notice the one time when Obama started calling on Germany to contribute a little more to help the United States, i.e. help rebuild Iraq and send more troops to Afghanistan his audience got really, really quiet. One might extrapolate that Obama the idealistic candidate is more popular with Germans than an Obama the president who might actually expect the Germans to do something useful to assist the United States.

But on the other hand, the not-so-helpful Schröder government was tossed out in favor of the much-friendlier-to-the-US Merkle government. So maybe things might work out after all.

I was waiting for you to bring this up, CG. I would have if you hadn't. But I have a slightly different slant on it.

First of all, Obama is not the President of the United States. Should he be giving a speech saying, in effect, we should tear down the walls that divide us as 'peaceful' nations?

As a candidate, has he any need to explain his platform to non-voters in a foreign country--or is he being presumptuous--assuming that no one in her/his right mind would vote for McCain and so he can speak as a president before the election?

Somehow, that just doesn't seem 'right' to me.

For a little different slant: Suppose that he was explaining his platform to foreign countries so that the American voters could get a sense of how the rest of the world would react to him in the event that he does get elected President. I think that this is something that we should be aware of and hence a good thing. It follows that the other candidates should follow in his footsteps so we can better gauge how our European friends would react to them and the international aspects of their platforms.

US politics affects the World, so of course they are interested in the man. As for Europeans being more "left" than Americans, that's only relatively speaking, because the US has less of an emphasis on social justice and as become saturated with corporatism.

Most Europeans would be more willing to help in Afghanistan than in Iraq, which is seen as a mess that the US created for itself.

It would be interesting to see what the same audience would make of McCain.

Compared to McCain's recent trip to Columbia (who of course is not President of the United States) I would say Obama dazzled his audience.

The irony is...that Gerald Baker isn't from the United States either, but we must listen to him while he ridicules Barak Obama.

See Ray's A Child Appears In The Wilderness Piece:

http://tinyurl.com/55d5th

McCain went to Iraq and Afghanistan before the election so what's the difference.

Check this out : http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080726/Obama/

Why?

It is not just Europe but as far away as australia that are hoping that Obama will win. Sure we are a liitle left of both parties in the USA. Is this not a reason why the USA should move a little left to the democrats.Surely this is better to going it alone as the last extreme right wing government in the developed world

USA government mistakes still effect the rest of the world.

...as does our largess during times of calamity.

Are non-US citizens hoping that Obama will win or the McCain won't win?

I cannot, in all good conscience, vote for McCain. On the other hand, I do not believe Mr. Obama, if elected, will be able to achieve much, if any, of what he says he wants to achieve. How can he, personally, tear down walls? How can his rhetoric solve the world's hunger by any appreciable percentage? He's an idealist, which I admire. Idealism can bring about change, hopefully for the better. But Mr. Obama, if elected, will be faced with much more than what skilled demagoguery can solve. And it'll start with Congress.

He's, if elected, going to have to knuckle down and come up with 'answers' that the majority of Congress (first) and the majority of the world (next) find agreeable and feasible.

It's hoped that he'll be able to do so. A lot of it will depend on his coterie of advisors, about whom we know little or nothing.

I'll be honest: At this moment in time, I couldn't care less who win the Presidential Election in November. Britain has so many issues of her own at the moment, what is more important to me is what the British government is doing (imploding, as it happens). The Presidential race is just a sideshow.

That cute little piece generated by Fox News (Ray posted the attempt at satire on A Child Appeared in the Wilderness) is without merit. Among the quasi religious sounding script that mocks, actually mocks, Christ and some of the most spiritual moments in his life, there are nasty little barbs aimed right at Obama. This isn't failed satire, it is a desperate attempt to mock a candidate who just did what George Bush hasn't been able to do in six years, go to a foreign country not be burned in effigy. There is another irony, seeing Europeans applaud an American and wave, with respect, does seem miraculous.

Gosh! Such venom! Such a pucker! I'm reminded of the words of a well-known political pundit whose humor is also regularly attacked by Cleopatra's asp:


Gerard Baker must have struck gold.

Gerad Baker, one of the top men working for Rupert Murdoch, the owner of FOX NEWS. Now we have a video narrated by the author, with visuals created by a FOX executive. We also find out that the newspaper was the Times of London, think New York Post....

Working your soul for the devil pays a high dividend. What more can I tell you?

. o O (Damn! I must have struck gold, too.)

Watch out, a black widow might get you... (not to be confused with an asp)

It's false to say that because people scream loudly or yell about certain ideas, you have "struck gold." The only "gold" you have struck is the delight you have in overlaying the text messages here with an emotional tenor they may or may not have.

As such, it's not only an unsupportable argument, but a dishonest one.

While some posts are written and can be read in anger, others are not, and you do a disservice to the writer when you interpret it incorrectly in order to lend support to your own wrong ideas.

As I've pointed out here so often it bores even me to repeat it, any C list actor can take a post and read it a dozen different ways. So, as stated earlier, the "gold" argument fails.

Ray, the arguement that America " largest in time of calamity' makes the mistakes of its government worthwhile is like saying the rich are not greedy because they give more to the poor than the middle class.

Of cause the richest country in the world gives more to calamities.

the real problem is that people outside the USA think differenty. Our local newspaper ONLY 8% of Germans and British support Mc Cann.
This does not mean he should not be elected by Americans who alone have the right to vote.
It just means that co-operation will be easier with a Democrat President.Most people outside America are not Obama supporters. Even he is too right wing for us.But at least he is closer to our position than Bush or Mc Cann

Oh, well, in that case, Aus22, I'd surely advise John McCain not to run for office in Australia. Probably doesn't need to run for President of Europe, either. Which is quite a relief. I can't tell you how much sleep I lose knowing how popular Barrack Obama is in Berlin.

Ray, I realise what Americans think is more important for your elections that what others think.

America making friends and closer alliances in the world IS important though Ray, and for that to happen, the opinion of those in Berlin might actually be worth looking at. Perhaps Obama has more diplomatic skill than both Dubya or McCain.

CG, don't let Ol Ray, get to you. He knows that everybody is finding out how stupid he and the rest of the bushites were for buying into the bs Bush was feeding them and they ate every bit of it,lmao!

Ray knows the time is coming for Obama to win, but was so bad, that the people will not choose a Republican this year, and he might have ruined the Republicans for years to come (Hopefully).

Now it's just a matter of time when the people sweep Bush and those like him out with the rest of the trash come november ( I can't wait ).

Not entirely. Those Americans who generally don't give a rap what the European on the street thinks of us are generally those who have a rather positive image of their own country. It is those who are basically ashamed of their country, who believe their country to be the root of all the world's evils, you know, the Blame America First crowd that is so wrapped up in whether or not other people particularly approved of us.

I might repeat a diplomatic aphorism: Countries don't have "friends." They have other countries with mutual interests."

Please make an effort to reply to something the writer actually said, which was "Most people outside America are not Obama supporters."

The faulty response you give is that Obama is popular is Berlin. You have to actually read and make sense of the other person's post before framing a reply. Okay, in your case you don't have to make sense of it, but you do have to read it.

Thank you Sleek! You gotta love Ray!

I was watching some conservative pundit over the week end... I think it was Laura Ingrams...(I can't remember...I was only listening to the program). She went on and on about Obama's lack of knowledge of Nazi controlled Germany! For conservatives like Coulter, Ingrams, Rush...(those who Ray associates himself with) it is important for Obama to know the difference between Nazi-controlled Germany and Nazi-controlled Poland, neither of which currently exist. However, it is not important for McCain to know the difference between Iran and Iraq, both of which currently exist.

Do I have their hypocrisy correct?

Ray, don't let SPM get to you...he is just demonstrating the colossal stupidity and ignorance of himself and the rest of the Liberal Left.

Gee...I wonder how long before the complaints about personal attacks start pouring in...

CG, pretty much...the Conservative pundits like Rush and Ingram are generally pretty hypocritical. Of course, I wonder if you will similarly concede the hypocritical nature of the likes of Franken and Olberman?

Thanks Dax when I said that I was simply saying that while we prefer Obama to Bush and Mc Cann, few of us would vote for any current canidate for the American President. Obama like most Americans support no real gun control and capital punishment both of which most non Americans do not accept.
Even Obama heath care policy is far short of the universal medical care schemes in most other developed countries.

We are not trying to impose our values on you. All we are saying it would be better that you move a little in our direction by voting for a Democrat. We will still fight you on these and other issues but at least there will be more understanding and some interest in issues like Climate Change which is our main issue here. I have not heard anything about it from any candidates but I suspect the Democrats policy is closer to ours. Here we need co-operation.

Actually, it's a far lot harder to find examples of hypocrisy revolving around the likes of Franken and Olbermann than it is, say, someone like Rush(who's fact checking over the years has been stunningly horrendous) and Laura Ingram. Rush flat out lies when it comes to presenting his arguments. Evidence of this is everywhere you search. About the only example of Franken hypocrisy one can turn up is how his corporation got fined $25k for a workman's comp issue in Minnesota. Even in that instance, I'm not sure one can carry a good case for hypocrisy in that the company admitted they were wrong in the situation and paid their dues.

I listen to conservative radio nearly every day I'm in the car. Boston has a great conservative FM talk radio station which carries Jay Severin in the afternoons and I highly recommend it(you can stream it at wtkk.com). This is conservative talk that I can at least respect, something that people would be hard pressed to say about someone like Rush or Ingrim. While I disagree with the guy more than anything, he makes great points critiquing both the republicans and democrats(more dem's than anything) and his show doesn't revolve around the sensationalist bullshit that people like Rush and Laura Ingrim excels at.

Laura and Rush are a perfect pair. She has that nails-on-a-blackboard voice and he's deaf.

Ingram's patriotism and love of country extend this far...when Fox News, esp. Bill O'Reilly, was pushing their "boycott" of France, and how we shouldn't buy any French products, etc. Ingram said (I heard it, so I know it's true) "Oh no, I'm not giving up my French wine."

Good move, Laura. Drink as much of that stuff as you possibly can. I'll bet you're not giving up any Iranian caviar either are you, you spoiled, stupid little twit? Yes, I said twit, respecting the FM rules.