PDA

View Full Version : An Englishwomen's thoughts on the right


noonereal
04-16-2010, 12:47 PM
Below is a copy and paste from a health message board side room. I though it well worth a copy and paste. This is how an outsider sees our current political mood.


"Just my opinion as an outsider here in Europe: I (We) here in England doubt very much whether Obama would have had to put up with such serious hostility, had he not been black.

Being called a Nazi, accused of setting up death camps, protecting the opium trade and therefore terrorism, the list is simply too long - in fact there are 128 pages of it here - it is hard to believe that any white President would have had to put up with such slander.

During the election already, 40% of the country had indicated that they were not ready for a black leader. Now you may be one of the remaining 60% for which colour did not matter, but it would not be accurate to be the single voice of all Republicans.

What is more, the Republican party lost to a black man. That is a humiliating and embarrassing defeat (in their eyes). The Republicans who so often (not always, but quite possibly more often than not ) look down at the black man was defeated by one.

It is the ultimate defeat (for them). Quite frankly, that is why they have taken this fight to such a personal level. We are all humans, we all know what human nature is like. We have seen it on these forums first hand. The minute somebody runs out of credible ammunition, they sink to a personal level to try and discredit their opponent.

The Republican party lost the election and their sour grapes are fermenting into oak aged red wine vinegar. It is clear from their very undignified behaviour right now.

Now that they have so much to say about Obama, what exactly did the Republican party bring to the table at the last election? What except the most dangerous foreign policy in the world, a gun toting ex beauty queen who seemingly pops babies like a seedy Thai club does ping-pong balls, a man who may quite possibly expire half way through his term or a continuum of all that destroyed the once great America’s reputation with almost all of it’s allies?"

finnbow
04-16-2010, 12:59 PM
Seems like her distance vision is pretty good from that side of the pond.

d-ray657
04-16-2010, 03:15 PM
Most people in Europe are well informed on US politics.

Regards,

D-Ray

Charles
04-16-2010, 03:56 PM
Typical liberal assessment.

Chas

Sandy G
04-16-2010, 05:46 PM
Yeah, leftist/socialist policies sure have done a LOT for Britain, haven't they...From being "Great" & having an empire that the sun never set on, to being a smallish nation surrounded by a whole bunch of equally self-deluded "important" states...

Charles
04-16-2010, 06:06 PM
Yeah, leftist/socialist policies sure have done a LOT for Britain, haven't they...From being "Great" & having an empire that the sun never set on, to being a smallish nation surrounded by a whole bunch of equally self-deluded "important" states...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but hadn't the Brits pretty much unarmed their population before WWII? And when the Nazis were on their doorstep, they were begging Americans to send any old firearm we had so that they would have the means to defend themselves?

Chas

Sandy G
04-16-2010, 06:08 PM
Yup. Think so, anyhow.

Boreas
04-16-2010, 07:41 PM
Yeah, leftist/socialist policies sure have done a LOT for Britain, haven't they...From being "Great" & having an empire that the sun never set on, to being a smallish nation surrounded by a whole bunch of equally self-deluded "important" states...

Thatcherism, like Reaganism here, is largely responsible for their problems.

John

Sandy G
04-16-2010, 07:53 PM
Thatcher had little or nothing to do w/the disembowelling of the Empire...And when she took over in '78 or '79, England was in the throes of the worst malaise they'd seen since the war.

Charles
04-16-2010, 07:59 PM
Thatcher had little or nothing to do w/the disembowelling of the Empire...And when she took over in '78 or '79, England was in the throes of the worst malaise they'd seen since the war.

I've noticed that as long as you're out there kicking ass and taking names, you do pretty good.

It's when you become enlightened and take up navel gazing that things go South.

Just an observation on my part.

Chas

BlueStreak
04-16-2010, 09:49 PM
I heard a commentary on BBC World News not long ago that described "American Right-wing rhetoric" as "verging on the insane, with nonsense being tossed about such as death panels, concentration camps for the infirm and elderly, hordes of Canadians jamming American health facilities and the like. It's all absolute rubbish, of course. But, the most bizarre part is that so many Americans seem eager to buy into it. One cannot help but wonder if the likes of Rush Limbaugh and the former Alaskan Governor are responsible for this rediculous spectacle."

Amazing the things people on the outside can see when looking in.

Dave

Sandy G
04-17-2010, 06:30 AM
I've noticed that as long as you're out there kicking ass and taking names, you do pretty good.

It's when you become enlightened and take up navel gazing that things go South.

Just an observation on my part.

Chas

Huh ?!?

merrylander
04-17-2010, 10:47 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hadn't the Brits pretty much unarmed their population before WWII? And when the Nazis were on their doorstep, they were begging Americans to send any old firearm we had so that they would have the means to defend themselves?

Chas

Yes you are wrong, remember to the Commonwealth WWII started Sept 9 1939, not Dec 7 1941. Britain fought off the German Luftwaffe with Spitfires and Hawker Hurricanes, both superior to anything the US had in the air at that time. In fact the vaunted P-51 was an iron dog until they yanked that POS Allison and put in a Rolls Royce V-12.

I realize that it is popular mythology that America won the war single handed but I do believe if you check the facts that it was the Canadians who liberated Holland and if not for Field Marshall Montgonery defending his flank Patton would have outrun his supply lines and been in deep shit. The best general the US had was Omar Bradley.

Lend Lease was FDR's brain child and near as I recall we sent them Hudson twin engine bombers, not the most sophisticated aircraft around at that time, at lease that is what I recall seeing teams of horses drag across the border at Plattsburg NY into Quebec. Yow were not about to fly them to St. Hubert airbase because the isolationists here would have had a hissy fit.

Sorry, but I lost too many friends and relatives in that mess and this penchant here for ignoring everyone else's sacrifices and contributions in WW II rubs me the wrong way. BTW, check your history books, the Canadians never lost a war.:mad:

The idea that Britain had disarmed its population possibly comes about because until recently the police did not carry firearms and the crooks realized that armed robbery was a mug's game. I guess after watching too many westerns they have changed, for the worse. Britain was quietly preparing, frex the Supermarine Spitfire was developed ostensibly as a racing plane, Super 'Marine' because it was a water based racer on floats. The Avro Lancaster and Stout Sterling were ready as four engine bombers far too quickly to not have been in the works prior to 1939. The DeHaviland Mosquito could blow the arse off of anything in the air, that came out damned quickly after 1939.

However if all this puffery makes y'all feel smug just keep believeing what you do I would not want the facts to spoil your daydreams.

BlueStreak
04-17-2010, 05:08 PM
Yes you are wrong, remember to the Commonwealth WWII started Sept 9 1939, not Dec 7 1941. Britain fought off the German Luftwaffe with Spitfires and Hawker Hurricanes, both superior to anything the US had in the air at that time. In fact the vaunted P-51 was an iron dog until they yanked that POS Allison and put in a Rolls Royce V-12.

I realize that it is popular mythology that America won the war single handed but I do believe if you check the facts that it was the Canadians who liberated Holland and if not for Field Marshall Montgonery defending his flank Patton would have outrun his supply lines and been in deep shit. The best general the US had was Omar Bradley.

Lend Lease was FDR's brain child and near as I recall we sent them Hudson twin engine bombers, not the most sophisticated aircraft around at that time, at lease that is what I recall seeing teams of horses drag across the border at Plattsburg NY into Quebec. Yow were not about to fly them to St. Hubert airbase because the isolationists here would have had a hissy fit.

Sorry, but I lost too many friends and relatives in that mess and this penchant here for ignoring everyone else's sacrifices and contributions in WW II rubs me the wrong way. BTW, check your history books, the Canadians never lost a war.:mad:

The idea that Britain had disarmed its population possibly comes about because until recently the police did not carry firearms and the crooks realized that armed robbery was a mug's game. I guess after watching too many westerns they have changed, for the worse. Britain was quietly preparing, frex the Supermarine Spitfire was developed ostensibly as a racing plane, Super 'Marine' because it was a water based racer on floats. The Avro Lancaster and Stout Sterling were ready as four engine bombers far too quickly to not have been in the works prior to 1939. The DeHaviland Mosquito could blow the arse off of anything in the air, that came out damned quickly after 1939.

However if all this puffery makes y'all feel smug just keep believeing what you do I would not want the facts to spoil your daydreams.

Bravo!

I am an American, born here. And I believe that the outcome of the war would have been very different had my country not been involved, (For the worse.).

However, every word that Rob wrote is true. We did not do it alone, and to deny the contributions of other allied nations, Britain, Canada, Australia, the Phillipines and YES, even France and the USSR, is to arrogantly dismiss the immense and selfless sacrifices of millions of brave men and women. The notion that somehow the rest of them were too "pussyfied" to fight, so we strapped on the cape and saved the world singlehandedly is simplistic nonsense.

Now, if you'll excuse me, it's time to baste the chops.

Dave

And it's a pretty airplane too.

finnbow
04-17-2010, 06:14 PM
To put things in perspective, the Soviet Union had more than 20 times the casualties of the US and lost 14% of their population to the war as opposed to 0.32% for the US. BTW, Canada lost 0.40% and the UK lost 0.94%. In absolute terms, the UK lost nearly as many as the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Human_losses_by_country

merrylander
04-18-2010, 07:20 AM
I did not mean to disparage the U.S. contribution nor imply that the fighting men and women were not among the bravest and best. However damn few of us are old eenough to have taken part, I was 16 when it ended but had a brother in the army, one in the RCAF and a brother in law in the RCN as well as many friends and acquaintances in the services. War is obscene but should at least be remembered properly.

finnbow
04-18-2010, 07:30 AM
I did not mean to disparage the U.S. contribution nor imply that the fighting men and women were not among the bravest and best. However damn few of us are old eenough to have taken part, I was 16 when it ended but had a brother in the army, one in the RCAF and a brother in law in the RCN as well as many friends and acquaintances in the services. War is obscene but should at least be remembered properly.

Nor did I. I'm just stunned, however, by some of these numbers. It is astonishing to think that the Russians lost 14% of their total population (and 25% of their army). WWII is burned into their national psyche even more than it is ours.

piece-itpete
04-19-2010, 11:40 AM
Most people in Europe are well informed on US politics.

Regards,

D-Ray

I heard a commentary on BBC World News not long ago that described "American Right-wing rhetoric" as "verging on the insane, with nonsense being tossed about such as death panels, concentration camps for the infirm and elderly, hordes of Canadians jamming American health facilities and the like. It's all absolute rubbish, of course. But, the most bizarre part is that so many Americans seem eager to buy into it. One cannot help but wonder if the likes of Rush Limbaugh and the former Alaskan Governor are responsible for this rediculous spectacle."

Amazing the things people on the outside can see when looking in.

Dave

They think they know what's going on, but for most they have a movie/hollywood/leftist view of Americans. This is firsthand experience.

Stalin turned tail and ran like a coward while his troops were being slaughtered, and then enslaved and starved the ones who made it home alive. Not to change the subject, just FYI.

Pete

finnbow
04-19-2010, 11:58 AM
They think they know what's going on, but for most they have a movie/hollywood/leftist view of Americans. This is firsthand experience.

Actually, my first hand experience (from 11 years in Germany) was that the average German had a far better knowledge of world history and current events than the average American. Furthermore, he was better travelled and spoke more languages.

As for knowledge of America, they knew way more than the average American knew about Germany, but less than the average American does - naturally. That is not to say, however, that the better read and educated Germans (or Brits) don't know America well. Read The Economist a bit and tell me the Brits are unaware of what's going here.

Zeke
04-19-2010, 12:45 PM
However if all this puffery makes y'all feel smug just keep believeing what you do I would not want the facts to spoil your daydreams.

Britain's greatest defensive weapon has always been the channel. Since WWII, it's been the assurance of American involvement after any attack on the homeland, under what used to be the SAC umbrella of the USAF. (The F-111 flightline at RAF Upper Heyford was an impressive place.)

I lost respect for anything but their Special Forces and attack submarines when they retired the HMS Ark Royal (R09). I mean, really, why do they need a fleet carrier when they can build baby flattops, do ASW for ours, and let the United States do the heavy lifting? :rolleyes:

As for Canada (since 1931) having never lost a war, I can't argue against them having managed to always be on the winning team: that of the United States. Prior, they really only had to fight my ancestors and snow geese, with the geese -- likely -- being more pervasive.

Finally, since it looks like I'm shooting fish in a barrel (I'm not, swear), the Allison V12 is a wonderful engine, for a tractor.

piece-itpete
04-19-2010, 01:01 PM
Finn, the average Brit. We had numbers for extended stays as I was growing up, the info from my mother (who died an English citizen), the input of my Grandmother (who was here a lot), and my experience in England (that I love).

I have little to no knowledge of Germans, I'll take your word for it ;)

Pete

finnbow
04-19-2010, 03:11 PM
Finn, the average Brit. We had numbers for extended stays as I was growing up, the info from my mother (who died an English citizen), the input of my Grandmother (who was here a lot), and my experience in England (that I love).

I have little to no knowledge of Germans, I'll take your word for it ;)

Pete

For sure, the "average" American knows more about America than the average Brit or German (and vice versa, of course).

OTOH, the average Brit or German knows more about America than the average American knows about either of those countries and knows more about world history/current affairs than the average American.

For a modern, First World country, America is about as insular as it gets (though Britain ain't far behind in this area). Heck, the guy who impresses me most with his knowledge of American history on this forum is a Canuck.:D

merrylander
04-19-2010, 03:13 PM
Not since 1931, since 1867 when it actually became Canada.

As to our defending England - from what? Since the EU the chances of war breaking out in Europe are about 0.01%.

piece-itpete
04-19-2010, 03:21 PM
For sure, the "average" American knows more about America than the average Brit or German (and vice versa, of course).

OTOH, the average Brit or German knows more about America than the average American knows about either of those countries and knows more about world history/current affairs than the average American.

For a modern, First World country, America is about as insular as it gets (though Britain ain't far behind in this area). Heck, the guy who impresses me most with his knowledge of American history on this forum is a Canuck.:D

Agreed, they pay greater attention (are England and Germany still countries? :headsmack: ).

I suppose what I mean is even most of the smarter ones don't (and can hardly be expected to) understand American culture, and how it effects, heck, everything :) So their view of us is still skewed, even if they know what we're doing. Plus if they want to be 'on top', as it were, they'd better do something different, if you know what I mean. It's easy to armchair quarterback. Germany's bruhaha over accepting a gitmo detainee is a good example.

Agreed, our friend from the north sure puts the Red Green stereotype to the test :D

Curious Rob, what do you think of that show?

Pete

Zeke
04-19-2010, 04:06 PM
Not since 1931, since 1867 when it actually became Canada.

Great Britain still maintained control of Canada's foreign affairs, under the Confederation Act, until 1931. So, Canada was "Canada" in 1867, in the same manner that Puerto Rico is "Puerto Rico," now.

Noted.

merrylander
04-20-2010, 07:48 AM
If you are referring Wm. McKenzie King and Lord Byng, you will note that I do not use his portrait as my avatar, he was a bit of a wing nut. That was really a tempest in a tea pot and Britain had no realistic control.

King used to buy ruins and have them erected on his estate in the Gatineaus, we were never certain that he was all there. I believe he used to 'communiicate' with his mother's ghost. His final nose thumb at Westminster was to declare war on the Axis on Sept 10 1939, one day after the rest of the Commonwealth.:p

It is funny haoww everyone believed frex that Canada had no 'constitution' because the BNA act still resided in Westminster. It was simply a formality and required provincial agreement to patriate it, but as far as day to day matters were concerned it did not really matter worth a hoot.