#3
Because they are nuclear armed. Because the European blend of Christianity and the classical Greco-Roman world was the foundation of our civilization, no matter how far they've strayed since. Because giving Europe up to Sharia brings more darkness into the world.
#5
I'm reminded of the Byzantines who exhausted themselves trying to rebuild the 'old' Roman Empire. Got a good portion back, but in doing so they eat up all their resources and manpower which is why the muzzies streaming out of the Arabian peninsula were able to overwhelm them in the first big push taking most of the Middle East and Northern Africa. If the Euros aren't willing to have their own Anbar Awakening, then from a cost effectiveness perspective, its time to cut line and move on in history.
#6
I expect that the increasing cost of socialism and the floundering of economies to bring real unrest. And that unrest will usher in political groups that are racist and xenophobic. We will see more ethnic cleansing and war in Europe by the 1/4 mark in this century I think and it will make the Balkans look like a kid's party.
#9
The Euros need an "American" revolution of sorts, to go toward individual rights and individualism, instead of the state socialism and collectivism. Its the only thing that can save them from Islam or dictatorship (or, God forbid, both at the same time).
I do not believe they have it in them. They have been bathing in statist collectivism for such a long time they are blind to the ideals they gave birth to a long time ago, other than Marxism.
#10
Yep, they are gonners. They have been feminized to the point that they have no will to fight back and protect their culture, their hard won democratic rights, their own land. Unless they get feisty fast and start eliminating these interlopers they are gone.
All the troublemakers, outcasts, misfits and otherwise socialy unacceptable went elsewhere, mostly to America, where they built a new society completely unlike the "Mother Country"(And which just happens to be the greatest in the world)
All the Confirmists, Church ridden, do-littles stayed and bred.
Europe had a chance, and blew it. Ever wonder why Diggers and 'Mercans, do beter?
Breeding.
The misfits, crooks and otherwise unwanted made their own place instead of "Fiting In"
Seems Obvious to me.
(And I'm damn glad to be here than be just another Europeon)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/19/2008 12:42 Comments ||
Top||
#12
A muzz and a european are walking down the sidewalk approaching each other in opposite directions. The muzz steps into the path of the euopean and smacks him upside the head for having the audacity to share a sidewalk with him. The first thing a majority of europeans would do is to apoplogize to the muzz, beg forgiveness, and promise to never do it again. Perhaps coupled with an offer of monetary compensation for the slight.
That scenario is not a hypothetical. That's the reality of most (not all) europeans.
so yeah, if you're asking for a vote, I'd say yes, Europe is lost. It is sad for the reasons outlined by lotp. Sader still because I know my children, grandchildren, godchildren and their offspring will be asked one day to pull europe's ass out a fire that europe didn't put out while they had a chance.
Muzz burned the libraries of Alexandria. The same will happen again with libraries and museums of europe.
#16
Europeans pretend to be "civilized". I doubt you have to dig very deep in them to find the jungle. Europeans were the ones who perfected mass slaughter. It will be messy.
#17
Breeding, Redneck Jim? There is enough variation in the gene pool from which many of us at least partially derive to replace those who left with others of similar gumption. That's why there is a continuous stream of emigration from Europe to places less wrapped in government regulation, including the U.S. And why Rantburg has European posters who are well worth listening to.
It seems to me that with the industrial base in Europe, the jihadis could create an actual army with which to try to conquer the Dar al Harb, not merely the small groups of terrorists they produce now. Granted, the Dutch, French and other fighting troops would probably form Free European units under U.S. command, as is the tradition, but still. We'd have to reconquer Europe just to deny it to the jihadis, rather than focussing on the jihadi centers, as we have been doing since 2002.
#18
Let em have it. In time it will resemble the ruins of Mayan Empire -- choked in overgrowth and illiterate Muslims picking through the trash w/out pausing to wonder what ever happened to the previous civilization.
Posted by: regular joe ||
09/19/2008 17:59 Comments ||
Top||
#19
#16: "Europeans were the ones who perfected mass slaughter. It will be messy."
I'll double my popcorn order, Chemist.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/19/2008 18:17 Comments ||
Top||
#20
regular joe,
I think I understand your comment, and I certainly understand your sentiment, but I disagee.
"Let em' have it." you say ??? No...no...no...
Ideas ARE worth dying for (the muzz do it all the time), it's just that the ideas of Western Civ. ar superior in every resepect. "Stuff", too, is worth dying for. I didn't know THAT until the last few years...until I started to think it through. The physical representation of ideas, thought, word and deed. Be it in art (painting...sculpture ..etc), literature, architecture....agriculture (great verities of wine !) etc...
Good Lord people...we have so much to lose with the coming onslaught of islam. And seemingly so few seem to understand or appreciate or to even care throughout the world. Study the history of each and every place on the face of the earth conquered by islam. What do you find? Third and fourth world countries. and no, sorry, you can't blame the white man. Statute of limitations ran out on that defense a long, long time ago.
We should we so proud of our civilization and yet we have the elites telling us we need to be ashamed. How often do you read of muzz being told to be ashamed of who they are and what they do on a daily basis to themselves let alone to the "other"? Never happens. Never.
Fight back now so your children will not have to do it later.
Jim Geraghty, "Campaign Spot" @ National Review Why All The Talk of Replacing Biden?
I called it a "crazy prediction" back on August 29.
It's now a viral e-mail:
Subject: Biden stepping down
Let me share some info with you that I have gotten from excellent sources within the DNC:
On or about October 5th, Biden will excuse himself from the ticket, citing health problems, and he will be replaced by Hillary. This is timed to occur after the VP debate on 10/2.
There have been talks all weekend about how to proceed with this info. generally, the feeling is that we should all go ahead and get it out there to as many blog sites and personal email lists as is possible. I have already seen a few short blurbs about this - the "health problem" cited in those articles was aneurysm. Probably many of you have heard the same rumblings.
However, at this point, with this inside info from the DNC, it looks like this Obama strategy will be a go. Therefore, it seems that the best strategy is to get out in front of this Obama maneuver, spell it out in detail, and thereby expose it for the grand manipulation that it is.
So, let's start mixing this one up and cut the Obamites off at the pass - send this info out to as many people as you can - post about it on websites and blogs - etc etc
I think it's supremely unlikely that this will occur. Yet somehow, the meme continuestogrow...
Posted by: Mike ||
09/19/2008 15:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
health problems = complications from hair transplant
Bill & Hill ain't gonna do it. There's nothing in it for them, except the blame if The One doesn't make it (can't be HIS fault!)
They'd have to pick someone else. Don't know who would want in on this sinking ship.
Just for fun, let's say Pelosi. (I think she can still hold on to her Speaker seat, right? Not like she's putting in any work there anyhow.) PUMA's still are pissed off at the O-man. No new support for him there. Axelrod starts an astroturf organization called COUGAR (acronym to be worked out later), but it gets swamped by horny Nutroots D&D fanatics into older women.
McCain and Palin get a bump from the people who just can't stomach San Fran Nan.
MSM tries to spin this as a new, brilliant maneuver that strengthens the ticket (with the obligatory "Sorry, Joe, sad to see you go!" stories for a day or so). Olbermann gets even more creepy and Matthews gets that tingle up his leg again.
The Nutroots develop even crazier theories about Republican superviruses that affected poor ol' Joe. They are easily identified at the polls since they are the only ones wearing surgical masks and gloves in fear of the deadly cooties.
#8
Intrade.com has the odds of Biden withdrawing at 7% today. But, that is up 1.9%. If you have a few bucks for a longshot bet....
Posted by: Formerly Dan ||
09/19/2008 20:53 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Gotta go with Blondie on this one, just cause he gives her the tap don't mean Shrillary is gonna hop to it. She and Bill are not the students, they're the professors, and like she said, what's in it for her/them? Nothing but blame.
#10
well he was remarking on some reporter's pecs today... a few more of those gaffs and he's toast....on the other hand, since it was a male reporter, maybe he gets a boost in the Alice B. Toklas (Gay SF Voters) club.
PS - ignore the nym - it's a coincidence - no really.... Fred, we need to talk.....
#11
I wonder when States start sending out absentee ballots? Seems that as much as the Dems use absentee ballots to stuff the ballot boxes that they wouldn't do anything to jeopardize that particularly lucrative form of voter fraud.
#12
The way Hillary will run as VP is if Obama is sure to lose. And the only way Obama is sure to lose is if he's found in bed with a live boy or a dead girl. Hillary doesn't want to wait 8 years to run again. She wants to run in 2012.
#1
"All of my women friends, a week ago Monday, were on the verge of throwing themselves out windows," an author and political activist, Nancy Kricorian of Manhattan, said yesterday. "People were flipping out. ... Every woman I know was in high hysteria over this. Everyone was just beside themselves with terror that this woman could be our president â our potential next president."
These are 'adult' women? The writer doesn't understand that while Palin reinforces the concept of equality, the 'women' portrayed in this article are the worse stereotype of an emotional immature self centered bridezilla. IT'S MY WEDDING AGENDA!! How dare she wear the same dress!
#5
Palin is an absolute threat to these women because they believe, no demand, that they have the one and only archetype of feminism that is permissable.
These are big city women. They cannot comprehend, nor do they want to, the sort of life in which Sarah Palin was raised. They neither understand nor condone the concept of having 5 kids, let alone one that has downs syndrome.
Palin is so out of the orbit in which these women travel that she might as well have green skin and large almond-shaped eyes. And that someone so different from them could grasp the ultimate golden ring drives them to madness.
I think it is wonderful. I so hope that Sarah Palin becomes VP because she is going to shove it down these bitches throats for a long, long time.
#7
There was a quote yesterday attributed to M. Obama that went:"...don't vote for her just because she's cute..." and then demurrly indicated she was talking about herself. well for starters she isn't on the ballot, but imagine the outrage these same women would likely feel if that quote were uttered by SP with three words changed: " ...don't vote for him just because he's black."
the whole friggin world would be in an uproar and yet MO gets a pass and these bitches get coverage also? like a previous poster said: five stories minimum. Or go to LA and sit on some train tracks.
#11
A posting on a New York-based Web site for women, Jezebel.com, spoke of unbridled anger. "What I feel for her privately could be described as violent, nay, murderous, rage," an associate editor at Jezebel, Jessica Grose, wrote just after the Republican convention wrapped up. "When Palin spoke on Wednesday night, my head almost exploded from the incandescent anger boiling in my skull."
I don't know whether to laugh out loud or light a candle at the back of the church and ask for the intercession of St. Jude in the cause of this woman's sanity and inner peace.
Posted by: Mike ||
09/19/2008 15:35 Comments ||
Top||
#12
EModerate,
You are both right & wrong.
Right that the US is not (thank God) full of these people, but,
Wrong in that the cultural trend setting institutions (Academia and Media, especially Hollywood) ARE full of people like this.
#14
Howie Carr has tagged these women "Hags from the Hamptons." Think about it the next time you hear from the 70+ "beautiful people" gaggle like Babba Walters, Sally Quinn, MoDo...
Posted by: regular joe ||
09/19/2008 17:54 Comments ||
Top||
#15
These are people who care little for those who jumped out windows seven years ago....
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
09/19/2008 19:30 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Drama princesses. 'Cause all little girls know princesses wear pink.
#1
I was deeply dismayed by the 72-year-old McCain's reckless choice of the inexperienced and untested Palin to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Yet the author fails to notice that Gov. Palin has more executive experience than the rest of BOTH tickets combined.
#1
some sleuthing I see this comment about the author: I dont usually indulge. The past is dead like Elvis, and Ive got an iPod. But heres a personal history you might find amusing.
I moved out of my parents house in 1972. And until 1996 when I moved to our garden district, I lived in black neighborhoods exclusively. In those 24 years I was not called Whitey, Cracker, Ofay (for you older folks), Honkey, (I do miss the seventies) or Jew. Never. But the day after I published my first piece in this newspaper, I received a letter, without return address, which stated, People like you belong in Mt. Airy. And it has been downhill ever since.
Jim Albrecht, writer of the Snowden Report and newly minted persona non-grata Hiller, tried to confront the issue in a brilliant speech at the annual meeting. He never mentioned color. He talked about a sectarian animus so rare in the 21st Century that, with the disbanding of the Ulster Guard, perhaps only the Hill can still claim it. The Protestant-Catholic issue! A concept so encased in amber that in needs to be extracted from stegosaurus by Richard Attenborough.
For the past 150 years, most American war presidents -- most notably Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt -- have entered (or reentered) office knowing war was looming. Not so George W. Bush. Not so the war on terror. The 9/11 attacks literally came out of the blue. Indeed, the three presidential campaigns between the fall of the Berlin Wall and Sept. 11, 2001, were the most devoid of foreign policy debate of any in the 20th century. The commander-in-chief question that dominates our campaigns today was almost nowhere in evidence during our '90s holiday from history.
When I asked President Bush during an interview Monday to reflect on this oddity, he cast himself back to early 2001, recalling what he expected his presidency would be about: education reform, tax cuts and military transformation from a Cold War structure to a more mobile force adapted to smaller-scale 21st-century conflict. But a wartime president he became. And that is how history will both remember and judge him.
Getting a jump on history, many books have already judged him. The latest by Bob Woodward describes the commander in chief as unusually aloof and detached. A more favorably inclined biographer might have called it equanimity. In the hour I spent with the president (devoted mostly to foreign policy), that equanimity was everywhere in evidence -- not the resignation of a man in the twilight of his presidency but a sense of calm and confidence in eventual historical vindication. It is precisely that quality that allowed him to order the surge in Iraq in the face of intense opposition from the political establishment (of both parties), the foreign policy establishment (led by the feckless Iraq Study Group), the military establishment (as chronicled by Woodward) and public opinion itself. The surge then effected the most dramatic change in the fortunes of an American war since the summer of 1864.
That kind of resolve requires internal fortitude. Some have argued that too much reliance on this internal compass is what got us into Iraq in the first place. But Bush was hardly alone in that decision. He had a majority of public opinion, the commentariat and Congress with him. In addition, history has not yet rendered its verdict on the Iraq war. We can say that it turned out to be longer and more costly than expected, surely. But the question remains as to whether the now-likely outcome -- transforming a virulently aggressive enemy state in the heart of the Middle East into a strategic ally in the war on terror -- was worth it. I suspect the ultimate answer will be far more favorable than it is today.
When I asked the president about his one unambiguous achievement, keeping us safe for seven years -- about 6 1/2 years longer than anybody thought possible just after Sept. 11 -- he was quick to credit both the soldiers keeping the enemy at bay abroad and the posse of law enforcement and intelligence officials hardening our defenses at home. But he alluded also to some of the measures he had undertaken, including "listening in on the enemy" and "asking hardened killers about their plans." The CIA has already told us that interrogation of high-value terrorists such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed yielded more valuable intelligence than any other source. In talking about these measures, the president mentioned neither this testimony as to their efficacy nor the campaign of vilification against him that they occasioned. More equanimity still.
What the president did note with some pride, however, is that beyond preventing a second attack, he is bequeathing to his successor the kinds of powers and institutions the next president will need to prevent further attack and successfully prosecute the long war. And indeed, he does leave behind a Department of Homeland Security, reorganized intelligence services with newly developed capacities to share information and a revised FISA regime that grants broader and modernized wiretapping authority.
In this respect, Bush is much like Truman, who developed the sinews of war for a new era (the Department of Defense, the CIA, the NSA), expanded the powers of the presidency, established a new doctrine for active intervention abroad, and ultimately engaged in a war (Korea) -- also absent an attack on the United States -- that proved highly unpopular. So unpopular that Truman left office disparaged and highly out of favor. History has revised that verdict. I have little doubt that Bush will be the subject of a similar reconsideration.
#2
Yep, if he had clearly explained that the Iraq war was about deposing a dictator, setting up the first Arab democracy in the M.E. and establishing a toehold for freedom in that part of the world he would have been hit with a lot less slime.
People really hammered him (wrongly) with the 'No WMDs Found in Iraq, Therefore this War is Illegal' meme.
#3
Ultimately, history will judge him in light of events that are yet to come. The WOT has barely begun and noone knows it's outcome. His legacy, for better or worse, is in the hands of future presidents and future scumbags. I hope it goes a bit like Truman's. A lot of his enemies wiill need to die before the merits of his administration can be fairly assessed. Personally, I think he did a tremdous job under very trying circumstances. Even many of his 'friends' take every opportunity to stab him in the back.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
09/19/2008 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#4
When I was a kid my parents always said I would be judged according to the company I kept. I apply that wisdom (and its converse) to my assessment of Pres. Bush: who are the people who hate him? Ted Rall, Islamofascists, Euroweenies etc. Who like him? Soldiers, roughnecks etc.
#7
I heard George W. on CSPAN talking about the economy and "persecuting" people guilty of financial wrong-doing. I might be in favor of that if my investments lose any more. I'd be in favor of prosecuting them too.
#8
I'll venture this, President Bush's greatest achievement will be as the man who saved the continent and peoples of Africa. If we would have had 8 years of algore the only human beings left in Africa would be the Chinese, maybe a few French. algore would have continued the clinton libtardcommiecrat policies of do nothing in Africa about AIDS, tribal war or islamofascist genocide - IMHO.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
By Charles Krauthammer
