Deconstructing John Kyl

The danger of convergence.

"It seems to me it is quite possible that there would be greater convergence'' between the United States and some European nations, Kyl said, "not because he could persuade them to an American view, but because he would be persuaded to their point of view."

Notice he's still stuck in that "My way or the highway" mentality, oblivious to (or in denial about; your call) the awareness that's finally starting to seep into the general consciousness about Iraq that perhaps rushing forward almost unilaterally with no plan other than for toppling the regime wasn't such a great idea after all. Can the international successes of the US and its European allies traditionally be characterized as the result of making European governments adopt the "American" way of thinking? No.

This is silly. For starters, it's a false dichotomy. And, on a more subjective level, relationships between governments (especially democratic ones with active opposition voices) would be dysfunctional if a common point of view were achieved by way of complete conversion of one side. Not to mention that it ain't.. gonna.. happen. European governments see the mistakes the Bush administration made - perhaps with a little more clarity and honesty than Senator Kyl - and if they wouldn't get on board when the US was politically strong on the international stage, they sure as hell won't now when it's standing in the ruins of Bush's recklessness AND their unheeded cautions prove dead on the money.

So if Senator Kyl wants the "everybody has to do it the American way and a US President shouldn't talk to allied foreign leaders unless they adopt his preconceived opinions and agenda" vote to go for Bush this November, fine. I think that group - formerly known as the "my Country, right or wrong" crowd - will be voting Republican this year anyway.

This isn't patriotism; it's xenophobia.