Glenn and others are openly wondering why Kerry talks about how he'll restore our relations with old friends like France and Germany, while at the same time trashing our current allies like Australia and Eastern Europe. Today, it's the new Iraqi government's turn to be called names. It doesn't seem to make sense.
But it does. Over the last decade or so, international alliances have formed on the political axis, and these are now overriding previous national ones. Kerry is allying himself not with countries that share our interests, but with leaders who share his ideals. Socialist ones.
It really doesn't matter anymore which Republican is in office. Reagan, Bush -- it could be Gerald Ford for all they care -- the Social Democrats in Europe view the Republicans as beyond-the-pale rightists. Only Blair stands apart, still valuing Britian's close ties with America over Party -- to the extreme displeasure of many in his camp.
I'm pretty sure that Pat Buchanan could explain it better, but globalization is increasingly binding politics at the international level. While I would disagree with Pat on the advisability of globalization, he is entirely correct when he speaks of the uncoincidental approach of international government. WTO, WHO, the European Union, NAFTA and the attempts to make something meaningful out of NATO and the UN all point in this direction. While I would hope for some kind of loose democratic Federation rather than the bureaucratic model of the EU or WTO (or the idiocy of the UN), that's not what the socialist wing wants. They want a top-down bureaucratic state with weak Parliaments, and are well on the way to getting one.
So look for more of this -- these people see the future and are playing for keeps. Perhaps the only real response is for the Republicans to start allying internationally themselves with those remaining parties that still value free enterprise and small government. I just hope we don't run out of time.