Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

AMERICA SHOULD PUT BRITAIN TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE, NOT TO THE BACK AS OBAMA THREATENED

** National Review Editorial: Why Britons should vote to leave the EU   [Perceptive arguments!]

** Andrew Roberts, the great English historian, recounted the ways Britain and America have come to each other's aid in sharp contrast to Obama's threat to cast Britain to the back of the line if she voted to withdraw from the EU.  Now that Britain has asserted her independence and voted for Brexit, it would be ghastly for Obama to treat her as an enemy (in keeping with the shameful way he habitually treats America's friends and allies).  On June 17th, before the successful Brexit vote, Roberts wrote the following (and it is particularly pertinent post-Brexit):

On June 23 the British people will be going to the polls to choose whether they want to continue with the present system whereby 60% of British laws are made in Brussels and foreign judges decide whether those laws are legitimate or not, or whether we want to strike out for independence and the right to make all of our own laws and have our own British judges decide upon them.

It’s about whether we can recapture the right to deport foreign Islamist hate preachers and terrorist suspects, or whether under European human-rights legislation they must continue to reside in the U.K., often at taxpayers’ expense. The European Union is currently experiencing migration on a scale not seen since the late 17th century—with hordes of young, mostly male Muslims sweeping from the southeast into the heart of Europe. Angela Merkel invited them in and that might be fine for Germany, but why should they have the right to settle in Britain as soon as they get a European passport?

Surely—surely—this is an issue on which the British people, and they alone, have the right to decide, without the intervention of President Obama, who adopted his haughtiest professorial manner when lecturing us to stay in the EU, before making the naked threat that we would be sent “to the back of the queue” (i.e., the back of the line) in any future trade deals if we had the temerity to vote to leave. . . . 

PAPER: SECRET PLAN TO CREATE 'SUPER-POWERFUL EUROPEAN UNION PRESIDENT'

Look for prophecy buffs to have a heyday with this report.  I've taken the title of this blog post from the Drudge Report. 

Opponents fear the plan could create a modern-day equivalent of the European emperor envisaged by Napoleon Bonaparte or a return to the Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne that dominated Europe in the Dark Ages.

Me: Bears watching... 

THEODORE DALRYMPLE - "THE EUROPEAN CRACK-UP"

I found Dalrymple's article a good summary of European incompatibilities, starting with the situation in Belgium, and then going on to contrast Ireland and Greece, and then Germany with the rest of Europe.

BRITAIN'S PRIME MINISTER DAVID CAMERON WANTS TURKEY ADMITTED INTO THE EUROPEAN UNION

Beyond dumb.  Foolish and catastrophic.  Read Pamela Geller's take.

Update 7/28/10:  Barry Rubin in Pajamas Media: In Speech to Turkey, PM David Cameron Goes full Idiot.  

British Prime Minister David Cameron’s July 27 speech in Turkey will not live on in history. But it should, as an example of the decline of Western diplomacy and of suicide by political correctness. It is a textbook example of how not to conduct international affairs. . .  (more . . .)

EUROPEAN JOTTINGS

I found the following articles worth noting and posting:

- Steven Erlanger (NY Times) - Europeans Fear Crisis Threatens Benefits.  (Me: An alternative headline could read: "Europe's Disneyland world coming to an end.")

- Extraordinarily thought provoking is Victor Davis Hanson's ruminations on the future of Germany ("The New Old Germany").  Has anyone noticed that Germany's work ethic differs from Greece's?  Does it matter?  VDH's article makes for sober reading. 

EU CREATES HISTORIC & UNDEMOCRATIC NEW POST: "PRESIDENT OF EUROPE"

That's the headline Joel Rosenberg gives his latest post.  The European Union chose Belgium Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy over Britain’s Tony Blair to be  “President of Europe.  Rosenberg:

If you’re thinking, “van who?”, don’t worry — you’re not alone. In one of the most undemocratic developments in recent history, the new leader of a half-billion Europeans is a name only 12% of them have even heard of. He was chosen unanimously by a council of other EU leaders, not by popular vote, and will take office January 1, 2010.

Rosenberg again:

EU leaders didn’t bumble into this appointment. They are determined to create an unrivaled superpower. They are determined to create the world’s most powerful political position in the presidency. But they want an EU-fanatic, not a British lone ranger. I’d never heard of van Rompuy until Thursday, but I have no doubt the EU leaders who chose him unanimously knew exactly what they were doing. I expect this guy to be a problem for the U.S., for freedom, and for Israel. Time will tell for certain.  [more . .]

The London Telegraph asserts "Herman Van Rompuy's quirky exterior conceals a ruthless political operator who will stop at nothing to get his way as president of the European Union.

Mr Van Rompuy is a supporter of the creation of an EU federal state, with its own anthem, flag and with powers to collect taxes on car fuel or financial transactions from Europe’s citizens.”

EUROPE DUMPS DEMOCRACY

Paul Belian reports:

The Czech Republic ceased to exist as a sovereign state when Vaclav Klaus, its president, put his signature under the Treaty of Lisbon at 3 pm November 3^rd, 2009. The Czech Republic was the last of the 27 member states of the European Union to ratify the treaty which turns the EU into a genuine state to which it members states are subservient.

 The new European superstate, however, is not a democracy. It has an elected parliament, but the European Parliament has no legislative powers, nor does it control the EU’s executive bodies. The latter, who also have legislative power overriding