Storm Clouds For Obama Over Europe?

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on. I'm sure Mr. Topolanek will have oodles of local support if he prefers rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

Mr. Scherer seems to be unilaterally (albeit subtly) changing the definition of "storm clouds" in our political discourse. When Churchill wrote of the "Gathering Storm" of pre-WWII Europe and when the Bushies attempted to ape Churchill in promoting the utterly unprovoked military invasion of Iraq, the phrase "storm clouds" and "grave and gathering storm" meant, of course, the short and long-term potential of actual war and armed conflict. With real deaths and injuries.

When Mr. Scherer uses the phrase, however, he is merely talking about budgetary matters. Mr. Topolanek, of course, is not threatening war or anything like it. Perhaps Mr. Scherer should be informed that, at long last, peace is at hand between the U.S. and the Czech Republic.

Mr. Topolanek advises us to read history books. In my history books, the "long" history of the EU traces only back to the Maastricht Treaty of the 1980's and even now, individual EU Member states set their own fiscal policies, that is, they write their own budgets. So, the long history of the EU gives us no particular lessons about federal EU budgets whatsoever. The EU's only role is in enforcement (or lack thereof) of the Stability Pact provisions - that is, EU Member states "must" keep their budgets less than 3% of their GDP. When they don't, they are supposedly sanctioned in that they are "required" to post deposits with the ESCB. But, and this is key, when it has actually happened - when, throughout this decade both France and Germany routinely ran budget deficits in excess of the prescribed level...

NOTHING HAPPENED. No sanctions. No enforcement. Just a renegotiated Stability Pact. So, when Mr. Topolanek implies that the EU's history provides lessons of fiscal restraint, he isn't reading the same history books as those that recounted what actually/really happened. Virtually throughout the EU's brief history, EU Member states have routinely violated the Stability Pact provisions and little to nothing (other than rhetorical preening) has ever occurred as a result thereof. Despite the "legal" provisions, the EU's role in fiscal policy is really only that of moral suasion for its Member states to behave responsibly.

Apart from the history, Mr. Topolanek would have more credibility if he had similarly criticized President Bush's profligate fiscal policies. And he ought to be more concerend about the EU's economic situation rather than that of the U.S.

From what I have read the European response to the economic crisis has been uncoordinated at best. Perhaps Mr. Topolanek is trying to deflect the EU's inability to deal with this crisis effectively by bashing Obama's proposals?

Michael do you understand how the EU works? This is a simple question, and I am certain the answer is no, otherwise you would not have started this article with the silly statement that Topolanek is "head of the European Union." While it makes the article sound far more interesting and important than it really is, it is not correct. Topolanek is head of the Council. While the Council is very important, the post as head rotates every six months between the heads of the member governments (i.e. it is not elected by the member states, so the head does not have to have the confidence of the other members, nor does he/she have executive powers). Now it is an important post, but Topolanek's actions do not tell us anything about how the other EU countries view Obama. I would suggest you simply introduce Topolanek as the current head of the Czech government (and he will not be head of that government soon - and therefore will NOT be head of the Council). If you want to look at who is important in the EU I would suggest Barroso (who is President of the Commission), as well as the leaders of the big countries in the EU (France and Germany for example).

Michael and the GOP give a rat's a$$ about what "old Europe", "new Europe" or the EU have to say about the USofA...unless some Euro-honcho is criticizing a democrat politician. Then, the critique falls into the "See! Told ja!" category.