[MavKikiNYC]

To the extent that Kerry's claims are true, it means that foreign leaders feel like their nations' interests will be better served relative to those of the American people with a spineless, unprincipled, approval-seeking Dim-ocrat such as Kerry in the White House.

The United States' interests were never more poorly served than with the pathologically needy Clinton in office, who sought validation from foreign leaders, all the while whoring away the U.S.'s national security. The unctuous European leaders in turn propped up Willie's sagging and slimy public image with a faux-obsequiousness borne of self-interest. They may well have identifed with Willie, but it's hard to think they actually respected him. Rather, they knew and understood that the more he felt he was one of them, the easier he would be to manipulate. And so it was.

The same Europeans are clueless when it comes to manipulating Bush. He is not one of them, doesn't share their values (for better and worse), doesn't identify with them, and absolutely does not aspire to be like them. W is immune to the charms of adulation by world leaders, and virutally un-influencable by them. And for this they resent him--some even may hate him. But unlike Clinton, they respect him with a fear borne of loathing. Because they know that he will not be seduced by their flattery; that he does not NEED their acceptance or approval; and that he will always put the interests of the U.S. ahead of his own personal legacy.

In Kerry, they see a throwback to the days of Clinton--an easy mark who will sell the U.S's interests out for nothing more than cheap flattery. Fortunately, my sense is that the bedrock of American voters are not really swayed by these Euro-blow jobs.