« Shocking! Joschka Fischer Jostled and Pushed!! | Main | German Government Official Lectures U.S. »


Wenders Raus!

We're Not Worthy! We're Not Worthy.....

Wim Wenders is german . And a german who want to fight for a "liberal USA " ! A foreigner who want to impose his will on the american people ! There were a lot of people ( Hitler , Stalin ,...)who were much more powerful than him tried to do that , and they had no success ! A pitiful Wenders !

Strange the the anticipated exodus from the US didn't seem to happen. Any signs yet of American refugees arriving in Germany?

I wonder whether Dutch supermodel Frederique will be leaving the U.S. as promised or perhaps she will join fellow-foreigner Wenders to re-educate her idiotic hosts.

Is there's a blogger out there who has compiled a list of all those who promised to leave the U.S. and have as yet failed to do so?

Dear God! Hold onto your Latte! This Hessian is going to turn the arthouse crowd loose. OK Wim, lets play two-out-of-three.When the Republicans win a fillibuster proof majority in the Senate in the 2006 mid-terms then your out'a here! For the geographically challenged Euro-Left, Between the Pacific Coast Highway and the outskirts of New York City there is two and a half thousand miles of "Jesusland" reality, so Wim hit the road on your liberal crusade you've got hands to shake and babys to kiss.

WW I a minor Eurohack. WW II a lying minor Eurohack.

My own interesting election year conversation:

We have a proverb in Germany: Wer den Schaden hat, braucht für den Spott nicht zu sorgen. (He who has the detriment needs not arrange for the mockery.)

The amount and intensity of Republican sneering at John Kerry and his supporters and voters is worse than I expected. After all, Kerry has lost, the fight is over. He has acknowledged his defeat. He shook hands with Bush after their last TV debate. Why can't his propagandists and followers show the same "noble" sportsmanship that GWB showed after the debates, and even after Kerry's concession of the election? What good does all this Kerry-bashing after the election do? I have some measure of sympathy with the losing side not being able to let loose, because it is not easy to acknowledge defeat after you have put so much energy and money into a campaign. But I don't think it shows good style if the winning side cannot lean back and just relax for a while. I guess Bush's victory has not done much to dampen the hatred that is poisoning your political system. The winning side ought to be the first so take the poison out of the atmosphere, as for them it is so much easier to stomach. Sneering, after all, comes from the same source as hatred, both are two sides of the same coin.

I don't doubt that GWB was elected by a majoriy of U.S. citizens. (Even though there were some strange peculiarites, like the baffling discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote count results in some areas. But I just don't want to believe that anybody would go so far and rig presidential elections. The U.S.A. is, I tend to believe, not a banana republic.) But it is much more important to ask: Did they elect a good president? You know my opinion of GWB. I won't change it just because a majority of your compatriots voted for him. I am sure America has had some bad presidents in its history. They, too, have been elected by a majority, I presume. The majority can err, big time. All the sneering about why Kerry lost does not make GWB a better president, or does it? (I concede that it probably makes you feel good.)

Karl Heinz
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
My response:

You will have to point out for me the "unsportsman-like" conduct of Bush's "supporters and propagandists" after the election?" You will have to point out which comments are "sneering?" Mr Peretz's? Ms Noonan's? I reread the columns and see a recitation of fact (observable from the privileged vantage point of being made after the election) and some personal observations thrown in. I would say that "the winning side" has been trying to take the "poison" out of the atmosphere for the last four years, but when the majority of the poison is coming from the left and is filtered through the mainstream media echochambers . . . well, it' s hard! (for example: find me a meanspirited quote from Bush about a democrat in the last four years?)

I do feel good that throughout all of this my criticisms of Kerry have been in the realm of his being a vacuous gas bag who will say anything to anybody depending on what will get him the best response at that moment. I have commented on the very obvious fact that the impression he attempted to make on the public is completely contradictory to his prior 20 year career in the Senate. I did comment on the verifiable fact that the result of the Swift Boat Veterans presence in the campaign was Kerry changing his story on how he got his first purple heart, his Silver star, and the "Christmas he spent in Cambodia!" I did bring up that 65% of all the Heinz factories and corporate headquarters have been "outsourced" and moved overseas. I did call him Clinton without the charisma. All rather benign and factual, (ok, except for the "gasbag" comment) I must say.

I do "feel good" that in spite of all the bile, lies and partisanship exhibited by the left both before and throughout this election that I have been firm in my convictions and consistent in my opinion, and proven to be correct in my ("bias?" "partisan?" "rightwing?") observations. (and can they really be considered as such when they have been proven to be true?)
I do feel good that my side didn't forge documents, didn't create media non-events, didn't call Kerry "stupid" or a "war monger" or a "cokehead!" Didn't throw bricks or shoot weapons through Kerry campaign headquarters windows, didn't assault Kerry campaign workers, didn't deface and teardown campaign signs, didn't try to trick/ win the election. I was glad to see it wasn't my candidate who was quoted on election night saying, "I can't believe I am losing to that fucking idiot!" (I suppose it was printed at all because someone in the media thought like minded souls would find it amusing?)
I do feel good that the side I voted for has stood up to and deposed two sets of tyrants in this world, has increased funding for school kids and medical care prescriptions for the elderly and job training for the unemployed. I do feel good that even with mistakes that will inevitably be made, my side stood for something beside flapping in the warm breeze of the latest opinion poll or focus group.
Bush has been consistent from day one. He says what he will do and he does it. Perhaps this is what is so infuriating to other who are use to talking things to death . . . as long as those deaths is in Darfur and don't interrupt the 5 course, 3 Michelin star, dinner scheduled for all the EU bureaucrats in Strasbourg or UNITED NATIONS bureaucrats in New York City this evening.

It is a shame that you all can not take this result and grant that 59 million people might not all be venal, or stupid, or tricked and might actually be onto something worth pondering; something worth considering that you might be missing, instead of dismissing them all out of hand. Since a sampling of articles is all that is necessary to see where the sneering and hate is coming from your comments here continue to reinforce my perception that you don't really grasp the whole of the politics in America.
I don't see Bush supporters pointing fingers and writing articles in mockery oft Kerry supporters. I am reading every day the columns from dems in the U.S.A. and like minded sycophants in Europe talking about how "Stupid" and "Ignorant" full of "blood lust" the American "Yokels" are. I see the sore losers photos on the internet holding up their apology signs to the world, the stories of massive hits on the Canadian immigration internet site, etc . . . the only thing that comes to mind to say is, You and the dems have the reality of circumstances exactly backwards and I suspect you will be miffed and frustrated for a long time to come, because of that.
R/ Tyranno

All the sneering about Bush. They will never stop. The German media and Kerry supporters in the US have the same enemy:

2. Seite in der WAZ, riesengroßer Artikel!

Freitag, 12.11.2004

Gastkommentar von Stephan Richter: Es gilt die Patina des Machotums

Für über ein Jahrhundert haben die Deutschen in den Augen der Welt ein Schandmal auf ihrer Stirn getragen. Seit den Zeiten Wilhelm II. galten wir als eine Nation, die von großer Überheblichkeit - und auch Unehrlichkeit - geprägt war.

Die letzten 50 Jahre haben viel dazu beigetragen, diesen mittlerweile gänzlich unverdienten Ruf zu verlieren. Doch erst die nächsten vier Jahre werden den Deutschen helfen, ihr Schandmal endgültig loszuwerden. Denn wenn George W. Bush keinen vollständigen Charakterwandel an sich vollzieht, werden die Deutschen indirekt die Einzigen sein, die von seiner Wiederwahl auf eine kuriose - und ihnen eher unangenehme - Weise profitieren werden.

In den Augen des größten Teils der Weltbevölkerung werden die Amerikaner den Deutschen in der zweiten Amtszeit Bushs ihren Ruf als maßlose und überhebliche Nation abknöpfen.

Die Parallelen zwischen George Bush und Wilhelm II. sind frappierend. Beide waren auf ihre immensen Aufgaben nicht adäquat vorbereitet. Beide sind im Innern von einer großen Unsicherheit geprägt, die sie nach außen hin mit einer grenzenlosen Selbstüberzeugung zu übertünchen suchen.

Und beide versuchen, sich Gewissheit dadurch zu verschaffen, dass sie die stabilisierenden Traditionen ihrer Nationen ohne Bedenken über Bord werfen. So wie Wilhelm II. kurzum Bismarck aufs Altenteil schickte, schrieb George Bush jeden Gedanken an außenpolitisches Maßhalten im Allgemeinen und die atlantische Allianz im Besonderen von heute auf morgen faktisch auf null ab.

Am meisten ist die Welt aber beunruhigt, weil George Bush das traurige Schlachtwort des Wilhelminismus - "Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen!"- für sich und seine Nation vereinnahmt hat.

Wie bei der Clique um Wilhelm gilt im Umfeld von Bush nur die Patina des Machotums. An die Stelle des blinden Glaubens an die Potenz der kruppschen Kanonenrohre ist in der Bush-Administration die Besessenheit mit dem US-Militär und dem immer gigantischeren Rüstungshaushalt getreten.

Macht durch (militärische) Stärke ist ein Motto, das Wilhelm in seinem Freundeskreis genauso betört hätte, wie es heute bei George Bush der Fall ist. Auch die Innenpolitik beider Länder - Deutschland damals, Amerika heute - weist unschöne Parallelen auf. Wilhelm II. bündelte in seiner Person zu viel an politischer Entscheidungsgewalt.

Wie Bush, vertraute auch er nur einem sehr kleinen - und nicht unbedingt realitätsorientierten - Zirkel von Vertrauten.

Und der amerikanische Kongress hat im Umfeld des Irakkrieges eine Unterwürfigkeit an den Tag gelegt, die selbst dem oft zahmen deutschen Reichstag peinlich gewesen wäre.

Und die amerikanischen Medien - und die politische Intelligenz der US-Hauptstadt - sie sind - wie seinerzeit im kaiserlichen Berlin - hauptsächlich darauf bedacht, seiner Majestät gegenüber huldvoll in Erscheinung zu treten.

Eine kritische Meinung zu äußern grenzt an Majestätsbeleidigung - und ist der eigenen Karriere gewiss nicht dienlich. Dass es der Bush-Administration bei alldem nicht düster vor den Augen schummert, ist kaum vorstellbar. Denn das traurige Beispiel der Deutschen, die ihren Ruf um die Welt bereits unter Wilhelm II. - und nicht erst später - weitgehend verspielten, sollte den Amerikanern von heute eigentlich als warnendes Beispiel vor Augen stehen.

Doch statt sich um den eigenen Weltruf zu sorgen, sonnt man sich im Ruhm des jüngsten Wahlsieges. Das Bush-Team sieht sich vom Volk in der Aufgabe bestätigt, als Leitnation der Welt zu agieren - und bei aller Martialität doch immer nur Gottes Werk zu tun. All das ist den Deutschen aus ihrer Geschichte bestens vertraut. Die Grundattitüde ist ganz wie die von Wilhelm II. - abgrundtief verblendet.
Stephan Richter ist Herausgeber und Chefredakteur von "The Globalist", einem amerikanischen Onlinedienst mit tagesaktuellen Nachrichten und Analysen zur Weltwirtschaft, Politik und Kultur.

Der Autor ist Absolvent der Universität Bonn und hat bereits Politiker, Unternehmen und internationale Organisationen in strategischen Fragen beraten.

Richters Artikel und Analysen zur Globalisierung sind bereits erschienen in Die Zeit, der New York Times, dem Wall Street Journal, der Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, in Le Monde, der Singapore Straits Times und der South China Morning Post. (WAZ)


Copyright: Westdeutsche Allgemeine


Herr Wenders should consider returning to Germany to fight the NDP. In fact it should be mandatory.

Soulds liek he may break his word the the American People.

If Germany is truly interested in finding a way to improve relations with the U.S., it will convince Wim Wenders to move back home.

But once he is there, you may find yourselves wishing that you had taken the less painful route of sending a couple brigades to the Sunni Triangle instead... :)

Perhaps you can pass him off on the Swiss? They have a reputation for taking in past-their-prime movie stars. :)

All this is based on the premise that someone who makes picture-shows is important, someone whose opinions on political matters should be taken seriously. I assume from these comments that Wenders has something to do with picture-shows (you may call them movies or films, but when I was young they were picture-shows). I've never heard of him. And I'm not some ignorant, hick red-stater. I have 3 graduate degrees (political science, economics, and mathematics), have studied several years in Europe (Germany and Italy), live in a cosmoplitan environment (Washington, DC), and am knowlegeable about politics (having worked for 20 years in the US Congress). But I have never heard of anyone named Wenders. Perhaps that is because I pay no attention, at all, to picture-shows. I recognized, early on, that almost all of Hollywood is trash, most picture-shows are trash, most NY-Hollywood personalities are (politically) morons. A considerable majority of Americans (the 60 million or so who voted for Bush, my vote proudly among them) think likewise. Many of them will go to picture-shows, for frivolous entertainment (which I will not: the only picture-show I have seen in recent years was "Master and Commander", which I adored, in no small part because it stuck it to the frogs, and celebrated classical virtues.)
Something close to 60 million Americans would agree with me that the political opinions of most picture-show makers deserve no attention or respect at all. That is democracy. We, in America, have it. I wonder about Europe.

Well, we don't want him back in Europe ;-)

Steven in California,

no way we're taking this one! I mean, we can deal with the brothers and the ex-wives of Osama bin Laden, but Wim Wenders is just crossing the line.

I'm just wondering how this guy can live with the oh so stupid Americans in this oh so tragic political system... That's all I'd like to know...

Wim Wenders shot several quite known movies, such as "Paris, Texas" (sic!), or "Buena Vista Social Club".

" Wenders, like Herzog, stresses the visual, delegates the story to a secondary level, contemplates landscapes and cityscapes. Wenders' films have often been called 'films of the desiring gaze', where the camera is an instrument of affection (that is, by the critics who like his films). Another typical element of Wenders' films is the use of music, esp. American Rock'n'Roll."


WW: "Sex and violence was never really my cup of tea; I was always more into sax and violins."


Funny - I thought Wenders was best known for his film "Wings of Desire" (with Peter Falk if I recall correctly) - later remade into the popular film "City of Angels" with Meg Ryan and Nicholas Cage. This was a film about Angels! for pete's sake. Surely red state material, non? I don't think Mr. Wenders has anything to fear from red state movie goers here in the US. Perhaps he is thinking of relocating to the Netherlands?


why not drop Mr. Wenders a note in his forum?

There aren't that many entries yet, but they mostly are applauding Mr. Wenders. Why not change the direction of the discussion a little bit!? ;-)

Thanks Wuldorblogger,
I did my part and gave Wenders what he deserved. I just hope one of his underlings tells him about the reaction in his forum.


I was on vacation in Europe recently. I left before Election Day and the plane to Zurich was mostly empty.

I returned after Election Day, and the plane was 100% occupied. And my mother-in-law just got back from Europe and her plane was also 100% occupied.

Maybe the refugees are coming this way!

Wenders made* some great poetic movies in the 70s (particularly Alice in the Cities and Kings of the Road). By the time he became internationally famous in the 80s, his evident obsession with/awe of the pop celebrity scene had infected his work, and everything he's done since has been pure crap -- except, perhaps, the Cuban music documentary. But what else could've happened to one who understands America not at all, except through the eyes of a youth overwhelmed by American music and film?

(*Though Robby Mueller surely deserves much of the credit.)

Equally, Andrew Lloyd-Webber didn't leave Britain after the alleged left-winger Tony Blair had won the election.

That's the way with celebs (of whichever political camp) - it's mostly done for publicity.

Maybe Wim fears that should he leave America to return to Eurabia he will end up dead like Theo Van Gogh.

Germany shut up !!! You have so much shit on you hands that's a insult for everybody who died in 2 WW to talk any longer about you. Wait until the problems in Germany imposed by the Schroeder goverment get worse and worse !!

Wender where were your people at 9.11.1938 ??
Shut up you son of a bitch ! Come her and I will place you myself in a plane with no return !! Son of a bitch !!

The comments to this entry are closed.


The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

June 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30