Heather A. Conley, a senior fellow and director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C, has a piece in Foreign Policy titled "The Transatlantic Test" with the subheading "Europe is facing an existential crisis, and it's time the United States recognized it."
Does she and the FP editors know what "existential" means? Did they ever experience a real existential crisis? Europe survived two world wars. The continent still exists and his stronger, more united and prosperous than before these wars. Her article also ends with hyperbole: "After all, it is the future of the West that is at stake." Why not claim that the future of the world or the universe is at stake?
Another example of bullshit in question form: "After spending two years in France as he undertook his missionary work, will Romney have a greater sense of, and interest in, European political dynamics than Obama has exhibited?" I am speechless and can only respond with a rhetorical question: How do missionaries get a sense of "political dynamics" in the continent they proselytize
The only interesting sentence in her article that makes sense is this: "Arguably, if the president wins, his victory will have been brought to you by the letters E, C, and B, as the cataclysmic eurozone breakup scenario that many feared dissipated thanks to ECB President Mario Draghi's verbal bazooka uttered in July, 'The ECB is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro.'"