| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Tom Jefferson" |
| Date: |
22 Nov 2003 08:31:53 PM |
| Object: |
America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservatives |
America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservatives
First came “deficit happy” Reaganites, then “bleeding heart” neocons, and
now “big spending” Bushites -- for Iraqis of course. What are these people?
By Stewart Nusbaumer
Nothing is more shocking and more perplexing in our transformed political
landscape than the metamorphosis of American conservatives into bleeding
hearts throwing government money at an international problem. Didn't
conservatives hate liberals for supposedly doint this?
Remember how the traditional heartland went into an utter tizzy over the
suffering of the Iraqi people, propelling America into a “war of
liberation”? Today conservatives continue to gush with extraordinary
sympathy for Iraqis. FOX News will probably be running a tearful Special
Report on “Saving A Nation!”
What makes all this extraordinary is that these are the very same Americans
whose perennial priority is tax cuts, reduce taxes at all costs -- ignore
the homeless and dump the elderly! These are the same Americans who declare
that the essence of Americanism is selfishness. The very same Americans who
used to oppose giving a simple band-ad to a hemorrhaging people. Evidently,
today that only applies to the American people.
Bonkers to transform Iraq into Texas and the entire Middle East into a sunny
democracy, drooling in sentimentality and obsessed to rescue a foreign
people they do not even know, our new internationalists on their mission of
mercy have gone over the edge. Way over the edge.
Back in the Reagan years, we watched in astonishment as conservatives, the
bedrock of American traditional, insisted there was a “free lunch.” These
so-called “supply-siders” told us national debt was good for America
because debt magically disappears when revenues pour into the Treasury.
Deficit-happy conservatives, however, are nothing on the richer scale of
the absurd compared with today’s bleeding-heart conservatives.
Having convinced themselves that saving Iraqis -- not Rwandans, not Burmese,
not Tibetans, not Argentineans, certainly not lazy Americans, but Iraqis --
is the moral test of the century and having remembered federal deficits are
good for America, they enthusiastically embraced transferring $20 billion
from our national treasure (which doesn’t contain an actual cent, looted
clean soon after the Republicans moved into the White House) to an
oil-soaked people. Make them pay? How crude that would be. “I don’t want to
place restraints on the backs of Iraqi people,” the President said with a
straight face.
But a slight problem developed. When this first installment to rebuild Iraq
was unveiled by President Bush, sticker shock ripped through the land of
the faithful snapping backward more than a few Right-wing heads. Elite
enthusiasm to remake Iraq into a democratic desert paradise suddenly faced
Americans not thrilled with a whopper of a ballooning federal deficit.
Fantasy suddenly faced reality.
The Bush Administration realized that for fantasy to rebuff reality it was
necessary to pump up the nonsense. So the stalwarts of bizarre
“conservative” values demonstrated even more pride that Iraqi schools were
opening, while remaining silent about the dismal performance of many
American schools. They celebrated like teenage cheerleaders the return of
public services to Baghdad, yet ignored the deteriorating utilities in
American communities. They bragged incessantly that democracy is returning
to Iraq, but refused to tell Americans why they must pay for the rebuilding
of an oil-rich nation. They did whatever they had to do to get the money
and they got the money.
Although the Bushites can defeat ideological reality in a lopsided national
dialogue, they can’t stop reality from busting the nation’s bank and
diminishing the citizens’ income. But the Administration has a solution for
this problem. Soon we will be hearing that senior citizens must have their
Social Security and Medicare benefits scaled back, some Boomers will be
forced to work another year or two before retiring. When our children are
raising their children, they will still be paying these bills. Hey, freedom
for Iraq is not cheap.
Of course these conservative do-gooders are feigning concern to save Iraqis
from themselves, but their addiction to spending U.S. taxpayer’s money with
near abandon is genuine. The $20 billion gift from the American people that
was just approved is only a fraction of the money needed for the
reconstruction of Iraq, only a fraction of the debt that we are in for. But
there is more, a nasty twist that is hardly mentioned, never seriously
discussed in the media. This free lunch for Iraq is in fact obese profits
for Halliburton, Bechtel, MCI World Com and other well-connected free
enterprises.
The money going to rebuild Iraq, then, is actually coming back to this
country, at least much of it, but certainly not to you or your communties.
It is going Halliburton, Bechtel, etc. to build up their profits, and then
into the pockets of those who do not need the money. So the conservative
bleeding hearts turn out to be nothing more than sugar daddies for certain
CEOs. Nothing more than government for big business. Iraq is the
convergence of the happy deficit, bleeding heart, big spending American
conservative.
Too many decent conservative Americans are ignoring the bedrock principles
of genuine conservatism -- individuals are accountable for themselves, and
charity begins at home. They are forgetting that Iraqis are responsible for
their own country and Americans are responsible for the growing mess in
their country. They are forgetting that in real conservatism the nation is
not a bank for the wealthy. They have forgotten conservatism.
For decades the Right has been a battlefield between those who sought to
remake the world and those who wanted to stay at home, those who saw
government as an instrument for business and those who saw government as
restricted government. Today the neo-imperialist wing dominates, the
neoconservatives have pushed America back into the business of empire, and
into a war of occupation against a highly motivated guerrilla force. And we
will pay the bill, in terms of reduced services in America, in terms of
dead and wounded in Iraq. The bleeding hearts will make Americans bleed,
all Americans except them.
Stewart Nusbaumer is editor of Intervention Magazine.
http://www.interventionmag.com/
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservatives |
23 Nov 2003 12:29:26 AM |
|
|
Compassionate Conservatives AKA Bleeding Heart Conservatives
__________________________________________________________________________
They say they want to give Human Rights to the Iraqi people.
Why do they care so much about the Iraqi people ?
They didn't worry about the 1.7 million murdered in Cambodia by Pol Pot.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Cambodians ?
They didn't worry about the murder of 800,000 in Rwanda.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Rwandans ?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Chile by right-wing
General Pinochet. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Chileans ?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Peru by right-wing
President Alberto Fujimori. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Peruvians ?
Human Rights has never been a conservative priority.
These new "compassionate conservatives" don't show any enthusiasm to change
the regime of right-wing dictators in Christian countries.
It's no use claiming to be against one dictator while supporting another dictator.
If the Iraq war were truly about Human Rights it would be against all dictators.
Either you are for democracy everywhere or you are not.
There's no room for hypocrisy in the Iraq debate.
__________________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Trust" |
|
| Title: Re: America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservatives |
23 Nov 2003 10:09:28 AM |
|
|
<grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk> wrote in message
news:qtk0svsetv8botarvdi0i8rco7gi9pl6r0@4ax.com...
Compassionate Conservatives AKA Bleeding Heart Conservatives
__________________________________________________________________________
They say they want to give Human Rights to the Iraqi people.
Why do they care so much about the Iraqi people ?
They didn't worry about the 1.7 million murdered in Cambodia by Pol Pot.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Cambodians ?
They didn't worry about the murder of 800,000 in Rwanda.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Rwandans ?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Chile by
right-wing
General Pinochet. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Chileans
?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Peru by
right-wing
President Alberto Fujimori. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis
over Peruvians ?
Human Rights has never been a conservative priority.
These new "compassionate conservatives" don't show any enthusiasm to
change
the regime of right-wing dictators in Christian countries.
It's no use claiming to be against one dictator while supporting another
dictator.
If the Iraq war were truly about Human Rights it would be against all
dictators.
Either you are for democracy everywhere or you are not.
There's no room for hypocrisy in the Iraq debate.
__________________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Trust" |
|
| Title: Re: America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservatives |
23 Nov 2003 10:39:31 AM |
|
|
<grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk> wrote in message
news:qtk0svsetv8botarvdi0i8rco7gi9pl6r0@4ax.com...
Compassionate Conservatives AKA Bleeding Heart Conservatives
__________________________________________________________________________
They say they want to give Human Rights to the Iraqi people.
Why do they care so much about the Iraqi people ?
They didn't worry about the 1.7 million murdered in Cambodia by Pol Pot.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Cambodians ?
If you're going to throw darts, you might try be a little more accurate.
Trying to pin all this as conservative failings is extremely dishonest.
Pol Pot held power from 1975 to 1978, when most of the atrocities occurred.
Most of that time frame falls under the Carter era.
They didn't worry about the murder of 800,000 in Rwanda.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Rwandans ?
Clinton era.
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Chile by
right-wing
General Pinochet. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Chileans
?
The General's time in power covered several presidential administrations.
To condemn one is to condemn them all, Republican and democrat alike. No
less tragic, the General's atrocities (trial dropped by Chile) were very
minor compared to Pol Pot and Rwanda.
Some 3,000 people were killed or disappeared during his 1973-90 rule.
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Peru by
right-wing
President Alberto Fujimori. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis
over Peruvians ?
Cite please, from what I've read, your numbers are EXTREMELY over-stated, by
*thousands*. Oh, and for the most part, Fujimori ruled during the Clinton
era.
Human Rights has never been a conservative priority.
Based on how inaccurate you've been in this post, it doesn't appear that
being accurate is a priority for you......
These new "compassionate conservatives" don't show any enthusiasm to
change
the regime of right-wing dictators in Christian countries.
Oh, so the former leader of Peru, Fujimori is accused of being responsible
for 24 deaths, to include suspected terrorists killed by military death
squad....... We're supposed to go in there and call for regime change? The
guy isn't even in power anymore but for about two years during the Bush era
(death squad murders happening in 1991 and 1992), and then it was all under
Clinton after that.
It's no use claiming to be against one dictator while supporting another
dictator.
You have established no such case, if you've done anything, it's been to
demonstrate how Clinton was good at looking the other way.
If the Iraq war were truly about Human Rights it would be against all
dictators.
Either you are for democracy everywhere or you are not.
The Bush position is consistent, he is leading us in the fight against
terrorism.
There's no room for hypocrisy in the Iraq debate.
So be quiet.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservative (aka, Corporate Whores) |
23 Nov 2003 10:20:31 AM |
|
|
In article <qtk0svsetv8botarvdi0i8rco7gi9pl6r0@4ax.com>,
grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk says...
Compassionate Conservatives AKA Bleeding Heart Conservatives
__________________________________________________________________________
They say they want to give Human Rights to the Iraqi people.
Why do they care so much about the Iraqi people ?
They didn't worry about the 1.7 million murdered in Cambodia by Pol Pot.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Cambodians ?
They didn't worry about the murder of 800,000 in Rwanda.
Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Rwandans ?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Chile by right-wing
General Pinochet. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Chileans ?
They didn't worry about the murder of thousands in Christian Peru by right-wing
President Alberto Fujimori. Why should they value the lives of Iraqis over Peruvians ?
Human Rights has never been a conservative priority.
These new "compassionate conservatives" don't show any enthusiasm to change
the regime of right-wing dictators in Christian countries.
It's no use claiming to be against one dictator while supporting another dictator.
If the Iraq war were truly about Human Rights it would be against all dictators.
Either you are for democracy everywhere or you are not.
There's no room for hypocrisy in the Iraq debate.
__________________________________________________________________________
This is all about making the world safe for international corporate looters and
has never had anything to do with "democracy!" The Bush Junta has done
everything in its power to destroy democracy in this country!
If Bush is so concerned about "democracy" in the Middle East, does that mean
we'll soon be invading Israel and Saudi Arabia? No one with a brain would call
Saudi Arabia a "democracy!" We have young women defending a fascist regime that
would not allow them to vote, drive a car, go to the beach for a swim in a
bathing suit, and would make them wear a bag over their heads in public! *****
that!
Kat
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vendicar Decarian" |
|
| Title: Re: America's "Bleeding Heart" Conservative (aka, Corporate Whores) |
24 Nov 2003 06:22:05 PM |
|
|
<kski@xnews.com> wrote in message
news:j75wb.31303$cJ5.4893@www.newsranger.com...
This is all about making the world safe for international corporate
looters and
has never had anything to do with "democracy!" The Bush Junta has done
everything in its power to destroy democracy in this country!
And you haen't seen nothing yet.
Bush plans call for another 5 trillion in Government debt, hundreds of
billions of tax dollars being sent directly to Japan and China as interest
on that debt, and a blanket reduction in the wealth of every american
citizen by 25% over the next decade, and of course a campaign of perpetual
war that will result in the death of tens of thousands of young americans.
Bush is the greatest traitor in American history.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
