July 8, 2005

UNWITTINGLY?:

Bush's Unwitting Eloquence (John Nichols, July 7, 2005, The Nation)

President Bush unwittingly provided an appropriate response to the gruesome terrorist attacks on London.

Highlighting the "vivid" contrast between the Group of Eight summit in Gleneagles, Scotland -- where the world's most powerful leaders have been forced by grassroots pressure to address issues of global poverty and climate change -- and the carnage in London after coordinated bomb blasts killed dozens of commuters Thursday morning, Bush said, "On the one hand, we got people here who are working to alleviate poverty and to help rid the world of the pandemic of AIDS and that are working on ways to have a clean environment. And on the other hand, you've got people killing innocent people. And the contrast couldn't be clearer between the intentions and the hearts of those of us who care deeply about human rights and human liberty, and those who kill, those who've got such evil in their heart that they will take the lives of innocent folks."

Bush went on to promise that, "we will spread an ideology of hope and compassion that will overwhelm their ideology of hate."

Imagine the cries of outrage and incomprehension that would have arisen from right-wing talk radio and television pundits if a President Al Gore or a President John Kerry had called, in the immediate aftermath of an attack linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network, for spreading an "ideology or hope and compassion" as part of the response to terrorism.

Imagine if a President Gore or a Kerry had spoken, as Bush did, of bringing those responsible for the attacks "to justice" rather than pledging to "hunt them down and kill them."

Imagine if a President Gore or Kerry had failed to make any mention of the invasion and occupation of Iraq -- supposedly a critical front in the "war on terror" -- at such a moment.


The guy ran for president on a platform of compassionate conservatism and this is the first Mr. Nichols has heard of it?

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 8, 2005 2:33 PM
Comments

Americans would set on Gore or Kerry if they said what Bush said for one reason: Bush can be trusted with securing our polity, Gore and Kerry can't.

Posted by: Luciferous at July 8, 2005 2:48 PM

I REALLY hate liberals after reading this pap.

Posted by: LC at July 8, 2005 3:09 PM

Bush can be trusted with securing our polity? What planet do you live on, Luciferous? This country is virtually bursting at the seams where 'polity' is concerned, and it doesn't look to be getting any more stable anytime soon.

OJ: nothing Mr. Bush has done with his hand in the till, uh, hand on the tiller, is either remotely compassionate OR conservative. You actually believe _he_ believes that blather about ridding the world of the pandemic of AIDS and working on ways to have a clean environment?

Pu-leeze!

Posted by: lonbud at July 8, 2005 3:25 PM

Troll alert! The Left is throwing personal insults around again.

Posted by: Mike Morley at July 8, 2005 3:31 PM

lonbud:

Yes.

Posted by: oj at July 8, 2005 3:56 PM

OJ,
You don't seem to get it. Bush can't do or say anything right! And regardless of that, his intentions are always sinister.So please stop upsetting us with these types of posts ... and attracting trolls too boot.

Posted by: Genecis at July 8, 2005 4:08 PM

"will spread an ideology of hope and compassion"

The difference is that Bush means democracy and Gore and Kerry mean socialism.

Posted by: erp at July 8, 2005 5:01 PM

Also, when Bush says "bringing them to justice," actually he does mean "hunting them down and killing them."

Posted by: mike beversluis at July 8, 2005 9:45 PM

lonbud;

You might want to look up the word "polity". It's not a cognate of "civility".

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at July 8, 2005 11:20 PM

AOG:

Thanks for the tip, but I meant what I said. BushCo have effectively co-opted the American form of government, and with this last election rendered any faith in the electoral process here hopeless.

Just as with the tenor of the "conversation" on this blog, our American polity is swiftly devolving into something that will brook no dissent to the word from on high. The fear of anything remotely kin to social responsibility among the vigilant troll patrol here is sad.

Posted by: lonbud at July 10, 2005 3:00 AM

lonbud:

Think of it in Darwinian terms--the fittest are ruling.

Posted by: oj at July 10, 2005 9:07 AM

Interesting.

The '00 elections, too close to call, DIDN'T render any faith in the electoral process hopeless, but the '04 elections, decisive enough that the opposition conceded without a struggle, or even a delay, DID.

[T]he tenor of the "conversation" on this blog, [...] will brook no dissent to the word from on high.

If by "word from on high", you mean the opinions of Orrin, Peter, and Paul, you have much to learn, grasshopper.

[N]othing Mr. Bush has done [...] is either remotely compassionate OR conservative. You actually believe _he_ believes that blather about ridding the world of the pandemic of AIDS and working on ways to have a clean environment?

Why would Bush want AIDS to spread, and the environment to collapse ?

Ideally, cynicism should be bemused sadder-but-wiser, not a blind, reflexive "tain't so".

If you're really interested, I could list two dozen conservative and/or compassionate Bush initiatives that have come to fruition, and a dozen that haven't - yet.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 10, 2005 1:04 PM
« NOT CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH: | Main | MUSCLE MAN: »