.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Friday, July 15, 2005

And I Don’t Live In Iraq

(Behethland, we're reading each other's minds... I wrote this one, went to upload it, then saw your post. Great minds do think alike, I guess. That's a joke, folks. I'm not really an elitist. Don't let the liberal = elitist rumors fool you. Anyway.)

In response to Steve's 'I Don't Live In Africa':

OK, so you don’t have any ‘conservative’ ideas on how to help with the problems in Africa, and you don’t care. Cool, thanks for admitting that. In turn, I’ll admit that helping those in Africa is no small task, but many feel that it is our duty as humans who have to help those who have not. It’s worth discussing, and it’s worth a try.

But for some reason, the vast majority of conservatives who share your opinion of why we shouldn’t increase aid for Africa are gung-ho about freeing and feeding those in Iraq (after we invaded their country, of course). When did that become our (mine and your) responsibility? What’s that you say? For our interests in their oil? To have a permanent US military base in the Middle East? Or is it to snuff out terrorists?

Or maybe conservatives think, to use your own words, ‘there exists some universal imperative’ to save Iraq from itself.’ (See, liberals aren’t the only ones trying to save something from itself.) So I’m sorry, but I don’t buy your story that American conservatives don’t desire to involve themselves in things that aren’t the responsibility of America.

I know you don’t support our current involvement in Iraq, and I’m with you there, so I won’t accuse you of insisting that Iraq is — and I’ll use your own words here — the ‘single most important thing on which we should expend our energies.’ But considering how much money we’re spending over there, it appears to be. Countless professed conservatives — who like to pat themselves on the back for their thoughtful spending habits — are still supporting this venture ‘while numerous other emergencies’ are ‘far more pressing.’

I’m digressing a bit here, but I think the following is fair to point out since the differences between problem-solving methods of liberals and conservatives has been previously mentioned in this discussion:

To be blunt, Steve, the conservative ideals that you speak of are not currently present in those that control today’s Republican party. And I challenge those of you who consider yourselves to be true conservatives and/or good, honest Republicans to admit it.

True conservatives wouldn’t support CAFTA, would they? They would be, and I’ll quote you, doing something ‘to stop the emigration of manufacturing jobs from this country that throws thousands of people into poverty and subsistence each year,’ not helping corporate fat-cats increase profits while cutting American workers. They wouldn’t be spending taxpayer money to fight a war in Iraq; they would be spending taxpayer money to benefit American taxpayers (and maybe even our many undocumented immigrants that so many Bush-supporting small business owners gladly employ instead of American citizens because they’re cheaper help. You know what I’m saying.)

Anyway, the conservatives that you tout may still exist, but they’re not the ones that control America and possess the clear-cut conservative qualities that are frequently mentioned on this board.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home