Tel-Chai Nation

Ned May has written on Big Journalism about how, for example, the US ambassador in Denmark - even if he wasn't responsible per se for getting Jyllands-Posten to not reprint the Mohammed cartoons - still indicated that he considers the primaries of free speech a negative aspect, as was revealed in another Wikileaks document. But surely even more troubling is that this apparently happened during the Dubya administration:

Remember: all of this occurred on the watch of President George W. Bush, the man who said the United States was the “friend of all those who love freedom”. The same guy who sent our soldiers all over the world to die for “freedom”.

Some “freedom”.

One of the big mistakes being made by American conservatives nowadays is to believe that the Republicans are substantively different on this sort of issue than the Democrats. They aren’t.

That’s why I experience a certain loathing when I read magazines and look at websites that act as partisan cheerleaders for the Republicans at all times, no matter what. Whatever helps Republicans win elections is good. Whatever hurts their chances is bad.

Yes, yes: I know the Republicans favor higher defense spending. But they use all that military power to serve the purposes of the Saudis and the Emirates. If we ever take out Iran’s nuclear capability, it will not be to “advance the cause of human freedom”, but to eliminate a rival and threat to Saudi Arabia. Petrodollars speak louder than the electorate. It’s as simple as that.

The mainstream Republicans are on board with all this. They’re appalling. They’re disgusting.

And yes, the Democrats are worse, but the Republicans pretend to stand on principle — and so they should.

As it stands now, they are masters of the Big Lie.

May is correct that acting as though conservatives are literally incapable of being as bad - possibly worse - than their liberal counterparts is being totally naive. If the senior Bush's attitude towards Israel back in 1988-92 is any indication, he was very bad indeed, and pressured Israel not to take part in the war against Iraq at the time, probably because Israel's military would have done a much better job in bringing down the now deservedly dead tyrant Saddam. And the damage that Condi Rice did to Israel on her part at least 5 years ago...all on the junior Bush's watch. And have the Republicans done much to speak out against Grover Norquist's support for shari'a?

That's why I too often feel very angry whenever I see allegedly conservative/Republican entities who act as cheerleaders at all times, and likely even refuse offers of debate from other conservatives. Why, 5 years ago, I once saw, much to my horror, a conservative blogger signaling support for a two-state solution for Israel, something Charles Krauthammer has also indicated he backs to the fullest. Am I supposed to just let that kind of damaging mindset off the hook as though it were nothing?

I guess I can understand all the more why the Tea Party movements were formed (if I'm correct, they're not a centralized outfit, so my use of a plural would make sense) to advance candidates whom they think are better suited to stand for the principles they believe in.

Update: Daniel Pipes provides even clearer confirmation of ambassador James Cain's damaging actions.

Labels: Iraq, islam, Israel, jihad, RINOs, Scandanavia, terrorism, United States