|
|
May 22, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Freedom’s Just Another WordPosted on Feb 14, 2011Why don’t conservatives love freedom? Judging by last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, that’s a fair question. As Egyptians overthrew the three-decade rule of Hosni Mubarak, politicians who spoke at the annual CPAC gabfest in Washington ranged from silent to grumpy on the subject. Mitt Romney, perhaps the leading Republican presidential contender, gave a speech without once mentioning the upheaval in Cairo that may signal the most important geopolitical shift since the end of the Cold War. You’d think that anyone who wanted to be president would be paying attention and might have an opinion or two. Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, also believed to be considering a presidential run, likewise seemed not to have noticed that the world was changing. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty confined himself to criticizing President Obama for somehow appeasing “Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.” Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who won the CPAC presidential straw poll, was at least forthright: He said the United States has no “moral responsibility to spread our goodness around the world” and urged the administration “to do a lot less a lot sooner, not only in Egypt but around the world.” Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was all over the map. At CPAC, he mentioned “what’s happening in Egypt” without commenting further. On Saturday, he told The Associated Press that Mubarak’s resignation was “good for the future” but criticized Obama for publicly supporting the dictator’s ouster. On Sunday, Gingrich explained on ABC’s “This Week” that Obama was right to side with the freedom-loving protesters in Tahrir Square but should have done so privately—as if whispered encouragement, of which there was plenty, had a prayer of making a difference. Advertisement House Speaker John Boehner, at least, has come out forcefully on the side of freedom. But why the ambivalence from so many prominent conservatives? For one thing—and I think this applies to most of the tongue-tied potential candidates—there’s the fact that all of this is happening on Obama’s watch. If everything turns out well, heaven forbid that the president get any credit. The administration’s public comments as the Egyptian revolution unfolded seemed to take two steps forward and one step back, but there was never any real question about Obama’s sentiments. The United States was by no means in control of events, but the White House used whatever influence it had to push for a transition. The conservative mantra has been: Obama Is Always Wrong. Therefore there must be something wrong with the way he handled Egypt—even if it appears, from what we’ve seen so far, that the result is a historic opening for democracy in the world’s most troubled region. The other possible explanation for the lukewarm conservative reaction is a lack of faith in our most cherished democratic values—at least where majority-Islam countries are concerned. I’m not talking about Glenn Beck’s paranoid fantasy of a vast leftist-Islamist conspiracy for world domination; that’s a job for a licensed professional with a prescription pad. I’m talking about people like former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, who told CPAC that “democracy as we see it” in Egypt would be all right but grumbled that “a democratic election can produce illiberal results.” In other words, some Egyptians might vote for candidates put forth by the Muslim Brotherhood. It is unlikely that the group would win a majority in free and fair elections—or even that a government headed by the Muslim Brotherhood, if it came to that, would necessarily be more dangerous or hostile than the Mubarak regime. But Bolton and some others seem to believe that only political parties of which the United States approves should be allowed to participate in Egyptian elections. Former Sen. Rick Santorum, another presidential contender, used his CPAC speech to blast Obama’s handling of Egypt; for weeks, Santorum has been claiming that elections there would lead straight to “sharia law.” Pam Geller, the conservative blogger who led opposition to the Lower Manhattan mosque, crashed the CPAC conference and told an interviewer from Mother Jones magazine that Mubarak’s fall was “catastrophic” and would lead to sharia law throughout the Middle East. These conservatives are arguing that the world’s 1.2 billion Muslims cannot be trusted to govern themselves. That’s not what I call loving freedom. Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.  TAGS:
|
Glaciers Are Melting Slowly but Surely
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By RayLan, February 17, 2011 at 1:27 pm Link to this comment
GRYM
“Opinions such as yours, however, need to be denounced immediately and emphatically”
Wow. Your thoughtless declaration is so enlightening! But you’re calling anybody an idiot would be a compliment given your intellectual grasp of what constitutes intelligence.
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 17, 2011 at 9:27 am Link to this comment
RayLan,
I neither sought nor took pleasure in calling you out as an idiot. Unlike many here, yourself included, it’s simply not my way.
Opinions such as yours, however, need to be denounced immediately and emphatically.
Report thisBy BR549, February 16, 2011 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment
Eugene, WTF? Do we have to go over this again with you every time Bob forgets to monitor the length of your leash?
“The conservative mantra has been: Obama Is Always Wrong.”
How can that be, when Obama has been following the Republican Party line ever since he got in office? If I’m a conservative, why do I get the feeling that Boehner and Obama are both far to the right of Goldwater?
Jeez, you make me sound like a McGovern supporter.
Report thisBy RayLan, February 16, 2011 at 6:40 pm Link to this comment
GYRM
Report thisglad to see I made you hit bottom - which wasn’t to far to go apparently
By Go Right Young Man, February 16, 2011 at 6:33 pm Link to this comment
RayLan, - “I don’t remember the first time you started calling me names”
-
Likely due to it never happening in the past?
Report thisBy RayLan, February 16, 2011 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment
GYRM
Report thisI don’t remember the first time you started calling me names - however it make sense coming from you. Your troll last ditch attempt at an argument.
By zonth_zonth, February 16, 2011 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment
Important to realize when an important abstraction like freedom gets besmirched and propagandized by politicians (jingoism) and corporate media (driving Range Rovers makes us free). Besides broad misuse such as “bringing freedom and democracy to other coutnries” another recent polito corruption of freedom is the absurd assertion in relation to health care; “Americans have the freedom to choose their doctors” & with healthcare reform, Americans will lose it. Freedom jargon has been thrown around in every department. The propaganda is so dense sometimes one needs to review fundamental concepts such as freedom. For myself I had to review some Eric Hoffer to salve my constitution.
“A chief objective of freedom is to make it possible for a person to feel himself a human being firstly. Any social order in which people see themselves primarily as, workingmen, businessmen, intellectuals, politicians, members of a faith, a nation, a race is deficient in genuine freedom”
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 16, 2011 at 12:07 pm Link to this comment
RayLan, - “conservatives love freedom. The freedom to pursue their greedy ambitions without consideration of anybody else’s needs.”
-
Only for the third time on this Web space will I be writing the following words:
You’re an idiot.
Report thisBy RayLan, February 16, 2011 at 8:32 am Link to this comment
Repubs (conservatives) love freedom. The freedom to pursue their greedy ambitions without consideration of anybody else’s needs. They shout freedom when they start wars, cut taxes and diminish social services. Freedom is their byword above all others.
The only problem is that democracy is not just about freedom. That would be anarchy. A dog-eat-bitch feeding frenzy to get the biggest piece of the economic carcass.
Democracy is the inconvenient union of freedom and EQUALITY.
Report thisThe reduction of democracy to unregulated capitalism fails because it thrives on creating inequity - the zero sum game of Wall Street trading.
As usual the conservative argument leaves out critical factors. The absurdity of laying people off to reduce the deficit - to uh.. stimulate the economy - and uh.. create jobs - is an excellent example of their contradictory BS.
By anaman51, February 15, 2011 at 6:59 pm Link to this comment
The reason convservatives dislike freedom so much is that the populace goes around acting free. How are they going to keep Americans nice and dumb so they keep punching that time clock at the factory? People with freedom frequently seek out answers to the questions that plague them, such as “where can I get a real education?” Raise the education level in this country and the conservatives will lose that one standard of American life that makes it possible for them to do the rotten stuff they do: towering, widespread ignorance. Keep ‘em dumb as spuds, stuff ‘em with biblical fairy tales, and they’ll keep on slaving away despite the fact that they live in grinding poverty; this is the conservative agenda. We would be doing them a huge favor if we had the civic decency to die rather than retire. That way, they wouldn’t have to waste money on “useless eaters;” you know, the people who built the country by working all their lives, but then had the bad manners to go and get old.
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment
Gmonst, - “This wasn’t done by Bush, Obama, or any other American. This one belongs to the Egyptian people!”
-
Every bit of evidence I hold tells me that you are absolutely correct.
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 3:52 pm Link to this comment
surfnow, - “On the last day Mubarak was in almost continual contact with Obama- that has been widely reported-”
-
O.K., I’ll bite. What, precisely, did President Mubarak and President Obama talk about all that day?
According to Saudi news agencies President Mubarak spent most of that day talking with regional leaders. According to Jordanian news agencies Mubarak spent the bulk of that day conferring with Jordanian Officials. According to Polish news agencies the President of Egypt busied himself with his cabinet and foreign Ambassadors. According to French, British, American and Egyptian news agencies Mubarak spent the day enthralled with directing behind the scenes discussions with opposition leaders inside Egypt. In fact I have not seen even one U.S. news agency reporting that Obama spent his day “in almost continual contact” with President Mubarak. If I am wrong on this you can simply point me toward these wide-spread reports you’ve seen.
I need to ask again. And, please, no reading between the lines. What, precisely, did Mubarak and Obama talk about almost continuously?
Report thisBy surfnow, February 15, 2011 at 3:49 pm Link to this comment
This wasn’t done by Bush, Obama, or any other American. This one belongs to the Egyptian people!
I don’t agree Gmonst. If Mubarak still had the support of the US presidency, and his assurances to continue military funding, he never would have stepped down. Not taking it away from the Egyptian people- but Obama was certainly instrumental in Mubarak’s decision
Report thisBy felicity, February 15, 2011 at 3:13 pm Link to this comment
Gingrich has worked long and hard and assiduously to
Report thisearn the title, and he’s finally got it: “Pig Newton.”
When the assumed-by-Republicans-to-be-the-‘brain’ of
the Republican Party is more comfortable slopping
around in the pig trough of political banality than
anywhere else, the Republican Party can rightly be
called the Pig Party.
By Gmonst, February 15, 2011 at 3:04 pm Link to this comment
This wasn’t done by Bush, Obama, or any other American. This one belongs to the Egyptian people!
Report thisBy surfnow, February 15, 2011 at 2:05 pm Link to this comment
It should be obvious to anyone with an open mind that Obama was instrumental. For 30 years Mubarak was a largely unpopular dictator who ruled through a Police State and a military paid for with US money. On the last day Mubarak was in almost continual contact with Obama- that has been widely reported- what do you suppose they were discussing? Lindsay Lohan and Charlie Sheen?
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 1:19 pm Link to this comment
surfnow, - “I should have known from your username how hopeless it would be to try to reason with a conservative.”
-
Or you could refrain from conjuring up such homely labels and share your insights within a simple conversation.
I asked if you were basically guessing and/or speculating as to the U.S. President’s involvement with Mubarak stepping aside. - In the beginning you wrote that Obama’s involvement was obvious. I do not see the same obvious conclusion. How is it obvious?
-
Understanding that the United States does not control the planet does not make me a mythical Neo-Con. I see my view as being pragmatic and realistic. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing.
Report thisBy surfnow, February 15, 2011 at 12:33 pm Link to this comment
Go Right:
Report thisI should have known from your username how hopeless it would be to try to reason with a conservative.
By Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 11:17 am Link to this comment
surfnow, - “Read between the lines”.
-
So you’re guessing and speculating, yes?
You believe the American President controls Egypt and the Egyptian President? Isn’t that the arrogance, that American sense of self-importance, that we hear complaints of all over the globe?
Without having to read between the lines, keeping events in context, it’s obvious the Egyptian people forced Mubarak to step aside. NOT American arrogance and heightened sense of importance.
-
The media is absolutely, most decidedly, not “Neo-Con” controlled. In fact major media have been desperately trying to link Obama to the turn of events in Egypt with a positive spin. It’s everywhere. The New York Times, MSNBC, NBC, CNN, The Washington Post, Miami Herald, L.A. Times etc.
Report thisBy surfnow, February 15, 2011 at 10:24 am Link to this comment
Go Right:
Report thisYou have to do some reading between the lines but more will come out. All day on the 11th, it’s been widely reported that Obama and Mubarak were in continual communication. Not long after Mubarak stepped down. What do you suppose they had been discussing? Up until that point Mubarak was subbornly determined to stay put. By the way, you won’t see too m uch on Obama’ role publicized since the media is neocon controlled.
By Dennis, February 15, 2011 at 10:19 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
BarbieQue,
Report thisThis AM a poll of Vermont Republicans had Romney with 40%, followed by Gingrich.
Mr Ron Paul can’t even get in the polls. That is tragic. I heard(Infowars.com)him say he was very uncertain that he would even run for POTUS.
By Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 9:45 am Link to this comment
surfnow,
Lend us some solid examples of actions from President Obama that facilitated thousands to protests in Egypt and Mubarak stepping down as President in 2011.
Report thisBy surfnow, February 15, 2011 at 9:27 am Link to this comment
Obviously Obama had a lot to do with Mubarak’s steeping down. Little gets done in Egypt without our say so. Why do you think Repugs and neocons are so pissed. They’ve spent trillions on illegal ,immoral wars that do nothing but cause more hatred, while Obama was able to help iniatiate a democracy in the Middle East without firing a shot.
Report thisBy BarbieQue, February 15, 2011 at 4:04 am Link to this comment
Mr. Robinson writes:
>>“politicians who spoke at the annual CPAC gabfest in Washington ranged from silent to grumpy on the subject.”<<
Then goes on to say:
>>“Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who won the CPAC presidential straw poll, was at least forthright: He said the United States has no “moral responsibility to spread our goodness around the world” and urged the administration “to do a lot less a lot sooner, not only in Egypt but around the world.”<<
So, since Rep. Paul was certainly not “silent” (neither were his fans) presumably Mr. Robinson is suggesting those who would follow George Washingtons prescription for foreign entanglements are…
grumpy
Watch as Rep. Paul is slimed by the “Right” and the “Left” because the empire lovers simply cannot grasp the concept that was apparent to George Washington.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington’s_Farewell_Address
“...Washington dedicates a large part of his farewell address to discussing foreign relations, and the dangers of permanent alliances between the United States and foreign nations…”
“...Once again making reference to proper behavior based upon religious doctrine and morality, Washington advocates a policy of good faith and justice towards all nations, and urges the American people to avoid long-term friendly relations or rivalries with any nation. He argues these attachments and animosity toward nations will only cloud the government’s judgment in its foreign policy. Washington argues that longstanding poor relations will only lead to unnecessary wars due to a tendency to blow minor offenses out of proportion when committed by nations viewed as enemies of the United States…”
What a shame that this brilliant man does not even have a Birthday (or any day) dedicated to him. A Man who relinquished power instead of consolidating it.
Every American should read his Farewell Address at least once a year.
Ron Paul is more like George Washington than Eugene Robinson. And it’s not the man, as some (D)emocrats suggest, it’s the message. Ron Paul is not charismatic or polished. But his message sells, because once people hear it, they know it’s true.
Report thisBy Go Right Young Man, February 15, 2011 at 3:17 am Link to this comment
Just so much whining Mr. Robinson. Just so much whining.
Mr. Robinson has been talking about the turmoil all across the Middle East region for more than a few years now. It was always prefaced with, “George Bush Did It”.
Today that turmoil has morphed into millions, maybe even tens of millions in the region, according to Eugene, protesting for open and free elections and, no more does the name George Bush cross his lips or make it to print.
Hypocrisy on display to its fullest…...LOL
Report this