Liberal? You decide.

“Distinguishing cherished hopes from disappointing facts

By George Will

Appearing Friday in the Rose Garden with Canada's prime minister, President Bush was answering a reporter's question about Canada's role in Iraq when suddenly he swerved into this extraneous thought: "There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren't necessarily - are a different color than white can self-govern."

What does such careless talk say about the mind of this administration? Note that the clearly implied antecedent of the pronoun "ours" is "Americans." So the president seemed to be saying that white is, and brown is not, the color of Americans' skin. He does not mean that. But that is the sort of swamp one wanders into when trying to deflect doubts about policy by caricaturing and discrediting the doubters.

Scott McClellan, the president's press secretary, later said the president only meant that "there are some in the world that think that some people can't be free" or "can't live in freedom." The president meant that "some Middle Eastern countries - that the people in those Middle Eastern countries cannot be free." Perhaps that, which is problematic enough, is what the president meant. But what he suggested was: Some persons - perhaps many persons; no names being named, the smear remained tantalizingly vague - doubt his nation-building project because they are racists.

That is one way to respond to questions about the wisdom of thinking America can transform the entire Middle East by constructing a liberal democracy in Iraq. But if any Americans want to be governed by politicians who short-circuit complex discussions by recklessly imputing racism to those who differ with them, such Americans do not usually turn to the Republican choice in our two-party system.

This administration cannot be trusted to govern if it cannot be counted on to think and, having thought, to have second thoughts. Thinking is not the reiteration of bromides about how "all people yearn to live in freedom" (McClellan). And about how it is "cultural condescension" to doubt that some cultures have the requisite aptitudes for democracy (Bush). And about how it is a "myth" that "our attachment to freedom is a product of our culture" because "ours are not Western values; they are the universal values of the human spirit." (Tony Blair)

Speaking of culture, as neoconservative nation-builders would be well-advised to avoid doing, Pat Moynihan said: "The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself." Here we reach the real issue about Iraq, as distinct from unpleasant musings about who believes what about skin color.

The issue is the second half of Moynihan's formulation - our ability to wield political power to produce the requisite cultural change in a place like Iraq. Time was, this question would have separated conservatives from liberals. Nowadays it separates conservatives from neoconservatives.

Condoleezza Rice, a political scientist, believes there is scholarly evidence that democratic institutions do not merely spring from a hospitable culture, they can also help create such a culture. She is correct; they can. They did so in the young American republic. But it would be reassuring to see more evidence that the administration is being empirical, believing that this can happen in some places, as opposed to ideological, believing that it must happen everywhere it is tried.

Being steadfast in defense of carefully considered convictions is a virtue. Being blankly incapable of distinguishing cherished hopes from disappointing facts, or of reassessing comforting doctrines in face of contrary evidence, is a crippling political vice.

In "On Liberty" (1859), John Stuart Mill said "it is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say" that the doctrine of limited, democratic government "is meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties." One hundred forty-five years later it obviously is necessary to say that. People who think Mill was mistaken, or that it is a mistake to doubt Iraqi faculties today, should say why.

Ron Chernow's magnificent new biography of Alexander Hamilton begins with these of his subject's words: "I have thought it my duty to exhibit things as they are, not as they ought to be." That is the core of conservatism.

Traditional conservatism. Nothing "neo" about it. This administration needs a dose of conservatism without the prefix.

Write to George Will in care of The Washington Post Writers Group, 1150 15th St. N.W., Washington DC 20071-9200. His e-mail address is: georgewill@washpost.com”

“Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like every time I bring up George Will (a long-time pillar of conservative thought), the Bush-lovers get reeeeal quiet.”

“Interesting thought, Phead.



We're usually knee deep in piss and vinegar by now.”

““We're usually knee deep in piss and vinegar by now."

It may be that the article is just too preposterous to take seriously.

This written has obviously taken something that was said, applied his own translation to it and used it as a means to run on with his own opinions. His first and biggest mistake was wrongly applying that “our” means “Americans”. The answer as to who the “ours” is is given within Bush’s own words…

"There's a lot of people in the world who don't believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern.”

And the last line clearly shows who it is speaking about…

“are a different color than WHITE can self-govern."

He is speaking of white people, not Americans.

Further, how can what Bush said be considered “careless talk”? What he said is true and it is a positive message.

The article is baseless rubbish and nothing more than a way of using quotes out of context as a means to segue into his own person view of “facts“.”

“interesting spin, nigal.”

“I agree with you Nigal, George Will is an A-hole.”

“How is it spin? The writer is obviously the one spinning. How anyone can read Bush's words and apply what the writer did is beyond me.”

“I also don’t see how conservatives can be sucked into the whole neo-conservative label the liberals have slapped on some. There are varying degrees of conservatism but that doesn’t mean there should be a different kind of conservative. No one calls moderate liberals neo-liberals.

This writer is obviously displeased that Bush isn’t conservative enough.”

“Pssst, (liberal is moderate)....”

“Sorry Tom, I ain't playin' the Game any more. Save your time.”

“George Will would be more credible if he switched to bow ties.


Bush used the same line in his failed press conference in answer to a similarly unrelated question. You have to guess that he's been prepped with it and just doesn't know when to work it in for proper effect.

I think Will is dead on when he charges that it is an attempt to short-circuit debate by implying racism to the questioner and other critics.

Will is right that an open debate and careful examination of the successes and limits of current policy, specifically our ability to direct change in predictable and desirable ways is critically needed, ideologies be damned.”

“To go back to Bush's original statement, it does seem like he's trying to shift the blame for the struggles of his simplistic policies re: Iraq.

Someone needs to tell Dubya that people who disagree with his methods for nation-building aren't racists... they just appreciate the complexity of the situation. It's those 'nuances' he didn't want to bother with that are coming back to haunt him.”

“No one calls moderate liberals neo-liberals.

That's about the only name they haven't called liberals.

Conservatives were just too slow on the draw and now don't want to appear as if they're borrowing from the left. After all, a conservative is a man who believes that nothing should be done for the first time.”

“I found this part to be particularly telling, especially coming from a staunch conservative:

..."But that is the sort of swamp one wanders into when trying to deflect doubts about policy by caricaturing and discrediting the doubters. "

That sums up the Bush admin's policies toward so many of those who disagree with them and have the guts to say so publicly.

The list is long, and each of these men has told a similar story in regard to Iraq. Paul Oneill, Joe Wilson and Richard Clarke are names that spring to mind right away...”

“After all, a conservative is a man who believes that nothing should be done for the first time

huh?”

“I think the Bush Admin setting its attack dogs on those detractors is more evidence that their opinions have merit. It's obvious that they take them seriously, but they can't refute the arguments... so they sic the dogs on them.

On a side note: I wonder what the story is on the Plame investigation. It seems like I heard 3 or 4 pundits say that indictments went imminent... And that was over a month ago(?).”

“Nigal there most certainly is such a thing as neoliberalism. We don’t generally use the term much in this country. The 'New Democrats' exemplified by Clinton are basically neoliberals. They believe is global change through the spread of market economies. ‘Neoconservative’ isn't a slur made up by filthy liberals. It is a label (that neoconservatives themselves use) to distinguish those who favor global change through military force from the paleo-conservatives who are more apt to be isolationists (think Pat Buchanan).

Don’t get so hung up on labels.”

“oh, and every black american in florida will have their vote taken away, because they might be previous or current felons. Black votes won't be counted, brown votes won't matter, Asian votes will be counted, because they side with Bush for the most part, and Muslim votes in certain populations will just have their voting machines quit working at opportunistic times. The Bush administration is racist. He even calls the Spanish language- Mexican. And Powell is left out of the circle-is he not? aren't most methodist churches white. Isn't that what Bush is going after?... the white,neocon,evanglical,war-mongering votes? We will wipe out those evil-doers. all of them.”

“Powell was drafted by the White Race with Condy Rice, no? I believe in exchange for OJ.”

“Yep. Then the Asians drafted the Wu Tang Clan, LOL”

“That was a coup for the Asians. I forgot who got Tiger Woods, though.”

“I think we traded Eminem for him(?)”

“No way did we lose eminem! The Black race tried to pull that crap but they were rejected!”

“The article is baseless rubbish and nothing more than a way of using quotes out of context as a means to segue into his own person view of “facts“."
Nigal
09:28:07 AM
05/06/04


Hmmmm, kind of like you just did. To be honest, I don't think a conservative would know what "context" meant, if it smacked him/her in the head, unless, of course, it could be applied to some biblical refernece.”

“I am ignorant and naive! I thought all conservatives loved George Will!

My world is rocking. What's next? I can't even imagine”

“Damn! In my discussion of labels I totally left out the oxycontin-conservatives. Sorry!”

“liberal?

who?

what's the question phaed?

bush? yes, he is a moderate conservative and g. will is showing his disatisfaction of that fact. many conservatives believe bush to be too liberal.

i have quoted or posted g. will alot and ya'll lefties usually rake me over the coals when i do cuz you hate him.

bush, a racist? good frikkin God. why can't you give the man credit for having more top level women and minorities than any other in history?”

“"why can't you give the man credit for having more top level women and minorities than any other in history?...."



YES! I agree! Let's give Georgie Poo a hand for all those stooges he's put into office!”

“"bush, a racist? good frikkin God. why can't you give the man credit for having more top level women and minorities than any other in history?"

Conservatives have a very long history of being pro minority and have a great, great deal to further equal rights.”

“What would you expect from a person who only likes to play Conservative?”

“"What would you expect from a person who only likes to play Conservative?"

Exsqueez me? What does this mean?”

“It means that I agree with you, nigal and I'm pointing out that Strat doesn't relize the history of the Party, like you expressed in your point. Mr. Dewd only knows what's fed to him.

Not a slight to you, nigal, just taking my morning wiz on Strut.”

“Well, he does have a point about Bush not getting credit where it’s due. Then again Strat should know better than to even expect the left to give Bush any credit as the above article shows anything he says will be made out to be bad. Hell, he could say, “The sky is blue.” and the headlines the next day would say, “Bush Reveals His Hatred for the Color Green!”.”

“"Hell, he could say, “The sky is blue.” and the headlines the next day would say, “Bush Reveals His Hatred for the Color Green!”....."


GD! I knew that bassturd hated the color green!

I knew it!

I knew it!

I knew it!

I knew it!



All kidding aside, I'll give'em credit for being able to find minorities that would agree enough with him to be in his cabinet. His ways are a real tough sell that that group of people nowadays.

Would it be outta line to suggest that in this day and age, almost by default due to the new age of "Diversity", that this has been made a lot easier to achieve, than in the past?”

“liberal?

who?

what's the question phaed?

bush? yes, he is a moderate conservative and g. will is showing his disatisfaction of that fact. many conservatives believe bush to be too liberal.



It was a shot at those who believe that anyone who disagrees with Bush must be branded a liberal.

Also, if Bush is too liberal for some, it's probably only in his spending plans and where its best for big business to fall left of center. I could care less if the guy is left or right as long as his policies make sense in a given situation. I've seen too many instances of this administration pigheadedly refusing to admit wrongdoing and change course to believe in them.

I also believe Will had a valid point about Bush's comments about arabs.”

“Would it be outta line to suggest that in this day and age, almost by default due to the new age of "Diversity", that this has been made a lot easier to achieve, than in the past?"
laqtis

yes.


It means that I agree with you, nigal and I'm pointing out that Strat doesn't relize the history of the Party, like you expressed in your point. Mr. Dewd only knows what's fed to him.

Not a slight to you, nigal, just taking my morning wiz on Strut."
laqtis


abe lincoln was a republican. the civil rights bill passed because of republicans. man, dood, i gotta say, you are one nasty liberal. i've noticed more BS outta you lately, gigantic generalizations, complete falsehoods and downright hatefull meaness towards conservatives, Christians, and republicans. quit calling me stupid.

i'd bet you're prolly an ok guy in real life. maybe you don't realize the way you come across..... but dood, you're just freekin mean.

oil well....i can dish it out too...”

“You seem to confuse republican and conservative. They aren't synonymous throughout history, strat.”

“Hell, strat in comparing the repubs and the democrats the conservatives have nearly ALWAYS been stronger on race issues and have outvoted the dems on some of the biggest votes.

The whole "conservatives are racist" thing is a fabrication of the libs.”

“And.....why did the South go Republican? Because the Democratic party put their support firmly behind the civil rights movement.”

“conservative

adj 1: resistant to change [ant: liberal] 2: opposed to liberal reforms 3: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate" [syn: cautious] 4: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-gray world of business"- Newsweek [syn: button-down, buttoned-down] 5: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality" [syn: bourgeois, materialistic] n : a person who has conservative ideas or opinions [syn: conservativist] [ant: liberal]



By definition, those who believed in and worked toward desegregation, civil rights and even women's suffrage were liberal in that view at least.”

“"man, dood, i gotta say, you are one nasty liberal. i've noticed more BS outta you lately, gigantic generalizations, complete falsehoods and downright hatefull meaness towards conservatives, Christians, and republicans. quit calling me stupid......"


OMFG - I've had more enlighting conversations with a trash compactor.

OK deal, I'll stop calling you stupid, you phucking moron.”

“Damn Commies. Y'all know how much that crap costs companies? At least give them child labor back. Maybe using only immigrant children?”

“Immigrant children??

bearmagnet, that's a good idea, especially since some of those immigrants have soooooooo many children.”

“Nigal, you forgot to mention that those Democrats who opposed civil rights were southern conservatives, many of whom became Republicans.

And those Republicans who favored civil rights were moderate and liberal.

Are you trying to mislead(lie)?

......or just stupid?”

“goose<----------->gander”

“I think that Republicans have every right to be proud of their pro-civil rights history. Deomcrats have every right to point out that they have left their era of civil rights obstruction behind them, and that many of their more racist members left the party (some for the Republican Party).

It was John Kennedy's fear of losing the Southern segregationist wing of the Democratic party that caused him to be so lukewarm on civil rights for so long.”

“There's that Democrat/Liberal confusion again.

Is it time to bump the Strom Thurmond thread again?”