Ultimate Flip-Floppers
The umitigated gall of the Right


It’s time for another old fogey rant. The hyper-hypocrisy of the Right and the Bushies is absolutely dazzling! Let me count the ways:

1.) For Clinton, perjury and obstruction of justice charges were the moral equivalent to murder; for Libby, however, such charges evidence of the failure to make "a real case." Libby’s lies regarding issues of national security are somehow less significant that Clinton’s lies about a personal affair.

2.) Bush and the Right loudly proclaim the importance of "personal responsibility"as regards to poor people and sinners but overlook the Bush administration’s bountiful buck passing. The only time Bush took responsibility for anything (FEMA’s failures) the admission was cagily hedged--and made national headlines.

3.) Republicans have boldly proclaimed that they are the party of fiscal conservatism, while Democrats are the "tax and spend" party. Let me see, which party had budget surpluses (needed to pay down the national debt) and which party has blown the surpluses and taken our nation deeper in debt (in large part to foreigners) than it has ever been? I sometimes think the Right’s goal is to have the nation paying so much interest that there is little left for discretionary spending. At that point we might as well pay our taxes directly to China, etc.

4.) Number 3 leads right into number 4, the old Republican saw about needing "to teach a man to fish." Yet the discretionary spending now facing the greatest cuts are the very programs that allow economic advancement for the poor, such as student loans.

5.) Republicans claim to be the only party to exhibit patriotism or to "support our troops." Nevertheless our soldiers are sent to a discretionary war without proper equipment to protect their lives, and wounded vets are not being adequately treated. Republican patriotism seems to require giving unquestioning support to Republican presidents while accusing Democratic presidents of everything up to murder. To them "Bush bashing" is all about personal hatred for the man (who has followed programs in direct conflict with his critic’s core beliefs), while criticism of Clinton was justified, even though he followed policies that most Republicans supported (i.e. Welfare reform, NAFTA, fiscal restraint, etc.).

6.) The Right loudly condemns "judicial activism," which means the court taking over the legislative functions of government. Yet their darlings, Scalia and Thomas, have voted far more often to overturn legislative acts than any so-called liberal judges. The same hypocrisy is found in the Right’s advocacy of state’s rights--unless, of course, the state allows such things as assisted suicide or gay marriage.

7.) This rant was inspired by the latest hypocrisy concerning judicial nominees. For Roberts, executive privilege was sufficient reason to withhold documents, an up or down vote should be given to all of a president’s nominees, and a candidate’s religion should not be a factor. For Mier, every position was reversed. If Bush now picks a right-wingnut, I’m sure the Robert’s standards will again become operative.

How in the world can the Bushies call anyone else a flip-flopper, as they did so effectively against John Kerry? Have they no shame?