Rightwinger - I'm Glad Bush Was Lying About Compassionate Conservatism

By Cernig

How many Republicans does Paul Mirgenoff, A-List Power Line blogger, speak for?

When I first heard George W. Bush talking about "compassionate conservatism" in 1999, I figured (and certainly hoped) that it was at least 80 percent ad campaign and no more than 20 percent policy guide. Eight years later, it seems to me that, in practice, the Bush administration probably hasn't strayed too far to the wrong side of that proportion.

Mona at Unqualified Offerings provides the essential commentary:

Power Line’s Paul Mirengoff comes right out and admits he figured candidate W lied, and is glad the lies turned out to be such. (No, Mirengoff doesn’t use the word “lie,” but that’s what his euphemistic BS reduces to.) The dumb schmucks who took Bush seriously about the “compassionate conservatism” thing, well, they are no longer useful (idiots), and thus not worth Mirengoff’s time. For they don’t realize that the compassion blather was a necessary peddling of false fodder to the electorate. To, you know, get a warmongering, neocon-friendly Republican elected.

In the ‘08 election, all supporters (including bloggers) of the GOP’s neocon candidates who spout happy happy for the voters’ consumption — on everything from Iraq to domestic policy — should have Mirengoff’s words flung at them

Indeed.

I'm quite happy to hold Democrats who use that 80%spin/20%belief formula just as accountable, though. As far as I can see, all the frontrunners of both parties are 80% PR and 20% belief in what they say. In some cases, mind you - Rudy G on foreign policy springs to mind - it's 100% conviction and 100% dangerous lunacy.

Update Michael van der Galien links approvingly to Mirgenoff and observes:

“To me, it simply sounds like an excuse to favor and implement distinctly unconservative policies…compassion has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.”

Just...wow. Compare that attitude to the words of Thomas Jefferson: "The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government." Do you see the problem now?