confused priorities?

via TalkLeft comes a reference to an article by Paul Craig Roberts that is typical of Republi-Tarian thinking. For example:

The Bush regime was able to evade these restraints, because Republicans controlled both houses of Congress and because Republicans wielded 9/11 as a weapon to forestall political opposition.

OK, no argument there, this is true, BushCo are slimeballs. But, typical of a former member of the Reagan Administration (Roberts was an Asst. SecTreas), he doesn't seem to think that kids are all that important:

Do Pelosi and the incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have the intellect and character to deliver the leadership required for Americans to remain a free people? Instead of bemoaning the damage Bush has done to civil liberty, Democrats are up in arms over one child in five being raised in poverty. The more important question is whether children are being raised as a free people protected by civil liberties from arbitrary government power.

Yeah, "screw the kids" is such a great argument. It's OK if you're starving, so long as you're FREE while your kids' teeth rot in their mouths.

We have to face the fact that BushCo have really fucked up things on a number of fronts. It may be easier to address poverty and economic concerns before trying to roll back PATRIOT and PATRIOT II.

You can ping this entry by using http://www.nola-blogs.com/cgi-bin/mt/ruebourbon.cgi/565 .

Posting of new comments has been disabled for this post.