"When they are challenged on their compassion, they go postal"

"No one really trusts the UN to guarantee security," writes Captain Ed, explaining how India's can-do approach to tsunami relief efforts -- as part of GW's "core group" of democracies in that part of the world -- may transform India-US relations. Excerpts (be sure to read the whole thing):

If India did [trust the UN], they would have spurned Bush's offer and worked exclusively through Turtle Bay . . . As I wrote earlier, the devastation that has swamped the entire region gives everyone an opportunity to pursue political goals as well as humanitarian, and India wants to be sure that Islamofascism doesn't take advantage of it.

Bush knows that India provides a powerful bulwark against terrorism, and what's more, they're already on the scene and resisting the role of victim.

The only people who still believe in the UN's "moral authority" are Clare Short and her coterie of benighted leftists around the world -- who mostly can be found in the media and on university campuses.

Short, you may recall, resigned as Tony Blair's international development secretary in May of 2003, "saying that Blair had broken promises to her about the involvement of the UN in the post-war reconstruction of Iraq." Her criticism of the President's alliance with India, Australia and Japan to coordinate humanitarian efforts reflects the international progressivist left's instinctive fear of its growing irrelevance in world affairs. Did you catch the old girl's latest pronouncement?

I think this initiative from America to set up four countries claiming to co-ordinate sounds like yet another attempt to undermine the UN when it is the best system we have got and the one that needs building up.

Doesn't her whining that the UN is "the one that needs building up" speak volumes?  As Pierre Legrand of The Pink Flamingo Bar and Grill wrote the other day, "Only a child would in the middle of all this horror start talking about 'Me.' It isn't all about the Left no matter how much they want to be relevant again."

What's their problem? Paul of Wizbang! [via Pierre Legrand] explains:

The core of liberalism, and the font from which they draw power, is that they care more than anyone else. They care more about the poor, the elderly, the weak etc etc etc.

It is as if their compassion  -- or their perceived compassion -- is the curtain that hides the great and powerful Wizard of Oz. If people (voters) realize that the liberals don't give a sh** about them -- that they are pawns in a political game -- the curtain will be drawn back, and they will be exposed.

For that reason, when they are challenged on their compassion, they go postal. Whatever happens they don't want people to see behind the curtain.

As the Wicked Witch -- and Dan Rather -- said, "Ahhhh! You cursed brat, look what you've done!  I'm melting . . . melting."

Comments

[pam]

Ahhh... and things become clearer... ;)

[goomp]

Some of us have studied and thought about mankind's experience over the span of recorded history and from this experience we learn to judge the merits of the ideas of others. The Intellectual Morons such as much of the MSM and our academics which you describe latch on to new unproven but popular theories prescribed by academics of the last hundred years and take them as the word of infallible prophets. We are doomed to destuction should their foolishness be our guide.

[Tom Carter]

Nice post. It was surprising to see the left, including the UN and the U.S. mainstream media, immediately start jumping on President Bush and criticizing the U.S. at about the same time the last tsunami was hitting the beach. These people need to get back on their medication.

[Sissy Willis]

They will need stronger doses, Tom.