Posted on 01/09/2003 4:07:54 AM PST by DocFarmer
Right-wing critics miss the point of senator's comments By Jack Z. Smith FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM
In winning her first race for the U.S. Senate in 1992, Patty Murray was depicted as an everyday "mom in tennis shoes." But the Democratic lawmaker from Washington may now need to don a pair of hip waders to navigate the deep political mud in which she finds herself mired.
Conservative critics have assailed Murray - admittedly, with some justification - for her controversial comments about U.S. foreign policy and Osama bin Laden.
But the primary point she was making - that America needs to reassess its foreign policy and examine why so many people around the world loathe us - also meshes strongly with recent remarks from a top official in the Bush administration: Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Those frothing-at-the-mouth right-wing commentators who seek to portray Murray as a Benedict Arnold are off the mark. Instead of lynching Murray verbally, they should use her comments as a springboard for a serious, balanced discussion of shortcomings in U.S. foreign policy and how they might be addressed.
But serious, balanced discussions aren't the type of thing that many frothing-at-the-mouth right-wingers like to engage in. They greatly prefer one-sided blather that doesn't require them to think too hard.
In a Dec. 18 talk to a high school honors class, Murray said:
"We've got to ask, why is (bin Laden) so popular around the world? Why are people so supportive of him in many countries that are riddled with poverty?"
Murray said bin Laden has "been out in these countries for decades, building schools, building roads, building infrastructure, building day-care facilities, building health-care facilities, and the people are extremely grateful. We haven't done that."
"How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of that rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go to Afghanistan?" Murray said.
Let's get one thing straight. I "loathe" bin Laden. It's also my guess that Murray detests bin Laden. From the news accounts I read about her speech, I never got the impression that she "admires" the creep, as her critics would have you believe.
However, I agree with the critics that Murray expressed herself poorly.
From what I have read, she probably overstated whatever good deeds bin Laden might have done when he wasn't busy masterminding terrorist plots to kill thousands of innocent people.
She also understated the good that America has done in foreign countries via government aid or private charitable institutions.
But, having said all that, she raised a legitimate concern as to whether America should do more to foster good will and assist poor nations that view us as greedy and exploitive.
On an individual basis, Americans are, by and large, generous people. But we rank near the very bottom of the world's wealthiest nations in terms of the percentage of our gross national product that goes to foreign aid.
It was heartening to read a recent news story about how U.S. soldiers in the Paktia province of Afghanistan have been helping to rebuild three schools that were bombed to ruins years ago.
That kind of foreign aid fosters enormous good will, and it will brighten America's image in that neck of the woods for a long time. More than half a century after the United States carried out the Marshall Plan to help rebuild Europe, we are still admired for that noble undertaking.
Powell, in a Dec. 12 speech, outlined an ambitious Bush administration program to reach out to the hostile Middle East in nonmilitary ways, such as providing technical assistance to Arab governments seeking membership in the World Trade Organization and supporting measures to expand female literacy.
"Any approach to the Middle East that ignores its political, economic and educational underdevelopment will be built on sand," Powell said.
That's also what Murray was trying to say. Strong foreign relations require more than guns and ammo.
(Excerpt) Read more at tallahassee.com ...
I could care less! If they "loathe us" so much then STOP sending them MY money!!!
What a nerd! The proofs in the pudding.
START NAMING THESE PLACES and lets put some dollar signs on these remarkable deeds
While the editorial writer and Murray make the case for a materialistic answer to OBL. I believe that OBL’s popularity has its roots in Islam. Few people, especially the middle class, educated perpetrators of 9/11 are willing to kill themselves for construction projects. However, history is full of martyrs for their faith, both in the Christian world, but especially in the Moslem world where the fruits of martyrdom are explicitly described.
And I suppose this guy's redeeming trait is that he doesn't froth at the mouth.
Another name caller without a mirror.
"We've got to ask, why is (bin Laden) so popular around the world? Why are people so supportive of him in many countries that are riddled with poverty?" Uh, hello? Could it be that the people in these countries "riddled with poverty" are not being told where all of the money has been coming from? Or maybe because they have been told that those evil devil's the Americans are hoarding all of the worlds money, resources, etc.. for themselves? (while thier greedy Governments take the aid and live like kings)
Murray said bin Laden has "been out in these countries for decades, building schools, building roads, building infrastructure, building day-care facilities, building health-care facilities, and the people are extremely grateful. We haven't done that." Uh, Senator Murray?, as a US Senator have you, or have you not, been responsible for approving foreign aid to all of these countries "riddled with poverty"? Please speak up, we can't understand your response. What?? You mean you have approved foreign aid in the past? How then can you make the statement "We haven't done that."?
"How would they look at us today if we had been there helping them with some of that rather than just being the people who are going to bomb in Iraq and go to Afghanistan?" Murray said. This woman proves Orwell's theory about double think. She knows the truth about American foreign aid but since the truth does not coincide with the Party Line, she must totally ignore what she knows is true and state a bald faced lie. 2 + 2 = 5, the new Social Democratic Creed.
Did Jack Smith give Trent Lott the benefit of the doubt? Is it more or less OK to praise Bin Laden, but obviously out of line to praise Thurmond? I'm so confused.
It is human nature to dislike the biggest, the most powerful, the most successful, the one who gets what he wants...that's why so many people hate the Cowboys and the Raiders. There is a dislike of America throughout the world, not because of our foreign policy, but because of our station.
America-haters around the world gravitate toward Bin Laden simply because he is the star of their team. He became a major player when he showed he could damage America, and the rest of the world, who doesn't mind seeing the big dog get knocked down a couple pegs, rallied behind him.
It has nothing to do with building infrastructure and day-care centers, Miss mental midget Murray. It has everything to do with America-hating (a concept I'm sure as a Democrat you're familiar with) and the star power Bin Laden achieved by successfully killing 3000 Americans.
No it is not. Because, as noted above in the article, America already DOES more than "guns and ammo" foreign policy.
The Patty Murrays of the world will never be satisfied until America eliminates guns and ammo from our foreign policy entirely. They think negotiating from strength is, well, rude. They approach foreign policy like a girl approaches dating, thinking that the goal is to make ourselves desired or even loved. Attempting to candy-coat this childish world-view, and make Murray sound like a serious foreign policy advisor, is rather silly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.