THE MORALITY OF TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN

For every reference in this article to America and American leaders, just substitute Britain and British leaders.

You wont find much to disagree with. I certainly don’t.

“The moral obligation of an American leader is to look after the well-being of the people of the United States. The moral obligation of a Russian leader is to look after the well-being of the people of Russia. A leader of either country who fails to do these things is acting immorally.

President Bush has acted immorally towards his own people.It is arguable that Vladimir Putin has acted in a more moral fashion with respect to his own people than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton has with respect to Americans. This is because the forty-second and forty-third presidents of the United States placed “international law” ahead of the welfare of Americans.

Not to see this is to be obtuse.

It doesn’t mean that Vladimir Putin is a good person. It doesn’t mean that he hasn’t acted cynically (and against American interests) in Iran and other places. It doesn’t mean that he hasn’t been brutal.

It means that he has taken care of his own.”

Go read it all:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-russia.html

I can think of only one British political party whose leadership will be sure to take care of its own (people).

What say we all?

Morg