BuzzFlash Guest Contribution

CONTRIBUTOR ARCHIVES  

Clinton and Bush Sr., Together Again—But Why?

Liberal Compassion For Acts of God, Conservative Compassion for Acts of Man

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Dr. Teresa Whitehurst

Former foes come together in photogenic form, and all that has separated them for decades is forgotten as they seek charity for tsunami survivors:

"Former US presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush Senior have visited Indonesia as part of a tour of areas affected by December's tsunami. After a brief meeting with Indonesia's President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the pair flew to the devastated province of Aceh to speak with survivors.

"They arrived from Thailand, where they had urged the world not to forget the victims and the reconstruction effort. The two men have been asked by the White House to raise relief funds.”

-- “Clinton and Bush see Aceh damage”, BBC.com, 2/20/05

Why has the White House asked these two men—the president’s father and Bill Clinton, a Republican and a Democrat—to appear together in photo op after photo op, illustrating Americans united in compassion for victims of this natural disaster? Perhaps the president and his advisors are trying to create the illusion of “united we stand” at a time when our nation is wracked with divisions over moral issues, and rightly so: The minority of Americans are horrified by the majority’s complacent acceptance of man-made wickedness (e.g., the destruction of entire cities, the killing of over 100,000 innocent people, and the depraved torture of men, women and even children).

Or is the Bush administration blitzing the media with two former presidents to offset negative public opinion regarding its stingy conservative compassion for tsunami victims?

Bush Sr.’s motivations for helping his son are none too mysterious. But what about Bill Clinton? Why did he accept this offer? Whenever I see him standing there shaking hands with Bush Sr. in front of the cameras for a cause that everyone can agree is worthy and that will ruffle no-one’s feathers, I’m reminded of a meeting I attended many years ago. Business leaders were being advised about the causes or charities they should “adopt” for free publicity and positive PR. The expert explained:

“Now I know that some of you have expressed interest in things like battered women’s shelters or child abuse or animal maltreatment or AIDS, but these can be tricky. There will always be somebody who’s prickly about feminists, or threatening parental rights, or interfering with animal experimentation, or the gay “lifestyle”. So stick with something neutral that nobody can argue about, like sick kids or dying people (except when the actions of people—you know, their behavior—are assumed by the public to be the cause of the disease). Even if a cause is already crowded with funds and support, it’s better to align yourself there than with those causes where the need is greater, but where your support could turn off a segment of your market.”

A Twisted Theology: Double Standards for Compassion

But today I am not dwelling on the political strategy of this magical mystery tour led by such strange bedfellows as Bush and Clinton. What awes me is the moral and theological contrast: Why do they seek prayers and raise funds to help the survivors of “God’s” violence, but not the survivors of man’s violence?

The preventable man-made violence in Iraq was perpetrated in their names as Americans and carried out by their own countrymen, yet these two men are not raising sympathy and cash for that cause. Instead, they are focusing only on disasters for which they bear no collective responsibility and that could not have been prevented.

It is my hope that this article will inspire them to prove to the world that they do not hold double standards for American conscience and Christian compassion by extending their media tour to Iraq. The Bush/Clinton Iraq tour must not limit its sympathy or help to victims of “the terrorists” alone, but to victims of US bombs and guns as well.

If George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton, former presidents identifying themselves as Christians, care about the Indonesians who are grieving, living in fear, and suffering from the destruction of their communities, why do they not also care about the Iraqis who are grieving, living in fear, and suffering from the destruction of their communities?

Is there something I’ve missed in Jesus’ words that would allow Christians to care so much for victims of nature or “God”, but not for victims of man? Where did Jesus say that we should not have compassion for those whose arms have been blown off by men, or for children whose parents were shot dead before their eyes by men? Did I somehow misunderstand the story of the Good Samaritan, who stopped to help a man from a people antagonistic to his own, a victim bloodied by men and ignored by the godly religious folks who rushed past him?

I am glad that Americans still have the capacity to care about anyone who isn’t American; I was beginning to wonder. But the dividing line for that care, particularly in a nation that boasts its heaven-worthy Christian status at every opportunity, is twisted and vulgar. “Christ’s love for all” has been changed to “Christ’s love for those our president hasn’t yet identified as “the enemy” or “in need of liberation””.

The Strange Logic of Conservative Compassion

This dividing line that determines whom Americans will care about and whom they won’t reveals our true beliefs, and they are strange indeed. If you fall down a well, then I should have compassion and rescue you because your fall was simply an accident, an “act of God”. Because you fell and were not pushed, I can help you without fear of undermining or angering anyone who wanted you dead.

And if I think the way the majority thinks, my assumption—though I may never realize it, let alone articulate it—is that accidents such as this, though they’re “acts of God”, are not God’s will. God allowed it, but did not want it to happen. (What this says about our real beliefs about God must be addressed at another time, for it says a lot.) Thus I am not only allowed, but am obliged to help you.

However, if my friends push you down the well, then I should stifle my compassion and walk on by because to help you would be to betray my friends, who must have either (1) had good reason to push you down the well, or (2) thought you were someone else, thus weren’t really targeting you.

If I help you, I am either (1) undermining my friends’ efforts to kill you (if you were the intended target of their violence, which I blindly trust was justified), or (2) making them and their error-ridden violence look bad by publicly showing my compassion and rescuing you (if you were not their intended target).

If I close my ears to your desperate cries for help, then I support my friends. “Support our troops” means that you are not allowed to help those people—including US soldiers—who’ve been harmed or are in danger of being killed by the US military. To help them, especially while the cameras are rolling, would be to make the military and its commander-in-chief look bad.

If I think the way the majority thinks, my assumption is that acts of man, as long as they are the acts of my countrymen, ordained by my president and thus by God, are God’s will. Thus I cannot help you. To help you would undermine my countrymen and my president and make them look bad. To help you would be to interfere with God’s will.

The article reports that scenes of death and carnage are new to Bush Sr.: ""I've never seen anything like this in my entire life," Mr Bush said, “…It's very moving... I'll never forget this," Mr Bush said on Saturday at a news conference in the Baan Nam Khem village, just north of the Thai resort of Phuket. He was speaking after a little girl whose mother was killed by the tsunami gave him a picture, showing her village being struck by the giant waves.”

If their Christian faith is based on obedience to Christ’s teachings, then surely George Bush Sr., George Bush Jr., and Bill Clinton will visit Iraq next to pray and raise funds for survivors, and speak with little girls and boys whose mothers and fathers were killed by the giant bombs and guns of men.

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION

Dr. Teresa Whitehurst is a clinical psychologist, author of Jesus on Parenting: 10 Essential Principles That Will Transform Your Family (2004) and coauthor of The Nonviolent Christian Parent (2004). She offers parenting workshops, holds discussion groups on Nonviolent Christianity, and writes the column, "Democracy, Faith and Values: Because You Shouldn’t Have to Choose Just One" as seen on her website.