Recall that “the Left” was protesting the Taliban dynamiting the statues of Buddah in Afghanistan in June 2001, while the Bush Administration was keeping its mouth shut about it.

Right. Keep in mind that in May 2001, the Bush Administration gave the Taliban $43 million. In return the Taliban issued a statement saying that poppy cultivation was against Allah's wishes. In return for such a generous gift, Bush wasn't about to give them grief for blowing up the statues of some religious figure Bush wasn't even familiar with, was he?

That was the job of "the left."

From letting Osama bin Laden get away at Tora Bora, to overthrowing secular Saddam Hussein, the Bush Administration and Conservatives in general have always favored the religious fundamentalists at every turn.

Of course in the fantasy bubble that Conservatives maintain around their vision of George W. Bush, facts do not matter at all: Just the spin that FoxNews puts out.

"Go ahead. Find me a group on the left with any sort of pull that’s been half as vocal about the very real and very deadly abuses of women in the past six years as it has the “abuses” of the Bush Administration."

You've completely missed my point. There may be groups that are currently doing this, or there may not be. The point is, protesting the actions of a government or organization in which you have NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER is not particularly effective. But as for whether or not liberal groups have done this in the past, I have shown that they have. (Just try and remember this one word: Afghanistan.)

Jimmie said:

"Never mind that the President has been very vocal about human rights abuses…"

What difference does that make, when your president is responsible for massive humanitarian crises, particularly in Iraq? You're saying that he gives a mean speech, which makes it all okay?

Jimmie said:

"He’s actually used the word “genocide” – something the last leftist adminstration was afraid to do lest we demand they do something about it."

Okay, Jimmie, while you were scrutinizing that blue dress, back before you'd heard about Afghanistan, there was also something else going on. Seems the Serbians were committing genocide in Bosnia and Kosovo. A democratic president sent troops there. Your republicans (most notably your president) protested against this action, claimed "wag the dog" and demanded an immediate exit strategy.

Just a little bit of history for you.

Jimmie said:

"Railing against Bush brings in big money, though. Railing against the Islamists is less lucrative and more risky."

That's not the calculus that's generally going on. Railing against Bush addresses the most grave foreign disasters currently occurring, from the Iraq debacle to resolutely ignoring climate change. For a person who wants to see the world change in a more positive direction, pointing out the abuses and failings under Bush and marshaling an opposition to them provides far more "bang for the buck" than picketing in front of the embassy of a foreign dictatorship that is the beneficiary of US aid.

Go ahead. Find me a group on the left with any sort of pull that's been half as vocal about the very real and very deadly abuses of women in the past six years as it has the "abuses" of the Bush Administration.

Your summation of my point is wrong. What I am saying, and what I have said, is that the left has pretty much forgotten about the plight of women, gays, teenagers, Christians (well, the left's never been particularly concerned about them, and everyone else held under the sword of the Islamists now that they have Chimpy McBushHitlerBurton and his American Taliban to get all froth-lipped about. Never mind that the President has been very vocal about human rights abuses and, more importantly, has given a physical form to Congress' overwhelming resolutions. He's actually used the word "genocide" – something the last leftist adminstration was afraid to do lest we demand they do something about it. The President is hardly ideal on the issue, but he's a sight better than anything the left has managed to produce in a President (or Presidential candidate) in the last couple of decades. You can argue that all you want. History is squarely against you.

Railing against Bush brings in big money, though. Railing against the Islamists is less lucrative and more risky.

While that kind of activity is good and useful in informing compassionate people around the world (another reason why you never knew about it), unfortunately it is rarely effective in creating the change that is sought. The Taliban did not change their policies in response to "the left."

Similarly, Saudi Arabia did not change this woman's sentence in response to the left, nor would they ever have. What changed Saudi Arabia's response was strong criticism from Bush. Without that word from the president, that woman's sentence would still be intact.

Why did he issue that criticism? Who knows? Bush isn't generally the type to give humanitarian concerns more weight than profitable alliances with the devil. So why the deviation? Personally, I understand that Bush's #1 concern right now is his legacy, his desire to leave office NOT as the US's worst president and a major step backwards for civilization. So, he throws a bone to a humanitarian cause, at least when it won't cost him anything.

Your main point seems to be that the left should quit criticizing abuses by our own government, and instead criticize the abuses of other governments that are arguably worse. This would make perfect sense if we were voting citizens or in some other way had any sort of influence whatsoever on the foreign government in question. Without that, it is far more effective to protest against the government that you — theoretically, at least — have some say in.

I hope you can understand all this.

They've provided enough offenses on their own (fixing the facts around the reasons for War in Iraq, eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, condoning of torture, Abu Ghraib, the hiring of unqualified cronies to positions of power, etc) without the need to invent others.

iaintbacchus,

Your last 2 paragraphs (in particular) are spot on.