Why the GOP says 'freedom isn't free'

They've said it a gazillion times in defense of Bush's warmongering in the middle east. They say "freedom isn't free," meaning that Americans must pay billions of dollars and thousands of lives so that Bush can liberate oil--I mean, liberate the Iraqi people--from Saddam's brutal rule.

What I enjoy about Bush is that he usually is telling you exactly what he really thinks--even though his voter base is too obtuse to catch it. For example, when Bush says he wants to fix Social Security, he means fix it, and "fix it good." As in, ruin it.

Regarding Iraq, Bush said freedom wasn't free. What he meant was, Republicans don't bother liberating people if there's no profit in it. For example, Iraqi people were liberated because they sat on the world's second or third largest oil reserves. On the flip-side, Bush sat on his thumbs regarding the better-documented suffering of the North Korean people, even while "evil" NK brandished nukes in his face. Not coincidentally, North Korea is one poor-ass country.

Lesson: you don't get liberated by Bush if you don't have anything we want.

So it's no wonder at all why the Bush administration and his sycophantic GOP supporters aren't shedding a single tear for the genocide going on RIGHT NOW in Darfur, in the Sudan. Sudan has some resources, but mostly undeveloped. And it's people are suffering from a brutal rebellion.

According to the U.N., 180,000 people have died from hunger and disease in the past 18 months. That's 10,000 per MONTH, and does not include war casualties.

Never, at any time, did Saddam ever commit such atrocities. Where are the Republican "liberators" now?

Waiting, I suppose, for the Sudan to discover more oil...