Monday, December 01, 2014

Are Conservatives and Socialists ‘Brothers’? George W. Bush Calls Bill Clinton His ‘Brother’

Are Conservatives and Socialists ‘Brothers’? George W. Bush Calls Bill Clinton His ‘Brother’

By Julio Severo
George W. Bush has described Bill Clinton as a ‘brother from another mother’ in a gushing interview about their surprising friendship, according to Daily Mail.
Clinton and Bush
He added that his own father ‘serves as a father figure’ to Clinton, who pushed the elder Bush out of office in 1992.
The Daily Mail reported that after becoming president, Clinton frequently sought Bush Sr.’s advice, just as Bush Jr. did with Clinton when he was elected America’s 43rd president.
Did these mutual advices include abortion and homosexuality? After all, before Obama, Clinton was the most prominent pro-abortion and pro-sodomy U.S. president. In contrast, Bush was generally pro-life and pro-family.
Did their friendship involve moral clashes? I have never heard about it.
In fact, I have never heard Bush openly criticizing Clinton’s pro-abortion and pro-sodomy policies. And even now that the U.S. government has been championing, through its State Department and USAID, the promotion of the homosexual agenda around the world, Bush’s voice of protest has been heard nowhere.
In 2007, in his visit to Brazil, Globo, the largest TV network in Brazil, contacted me for an interview, because, according to its journalist, I was one of the few Brazilians supportive of Bush. My support was based on pro-life and pro-family values.
I honored Bush because of these values.
Bush could honor these same values and his alleged Christian convictions by exposing and denouncing the leftist wickedness of men like Clinton and Obama. Why does he never have done it?
They are not brothers in the abortion and the sodomy issues. But, apparently, in the U.S. foreign policy there are higher interests. Clinton funded the Venezuelan Marxism in the 1990s by letting his country to buy the Venezuelan oil, thereby helping Venezuela fund Marxism in Latin America, including Foro de São Paulo. Bush never criticized Clinton for this funding. On the contrary, he did the same thing in the 2000s. So Clinton and Bush were brothers in the funding of the Venezuelan Marxism.
They were also brothers when they supported Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two foremost Muslim nations involved in international Islamic terrorism.
It seems that the message of their ‘brotherhood’ is:
It does not matter if you are conservative or socialist, support America, which has everything you need, whether conservatism or socialism. America can satisfy your ideological preference if you support her.
America can satisfy you even religiously. If you are (conservative or liberal) Christian, America has top liberal and conservative Christians to your liking. If you are Muslim, America has a Muslim as director of CIA and Muslims even in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). As you, DHS labels conservative Christians as “terrorists”!
America can satisfy you in the pro-life and pro-abortion issue. But as far as pro-life stances are concerned, America can satisfy you only in the private setting. Satisfaction about the U.S. government promoting and imposing an ideology is guaranteed only to pro-abortion and pro-sodomy activists, as the U.S. government is committed only to this cause.
Bill Clinton is socialist, and he has a pro-abortion and pro-sodomy record to confirm it.
George Bush is conservative and he has a pro-life and pro-family record to confirm it.
Yet, apparently, when the subject is U.S. supremacy, both disregard their “irreconcilable” moral and ethical differences and become “brothers.”
Another factor uniting them and making them brothers is the U.S. politics of imposing on Israel a two-state solution. This is, even though God wants only the Jews in the land of Israel, the U.S. wants Jews and Palestinian Arabs in that land. Both Democrats and Republicans are determined in this plan against Israel. Both Bush and Clinton and now Obama wanted and want to impose a Palestinian nation in the land of Israel.
For Clinton, it is easy to defend a U.S. supremacy with a government eagerly promoting the gay agenda, including by threatening developing nations with aid cut if they do not submit themselves to the U.S. homosexualist impositions.
Yet, how can be easy for Bush to be with his “brother” in this?
In fact, if the Christian conservatism of a man, American or Brazilian, matters less than nationalist interests and ambitions, just as the nation is in grave sin and threatening to turn the world into Sodom, what is the use of being a conservative?
If the Christian conservatism of a man, American or Brazilian, forms an easy alliance with socialists in a nationalist brotherhood, what is the use of being a conservative?
God-oriented conservatism makes a country strong. Socialism, which distorts and attacks God, leaves people weak.
Conservatism and patriotism is good. But when God-oriented conservatism is sacrificed on the altar of nationalism, conservatives and socialists become “brothers,” and the nationalist supremacy makes socialism a winner and pro-family and pro-life values generally big losers.
An example of the nationalist supremacy’s negative effects is the criticism from U.S. homosexual activists, feminists, leftists and rightists directed at the International Forum of the Large Family and the Future of Humanity, held in Moscow last September and attended by fine pro-family leaders from other nations, including the U.S. American leftists attacked it because it was a conservative event. U.S. homosexual activists attacked it because it opposed the gay agenda. American feminists attacked it because it was pro-life. American rightists attacked it because they think that Moscow is not entitled to hold pro-family events. All of them, even though from antagonistic ideological spectrums, were moved by nationalism.
The Moscow event was conservative. I was there. Conservative American-Jewish author Don Feder was there, attacking the culture of death and cultural Marxism. And there were other Americans, who were under threat from their homosexual, feminist, leftist and rightist ultra-nationalist compatriots.
In the past few decades America has produced Clinton, Bush and Obama. Their nationalism, marked by military interventions with a trail of suffering and death for countless Christians around the world, has been strongly accompanied — excepting Bush — by anti-family and anti-life impositions in the United Nations and around the world. The Obama administration is the most pro-Islam and anti-Christian administration in the U.S. history.
Increasingly in this terrifying nationalism, there is no place for respect for life and family. Even during the Bush administration, pro-life and pro-family values never were a top priority as sodomy and abortion have been now in the U.S. foreign policy. Even so, Bush and Clinton are ‘brothers.’ Even so, Bush have never criticized this wicked policy and sodomitic nationalism. He has never criticized the Islamic promotion by the U.S. government.
What is the use of being a pro-life and pro-family Christian conservative when the U.S. nationalism allows his values no priority or even a place of honor?
The fact the U.S. has a sodomitic top priority in its foreign policy, military interventions facilitating Islamic expansion and persecution of Christians around the world and a destructive two-state solution for Israel confirm a destructive nationalism at the service of oligarchic interests and ambitions.
If the two-state solution for Israel unites U.S. presidents in a nationalistic ‘brotherhood,’ Clinton, Bush and Obama are ‘brothers.’ And if promotion of Islam also strengthens this ‘brotherhood,’ then while Obama is the guy who is promoting Islam today, Bush was the guy who immediately after 9/11 said that Islam is a ‘religion of peace.’
After a Nazi attack in 1940, would a Clinton, Bush or Obama have said that Nazism is an ‘ideology of peace’? Why then is Islam, whose adherents love Hitler, afforded a title of peace when its ideology fosters terror and death?
Why was not Bush ashamed of misrepresenting the ideology that violently attacked his country and has been slaughtering thousands of Christians every year?
As a Christian, is he aware that one of the Ten Commandments orders us not to give false testimony? Sadly, even the Pope has broken it by saying recently that “equating Islam with violence is wrong.”
The strange nationalistic ‘brotherhood’ of Clinton, Bush and Obama does not have brought benefit for Christianity and its values. On the other hand, it has been advancing socialism, Islam, abortion and sodomy around the world in a babylonic orgy.
In his autobiography “Decision Points” (Crown), George W. Bush said that he had a spiritual conversion through Billy Graham. He said, “As I read the Bible, I was moved by the stories of Jesus’ kindness to suffering strangers, His healing of the blind and crippled, and His ultimate act of sacrificial love when He was nailed to the cross.”
About his pro-life values, he explained, “The abortion issue is difficult, sensitive, and personal. My faith and conscience led me to conclude that human life is sacred. God created man in His image and therefore every person has value in His eyes. It seemed to me that an unborn child, while dependent on its mother, is a separate and independent being worthy of protection in its own right. When I saw [my daughters] Barbara and Jenna on the sonogram for the first time, there was no doubt in my mind they were distinct and alive. The fact that they could not speak for themselves only enhanced society’s duty to defend them.”
Yet, he added, “Many decent and thoughtful people disagreed, including members of my family.”
One of these people is his wife, Laura Bush, who in her autobiography “Spoken from the Heart” (Simon and Schuster), said, “I have always believed that abortion is a private decision.”
Can the killing of an innocent child be a ‘private’ decision?
To defend life, Bush had to disappoint his wife and a multitude of pro-abortion activists.
Why not disappoint a larger number of pro-death and pro-unjust war radicals? Why not disappoint the oligarchic forces ruling in the U.S. in administration after administration?
A spiritual conversion puts you in a new family.
I would like my article to reach Bush and challenge him to commit himself more to his Christian brotherhood, with international Christians suffering on the trail of the U.S. military (mis)adventures that facilitate Islamic expansion, than to his nationalistic ‘brotherhood.’
Can Clinton and Obama become Bush’s brothers? Yes. Under Christ, they can enter the new family — which has nothing to do with the promotion of socialism, Islam, abortion, sodomy and destructive oligarchic interests and ambitions.
This new family is about knowing Christ as a Savior and Lord, living with Him and seeking and expanding His Kingdom (His Government) and His righteousness.
Recommended Reading:


  1. Anonymous9:14 PM

    The author of this piece assumes that George W. Bush is a conservative. How wrong can you be.

  2. Anonymous10:06 PM

    When did George W, Bush (or any Bush) become a conservative?