If the White House were politically smart, they would intervene in Darfur

If President Bush is eager to boost his approval ratings, which I guess that he is, then he might want to think about intervening to stop the genocide in Darfur.  This is such an easy opportunity for him to address the nation and say, "I stand behind my values of compassionate conservatism.  I stand in favor of making the Oval Office an example of how the U.S. government should exercise moral responsibility.  Therefore, as a Born Again Christian, I will intervene in Darfur because our nation will not sit by and watch as hundreds of thousands of refugees are being murdered and raped every day."

The entire nation will be with him in this effort.  Yesterday people from all different social and religious interests rallied together on the National Mall to urge the President -- the commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation in the world -- to do something about the genocide:

"The personal motivation for a lot of us is the Holocaust," saidBoston-based Rabbi Or Rose of Jewish Seminarians for Justice. "Givenour history and experience, we feel an obligation to stand up and speakout."

In an interview, refugee Hassan Cober said he was forced to leavehis family and flee Sudan four years ago after many were killed andraped. He urged the United States and the United Nations to act quickly, saying he had no idea where his family was or if they were OK.

"We need deeds, not words," said Cober, now of Portland, Maine."They need to come to Darfur today, not tomorrow, because what is goingon is a disaster.

Most importantly, President Bush could intervene and prove to us once and for all that he is not as much of an non-populist as we think he is.  This is about populism in action.  During Andrew Jackson's Administration in the late-1820s, President Jackson believed that the Executive Branch was a governmental arm whose job it was to protect the wishes of the people.  And although Jackson did extend Executive power beyond a legal limit during his term (by killing the National Bank), many think that the founder of the modern-day Democratic Party was on to something.

This is Bush's chance to show us that he is less of an elitist and more of a populist.  With Darfur, Americans are asking their government to act -- completely different than with Iraq, since in that case the government convinced the American people that it was right to act (the other way around!).  Most of our country believes in a government that protects the wishes of the people.  When people want action, the government is therefore obliged to act.

On several occasions, President Bush said this about freedom:

"I also have this belief, strong belief, that freedomis not this country's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty's giftto every man and woman in this world."

If that is the case, then Bush needs to stand by his principles and intervene in a part of the world where an oppressed people are being denied, against their will, a freedom that we believe is a basic right in life.