Fineman looked at Bush's mindset just before the war..."Bush and God"

This is from March 2003, Newsweek. It was the cover article. We were on the verge of invading and bombing Iraq, and some were referring to it as a "just war." If this is what we did in the name of Bush's God, then something is very wrong indeed.


NEWSWEEK - BUSH AND GOD
In the March 10, 2003, issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, March 3): "Bush & God". Newsweek examines President Bush's background of strong religious faith and belief and how both saved his life and family and shaped his political career and national government. Also: An excerpt from Steve Brill's upcoming book about America's response to September 11; the culture of evil in Baghdad; the good and bad of the Pentagon's plan to have the media with the troops; new hope for preterm babies; and a profile of Daniel Libeskind. (PRNewsFoto)
NEW YORK, NY USA

Bush And God

"A Higher Calling: It Is His Defining Journey--From Reveler To Revelation. A Biography Of His Faith, And How He Wields It As He Leads A Nation On The Brink Of War."



Bush and Rove build his campaign and agenda on their new base, the religious right. More from the Newsweek article.



David Frum tells how Bush began using the words of good and evil in regard to the war.



We on the left were right about the war from the beginning. Yet the religious right is still the group that neither party wants to upset. Those on the left are expected to be patient as things take course, because we don't want to offend those who still defend the bombing and torture of civilians in a war that was supported from many pulpits.

We on the left are not to be too demanding.

that is just begging for a hole-puncher.

Fuck you, LittleMan.

Fuck you.

You Friend,
Tom

Little Boots. And a truly little mind.

and everything that implies.

Take it own home, HotRod.

Tucked between your legs.

If it will reach (which I doubt).

And enjoy the rest of your miserable little life.

:puke:

He seems unaware of the destruction caused by his administration.

a Christophobe.

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/12/rick-warren-doubles-down-accus.html

Video at the link.

group that neither party wants to upset".

The $64 million question is "Why"? Maybe this should tell us that there is something very important going on that we don't know about. What does their power consist of, how did they get it, and how do they keep it?

because of the outrage by groups like Focus on the Family. I would LOVE to know where they are getting their money and clout...but this may be only a part of it.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/10/09/religious_right_wields_clout/

"For six decades, CARE has been a vital ally to the US government. It supplied the famed CARE packages to Europe's starving masses after World War II, and its work with the poor has been celebrated by US presidents. So the group was thrilled when it received a major contract from the Bush administration to fight AIDS in Africa and Asia.

But this time, instead of accolades came attacks. Religious conservatives contended that the $50 million contract, under which CARE was to distribute money to both secular and faith-based groups, was being guided by an organization out of touch with religious values.

Senator Rick Santorum , a Pennsylvania Republican, charged last year that CARE was ``anti-American" and ``promoted a pro-prostitution agenda." Focus on the Family, the religious group headed by James Dobson , said the agency that delivered the contract, the US Agency for International Development, was a ``liberal cancer."

The complaining paid off. CARE's $50 million contract is being phased out this year; it has been replaced with a $200 million program of grants that is targeted at faith-based providers, and overseen by USAID itself. The pressure on CARE is emblematic of that facing many other secular groups. President Bush's faith-based initiative has not only increased funding for church groups, but also raised the expectations of the religious right, which has asserted a stronger role in setting policy.

The pattern of outcry by religious conservatives, followed by accommodation by the administration, has been replicated on numerous occasions at USAID, from personnel decisions to choices of who runs humanitarian programs overseas. In the process, secular groups have seen an overall drop in funding. CARE's USAID dollars declined every year, from $138 million in fiscal 2001 to $96 million in fiscal 2005, the last year for which data is available, according to a Globe survey of prime contractors and grantees in the development arena."

... who doesn't have *something* that doesn't measure up to the self-proclaimed purity of the religious right nuts.

I can believe *that* as a motivator before I can believe that so many in government really believe the religious right's dogma. I've always felt that Dubya's proclamations of faith were merely cynical tools to achieve and maintain power.

Bill Moyers did a series on television fifteen or twenty years ago about how the religious right was making slow incursions into government by winning power at the local level all over the country, with an eye on the prize of the White House eventually.

So their power consisists at least in the willingness to seek out and expose human failings that would cause people in public office to toe the line out of fear of exposure, concern for their families, and actual fear for their lives.

How they got it was through a slow drip, drip, drip against a rock that finally began to give way. Religion has always been running in the background in American, but I remember as a young person attending the same church that Ken Starr belongs to that they continually made it clear that we should "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." The message was that we live our lives privately, according to good Christian precepts, but we don't organize a revolt against Rome. I don't remember ever hearing back then ("back then" was a while ago, but don't ask :) ) that established government should give way to a biblically-based government, as opposed to constitutional law. But there was always talk of the "End Times" when Jesus would return and take over everything. It was a passive expectation, not something they preached we should be trying to orchestrate.

I always felt I was among uneducated and incurious people -- even when I was five. We could have a whole conversation about what causes some people to stay with their tribe, and others to "reach out" to other realities. I credit some of my own leaving the fold with the world travel given to me by wars and my father's military travels. Some of it I believe is because I was born to a soldier father who was not highly educated, but very intelligent, and who set the example of reading all the time on subjects of interest to the fate of the world. I do not credit Obama's efforts to "reach out" to set-in-their-ways bigots like Warren as likely to have any success. And any hope that a token offering of friendship will mollify Warren and his ilk is simply smoking some high-quallity dope on the part of Obama -- metaphorically speaking, of course.

How they keep it is a mystery, but they keep it in large measure because Barack Obama, our congressional representatives, and our Supreme Court, and a long line of enablers in the past, are complicit in helping them keep it. Your three questions remain largely unanswered. I'm speculating here, based on my years of wondering the same things, and observing in first person the mindset of religious right people.

I keep fantasizing a scenario in which Barack gets past his fear that he needs the religious right to stay in power, and pays attention to the needs of all the people, including certain principles that are now classified as "left-leaning," and replaces that base with a more enlightened base that will help him stay in power. Actually, didn't we just do that?

I still haven't figured out Obama.

I think we'll have a much better idea about what kind of President he will be after he's been in office for 100 days or so.

In the time I spent in North Carolina, I was amazed to run into people who thought, who truly believed that Jesus wanted them to have that Cadillac or Mercedes Benz. I felt as if I had landed on a different planet, as I drove to work in the morning and was tailgated, and nearly sideswiped by drivers who had "Jesus Loves You" stickers on their cars. Retailers told me of patrons who on one hand would praise god and at the same time, write bad checks. One morning in a major chain coffee house, as I sat with my paper and coffee, a woman sat down as of to make small talk but ended up telling me how all sinners were welcome in God's house, and invited me to her church, while I could see, her son was trying to pretend he was not with 'her;' I assumed it was the New York Times that made her think I was a sinner. And the local radio was filled with Christian invective, while the racial boundaries of the town I lived in, were clearly drawn and enforced through economics and mass transit routes.

The Bush regime has changed America forever. The Obama White House will not change it. We've enabled
the Christian right wing bigots in the last eight years, and have given them legitimacy, and on inauguration day, Obama will be giving the stage briefly to 'these people.'

Bush used the god doctrine to great advantage, which when mixed with the Republican mantra of 'love the fetus, but hate the already born,' did so much damage to our national psyche and individual esteem, it will take a generation or more to erase from our collective memory, and his policies from the books.

Bush removed dignity from the American lexicon and replaced dignity with divisiveness, cynicism,
lack of respect for actual living people, and hostility toward ordinary Americans, while elevating corporatism, fascism, and crazy religious doctrine to new heights.

There are too many Americans to save, so we're on our own now.

They do without the cover of their "divine faith". Religion is the biggest money and power scam of all time and is as old as prostitution. It is by nature vicious since there is no better way to keep the masses in supplication while they are screwing and swindling them. Crooked politicians and religion go hand in hand. Until we rid ourselves of this enormous yolk we are doomed to slavery.

That said, there are also honest religious folks who do not feel the need to shout from the rooftops "look how religious I am, I've got religion" and try to get others to do, by law, their bidding. These folks as Jesus is meant to be, holding their religion deeply and privately, have selflessly done good works from the beginning and it is these folks and their reputation the greedy crooks and fakers use as their foundation to do damage to the rest of us; Most televangelists are perhaps the most evil of all and if they are not they are soon drummed out of the money and power scam lest they spoil it for the rest. If you have followed politics as closely as I, you will realize most pugs fit this mold and so do many dems. If you can bargain something you do not have; the power to give (Heaven) for wealth power and glory and call yourself a prophet; Who's to stop you? Nothing for something vastly powerful and as tangible as the biggest storehouse of gold.

I didn't check the spell checker

... our own, home-grown war criminals: "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

In some measure, most members of Congress are complicit in Bushco's war crimes because of their collegial agreement not to use the power of their respective offices to say no to clearly unconstitutional proposals.

I recommend, once again, Jeff Sharlet's book "The Family":



We have a history of political assassination in this country. Those in political office have more to fear than fear, itself. Even where individual courage exists, it requires swimming alone against a strong current of passivity. Dennis Kucinich comes to mind.

I fear that this phrase is very close to the truth in America today: "Religion is the opiate of the people." *Our* government, however, cynically uses religion to maintain a level of ignorance in the populace which will ensure its continuing power.

We've determined that Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim in the religious sense. Is Obama a closet Dominionist? Does it matter? Who/what is it that really controls power in America?

For anyone with the courage to demand answers, I fear a storm of documents with large portions redacted -- painted over with opaque black ink to protect We the People from the stress of knowing the truth about our government today.

like the Fellowship that Sharlet wrote about. Nelson and Hillary Clinton are just two of them.

I was raised in the church, and I am finding this caving in offensive.

A lot of intellectuals and progressives sort of brush this thing off as something of a fly on the lapel, and unworthy of any real consideration.

And you are right it should not be brushed off at all.

:hi:

The final moment before the Nov 2004 election, he deliberately skewed so many of his articles against Kerry.

Now he is KO's darling, and he will go on the air talking about how bad Bush is in terms of the intelligence and other decisions leading up to the IRaq war. But I'd love to see Olbermann ask him sometime - "How is it that no one at Newsweek went for Kerry?"

A person can claim how insightful they are these days, but everyone in the M$M, Fineman included, was a Bush fan until just lately.

I don't trust any media person completely. And him I trust less than some.

Does anyone remember this amazing video starring * as John the Revelator in Depeche Mode's classic?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx2trVA95Kk

Man of God, my ass.

The belief that the world can be explained as an eternal struggle between the forces of absolute good and absolute evil. Bush's Manichean mindset and the damage which has resulted is examined in A Tragic Legacy: How a Good vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency by Glenn Greenwald, author of "How Would a Patriot Act?". Recommended reading.

I ordered How Would a Patriot Act. I forgot about Tragic Legacy. I admire Greenwald's work very much. He is not afraid to be controversial.

The Fellowship.

....