Seduction of Christians
Excerpts from this article:David Kuo was a rising star among social conservatives: he wrote speeches for Ralph Reed, served as a policy adviser to John Ashcroft and counted Bill Bennett as his mentor. He joined the Bush campaign in 1998 and rose to become second in command at the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. But he quickly grew disillusioned with the Bush White House for what he saw as its political manipulation of Christian groups—and the failure to fund a policy that the president portrays as his personal priority.
Are Christian leaders being naïve in their dealings with the White House or do they understand the nature of the exchange?
It’s a little bit of both. In some ways White House power is like [J.R.R.] Tolkien’s ring of power. When you put it on, it feels good and it’s dazzling. But after a while it begins to consume you in ways you don’t realize. That’s the nature of White House power. I have no doubt that Christian political leaders have gotten involved for all the right reasons. I just think over time it becomes harder and harder to stand up against that ring of power and the White House, to say no and walk away.
On why the Pres didn't deliver on his faith based agenda:
George W. Bush is a really good, caring person—a caring, compassionate man. He’s unbelievably empathetic for the people around him who are hurting. But President Bush is the head of the GOP. He’s leader of the government. He’s either the perpetrator or the victim of the modern presidency. He’s a politician and politicians make strategic decisions. In that context, our work wasn’t a political priority.
--------------
Thoughts? I have mine but as a gentleman, you go first:o)
posted by Mercy Now @ 10:58 PM
7 Comments:
I think this hate/digust for Bush is compleatly irrational. Who else would have been as helpful to the evangelical right?
Not Dick Armey, he called us thugs.
You know what, I have a hard enough time trying to keep a 9 year old girl and an 11 year old boy happy, peaceful and content with the life I'm trying to provide for them, all the while trying to prepare them for life when they leave home, and I'm a Christian. I can not imagine what it's like for the president of our nation to do the same on a level about a million times more complicated, whether democrat or republican. The one thing that always ticks me off the most is when people blame the presidential office for policies, decisions or events that they have absolutely no control over; i.e. school shootings, hurricane disasters, etc. I wouldn't want that position if you paid me what a left-handed relief pitcher with a losing record earns in MLB. (which you would think should be a lot less than what the president makes)
I think there's a lot of truth in this article.
I don't hate or despise President Bush (I'd have vote for him over any of the 2004 Democrat nominees.), but I do doubt that he is as devoted a Christian as he tries to appear. I think he's a shrewd politician and I wouldn't put it past him to try and manipulate Christians as a voting block.
I have no doubt as to Bush's sincere faith and I think that he is doing his level-headed best to infuse his policies and actions with it. And he's done an incredible job of doing just that. Given the level of villification directed at him it is incredible that he has declined to lash out.
Sometimes I almost cringe at how he gets unfairly pummeled by the hateful insects. But he lets it bounce off of him (or absorbs it) and keeps trying to explain what he is trying to accomplish. He may be the most powerful man on earth, but by definition he is still a Gulliver in the land of the Lilliputlians.
No he's not perfect by a long shot. But he's my president and I pray for him, both as a man and as the leader of our country.
If Bush is the head of the GOP and the GOP controls congress, he's not doing a very good job keeping his party in line. The Republicans don't act as if they are in control. They let the minority party dictate the will of the majority, which is contrary to how a democracy works.
As for who becomes the next president, I would support anyone who will: lock down both of our borders, get spending under control, reduce taxes, pledge to protect my rights to own whatever form of arms I see fit, protect my right to my private property, and make English the official language of the US. I'm pretty flexible on most other issues, but these are the big ones to me.
Let's think carefully about this a minute; a man produces a book critical of the Bush administration just before the election. Can we at least admit the possibility of an ulterior motive?
Say, perhaps he was trying to divert "faith based initiative" funds to environmental causes?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30542
So I'd argue that this says something completely different from what is evident on the surface.
BB, good article:
My biggest worry about the "faith-based initiative" was that it would render previously effective religion-based charities ineffective. They would be neutered, I thought, by federal restrictions and red tape. Even I would not have imagined the very narrow social purpose of the initiative would be corrupted – at least not this quickly.
It's amazing. There's just no mixing compassion and government. Compassion equals love. Government equals force. Never the twain shall meet – at least not until the Good Lord returns.
BTW, if I become Pres, I'd put you on my cabinet since you're full of good ideas.
Post a Comment
<< Home