Lighting a fire - inaugural address

[Rspaight]

Cool. I'm glad that *somebody* is trying to reclaim what Jesus was actually about from these fascist "fundamentalist" nutjobs.

Ryan

[Rspaight]

From Scott Rosenberg in that left-wing rag Salon (I've bolded my favorite line):

Worth noting: This may be the one time in the history of the universe that I agree with Peggy Noonan, who points out that Bush's inaugural had "way too much God" in it:

"It left me with a bad feeling, and reluctant dislike... marked by deep moral seriousness and no moral modesty... [it] left this Bush supporter yearning for something she does not normally yearn for, and that is: nuance...."

"This world is not heaven. The president's speech seemed rather heavenish. It was a God-drenched speech... The speech did not deal with specifics--9/11, terrorism, particular alliances, Iraq. It was, instead, assertively abstract...."

"Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth....The most moving speeches summon us to the cause of what is actually possible. Perfection in the life of man on earth is not."

There you have it: The Bush inaugural marked the final transition of the Bush-family ideology from old-school conservatism, with its abhorrence of abstract schemes of human perfectibility, to a messianic idealism so divorced from reality it gives even sympathizers like Noonan the willies. Bush's vision of human perfectibility may be shaped by born-again fervor rather than socialist theory, but that difference doesn't make its collision with reality any less dangerous.

Ryan

[Dob]

Cool. I'm glad that *somebody* is trying to reclaim what Jesus was actually about from these fascist "fundamentalist" nutjobs.

And I'm glad that you saw fit to put quotes around "fundamentalist." True fundamentalists don't pick and choose which parts of the Bible to accept and which parts (the difficult ones, like "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor") to conveniently ignore, minimize, or not interpret literally. This sort of hypocrisy is common with the religious right, and -- once again -- visible to folks with only a cursory knowledge of Christianity.

[Matt]

Gentlemen, I have no problem admitting Bush wants to advance his political agenda under the guise of religion. As an individual who is not religious at all, I don't buy into any of it. Yes, Bush is a fundamentalist. But a fascist nutjob?

I personally think the whole 10,00 Jesuses thing is funny. Let them protest the fascist fundamentalist nutjobs. Yes sir, 10,000 Jesuses probably doesn't have a polical agenda they want to advance under a religious guise. True fundamentalists would never do that. Maybe they are just fundamentalist nutjobs?

[dcooper]

Matt, only Bush haters are welcome in this thread ... please stay out for the duration.

[Hey, this Gorfing stuff is fun!]

[Rspaight]

Gentlemen, I have no problem admitting Bush wants to advance his political agenda under the guise of religion. As an individual who is not religious at all, I don't buy into any of it. Yes, Bush is a fundamentalist. But a fascist nutjob?

http://forums.lukpac.org/viewtopic.php?t=1416

Ryan

[Xenu]

And I'm glad that you saw fit to put quotes around "fundamentalist." True fundamentalists don't pick and choose which parts of the Bible to accept and which parts (the difficult ones, like "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbor") to conveniently ignore, minimize, or not interpret literally.

(Nitpick)Kinda. Remember that "Fundamentalists" isn't a word that came from nowhere; it originally referred to those who followed the "Fundamentals," published IIRC around the turn of the century. I don't think that Fundamentalist has ever properly been synonymous with biblical literalism.(/Nitpick)

I could be horribly wrong, though.

[Rspaight]

Give Xenu a cee-gar.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fundamentalist

Ryan

[Dob]

I don't think that Fundamentalist has ever properly been synonymous with biblical literalism.

I believe this definition is closer to the generally accepted meaning of the word. But keep your cigar.