State of the Union

travis slack writes "President Bush used his State of the Union speech to press home key domestic and international agendas. At home he promised to reform Social Security for future generations. Looking overseas, Bush vowed to spread freedoms around the world while continuing the war on terror, and he pointed to Iraq as a symbol of change."

Comments

There is no tomorrow

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5211218.ht ml

One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington.

Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.

Remember James Watt, President Ronald Reagan's first secretary of the interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever-engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true -- one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index.

That's right -- the rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the 12 volumes of the "Left Behind" series written by the Christian fundamentalist and religious-right warrior Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans.

Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre (the British writer George Monbiot recently did a brilliant dissection of it and I am indebted to him for adding to my own understanding): Once Israel has occupied the rest of its "biblical lands," legions of the antichrist will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon.

As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to Heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.

I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelations where four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man." A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomed -- an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144 -- just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter Heaven and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to Grist to read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist Glenn Scherer -- "The Road to Environmental Apocalypse." Read it and you will see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental destr

Let freedom rain

[Malfourmed]

I've been tracking the number of times President Bush uses the words "free" and "freedom" in his last three major speeches. Here are the results:

First 2004 presidential debate: 38 times

2005 inauguration address: 34 times

2005 state of the union address: a "mere" 27 times

Two things worth pointing out:

First, he almost never defines these terms. The only time he even comes close (in the inauguration address) he (or his speechwriters) equates freedom with making money.

Second, he often uses the words in relation to Iraq - like Pavlovian dogs he (or his speechwriters) wants to link the two concepts indelibly in people's minds. To oppose this administration's policies in Iraq is to oppose freedom itself.

Re:FMA

[gothzilla]

If marriage is so sacred then why such a high divorce rate? Why such a high spousal and child abuse rate? Marriage is only sacred in books and movies anymore. It stopped being more than just a legal agreement a long time ago and now only exists as sacred in the minds of people who've never tasted it's reality. Yeah there are some that work out, but not anywhere near enough to keep calling it something sacred.

Re:We need to fight back

[Straif]

Here's a interesting page detailing a leftist view of the war that doesn't start with "Bush is pure evil". While I am definitely a Conservative, despite the source, I think this is one of the best defences for the war (and from a Marxist no less).

http://www.marxist.org.uk/htm_docs/comm12.htm

It does a pretty good job both pointing out the hypocrisy of many on the left as well as giving some very strong reasons why Iraq was a good idea.

Personally, I have no trouble with someone disagreeing with me on what they believe is the better solution to a problem. On the other hand when they refuse to even see a problem or refuse to look at alternatives solely because of their emotions, then I have a problem.
You may try to put the President into the latter group but can you honestly point to anyone on the left who was offering alternatives that you couldn't find in a cheap fortune cookie. Platitudes are not alternatives.

Well, time to begin the weekend and get out of here. Everyone enjoy the Superbowl. And if you don't like football, enjoy the commercials.

P.S. I haven't really looked at anything else on the above site, besides this one page, so I won't even try to defend anything else on it.