Our President is delusional, does that bother anyone?

[Echo 6 Sierra]

And there it "was" folks, effect. Effect was always temporary and thought was effect. There is the point being referred from, then the thought of an action, then the thought of intending to do an action, then the thought of the action being done.

Illusion started immediately after the point being referred from.



All that was going on was one individual trying to cause an effect.

So long as any individual intended to cause any effect, so long as any individual exercised their particular will (as opposed to their universal will/not-action) to do any action that they 'thought' their body did or was about to do, prior to the point of intention, that individual 'pigeon-holed' themself in the world of illusion and their self had fooled them.

Prior to the statement that Bush made that may have fooled many individuals, Bush fooled Bush first.

You 'want' to cause an effect? Do something.
You NEED to cause the cause? Do nothing.

OMG! I have no idea what you just said.

 

[Brad_1234]

Consider the source of the allegation

In response to post 1, consider the fact that any Palestinian offical or spokesperson claims this. Do you remember a fellow named "Baghdad Bob"? He was the spokesperson for the former Saddam regime, around April 2003 he was reporting that US forces are no where near the Baghdad Airport, they have surrendered and are retreating. Or some such. Is that what took place? No.

Rumor has it that many "liberal" networks like cbs, abc, nbc, comedy central, et seq, wanted to offer "Bob" a job doing standup comedy, or doing his schtick (hyperbolic denial) but that lousy DoD wants to keep him under arrest.

The next point is that the claim is not mainstream. Only fanatics like strung out cult leaders (David Koresh, etc) explicitly claim to hear Gods voice.

Christians in the mainstream claim that the Bible IS the literal word of God, circular logic or not, the Bible claims to be perfect in inspiration (2Tim3:16) so that the words, not the writers, are perfect. A Christian will say he or she is accountable to God and has the Bible to reference. When praying about something it takes advanced discernment to know if its "Gods will" or not.

No mainstream Christian would convey "God told me to topple Iraq... Then God told me to wear a lime popsicle around my neck..."

The White House denies it, and if you know your New Testament Scripture, the Christian is to be prepared to give their testimony and not be ashamed of the gospel at all. President Bush could not deny his faith and be faithful.

Id consider the story a stumbling block for people who are deeply skeptical about the Christian faith. If a person does not believe, or is atheist? Thats a personal choice. You could, if asked, tell someone no, I don't believe but that's my choice based on my experience. Respect my right to choose what to believe as I also respect your right to choose. Please don't insult me for being atheist, as I also don't insult others for not being atheist. I can't answer for you or anyone else how you should see your faith and I try to be careful about others' beliefs, my choice is mine but you should do your own searching...

 

[loseyourname]

Forget about Bush being delusional. The real terrifying aspect of this is that it was carefully contrived. It was contrived to be heard by God-fearing Americans.

He said this to an Islamic audience outside of the United States. Unless he's in charge of the BBC, he has also made no effort to make these statements known stateside.

 

[Skyhunter]

No one does bad willingly, we invaded iraq with our culture before the war, the men there use to have total control over the women for instance, now those ideas are threatened, it would be as stressful for a new culture to come to America that was telling women they should have total control over their men it's a lot of change either way.

Does God approve of killing each other then?

LOL tarheel

Are you British?

Since that would have been the "we" who invaded Mesopotamia before the US.

 

[Skyhunter]

And caused a lot of destruction along the way.

Comparing the President to character in a movie in an attempt to defend him is worse than invoking Clinton.

(I know you didn't start it Hurkl)

Besides, the White House is denying he ever said it.

I guess calling the Palestinian leaders liars is going to help the peace process.

This moron should just resign and spare us the embarrassment of his presidency.

New poll numbers out.

Bush's poll numbers: How low can he go?
A new http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/06/opinion/polls/main924485.shtml hands George W. Bush the lowest approval rating he has ever received. Just 37 percent of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing overall. Only 32 percent of the public approves of his handling of Iraq, another all-time low. While 36 percent say that U.S. troops should stay in Iraq as long as it takes to get the job done, 59 percent say that the troops should come home as soon as possible. And more than 60 percent say that the federal government should cut funding for the war in order to pay for Hurricane Katrina.

The poll was taken before Bush gave his big speech yesterday -- the one in which he informed Americans that Iraq is the "central front" in the war on terror and that "progress" is being made there. On the other hand, it was also taken before Americans got the latest news from Iraq: Six U.S. Marines were killed in bombings Thursday, bringing the U.S. death toll there close to the 1,950 mark.

-- Tim Grieve

 

[Moonbear]

You know, historically, many Christians have had a name for leaders who have such direct access to divine knowledge: False prophets.

Historically-speaking, there have also been other names for such leaders: kings and pharoahs.

 

[pattylou]

New poll numbers out.

Wow! again. Rasmussen still has his approval at 46-47%.

I'm almost starting to feel sorry for the guy. Maybe God *did* speak to him. Maybe God had his own plan, one in which he wanted to teach bush a lesson about humility.

We always assume God would speak to people in order to tell them what to do to make the world/their tribe better off. WHo knows? Maybe God spoke to Bush simply because he thought Bush needed to be taken down a notch.

(heheh, no, I don't really believe that.)

 

[faust9]

Wow! again. Rasmussen still has his approval at 46-47%.

I'm almost starting to feel sorry for the guy. Maybe God *did* speak to him. Maybe God had his own plan, one in which he wanted to teach bush a lesson about humility.

We always assume God would speak to people in order to tell them what to do to make the world/their tribe better off. WHo knows? Maybe God spoke to Bush simply because he thought Bush needed to be taken down a notch.

(heheh, no, I don't really believe that.)

Rasmussen never tells you what "somewhat approve" or "somewhat dissapprove" means. The fact remains that Bush has a 37% Stongly disapprove rating (today at least) versus the 23% stongly approve. That ratio is HUGE.

Rasmussen details the mechanism of their poll; however, weighting and determination of what constitutes the ambigious term "somewhat" is not detailed. For all we know Somewhat means a respondent answered one question with an approving(or disapproving) answer while the rest of the question were either all for or all against Bush. The "somewhat" 40% is a statistical gimmick. In fact, the rasmussen numbers can easily be correlated with the CBS numbers using the stongly approve or disapprove category and the Bush approval numbers from CBS(or any other poll for that matter). The other polls show a very small middle ground meaning they set a higher bar than Rasmussen and as such direct a larger percentage toward approve or disapprove. Smaller middle ground figures usually means a more useable statistic; however, these large middle ground numbers allows Rasmussen to play both sides of the fence.

[edit]I'd also like to add that many Rasmussen polls ask 4 level question(excellent, good, fair, poor). Adding a fifth level gives respondents a chance to choose the middle ground or sway toward one extreme or the other i.e "From 1 to 5 where 1 is poor and 5 is excellent: how is president Bush doing as President?" would be a more reliable approach because it SHOWS a dividing line. Respondents can CHOOSE a middle ground or sway instead of getting caught up in an ambigious "somewhat" category.

Look at this one: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2005/Perspectives%20on%20Iraq_September%2029.htm

There is only one negative category versus three positive catagories. The same goes with the Bush approval poll. There is only one negative category and three levels of positive response with no explanation of how a respondent gets grouped into a category.

 

[BobG]

No one does bad willingly, we invaded iraq with our culture before the war, the men there use to have total control over the women for instance, now those ideas are threatened, it would be as stressful for a new culture to come to America that was telling women they should have total control over their men it's a lot of change either way.

Does God approve of killing each other then?

LOL tarheel

You might be confusing Afghanistan and Iraq (unless you're talking decades ago). Hussein's oppression of Kurds and Shi'ites was horrible. None the less, Iraq was a secular government with quite modern ideas about men's and women's equality. Iraq's proposed constitution will reduce women's rights - not the other way around.

Are you British?

Since that would have been the "we" who invaded Mesopotamia before the US.

I think he meant 'culture' as in western products and western thinking, not military and political control. This was something willingly encouraged by Hussein (prior to his invasion of Kuwait, at least), but it is a source of friction now.

Western influence wasn't something appreciated by some Sunni or Shi'ite religious groups and is definitely part of the motivation of the Islamic fundamentalist groups in both the Sunni triangle and the Shi'ite regions.

 

[loseyourname]

You might be confusing Afghanistan and Iraq (unless you're talking decades ago). Hussein's oppression of Kurds and Shi'ites was horrible. None the less, Iraq was a secular government with quite modern ideas about men's and women's equality. Iraq's proposed constitution will reduce women's rights - not the other way around.

I think his point was that the actual people of Iraq were descended from a tradition of Islamic fundamentalism and Saddam was imposing western secularism upon them.

 

[SOS2008]

Some may recall a thread on the topic of whether Bush really believes he is doing God's work. I provided this link to Bill Moyers (who wrote an article on the subject as well):

http://www.pbs.org/now/commentary/moyers15.html

Other sources:

Bush's References to God Defended by Speechwriter

Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 12, 2004; Page A06

KEY WEST, Fla. -- Like many evangelical Christians, President Bush believes that God is at work in his life.
----------
Gerson, who has crafted almost all of Bush's major speeches since 2000 but has rarely spoken to the media, defended the president's religious rhetoric.
----------
Bush's references to God have drawn criticism both at home and abroad, particularly in the context of the war in Iraq. Boston Globe columnist James Carroll, for example, has argued on the basis of Bush's statements that "the war on which America has embarked is essentially religious," a contention often echoed by commentators in the Middle East.
---------
Gerson acknowledged some rhetorical missteps, such as Bush's remark five days after Sept. 11, 2001, that the United States had begun a "crusade" against terrorism. Gerson said it was an unscripted comment…

But on the whole, the speechwriter argued, Bush's references to the role of providence in human affairs have been carefully calibrated and fully within the tradition of American civic religion.

About 20 reporters from major newspapers, television and radio networks attended the session, part of a two-day conference on religion and politics organized by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a Washington think tank. Some participants closely questioned Gerson on Bush's frequently repeated line that "freedom is not America's gift to the world, it's the almighty God's gift to all humanity."

Gerson said the president wrote those words.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57915-2004Dec11.html

Heaven Sent
Does God endorse George Bush?
Slate/MSN
By Steven Waldman
Posted Monday, Sept. 13, 2004, at 8:29 AM PT

After 9/11, the sense among his supporters that God had chosen him increased. "I think that God picked the right man at the right time for the right purpose," said popular Christian broadcaster Janet Parshall. Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin, who got in trouble for derogatory comments about Islam, argued that it must have been God who selected Bush, since a plurality of voters hadn't. "Why is this man in the White House? The majority of America did not vote for him. He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this." (Boykin still has his job.)

Time magazine reported, "Privately, Bush talked of being chosen by the grace of God to lead at that moment." World Magazine, a conservative Christian publication, quoted White House official Tim Goeglein as saying, "I think President Bush is God's man at this hour, and I say this with a great sense of humility."

Even former President George H.W. Bush speculated that perhaps he needed to be defeated so that his son could become president: "If I'd won that election in 1992, my oldest son would not be president of the United States of America," he said. "I think the Lord works in mysterious ways."

Are the White House and the Bush campaign actively encouraging the idea that Bush has been put there by God? Bush has been careful to never say anything close to that in public. And yet the combination of passages in carefully vetted speeches and quotes from close friends or supporters indicate that this is the understanding.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2106590

Another link on the topic:

http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/DOCS/2004/10/NewYorkTimesMagazine.WithoutaDoubt.Suskind.20041017.htm

As concluded in the previous thread, IMO Bush believes he's doing God’s work, but of course they are careful not to say this straight out. Anyway, whether he does or doesn't, that so many fundamentalists believe it is really what matters, right?

 

[Gokul43201]

In response to post 1, consider the fact that any Palestinian offical or spokesperson claims this.

...

The next point is that the claim is not mainstream. Only fanatics like strung out cult leaders (David Koresh, etc) explicitly claim to hear Gods voice.

...

From USAToday, April 2003 : http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-01-bush-cover_x.htm

Bush believes he was called by God to lead the nation at this time, says Commerce Secretary Don Evans, a close friend who talks with Bush every day.

Slate article by Stephen Waldman,editor in chief of beliefnet.com , Sept 2004 : http://slate.msn.com/id/2106590

Several sympathetic books about Bush and his faith make a big deal of his deciding to run for president after hearing a Texas minister named Rev. Mark Craig preach about how Moses had been called to service by God. Bush's mother reportedly turned to her son after the sermon and said, "He was talking to you."

Stephen Mansfield, author of The Faith of George W. Bush, goes on to say: "Not long after, Bush called James Robison (a prominent minister) and told him, 'I've heard the call. I believe God wants me to run for President.' " Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention heard Bush say something similar: "Among the things he said to us was: I believe that God wants me to be president, but if that doesn't happen, it's OK.' "

From Beliefnet : http://www.beliefnet.com/story/121/story_12112_3.html

After Bush's September 20, 2001, speech to Congress, Bush speechwriter Mike Gerson called the President and said: "Mr. President, when I saw you on television, I thought--God wanted you there." "He wants us all here, Gerson," the President responded.

Richard Land recalls being part of a group of about a dozen people who met after Bush's second inauguration as Texas governor in 1999. At the time, everyone in Texas was talking about Bush's potential to become the next President. During the meeting, Land says, Bush said, "I believe God wants me to be President, but if that doesn't happen, it's OK."

From a local Pennsylvania newspaper about GW's visit to an Amish community near Lancaster, Pa. (quoted part not available online) July 2004.

http://local.lancasteronline.com/6/7565

The Amish told the president that not all members of the church vote but they would pray for him.

Bush had tears in his eyes when he replied. He said the president needs their prayers. He also said that having a strong belief in God is the only way he can do his job. . . .

At the end of the session, Bush reportedly told the group, “I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job.”

I'll end with a slightly, though often, misquoted statement attributed to Professor of Psychiatry, Thomas Szasz.

When you talk to God, you’re praying; if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia.
–Thomas Szasz, M.D.

 

[arildno]

George Bush is not delusional, he is a liar.

 

[Astronuc]

Change Our President is delusional to "the president is deranged".

arildno - he's not lying - he is so detached from reality that his words are simply fantasy fiction.

 

[arildno]

Change Our President is delusional to "the president is deranged".

Isn't that equivalent to being a Republican?

 

[Astronuc]

Isn't that equivalent to being a Republican?

No. In all fairness to the Republicans (and I have many friends and colleagues who are conservative or Republican or both), Bush does not represent the majority of Republicans. He became president through connections, but I know that many Republicans regret that he is now president.

And we have 3 years, 3 months and 12 days (total 1200 days) left in his presidency.

 

[arildno]

So why does the Republican Party systematically choose leaders like him, William Bennett and a host of others like them, then?

Bill Clinton does an extra-marital wiggle that he is uncomfortable about admitting to the general public, and that is supposed to be comparable to the actions and beliefs of a gang that includes many probable, and also, several convicted, criminals?

GOP is rotten to its core.

 

[faust9]

No. In all fairness to the Republicans (and I have many friends and colleagues who are conservative or Republican or both), Bush does not represent the majority of Republicans. He became president through connections, but I know that many Republicans regret that he is now president.

And we have 3 years, 3 months and 12 days (total 1200 days) left in his presidency.

But who's counting?

Bush is almost an official Lame Duck. Any attack here in the States will show the remaining 40% who support Bush how incompetent that man(and his administration) really is. The uber conservative talking heads are jumping the sinking ship like rats. Bush's brain is doing his absolute best to avoid an indictment(testifying in the 25th hour to a Grand Jury is akin to falling to ones knees and begging to not be indicted). Bush's picks for the SC have been less than the conservative masses had hoped for. "C'mon just trust me (911,911 Bin Laden,Al Quaeda)" has lost its luster. Well, I could go on, but no need right.

 

[SOS2008]

But who's counting?

Bush is almost an official Lame Duck. Any attack here in the States will show the remaining 40% who support Bush how incompetent that man(and his administration) really is. The uber conservative talking heads are jumping the sinking ship like rats. Bush's brain is doing his absolute best to avoid an indictment(testifying in the 25th hour to a Grand Jury is akin to falling to ones knees and begging to not be indicted). Bush's picks for the SC have been less than the conservative masses had hoped for. "C'mon just trust me (911,911 Bin Laden,Al Quaeda)" has lost its luster. Well, I could go on, but no need right.

In view of everything, I find 40% to be an astronomical percentage. Understand that these people think McCain is too liberal. These folks would still support Bush even if we were attacked again. The one thing that is really disappointing this faction is that Bush didn't pick a known fundamentalist for the SC. Amazing.

 

[Astronuc]

So why does the Republican Party systematically choose leaders like him, William Bennett and a host of others like them, then?

Well some of those leaders are members of the Republican Party. Bennet and a few others have been side-lined. Politics in the US can be very confusing. More so at the moment.

Bill Clinton does an extra-marital wiggle that he is uncomfortable about admitting to the general public, and that is supposed to be comparable to the actions and beliefs of a gang that includes many probable, and also, several convicted, criminals?

And he handed the Republicans an opportunity. The Republican-controlled Congress went after him. It was pay back for defeating Bush senior in 1992. They should have been focused on al-Qaida.

Gore and Kerry both failed to provide a compelling reason to vote for them. They turned off as many people as Bush did. Almost a third of elligible voters did not want Gore or Kerry, or Bush.

GOP is rotten to its core.

I wouldn't go that far, but parts of it certainly are. And so are parts of the Democratic party. Too few people are chasing too much money in either case.

We need a strong third alternative, until they start chasing the money.

 

[Smurf]

You need more than a third alternative.

 

[pattylou]

So why does the Republican Party systematically choose leaders like him, William Bennett and a host of others like them, then?

You should look at the primary results from 2000. I don't think the party chose him, or the electorate, ever.

McCain was ahead. Then Rove started slinging mud at McCain and there are anomalies among counties in the South Carolina primary correlated with voting equipment used.

And after that Bush eventually got the nomination.

When McCain received a blow-out victory in the New Hampshire primary and proceeded to rack-up victories in several other New England states and the open primary in Michigan, he seemed well on his way to the nomination. When the South Carolina primary came, however, he was soundly defeated by Bush. Many credited this to the fact that it was the first primary in which only registered Republicans could vote, which negated McCain's strong advantage among Independents. Others, including the vast majority of McCain's supporters, blamed it on a campaign of push polls, smear tactics, and numerous other dirty tricks perpetrated against him by his political enemies. Although no evidence was ever found linking these activities to Bush or any member of his campaign, most members of the press and the general public seemed to believe that they were work of Karl Rove, Bush's campaign manager and a man with a history of such "indiscretions."

Whatever the real reason for it, McCain's loss in South Carolina stopped his momentum cold. Although McCain won a few additional primaries, Bush took the majority and, with the support of the party's superdelegates, handily won the nomination at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000

No, of course it isn't proof of vote fraud. I think it is an indication of sorts, however, that Bush wasn't "picked" by the republican party. or if he was, it was by only a handful within the party.

Of course, I don't trust the man and come into any of these discussions with a bias of "he stole it, it seems obvious."

 

[Brad_1234]

From USAToday, April 2003 : http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-01-bush-cover_x.htm



Slate article by Stephen Waldman,editor in chief of beliefnet.com , Sept 2004 : http://slate.msn.com/id/2106590
I'll end with a slightly, though often, misquoted statement attributed to Professor of Psychiatry, Thomas Szasz.

When you talk to God, you’re praying; if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia.
–Thomas Szasz, M.D.

Yes president Bush is a Christian. This is hard to follow after 8 years of Clinton/Gore, people have trouble seeing a president who actually belongs to a Christian church doing what comes naturally, praying and being a Christian.

Perhaps people assumed the president should be an adulterous, lying, crooked scam artist? Clintons affairs were his personal business, any adultery? we forgive him, that's between him and his wife. Lying? hey its okay to tell lies, if you need to. Lying under oath to a grand jury? Its really ones first amendment right to free speech. Being a scam artist? Hey all politicians are crooks.

But wait, I am confused, people on the left seem ...upset? that Bush is a "liar" and not your average scam artist, but the mastermind for overthrowing other nations against their will, illegally. Unless there is a double standard, democrats should be endorsing president Bush.

Its okay for a Christian to perceive that God wants them to do this/that. But in context, Christians do not have the ability to say "God spoke to me and said (name), you tell the people I said to... " then rattle off some long sacerdotal instruction. That kind of message from God ONLY came to the writers of Scripture and to select historical figures, all such messages stopped about 2000 years ago. If any new messages like that came along? We would be required to add them to the Bible. but read what it says about adding anything? Its probably in your bible in the last page of Revelation.

You might hear a "self proclaimed prophet" claim to hear from God. But they have a problem with authenticity. There are NO Apostles of Christ walking the Earth in 2005, those Apostles were personally appointed by Christ and had to have seen the physically resurrected Christ on Earth 2000 years ago. There is no official office of "prophet" in the Christian church. What is there to add? Hebrews 4 makes the bold assertion that Scripture is Gods living word, saying its not writing in a book, but the Scripture is active and alive and sharper than any 2 edged sword, able to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart. Okay, so no prophets in 2005 as of yesterday;

Who ever claims "prophecy" ? Hopefully has good intentions, but many of those are cultists who have to deny that its all written, its all done. They have to claim to get new words from God, put the bible down, its obsolete, just listen to me as the supreme ruler, etc and the cult organizes around the claim.

President Bush CAN claim that God put him as president. Its a declaration God made in Old Testament times, God puts ALL world leaders into power and can cause them to fall. Notice also, Bush said he believed God "wanted" him to be president. He didnt say: "thus and lo verily thine words of my stock broker in the sky, the Lord, hath fallen upon thy servant whilst he was shaving near the dawn and watching thine financial show CNBC, yea the Lord spoketh unto me, audibly in the time of commercial break, saying..."

So nothing our Christian president has said or done in this context is in any way shape or form out of the ordinary. Those who pursue it relentlessly, do so likewise to pursue an Aquatic Fowl.

 

[SOS2008]

Brad_1234 - Many politicians are religious, as are many Americans who oppose Bush, because he crossed the line in his beliefs, and misuses religion to his end. He has dismissed fact and endangered our nation because he believes God guides him, and worse he has used powerful, emotional religious beliefs to manipulate voters. If you are a believer, you are familiar with the scriptures regarding false prophets. He will talk with God--on judgment day.

 

[Gokul43201]

Yes president Bush is a Christian. This is hard to follow after 8 years of Clinton/Gore, people have trouble seeing a president who actually belongs to a Christian church doing what comes naturally, praying and being a Christian.

Like I said before, it's one thing to pray to a God and an entirely different thing to claim that you are the chosen vehicle through which God liberates or punishes man.

 

[arildno]

Yes president Bush is a Christian. This is hard to follow after 8 years of Clinton/Gore, people have trouble seeing a president who actually belongs to a Christian church doing what comes naturally, praying and being a Christian.

Brad1234:
Being a Christian has nothing whatsoever to do with your morality, although you and many Christians have the utterly disgusting and immoral habit of insinuating just that.

Advice to you:
Get rid of your "holier than thou" attitude, and become a moral person.

 

[deckart]

Brad1234:
Being a Christian has nothing whatsoever to do with your morality, although you and many other Christians have the utterly disgusting and immoral habit of insinuating just that.

Advice to you:
Get rid of your "holier than thou" attitude, and become a moral person.

back to the fundamentals: define morality?

 

[arildno]

back to the fundamentals: define morality?

To contribute to your own and other humans' happiness.

 

[Lisa!]

God told me to invade Iraq, Bush tells Palestinian ministers

Sounds very familiar to me! I think I heard the same thing before.
(I'm doing my best not to laugh) I donn't know why his God didn't tell any of us that he's asked him to invade Iraq.
You know it always happens: whenever people aren't satisfied with a politician's performance , s/he usually brings up this one "God told me to do that. It's what religion says...". And that's why there's always a close relation btw politics and religion! If you study the history of slavery, you would find more examples "The bible want us to have slaves".
Anyway if that was God who told Bush to invade Iraq, I wouldn't believe in that God anymore.

 

[Skyhunter]

Yes president Bush is a Christian.

Perhaps in name, but not in deed. Therefore I would not consider him to be a Christian, because he does not follow the teachings of Christ.

 

[SOS2008]

That Bush is a religious man is not groundbreaking, even in comparison to recent presidents (Jimmy Carter taught Sunday School, etc.). The questions to ask are:

1) Does he cross the line between separation of church and state? (One clue - Have you heard of his faith-based initiatives?)

2) Is he a president of all Americans? He speaks about religion more often, and more openly than most of his predecessors. To speak frequently and directly about religion in a divided America can itself be divisive. As an agnostic, how can I feel he represents me? Worse, he has catered to special interests.

Of course Bush is careful of what he says in public, but those in the know, know and are not so prudent. They talk as if he has the mandate of heaven. “The Lord has just blessed him,” said Pat Robertson, the founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network. “I think President Bush is God's man at this hour,” said Tim Goeglein, of the White House Office of Public Liaison, soon after the September 11th attacks.

Obviously it helped him to be reelected.

3) Does he act in the best interest of his country, or does his personal beliefs interfere in good judgment? Instead of bringing together experts on the Middle East, he dismissed facts presented to him because God was guiding him. Does anyone believe the invasion of Iraq has been in the best interest of America, and that God would want us to take up arms against a country unless in self defense?

Bush also seems to believe there is some sort of divine plan for the world. I think this includes the End Times, and this may well explain why deficits, the environment, etc. that will affect future generations seem to be of little concern to him.

Does he cross the line? Yes.

 

[Brad_1234]

crossed the line

Brad_1234 - Many politicians are religious, as are many Americans who oppose Bush, because he crossed the line in his beliefs, and misuses religion to his end. He has dismissed fact and endangered our nation because he believes God guides him, and worse he has used powerful, emotional religious beliefs to manipulate voters. If you are a believer, you are familiar with the scriptures regarding false prophets. He will talk with God--on judgment day.

How did he cross the line in his beliefs? Is that from calling for a national day of prayer, supporting faith based groups or ?

Dismissed fact and endangered our nation, is that a claim about "ignoring intelligence on wmd"? and going to war illegally? You realize that the UN security council voted 15-0 to demand Saddams Iraq comply with illegal weapons restrictions or face war, and based on the process found Saddam in violation? Democrats have wanted the "war" to fail, so rather than support the US they want to find a different way, and say... AFTER the fact, that there were no WMDs, (when there were), and say Bush is out of control, etc.

So people make those claims but I only wonder how well they live with their own conscience.

If people are not of the Christian faith, why do they seek to demand everyone believe as they do? Why can't Christians believe in their religion? Why should atheists or one religion get to impose their beliefs on everyone?

There are those in the US who say the Christian faith is a form of insanity. Psychiatry categorizes the struggle a person has with their faith as a form of mental illness (DSM-4) but says religion in general has shown clinically to have a positive effect. Even while its a placebo and fake, people believe in their religion and it helps them.

So while people believe in the bible, we (progressives) want new laws saying those weird Christian types must keep their religion to themselves, they cannot be Christian in public, and ASSUREDLY no Christian should ever hold public office or any position of trust. WE want to help them and offer low cost mental health services to help cure them of the delusion of being Christian. We will just raise taxes, regulate businesses, repeal major tenets of capitalism and outlaw public expression of religion, for the good of the masses.

We get this story about president Bush talking to God? (even when its not a true story) and the left is energized in extreme outrage. How DARE he! But when Islamic leaders declare their official orders, saying God delegated the power to them? And the orders are to murder enemies of Islam? enemies being the US government, people, Jews, Israel, etc or whatever their enemy list is. The left? There is no outrage? Hey don't mock Islam, its their religion so let them believe as they want to.

If the concept here was about any figure getting "words from God" and then going to war or committing acts of terror in the name of that religion or God? Such as the DC Beltway Snipers, 9/11, the USS Cole bombing, the 1993 World Trade center bombing or so many others... Then the left should be equally outraged at Muslim leaders, and casting doubt at their claims of hearing from God.

But I've listened to democratic leaders and major statements from the DNC for well over the past 10 years. If you took the conceptual arguments about religion, that are against president Bush now, the left should be outraged at radical Islam. They are not.

Its another double standard

 

[Brad_1234]

morals and morality

Brad1234:
Being a Christian has nothing whatsoever to do with your morality, although you and many Christians have the utterly disgusting and immoral habit of insinuating just that.

Advice to you:
Get rid of your "holier than thou" attitude, and become a moral person.

Wait, I haven't insinuated that yet. Many other Christians do. I would even go farther and say many Christians are involved in imposing a form of "Moralism" when there is no biblical mandate to. Christians are not called to impose high moral values, but are called to share the message of salvation.

What are moral values? If we had a conference and tried to draft up some conclusion, what would we agree to? Do we agree that the 10 commandments are, in themselves, "good" moral guidelines?

Or the golden rule? do unto others as you would have them do unto you?

(They removed that one from public school)

How about this, I know non religious people who are kind, moral and upstanding.

In my personal experience, Christians are the MOST DISHONEST when it comes to business and money. They use their religion to get authorized access to cash or services, steal the money or refuse to pay for services and then leave.

Its not that way in all cases, but in my personal dealings time after time that's been the result most of the time.

Next concept, some say hey you cannot use the bible for a moral reference because (maybe or certainly) all life evolved from molecules, so there cannot be anyone moral guidepost, total relativism. This way, a person can excape responsibility to laws because to "them" they evolved where bank robbery is normal. Hey, we could re-evaluate everyone in jails/prisons and ask them, are the illegal crimes you committed normal for you? be honest...

 

[SOS2008]

You realize that the UN security council voted 15-0 to demand Saddams Iraq comply with illegal weapons restrictions or face war, and based on the process found Saddam in violation?

Yes, except the part about war--source? And you realize invasion of Iraq was an unprovoked assault on an independent country, which breached international law. Under Article 2, Number 4 of the UN Charter. Which do you think was worse?

Democrats have wanted the "war" to fail, so rather than support the US they want to find a different way, and say... AFTER the fact, that there were no WMDs, (when there were), and say Bush is out of control, etc.

The Democrats want the war to fail, and make false claims that WMD don't exist, but according to you they did? Source please.

So people make those claims but I only wonder how well they live with their own conscience.

If people are not of the Christian faith, why do they seek to demand everyone believe as they do? Why can't Christians believe in their religion? Why should atheists or one religion get to impose their beliefs on everyone? ...etc., etc. [weird psychology tangent] etc., [irrelevant comparison to Islamic faith/leaders] etc., etc...

You have it turned around. It is the Christian extremists who want to force their belief on everyone else.

In regard to "the public square" are you able to practice the religion of your choice, and practice your beliefs fully? Are you able to pray in public if you like, for example blessing the food at lunchtime in a school cafeteria or employee lounge? Are you able to proselyte door-to-door or preach from a soapbox on a street corner? The list goes on and on, and I fail to see how you are so repressed.

Let's please drop the religious tirades and return to the topic of this thread, which is about Bush and how he has misused religion to pursue his political goals, and/or whether he is delusional. I believe he is out-of-touch with mainstream America and the world for that matter, and I think he is an egotistical, self-centered idiot -- but not delusional.

 

[arildno]

Do we agree that the 10 commandments are, in themselves, "good" moral guidelines?

No, they are not.