I was going to do a diary on Jason Ring's 42" "verticle" (see the ad on the front page). A verticle is
defined as "n. 1. An axis; a hinge; a turning point." Verticle of evil? I think they meant "vertical" as in "leap". Or vertical + clavicle = verticle?
Anyway, Maureen Dowd's latest column led me to this bit by David Froomkin which refers to this Financial Times article about the guy in charge of crossing the line between Church and State. He claims:
President Bush doesn't portray himself as a super-Christian. He is very private about his faith. I work with people who are very devout Christians who say let's pray together. He doesn't do that. He is all business in the Oval Office.
Hm, I wonder, could it all have been an act?
It seems to me that Bush has been rather open about his faith, from stating (arrogantly) that Jesus is his favorite political philosopher, to brandishing a Bible and saying that he answers to a higher law, to his cross-like lecterns. I read a couple of years ago that people in the White House were carrying Bibles around (not sure if it was the administration or lower-rung butt-kissers). So this comes as quite a surprise.
I also read that one of the televangelists (Billy Graham, if I remember correctly) was never seen by his associates reading the Bible except on stage, with the implication that it was all an act.
So where has Bush's Jesus gone? Is W pissed off because God lied to him about Saddam's WMD and how easy it would be to remap the entire Middle East and be seen as a strong leader? Or, as I've always suspected, did Bush exploit religion but no longer needs it?
I sure hope the first thing Wesley Clark does when he gets into the White House is disband the Office of Crossing the Line Between Church and State.
More quotes from the FT article:
He inherited an agency on the defensive. It was accused of eroding the carefully patrolled border between church and state.
Why would anyone think THAT?
Mr Diulio said White House aides were too focused on the political benefits of the initiative - using federal cash to woo evangelical supporters and African-American churchgoers. This year David Kuo, the deputy director, resigned saying Mr Bush did not care about the "poor people stuff".
I know: I can't believe it either!!! That guy Kuo must be a liberal infiltrator with a personal vendetta.
Mr Towey blames Congress for the fact that faith groups secured just $2bn (1.6bn, £1.1bn) in funds, 10 per cent of what is available federally and below the $8bn mooted by Mr Bush in 2000.
Hey, blame the war. (Maybe they should start praying in the Oval Office.)
"It has been so badly misrepresented with people accusing the president of favouring one faith over another, or Christianising government, or giving grants to conservative faith groups. Four years later you can see none of those claims were true."
As of a few years ago, only Christian groups had received such funding, although non-Christian groups had applied. Anybody know where that stands today? Does anyone have a breakdown of applications vs. grants by religion? I'm sure that's unpublished.
Ten government agencies and 28 governors now have faith-based offices. In Washington he sees a change from Democrats. "There is a new receptivity. They are willing to talk about faith and its role in the public square a little more regularly."
Jesus, that's scary.
"The president cleared the brush and sowed a lot of seeds and now we are seeing the first fruits of the faith-based initiative."
I thought the fruits would be reductions in societal ills, backed up by statistics contrasting religious and non-religious providers of services, but this seems to confirm what we knew all along: "fruit" means "vote bought with taxpayer money".