Kuo Vadis?
EmailSo I’ve now read David Kuo’s "Tempting Faith," and — no matter what side you come down on the politics and controversies of it all — it’s a pretty compelling read. He writes genuinely about an abortion his college girlfriend got and how that made him anti-abortion, his political activism, some of the hypocrisies he saw along the way, and why he’s so disappointed in the President’s signature domestic policy proposal as a presidential candidate: faith-based initiatives.
"George W. Bush loves Jesus," Kuo writes. "He is a good man. But he is a politician; a very smart and shrewd politician. And if the faith-based initiative was teaching me anything, it was about the president’s capacity to care about perception more than reality. He wanted it to look good. He cared less about it being good….
"The Bush White House…substituted symbolic executive orders for real change, claimed ‘Mission Accomplished’ on faith-based legislation…"
Kuo also recounts a story where he say he witnessed Rev. Jerry Falwell acting rather boorishly at the National Day of Prayer in those first few days after 9/11. After he unfavorably compared Falwell with Rev. Billy Graham, Falwell complained to White House political guru Karl Rove, who called Kuo and ordered him to call Falwell and apologize…
Interesting stuff…
– jt
Newt Gingrich's Full Speech at CPAC 2012 
USS Gabrielle Giffords Honors Courage
If you vote for a candidate based of his or her religiosity, then I have no sympathy for you when that religiosity is traded in the name of politics.
Posted by: DKNY | October 16, 2006, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
Concerning Mr. Tapper’s article about Bush White House Aides making fun of Christians . .. I thought that journalists like Mr. Tapper were supposed to be unbiased? Since when does a reporter qoute an “uh” in a sentence, such as:
“People like Chuck Colson and Rick Warren and Dr. Dobson, they’re friends of the White House. We may not always agree with them, but, uh, there was a real mutual respect.”
This is a very subtle way of slanting a quoute.
The “uh” is stratigically placed before the “there is a real mutual respect” to imply that the person being quoted is hesitating about what he is saying; like they’re lying. Even if someone does an “uh” while talking, how often does a reporter insert it in the quote? Rather than getting the quote right, the writer is creating a character. Hell, it’s becomes fiction because we are not there to see how it was used, for all I know, a fly landed on the man’s nose. Very subtle, very slanted reporting. Come on Mr. Tapper, gezzzzz, try a little harder not to be a propagandist.
Posted by: Leo | October 16, 2006, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
I tend, also, not to do business with those who would reduce He whom they proclaim to be the redeemer, saviour, ruler of the universe, to a marketing gimmick. Thank you kind sir, but I’ll buy my vehicle from one who demonstrates more respect for his religion and God, than one who believes either should be referenced, even obliquely, to sell a used car.
Posted by: Liberal Texas Democrat | October 16, 2006, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
I’m sure that Kuo’s book is indeed compelling, if for no other reason than for the behind-the-scenes look at the entire “faith-based intiatives” process. I think that the most telling and revelatory statement in the passage you cited from the book is this: “And if the faith-based initiative was teaching me anything, it was about the president’s capacity to care about perception more than reality. He wanted it to look good. He cared less about it being good….”
When examined in the light of valuing perception over reality, all of this President’s policies and works–from “compassionate coservatism” to the destructive and divisive war in Iraq–are neatly summarized by “He wanted it to look good. He cared less about it being good….” Those two sentences are a fitting description of his so-called “legacy” as well.
Posted by: chuck | October 17, 2006, 8:49 am 8:49 am
So, Leo, how long have you studied semiotics?
Posted by: chuck | October 17, 2006, 11:32 am 11:32 am