Bush/Cheney '04 attempts to use Church's for partisan purposes.

Look, you two.

I’ll pay for the room if you can just keep your hands off each other for the next ten minutes!

Hey, if this is the reason for the faith based intiatives then that’s some serious thinking ahead. If only he’d put this much thought into Iraq :stuck_out_tongue:

This doesn’t strike me as tremendously offensive or even all that surprising. It’s just a clumsy attempt at getting his name out and encouraging his supporters to vote. I’d be more worried if the churches were advocating this instead of speaking out against it.

It’s this sort of heavy handed behavior that makes me miss “Slick” Willie Clinton. At least when he pulled this sort of crap it didn’t seem as obvious. :wink:

I can cut him a little slack because the Yahoo article focused on some pretty rabid reactions to the Bush campaign’s move. You had to really read the whole thing carefully to get down to the actual quote from the campaign’s e-mail.

What I want to know is why the Interfaith Alliance is so threatened by this.

Did you read the title of the OP?

I never said Bush did anything. I never even said he was aware of it. You really should work on your reading comprehension.

More to the point, perhaps, is that the fight isn’t worth it.

BushCo has an alliance with a segment of the religous public. No doubt his following amongst the Baptists quite exceeds his following amongst Unitarians. No doubt as well that vote getting appeals to those congregations sympathetic to his cause will fall on willing ears, for the most part.

Most pastors, priest, rabbis, ministers, the whole ecumenical gaggle of geese…are loathe to bring political controversy into thier midst. Hence, when Clinton appears before a largely colored Baptist congregation, he has a sympathetic audience. As well, when The Shining One appears at Bob Jones University. A slam dunk, as it were.

So what? Like minded people congregate, but its because they are like-minded. If the Republicans want to try to appeal to the churches that, for the most part, already agree with them, so what? Preaching to the choir, and all that.

GQ Aside: Whilst the article appeared on Yahoo News, it was not a “Yahoo article,” but rather a press release. Yahoo does that – perhaps someone might recommend that they do a better job of distinguishing between reprinted news articles and reprinted press releases (heh. To the extent there’s a difference in some cases), since people similarly thought that Andy Kaufman is alive was also a “Yahoo News” article. [/GQ aside]

A brief review of their issues page reveals that they oppose the President’s position on, well, pretty much everything. But on the other hand, they believe that "(i)n order to affect the social policies in the United States, people of faith have an obligation to participate in the electoral process through voting and in some cases running for office. " Color me wholly unsurprised that they chose to see this particular attempt to involve people of faith in the electoral process as objectionable.

There is ample evidence that BushCo realizes his re-election is in trouble and that he is working hard to lock in the votes of his religious base by affirming and pandering to their pet concerns. This is just another step in BushCo’s campaign to divide and polarize the electorate around pet issues, since anyone looking at Bush’s overall record with a jaundiced eye knows that he is one of the worst president’s the USA has seen in a long time. While focusing on the pet issues of the religious right will work for some percentage of the population, I think Bush is going to be very surprised when post-polling shows that he didn’t get the amount of the religious right vote he needed to win. Not every religious person is a Bush sheepie…

Here’s an excerpt from an article that discusses BushCo’s latest attempt to mobilize his religious base - Link.

From the Austin American-Statesman (gathered by way of Eschaton) regarding a GOP convention in Texas.

"…For many delegates at the three-day convention, religion and politics commingle with comfort, purpose and zeal. Delegates on Friday approved a platform that refers to “the myth of the separation of church and state.”

“Faith is important to the vast majority of Texans,” said Tina Benkiser, a Houston lawyer re-elected Friday as state GOP chairwoman. "And when you have real faith, that is who you are, and obviously what you want is your principles and your ideals to be put in public policy.

“And I think Texans clearly agree because they have put us in stewardship of statewide government at every branch of government,” she said. …

…A plank in a section titled “Promoting Individual Freedom and Personal Safety” proclaims the United States a “Christian nation.”

“The party affirms freedom of religion and rejects efforts of courts and secular activists who seek to remove and deny such a rich heritage from our public lives,” says a passage added this year…"

It goes on:

"…Also new this year is a section declaring that the Ten Commandments “are the basis of our basic freedoms and the cornerstone of our Western legal tradition.”

“We therefore oppose any governmental action to restrict, prohibit or remove public display of the Decalogue or other religious symbols…”

Don’t the Moonies have some kind of religious text, similar to the Big Ten? Howzabout the Scientologists? They must have something to offer for such a wildly ecumenical bunch as these Texas Christians, who are so thoughtful as to include the legitimacy of “other religious symbols”.

Can’t argue with Texas reality! Are there non-Christens in Texas? Do they vote?

Can we trade Texas back to Mexico for anything of value? A pile of beads maybe? :rolleyes:

And I’ll provide the movie camera, if only so I can guarantee that the film will be burned afterward.

In other news, can we please retire “BushCo”? I’m as motivated as anyone to see that the Smirker in Chief is told to pack his bags in November, but “BushCo” is brainless partisanspeak matching retarded crap like “Algore” produced by the other side. I get what it’s supposed to convey, but it doesn’t work. Please, give it a rest.