If you want to see the video, Crooks and Liars has the goodness and the transcript of the interview as well.
I see critics everywhere with Judas references, implying, as Les did (sorry, Les) that anyone who is making money criticizing the President is suspect. Follow the money, they say, and I kind of agree. After all, money is a great temptor.
But I ask the critics to actually look at the bigger picture. Kuo is just saying what we already know. Bushco have played evangelical fears of gay marriage and abortion to encourage them to vote against their economic interest (for some). They trot those issues out every voting cycle, but have done little. Have they pumped money into faith based programs? Have they fundamentally altered America's approach to poverty and crime?
No. They have not. Kuo simply reflects what every critic has said--that Bushco is intensely political and nothing more.
3 comments:
Nobody likes hearing that they've been had.
Streak,
You said that I said, "anyone who is making money criticizing the President is suspect."
Change "the" to "any" and you're pretty close to what I actually said. For the record, I have also stated that if Hilary was President I would hold the same view.
BTW, I watched the Kuo interview after church last night (good old DVR---the greatest invention known to man) and he "appeared" credible. However, to me, he would be more credible bringing these issues to light through an interview or some other venue other than a pre-book release interview.
I'm sure it's only a coincidence that his book is being published by a CBS "sister" company. ;>
Regards,
Les
Anglican, I understand. At a certain point, however, that isn't a very good excuse and becomes more an issue of pride. I think the church even speaks to that. :)
Ok, Les, yes of course, the book deal makes him suspect. But without the book deal, people would be demanding proof. From his perspective, perhaps, he would like to get the word out. This is the best way to do it. Given he has a brain tumor, perhaps we can give him a little latitude here in that he might be trying to provide for a family?
But credibility aside, let's back into this from the other side. Instead of asking if Kuo's contentions are valid, let's ask if Bush and his white house have A) ever acted in a Christian manner (not counting lip service or photo-ops) and B) actually pushed the faith based initiative in any meaningful sense?
I have asked for A) since 9-11. I keep asking. I would like some evidence that Bush has acted on his faith. Still asking and still hearing nothing. The critical eye to Kuo's book might be more impressive if that same criticism was aimed at the Bush administration.
Post a Comment