Homestead mailing list

[Bill Jones <billj AT harborside.com>]

Melody O. wrote:

> At 10:23 AM 11/21/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>  
>
> > I realize it's been hard for you (Gene), but try to remember, he won't be 
> > running.  All it takes to see that McCain is nominated by YOUR party is 
> > for you, me, and some of our atheist friends to show up at those GOP 
> > caucus meetings and drive the religious nuts from the room.
> >    
>
> You really believe that it is "religious nuts" that are ruining the
> country, or are you just really laying out a big, wide blanket in your
> statement?  I personally think our current President is nuts, but only
> outwardly religious.  
>
> I guess I can see where you are coming from...
>  
No.  They're often characterized as members of the "religious right" by 
people like Gene, the original postor, so when in Rome...

But no one would deny that a nomination of Powell or McCain represents a 
more secular alternative.

More deeply, it's not really GW who even came up with the whole Axis of 
Evil thing, but a group called the "Project for a New American Century" 
of which many key Administration figures are prominent members (but not 
GW himself).  Their campaign to eliminate the enemies of Israel is being 
carried out as it was outlined decades ago, regardless of who is 
"President".   When you consider that the PNAC membership consists of 
devout "born-again" Christians like Gary Bauer and radical orthodox Jews 
like Eliot Abrams, all of whom believe in a coming millenial utopian 
world, it's not hard to conclude that some belief in the supernatural is 
intertwined with the War on Terror.

There's just no doubt which demographic group helped him into office 
most effectively, because his stated policies appeal to them, even if 
he's not really a "good" Christian himself.  And who do you think the 
nominee will be in '08 if nothing else happens to change things?  Jeb, 
of course, because the religious right does seem to hold sway over the 
Party.  It shocks and saddens true fiscal conservatives to see how this 
has come to happen, but no one in the Party wants to put them in their 
place, for fear the Party will lose all those votes, just as libs seem 
unwilling to break the news to minorities that they won't be getting any 
special rights after all, for fear of losing their votes.

Some people who've come to understand the PNAC and its hold over the 
Administation are devoutly religious themselves, and yet still can 
denounce it as a cadre of religious nuts.  Pat Buchanan is the most 
familiar example, as a devout Catholic.  It's more than just being the 
"wrong sect" and I wouldn't dismiss his writings that way.

Christians traditionally held that it's a sin of pride to pretend that 
you know God's plan for the world and to act upon that presumption.  
It's even worse when you're the President and there's so much at stake.  
This is the sense in which I would characterize the Administration's 
view as "religious" even if it is a distorted one.