|
I remember the reporting on the "God told me to invade Afghanistan..." quote at the time it was made. Over confident, swaggering bushjr, deluded megalomaniac - who seemed to have believed (along with his reactionary religious rightwing base) that the 2000 election "proved" that "God wanted him (jr) to be in charge when Sept 11 hit." That idea - is that BECAUSE it was a contested election - and it "could" have gone either way - it MUST be true that this election (as opposed to Clinton's or any other president, including sr.) must have been God's will - so that jr could be at the helm to deal with 9-11. Icky logic, perhaps - but go back and read his quotes from after 911 and those of the rank and file on the far religious right - and you will see the theme I allude to above.
I don't recall at the time of the "God" quote - how it was received by the religious reactionary right. But the lack of, at the time, a countering by the WH (the No He Didn't Say That!) suggests to me, that at the time this very quote played well with his religious reactionary base. That it resounded with them (Amen, W!) without any sense of a lack of humility or an action of a bit scary of a messianic complex of a person who could utter such words.
So why the push-back now that the quote is repeated in a book?
Take it as a sign that even jr.s most loyal backers are backing away - and that today the quote reads, to them, in a much different light than it did back when it was made. Especially in light of his Govts handling of a disaster here, especially in light of a miserable quagmire in Iraq (so some of the religious reactionary right ask... is this REALLY the work of God or is it the work of man pretending to be speaking for God?), and oddly - in light of a SC nomination that is being perceived to be an affront to the reactionary religious right because it wasn't high profile and in your face enough to "count" as jr proving his loyalty to them. Somehow these and other factors have made even some among the talibornagain to question jr - and as such to suddenly find his statement to be offensive.
Interesting.
Seriously. Think about it. There was not the huge pushback trying to claim the statement was not made - at the time it was made and reported. So why now?
Context on the ground in the US has changed. And the WH reaction to this is very telling about how seriously those who are either trying to protect the "legacy" of bushjr, or to create a long-lasting single party rule in DC (or those who want both ala Rove) believe that bushjr is in a very precarious state - and that the body blow of a full out rejection by the religious right - would be of extreme consequence to this presidency.
Interesting, don't you think?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
