Wednesday, April 4, 2007

Inerrancy and Beliefs

Peter Baker writes a great article today in the Washington Post, parsing President Bush's comments at yesterday's press conference. My take follows: (all the quotes are from President Bush.)
"My main job is to protect the people, and I firmly believe that if we were to leave before the job is done, the enemy would follow us here."

See yesterday's blog about the Iraq war being a state-of-the-art training ground for a whole new lethal generation of al-Qaeda fighters.
"I know there are some who have basically said it is impossible to succeed. I strongly disagree with those people. I believe not only can we succeed, I know we must succeed."

Why will we succeed? Because we have to! How will we succeed? Because I believe we will! There is no statesmanship in this approach and little competence. A fundamentalist belief system like this is dependent upon believing in the power and inerrancy of the doctrine. As such, it's immune to any conflicting facts, opinions, arguments, or to reason.
"Congress shouldn't tell generals how to run the war,"

..especially since he had to fire a bunch of them to find one that would finally do what he was told. Let's hear from all the former "generals" who tried to "run the war."
"Congress should not shortchange our military. Congress should not use an emergency war-spending measure as a vehicle to put pet spending projects on that have nothing to do with the war."

And Bush shouldn't use "emergency war-spending" measures to fund an endless war. He can't put it in the budget, he'd have to defend it. He can't tell us how much it will really cost, it would be astoundingly expensive. And Bush should not short-change our military by sending them before they are ready, or sending them injured, or sending them to hospitals that aren't ready to take care of them.
"Congress's failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines,"

Last year amid little fanfare, the president didn't sign the emergency appropriations bill until JULY 15. So much for a pressing need. Right after he vilified Congress for taking off for vacation before putting this emergency bill on his desk, he took off for his ranch in Texas for .... vacation. Who's playing politics now?
"You're going to find that the White House and the Hill are going to work in close collaboration,"


Sure Bush has his die-hard Republican minority, but let's check into who disagrees behind the scenes. Oh yeah, don't forget to mention the bipartisan concern about the Gonzales 8 and the politicization of the Government...and the isolation of the White House from former political allies.

Speaking of politicization, Ruth Marcus hit the nail on the head today by writing:
If your faith is more in the operations of the private sector than in the capacity of government, if you have scant commitment to the laws you are pledged to enforce, if you see government less as a trust to be administered than a force to be used for the benefit of political and ideological allies, then this kind of behavior is the inevitable result.

In short, if you identify so completely with the foxes, it's no wonder that you end up with a henhouse that is so thoroughly, tragically trashed.

No comments: