MEALLY MOUTHED MULLAH MANGLES MESSAGE!

[mburbank]

"This country must not fear the influence of faith in the future of this country. "
-George W. Bush, announcing the release of some 3.7 billion in funds to reliogous charities.

[sspadowsky]

That's just damn creepy. I regret that my analysis of his remark is only, "What a prick that guy is," but that does sum it up nicely.

[Buffalo Tom]

Apparently, in the original text of his speech, Dubya was going to say 'cuz when I'm eventually voted out of office, everybody's going to have to pray to a higher power to clean up the mess I've made of the country!'.

[kellychaos]

I want to influence the fear of faith.

[sspadowsky]

The speech I found on www.georgewbush.com was from October 2003, and the sentence read, "Our Government must not fear the influence of faith in the future of this country."

Where did your quote come from, Max?

And really, when you get down to it, the quote in its (presumably) correct form is far scarier, in my opinion.

[The One and Only...]

Our government shouldn't try to enforce atheism. That is all it's saying.

[Anonymous]

Well, thank God we got that cleared up.

[sspadowsky]

OAO, if you had been paying any attention to what Bush has been doing since he took office, you would realize how mind-numbingly stupid your statement is.

[The One and Only...]

If you knew how to read properly, you might realize how you are drawing conclusions from nowhere.

If we are going to talk about what Bush has done, let's do it. But false abuse of language doesn't help any.

[Brandon]

Our government shouldn't try to enforce atheism. That is all it's saying.
And it shouldn't ally itself with religious groups, either. There's a difference between not promoting a particular faith and promoting atheism.

[sspadowsky]

Listen here, young'un, don't break your arm patting yourself on the back. That comment may seem innocuous enough, but, given that fact that he keeps trying to get federal dollars into the pockets of "faith-based charities," that statement should appear ominous, at least, to those of us who have been paying attention. Why? Because it amounts to state-sponsored religion. Which, it would seem, is unconstitutional.

Something else: I've noticed this a couple of times, and I hope it's not a pattern. Stop closing your posts with a sentence that makes absolutely no sense. Thanks. :)

[ItalianStereotype]

And it shouldn't ally itself with religious groups, either. There's a difference between not promoting a particular faith and promoting atheism.

Perhaps it's best not to think of them as religious "groups" and instead think of them only as charities. If they are giving food, medicine, and clothes to the destitute or seeking a cure for cancer, why does it matter if they say "God loves you" or something of that nature? To be honest, I would fear an atheist president far worse than a man of religion.

This isn't a failure of our Constitution, nor is it a failure to enforce said charter; we simply have yet to reach an acceptable compromise and we are growing as a nation because of it. We shouldn't strive for a compromise without appreciating the process that led us there.

[mburbank]

The quote is from the AP wire, who presumably took it from what he actually said out loud as opposed to what was in his prepared text.

[pjalne]

But false abuse of language doesn't help any.

http://www.encyclopedia-obscura.com/ext/sub.gif

[The One and Only...]

Best. Emoticon. Ever.

[pjalne]

Are you sure you know what I was trying to communicate with it?

[sspadowsky]

The quote is from the AP wire, who presumably took it from what he actually said out loud as opposed to what was in his prepared text.

Good point, Max. I keep forgetting who(m?) we're dealing with here. While in the bookstore last night, I perused a book called The Soft Cage, by Christian Parenti, which deals with the invasiveness of the surveillance society. Anyway, he had the quote from Ari Fleischer that came shortly after 9/11, "There are reminders to all Americans, that they should watch what they say, and watch what they do." Parenti follows that remark by informing the reader that it was removed from the official transcript altogether. Just another sign that 1984 has arrived, baby. "He who controls the present, controls the past."

[Abcdxxxx]

I dislike anyone pushing religion, OR pushing Atheism..... there's too much pushing going on from all sides. I don't want Bush's enemies ideals any more then I want Bush's.

Spads -
The Soft Cage just tries to paint a picture...it's accuracy is itentionally loose. It's all paranoia thrown in one context to try and prove some Big Brother wet dream... but it might help if you read the rest of the book before you started bringing up snippets.

[camacazio]

An important question is where the 3.7 bil is coming from. If it's federal funding, then he's that pisses me off. If it's from his pocket, then it's his right to fund whatever he wants.

[sspadowsky]

I recognized from the language of the book that it is what it is. Which is not to say that it doesn't bring up any valid points. That snippet stands on its own quite well, thankyousomuch. You've got something that was said, was recorded by dozens of media sources, and was widely publicized. Yet the administration saw fit to remove the remark. As though it never happened. And that's just an example we know about. If you don't recognize the danger of that, you're completely fucked.