Sore Subject: Has President Bush turned his back on his base?

[LadyEagle]

This is from another thread to Phillip: (didn't want to hijack that thread)

-------------------------
Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
I don't support the way he has turned his back on his base - Evangelical Christians.

I am not writing this to disagree with you. I am interested in your statement that he turned his back on Evangelical Christians. Can you elaborate and maybe provide some examples. I am not saying he didn't, I would really like to know where this information came from, because, if true, it is very disappointing to me.
Thank you.

Phillip, I am going to post some items which leads me to believe President Bush has turned his back on his base - the Evangelical Christians. I'm sure others here will not agree - so debate at will, but I won't be debating.

RE: SEPT. 11, 2001 From William J. Murray (Evangelist son of atheist Madeline Murray O'Hare)

FRIDAY THE 14TH (09/14/01)

My stomach churned as I watched Muzammil Siddiqi, the Imam for the Islamic Society of North America, stand on stage with President George W. Bush in the National Cathedral.

Imam Siddiqi is a radical extremist who has participated in anti-American demonstrations in front of the White House as recently as October of 2000. He has in the past called for a Jihad or holy war against this nation. While the Christian and Jewish leaders at the event prayed for our nation and for the dead and dying from the attack, Imam Siddiqi did not do so. At no time did he condemn the acts of the terrorists nor did he pray for America or for the families of those who lost their lives in the Jihad attack against the United States.

Indeed even the liberal Washington Post was left wondering by his words. Liberal Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer made this observation of the Imam’s behavior on stage with President Bush:

"Why did the spiritual leader of the Islamic Society of North America, Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, not say that such terrorism is contrary to Islam in his address at the national prayer service at the Washington National Cathedral?

His words went out around the world. Yet he was vague and elusive. ‘But those that lay the plots of evil, for them is a terrible penalty.’ Very true. But who are the layers of plots of evil? Those who perpetrated the World Trade Center attack? Or America, as thousands of Muslims in the street claim? The imam might have made that clear. He did not."

As the service closed I felt the chill of the presence of the awesome power of God. I was clearly reminded of the very first of the Ten Commandments, THOU SHALT HAVE NTHER GODS BEFORE ME (Exodus 20:3). The National Cathedral had been defiled by prayers to a pagan moon god, Allah. Our Christian President had bowed his head to prayers offered to other gods, prayers that may have been for those who would destroy our nation and enslave our children to an alien religion. At that moment the hand of protection of the true God was removed from our nation.

Since the Jihad attack on the United States on September 11th the President has surrounded himself with and sought advice from radical Islamic leaders who have openly called for the violent overthrow of the government of the United States. In addition, the President has invited six of the seven Islamic nations known to sponsor terror into his "coalition against terror".

By late Friday it became apparent to me that our nation was in fact not going to fight a war on terrorism, but rather follow the same old track of "punishing those who actually committed the crime." This was not a "crime;" it was an act of war.

Link:
http://www.rfcnet.org/wjmreport/october2001.htm


Before I read the above statement from RFC, a C-span caller had called in to say the same info about the imam. Later googling verified the info re: this imam is correct.

Is Bush's Tollerance of Islam Eroding His Evangelical Base?

(AgapePress) - Religious political correctness continues to be a growing theme at the White House.

In December, the President welcomed two dozen Muslim children to celebrate Eid, a three-day feast which follows Ramadan. He told the children that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all great faiths and have a lot in common.

Many Christians are troubled that Bush has tried to portray Islam as being a faith that is on an equal footing with Christianity and seems to be promoting the idea that there are many paths to God. In fact, there is a report that some conservative Christians feel the President is being too nice in his displays of tolerance toward the religion - among them, his hosting of a Ramadan celebration at the White House, the first ever held there and attended by a U.S. president.

Link:

http://www.connectionmagazine.org/2002_02/ts_bush.htm

Nov. 18 — The nation's leading evangelical Christians have been thundering against Islam, both from the pulpit and on television.
Bush Administration Responds

For months, President Bush, who frequently says Islam is a religion of peace, declined to condemn these statements. Until now. A few days ago, he said, "Some of the comments that have been uttered about Islam do not reflect the sentiments of my government or the sentiments of most Americans."

Secretary of State Colin Powell followed suit. "This kind of hatred must be rejected," he said. "This kind of language must be spoken out against."

Link:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/evangelical_christians021118.html

IMO, with this attitude, it is but a small step from speaking Biblical truth to that being called a hate crime. This is just too politically correct if we are truly fighting a war on terror, IMO.

Islam - Bush remarks from White House web site:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ramadan/islam.html

Muslims to pray in the White House
By Ben Fenton in Washington
(Filed: 16/11/2001)


PRESIDENT BUSH, eager to improve America's reputation in the Muslim world, will welcome 50 ambassadors from Islamic countries for a traditional meal and prayer at the White House on Monday to mark the start of Ramadan.

It is thought to be the first time that Muslims will have knelt and touched the floor with their foreheads in a formal ceremony in the official home of American presidents.

In another unprecedented event, the Muslim chaplain of Georgetown University officiated at the opening prayers of the House of Representatives on Capitol Hill yesterday.

Charlotte Beers, who has been chosen to take charge of an American-led campaign to build support in the Muslim world, said that the White House and State Department wanted to show sensitivity to the importance of Ramadan.

The linK (there are others re: this):

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/11/16/wus116.xml

RE: The DC snipers:

The Justice Department appears to be under direct orders from the White House not to offend any more "American" Muslims than absolutely required in the war on terror. The White House sees itself under fire from groups such as the ACLU for "targeting" Muslims. Also the Republican party still believes that Muslims can be convinced to vote for their candidates.

Indeed there is a big drive to recruit Muslims into the Republican Party. Thus there was political pressure not to investigate Muslim connections to the shootings.

http://www.wjmurray.com/news/default.asp?action=detail&article=62

A couple of threads on this topic previously posted here on BB:

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000690

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000719


It is not that President Bush doesn't know. Many Conservative Evangelical leaders have written to him or had informal face-to-face meetings with him over these things.

I know this is a sore subject for many folks. Now that the war in Iraq is pretty much over, I feel at liberty to address these topics once again. They are disturbing to me. And now there is the Road Map thing, making deals with terrorists, those who support Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa Martyr Brigade.

Thanks for asking, Phillip - Draw your own conclusions.

 

[KenH]

I don't know that President Bush has turned his back on conservative evangelical Christians as much as he was never on our side to begin with. His phrase, "compassionate conservatism" was a dead giveaway that he was not interested in rolling back the tide of socialism that is now the basis of our federal government as conservative evangelical Christians would like to see accomplished. We voted for him, probably more because of being tired of 8 years of President Clinton running the show and not wanting a continuation with Vice President Al Gore, than really agreeing with then Governor Bush's proposals.

During his time in office, the federal government has grown much larger. I voted for him in 2000. I don't plan on doing so in 2004. Most likely I will vote for the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party candidate. Neither of these candidates will win, but I will feel better about my vote in 2004 than if I vote for President Bush. I urge my fellow conservative evangelical Christians to do the same and resist the Siren song of the Republican Party in 2004.

 

[LadyEagle]

I don't plan on doing so in 2004. Most likely I will vote for the Constitution Party or Libertarian Party candidate.

Agreed.

http://www.constitutionparty.org

 

[WillRain]

I supported Alan Keyes in the last two presidential Primaries and voted for Howie Phillips so you can tell I'm not a Bush apologist, BUT, while he has made some moves which, in my mind, smack of being politically motivated (which is exactly what's going on by being "inclusive" with these Muslims) I have to give some major credit where it's due...

No President that I can think of has sent up a better slate of judicial nominations than W.

whatever else he's getting wrong, on this HUGELY important matter, he's getting it right to a very great extent.

Just so lonh as the GOP sticks to it's guns on the matter.

 

[InHim2002]

I'm not really too sure where you get the idea that extreme evangelical christians are his 'base' - there are so few of them that he would not have been elected if that were the case

 

[LadyEagle]

Didn't say "extreme" - that is your word, InHim.

THE BUSH Crowd loathes talking to the press, but they don’t hide their aims.

Their straightforward goal for ’04 is to boost turnout of “The Base”—defined, in the modern Republican Party, as voters who practice traditional religions in traditional ways. That means evangelical Christians, of course, but also, and increasingly, socially conservative (if economically liberal) Roman Catholics, adherents of various strains of Eastern Orthodoxy and non-Reform Jews.


Here’s one of the most salient facts of politics today: There is a close and growing correlation between dutiful church attendance and identification with the GOP.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/918997.asp


http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/evangelical_christians021118.html

The "base" is charged up about the Road Map. In courting the Muslim vote, Bush is losing his base, including not only Evangelical Christians, but Jews, as well.

There are a few who call themselves evangelical Christians who take an opposing view on this Board, but those dissenting voices are very few & nearly non-existent in the larger American political scene.

The Road Map will cost Bush the election in 2004. Watch & see.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
1) The "base" is charged up about the Road Map.
2)The Road Map will cost Bush the election in 2004.

1)Only if you narrowly define the base as composed of dyed-in-the-wool, nothing else matters dispensational premillennialists who actually vote.

2)No, it won't. There are not enough dispensational premillennialists who first, will actually vote and second, who will vote for someone other than President Bush to cost him the election. Very few Americans vote based on foreign policy. Very few Americans care about foreign policy on an ongoing basis. You, SheEagle9/11 and your dispensational premillennialist buddies, are an exception to that rule.

If President Bush loses it will be because the economy gets worse. If the economy gets better, he will be just about unbeatable.

Those are the plain political facts, SheEagle9/11.

 

[LadyEagle]

So you don't care if Mount Calvary, Bethlehem, the Garden Tomb - all the sites that are sacred to Christians become totally under Muslim Control? That is part of the Road Map - the capital of the newly created state of Palestine will be Jerusalem and all the aforementioned places will be under the control of Muslims for them to desecrate. But none of that matters, eh?

Interesting that the two main focal points of this administration are:

Babylon, the epicenter of darkness.

Jerusalem, the epicenter of Light.

 

[KenH]

Weren't they under Arab control prior to June 1967?

 

[LadyEagle]

A U.N. proposal of November, 1947 called for leaving Jerusalem an international city. This proposal was rejected by Palestinians and several Arab states.

At the end of the 1948 War of Israeli Independence, Jerusalem remained divided.

The Israelis gained control of all of Jerusalem during the 1967 war (my note: in which they were attacked) in which they also captured the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights, all points of contention between the peace negotiators.

Despite a United Nastions resolution disapproving of Jerusalem's unification, the Israeli Knesset declared unified Jerusalem its capital in 1980.

The Palestine Liberation Organization declared Jerusalem its capital in 1988. In an editorial written by members of Yasser Arafat's Fateh party, Jerusalem is said to be "legally an integral part of the Palestinian land occupied in 1967 and from which Israel must withdraw," citing UN Security Council resolutions 242, 338, and 252. The editorial calls on Palestinians to make control of Jerusalem a central aim of the Palestinian independence effort.

As part of the Palestinian's planned declaration of independence on May 4, 1999, Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat has sought at least partial, if not full, control of Jerusalem as the capital of the new Palestinian state.

The Israelis, of course, vehemently oppose such a plan, arguing that the capital is, and will always be, the undisputed capital of Israel. In the government's official policy guidelines, the platform establishes the following guidelines:

Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, is one city, whole and united, and will remain forever under Israel's sovereignty.

Freedom of worship and access to the holy places will be guaranteed to members of all faiths.

The government will thwart any attempt to undermine the unity of Jerusalem, and will prevent any action which is counter to Israel's exclusive sovereignty over the city.

The government of Israel, through its ministries and through the Jerusalem Municipality, will allocate special resources to speed up building, improve municipal services for Jewish and Arab residents, and enhance the social and economic status of the greater Jerusalem area.

http://www.yale.edu/accords/jerusalem.html

Also see:

http://www.jcpa.org/jl/jerusalem-gms.htm

 

[church mouse guy]

The Libertarians around here want to legalize all vice--I could not vote for them.

The road map is now a dead letter. It's real author is perhaps Secretary of State Powell. Bush blundered on this one so now perhaps he will allow Israel to deal with the terrorists as the USA is dealing with terrorists. It would be very helpful to the USA in Iraq if the Arabs were defeated in Israel. All politicans pop off and say and do foolish things. It is remarkable that Bush had the military power to have that meeting safely.

 

[LadyEagle]

It's real author is perhaps Secretary of State Powell.

That, my Friend, is probably the profound golden nugget of the day!

 

[church mouse guy]

Lady Eagle, Powell is good at what he does but he should not decide policy on this point completely. However, he is reasonable and loyal to Bush as all good soldiers should be loyal, shouldn't they? Powell is also very brave if you consider as true that the Palestinians tried to assassinate him a few months ago when he visited Israel. They say that the Palestinians sent an ambulance loaded with explosives on the airport road at the time that he was landing. Do you recall that incident?

Your kind remarks to me have me enthralled to you.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
It's real author is perhaps Secretary of State Powell.

If that is the case, then I say God bless Colin Powell.

At least he is trying to find a peaceful solution so that the Israeli and Palestinian children can live in safety instead of living in the horrible conditions that both sides are currently enduring.

 

[church mouse guy]

The road map was a dead end, wasn't it? It was little more that Oslo revisited or a rehash of all of the other plans that have been around since Carter. By the way, Carter likes Clinton a lot because Carter thought that there would never be a President worse than he himself was.

Europe and the UN are suspicious members of the quartet. The USA should well know that there is little that we can do to save ourselves from terror except to fight it and try to eradicate it. If we join Europe and the UN and turn our backs on Israel, Israel might have to use atomic weapons, don't you agree? The error of the Western approach to this oriental problem is to constantly call for Israel to restrain her response while failing to force the Arabs to comply with any of the promises on their side of the bargin. It is a shame that the Arabs live in such squalor, but the whole Arab League is squalor and filth and corruption. Remember that Islam wants to return to the days of Islamic military rule seven hundred years ago. Islam is fatalistic and nihilistic, willing to commit self-murder for an idol.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by church mouse guy:
Israel might have to use atomic weapons, don't you agree?

I don't think so. There is no Arab country or combination thereof that can take on Israel militarily without having their military wiped out in short order by conventional means.

 

[Roy]

Some things about President Bush are just blazingly apparent. His appointments of known homosexuals to government offices and diplomatic positions are an indicator that he isn't being led by the Holy Spirit. Open borders are an indicator that national security and national sovereignty mean very little to him. His plan for economic recovery is simply for Americans to spend more money. What a joke! How about making this country more productive.

I hear talk of giving foreigners U.S. citizenship in exchange for military service. That's a security breach and also constitutes a mercenary type military system.

What really gets me is knowing how knowledgeable and educated our leaders are, and for them to be carrying out policies that are destructive to our nation. I can only believe that they are willfully destroying our country.

Roy

 

[LadyEagle]

Roy, I agree 100%. There is another agenda at stake & we must look at a person's actions not just the words they speak that they think we want to hear to make us feel good.

It's not just certain Evangelical Christians who have taken a stand against the Road Map. The drum beat is growing.

Other Conservatives who have taken a stand yesterday & spoken out against the Road Map:

Sean Hannity (Fox & Friends) from his radio studio yesterday morning.

O'Reilly (Fox News) The Factor - last night.

Joe Scarbrough (MSNBC) last night from his show.

Michael Savage (MSNBC) last night from JS show.

None of these people are pre-tribs by the way (as far as I know - O'Reilly & Sean Hannity are Catholics).

On Capitol Hill, House Majority Leader Tom Delay, R-Texas, said Israel has the right to defend itself. "If (Abbas) doesn't destroy terrorists and their infrastructure, Israel must," he said. "And make no mistake: America must stand by Israel as it fights its own war on terror."

We are either for Israel who is already an existing Nation since 1948, or we are for the terrorists. The line has been drawn in the sand for many years. The fingerprints of the State Department are all over this road map.

America has been a friend to Israel for over 50 years. For our President to turn his back on her in favor of making deals with homicidal maniacs so he can get the Muslim vote in 2004 is unconscionable!

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by SheEagle9/11:
so he can get the Muslim vote in 2004 is unconscionable!

I serious doubt that is the case. There are less dyed-in-the-wool Muslims who will vote than there are dyed-in-the-wool dispensational premillennialists who will vote. I think President Bush is sincere in wanting to see the suffering ended for both Israeli and Palestinians, especially the children.

By the way, just because one is not willing to support Israel carte blanche does not mean one is pro-terrorist.

 

[LadyEagle]

There are less dyed-in-the-wool Muslims who will vote than there are dyed-in-the-wool dispensational premillennialists who will vote.

True, but he is living under a delusion that freeing Muslims & creating a Palestinian state will procure the American Muslim vote. Someone has given him faulty advice.

I thought on the other thread you couldn't see the correlation between dispensationalists and the Road Map. So why don't you answer the other thread about post-trib and being FOR the Road Map? Flipping & flopping like a fish on dry land, eh?