More than five years after President Bush created the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, the former second-in-command of that office is going public with an insider’s tell-all account that portrays an office used almost exclusively to win political points with both evangelical Christians and traditionally Democratic minorities.
“Tempting Faith’s” author is David Kuo, who served as special assistant to the president from 2001 to 2003. A self-described conservative Christian, Kuo’s previous experience includes work for prominent conservatives including former Education Secretary and federal drug czar Bill Bennett and former Attorney General John Ashcroft.”
Kuo, who has complained publicly in the past about the funding shortfalls, goes several steps further in his new book. He says some of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders were known in the office of presidential political strategist Karl Rove as “the nuts.”
“National Christian leaders received hugs and smiles in person and then were dismissed behind their backs and described as ‘ridiculous,’ ‘out of control,’ and just plain ‘goofy,’” Kuo writes.
Doesn’t it warm the cockles of your heart to learn the religious “goofy” — lead the American electorate in being misled?
More seriously, Kuo alleges that then-White House political affairs director Ken Mehlman knowingly participated in a scheme to use the office, and taxpayer funds, to mount ostensibly “nonpartisan” events that were, in reality, designed with the intent of mobilizing religious voters in…targeted races.
With the exception of one reporter from the Washington Post, Kuo says the media were oblivious to the political nature and impact of his office’s events, in part because so much of the debate centered on issues of separation of church and state.
Kuo characterizes himself as a “compassionate conservative”. He’s not only worked for Bush and Bob Dole, he worked for Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart…and AOL’s Steve Case.
He is also a professional bass fisherman. He helped reel in the gullible like the poor fish they are.
27. “Besides how is listing to a famous person really any different than listing to a politician? They are both just selling you something. The difference is politicians try to sell it as the truth where as the movie star and rock star let you know it is their opinion.”
No, it’s far worse than that. The acceptence of *most* Rock Star’s ideas is directly proportional to how musical their songs are.
RBG
29. “It took thirty years to kill that belief. 30 YEARS!”
Clearly, you’re a better man for it.
RBG
#25 – Traaxx
Who is more likely to assist evangelical Christians, Democrats that back and promote unlimited abortion, drug usage, caving into the Global UN, and forced participation in the gay/lesbian/transgender/Pedophilia. Which party do you think NAMBLA would support.
You guys love your hyperbole… In fact, it isn’t so much that you blow things out of proportion as much as it is that you are a bold faced liar and a scoundrel.
Democrats do not support unlimited abortion… Nobody “supports” abortion, but you say they do because charging your vitriol with electrified deception generates revenue for the 700 Club and the Moral majority and other hate groups. Democrats generallt believe that the government has no business legislating the decisions made between doctors and patients. I think they are right.
Democrats do not support drug usage, and you are a liar for saying they do.
Democrats respect the mission of the UN and you are aloonbat looking out for black helicopters and wearing a tin-foil hat if you don’t recognize the US participation in the UN is essential for our security now and as far into the future as we can see, and you are an ignorant baffoon if you think the US cowers before the UN and is somehow under its thumb.
Finally you wrote, “and forced participation in the gay/lesbian/transgender/Pedophilia” and what I really wanna know is, what the hell does that train wreck of English mean? No… I don’t wanna know. I already know. It means you are an ignorant tight ass and a liar. NOBODY supports pedophilia. Not Democrats. Not Republicans. Not Christians. Not Jews. Not Satanists. Nobody supports pedophilia, and if you think its rude of me to take you for a walk, well to hell with you for telling me that I and my party supports pedophilia. How dare you? Who do you think you are you moronic Bible thumping caracature of a Christian…
Jesus should kick your ass.
#30 – Assuming you’re referring to Liberals… I have selflessly dedicated my life to showing them the way to truth and righteousness.
RBG
How would you know the way?
I read about it once in Reader’s Digest?
RBG
#35 – I like you, RBG… You have a certain sense of the funny.
Yeah it was always funny listening to Christian radio and television shows making Bush out to be the Christian president.
I remember the guy who keeps track of Bush’s movements as much as possible said Bush has gone to church and entire 5 times out of 6 years in office.
Any of you sheep who bought that crap should seriously either wake up mentally, or just put yourselves out of your own misery.
Are you some kind of homosexual? Get thee behind me Satan! No, wait…
RBG
38 for 36. But you can join in too 37.
What a guy that Bush is. A president for everyone.
RBG
It’s not a matter of whether or not Bush is a Christian or not — it’s a question of whom he backs and who backs him. It reminds me of Roman Emperor Constantine who was close to losing his position and his head, until he became “Christian” and started to Christianize the empire.
The Democrats have dissed the Christians numerous times — they back the other major religion, Humanism. (Humanism as religion? See Torcaso vs Watkins)
The Americans are having a religious struggle right now. But things are getting confused.
Bush knew the Christians had nowhere else to go, so he started catering to the non-leftist Humanists. When he won re-election two years ago, the Democrats cried foul; they owned the Humanists.
Recently, the Democrats are trying to cater to the religious left, to counter the Republican incursion onto their turf. But the Democrats are wasting their time. These are pseudo-religious Humanists they have owned all along.
They were encouraged to do this when Billy Graham declared himself a liberal who backed Hillary. But he is an exception. He has been so out of touch with politics for decades, he thought “liberal” meant Hubert Humphrey, not FDR.
#40 – These are pseudo-religious Humanists they have owned all along.
Jesus, as portrayed by the Bible, is a liberal.
So why is it that when Christians are liberal they are somehow portrayed as less than Christian… Why are they pseudo-religious?
They were encouraged to do this when Billy Graham declared himself a liberal who backed Hillary.
And if Hillary were in fact, a liberal, I’d back her too. But then again, I guess a centrist is better than nothing.
Nerf. I hate missing a rebuttal, but I was installing this damned, commie OS.
23 & 24: I DID read the article, and my post was very specific about the fact that the book would be strongly TOUTED by the left, not that it had been written by someone themselves left-leaning.
Not to mention the fact that I think I did a pretty spiffy job re-spinning the topic O’Reilly-style.
Some days, it’s a wonder I’m not even deeper in the mushy middle…
41 – Humanists want to put all religions under their umbrella, making them the mother of all religions. But to do so, they have to come up with a Jesus who doesn’t demand full dedication, doesn’t heal, doesn’t cast out demons, doesn’t offer heaven, brought salvation through politics, etc. That is not Christianity. That is a fiction.
Jesus Christ and His followers up to the present day perform signs & wonders to attest to Him being alive and active today. If you want healing from something incurable by medical science, come look us up. Jesus offers you a personal relationship and with it, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness and self-control. This is available to you.
Too bad it doesn’t seem to be available to our President.
>. Democrats generallt believe that the government has no business >legislating the decisions made between doctors and patients.
Therefore abortion with no restrictions, unlimited abortion.
>Democrats do not support drug usage
Yeah, they do. Weakening crack cocaine laws, against mandatory minimums, legalizing marijuana, etc. Not as partisan an issue as abortion, but it’s definitely a partisan split.
>Democrats respect the mission of the UN
Caving into the global UN, indeed. Remember ‘global test?’
>NOBODY supports pedophilia.
Except the Democrats. They kept Gerry Studds for 13 years, which people assure me was a case of pedophilia. Pelosi marched a few spots away from NAMBLA’s Harry Hay.