Sunday, October 09, 2005

The Annointment of Saint George

Last week, the Guardian and the Indy broke the story that Bush claimed that God told him to invade and “end tyranny in Iraq”. Whats really amusing is the reaction to this story by the two camps for and against the war.

The anti-war reaction was one of bored dismissal. Tell us something we don’t know about the Bush Theocracy. The Guardian will be breaking a story a about a Whitehouse aide claiming Bush is an elitist dullard with a speech impediment next.

The pro-war camp scurried around trying their best to disassociate their causes from the story. Here are two from the pro-war blogswamp:

Scott Burgess @ the Daily Ablution, which regards itself as the Media Watchdog for the jingoistic RightWing NewLeft, does a typically malevolent mouth-frothing dis-job on the editors who broke the news. Calm down dear, its only a “non-story”. Isn't it?

The drink-soaked cretins for war does a typically piss-poor attempt at explaining to us why their ‘Secular’ politics unconditionally supports a man who has conversations with God.

Meanwhile the BBC has been scared off pursuing this story. I wonder why. It couldn’t be because of this could it?


At October 10, 2005 5:19 pm, Blogger Eric said...

1. Scott Burgess is not part of what you call the "jingoistic RightWing NewLeft". I suspect he would consider himself just plain right wing, but would certainly not consider himself left wing, new or old. He is however rational and evidence-based, unlike you.

2. Whether or not Bush "speaks to God" does not interest me at all. If the man obtains spiritual support from a God, then "whatever gets him through the night" as Lennon once sung. The issue is whether Bush's foreign policy decisions are dictated by voices in his head. Given the paucity of evidence supporting this view, and indeed the rebuttal of the story by both the Whitehouse and the primary source of the rumour, then I think it is safe to assume that US foreign policy continues to be dictated by US interests and strategic decisions.

3. The BBC is controlled by Jews? Why am I not surprised that you peddle anti-semitic twaddle.

At October 10, 2005 11:57 pm, Blogger Siddhartha said...

1. I stand corrected on his politics. But with all the visceral right wing nonsense going down nowadays, particularly from the "Left" that you inhabit, you'll forgive me for getting getting these labels wrong from time to time.

2. I completely agree with you on your points. I personally have no problem if Bush feels he derives his politics from his relationship with God. Its "Progressives" like you who seem to be most uncomfortable with squaring Bush's God-ness with your belief with secularism. This is underlined by Norman Geras' analysis of this whole thing (posted on HP). His point seems to be that if an Islamist Terrorist can define his politics in the name of God, thats a reprehensible thing that goes against the tenets of secularism. But when Bush does the same thing, it isn't against secularism. Instead he uses the old converse tactic: if Islamists can do it why is it so bad if Bush does, to paraphrase. He's being hypocritical if he thinks he can have it both ways.

3. LOL, I didn't say the "BBC is controlled by Jews". You're reacting in a usual predictable, programmed manner. I'll bet folding money I have similar views on Zionism as WE have on bin-Ladenism. But the trouble with the "Progressive New Left" is the refusal to see things universally and instead view things in a rigidly binary and knee-jerk fashion. That's politics for you. Oh well.

At October 11, 2005 9:21 am, Blogger Eric said...

But when Bush does the same thing, it isn't against secularism.

Ahh, but they are not doing the same thing are they?

As for your point about right wing nonsense from the left wing, you should look top your own views and note how you have started to parade right wing anti-semitic claptrap.

At October 20, 2005 12:27 am, Blogger Siddhartha said...

You should examine your own tendency towards cheap anti-Muslim claptrap before you go accusing others of anti-semitism. Or have you NewLefties entitled yourselves the license to do that in the same of opposition to "Cultural Relativism"?

At October 20, 2005 12:36 am, Blogger Siddhartha said...

Ahh, but they are not doing the same thing are they?

Bush's rationale for his expansionism is God-ordained, he claims. Islamist fundamentalist ideas make the identical claim. But I don't expect card carrying unconditional Bush supporters to develop the power of discernment anytime too soon.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home