Posted on 01/11/2005 7:47:20 PM PST by jdm
FLASH: Bush: 'I don't see how you can be president without a relationship with the Lord'...
FLASH: Bush: 'No women in combat'...
Tue Jan 11 2005 22:37:08 ET
President Bush granted THE WASHINGTON TIMES an extensive and exclusive interview late Tuesday, sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.
President Bush said yesterday that he doesn't "see how you can be president without a relationship with the Lord," but that he is always mindful to protect the right of others to worship or not worship.
Mr. Bush told editors and reporters of The Washington Times yesterday in an interview in the Oval Office that many in the public misunderstand the role of faith in his life and his view of the proper relationship between religion and the government.
"I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person," Mr. Bush said. "I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is.
MORE
President Bush's policy on women in ground combat takes just four words to articulate: "No women in combat."
Despite extended tours of duties in Iraq for soldiers and an Army examination of women's roles, the president told editors and reporters of The Washington Times yesterday in an interview in the Oval Office that he has no intention of sending women into ground combat, a mission for which they are banned under Pentagon policy.
MORE
Reporters Rowan Scarborough, Joseph Curl and James Lakely, along with TIMES chief Wes Pruden, probed Bush during the White House session.
The paper plans at least 3 stand alone stories.
Developing...
Or just made them up. No reference to these quotes I've ever seen even states a specific writing or date and place.
Your Washington quote "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible" is always attributed to be from his farewell address of 1796, but if you'd like to read it for yourself, you'll find that the quote is not in there. It is a Christian fabrication.
Exactly, professing ones faith is a tricky issue. In the north where we mainly have the traditional protestant faiths, it is considered "showy" to talk about one's relationship with God. I grew up Lutheran and my old Norwegian Grandmother became suspicious every time she heard someone profess their faith in God.
It's a weird double standard for some of us. We believe in God but we don't shout our faith. When people shout their faith, we find their motives suspect.
A credentialed reporter directly quoted by the UPI at the time is enough to give this quote credence until the claim can be disproven.
Otherwise, I have no problem with the senior Bush and have no reason to WANT anything bad about him. I know he's basically a good man. I fought under his command in a just war, and although I wish he'd finished the job I know his valid political and practical reasons for not doing so at the time.
I saw that and you're a true gentleman. :-)
Clinton: "I don't see how you can be president without a relationship with an intern".
Do you realize you are asking someone to prove he DIDN'T say something? Asking someone to disprove a negative is not how it works. You made the assertion, you need to prove it happened.
Do you wonder at all why, given the controversial and sensational nature of the quote, it can only be sourced in obscure places?
We all make mistakes and I think you are making one here, but it's one at George H. W. Bush's expense.
I'm Norwegian as well. My parents/grandparents were also Lutheran but there's no Lutheran church in town so mom was mostly Episcopalian, when she went (which wasn't often). I grew up in that Church. I loved being Norwegian and our town had a pretty large Norwegian population, each one sending for someone else when they came.
I don't believe in boring people to death with my faith but I don't mind answering their questions. I hope that we, by our loving actions, show Him to others without having to talk too much about it.
"His harshest words, and actions, were against the religous authorities of His day."
Isn't that akin to attacking the "new(invented)morality", or religion of atheism that is spewn about today?
"Just professing Christ angers a lot of people. Even here."
Yes, but it should not be the goal(and usually isn't)of the one professing to anger anyone.
yeah. I noticed that as well. Could get some flack for that one.
So is he saying that he does think that non-religious people are not equally patriotic as religious people?
Nothing wrong with this.
It is commonly accepted you may refer to the president as Mr. after calling him by the proper title.
It is not a sign of disrespect.
After all, most do not even get referred to by Mr.
I couldn't make it through the day either without my Jesus.
And I'm just a working Mom.
. . . which runs down into Florida, are mostly Mexicans or South Americans . . .
I don't remember bringing that up in discussion.
See but not you have admitted your bent.
It is a Christian fabrication.
So when you say if is a Christiano fabrication what exactly do you mean? Was this made up by Roman Catholics? Maybe Presbyterians? Anglicans? See I'm not sure that there was or is some secret group called "Christians" that sat down and made this and other quotes up.
Now we know that the quote didn't just materialize and we suspect that someone made the quote so maybe we could search for the first use of the offending quote rather than make a statement that ascribes an entity that does not exist the way you imply. The groups that are called by Christs name generally will not sit at a table with each other, much less agree to design quotes from Washington and Jefferson.
This was widely reported on, and GHWB had ample opportunity to deny he made the remarks. He didn't. Why wouldn't he just deny making the remark if he didn't say them?
His office has also refused to deny this. But I just mailed his presidential library with exactly that question.
it can only be sourced in obscure places?
Since when is UPI obscure?
For the forty or so years that I have followed politics it has always been President XXX the first time in an article and then President mixed with Mr. This is to lower the repetitiveness of using just one and is done no matter who is the President.
Thank you for your stupid blue state input.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.