Saturday, November 04, 2006

The Reverend Ted Haggard

... But I Didn't Inhale


Remember Bill Clinton's "confession" about smoking pot, Bush? "I tried marijuana," he allowed. "But I didn't inhale." He was roundly mocked for his half-way admission, and not only by your Republicans. Laughed, as they say, out of court.

Now comes your friendly evangelical pastor, the Rev. Ted Haggard of the New Life Church, with the reluctant--and belated--confession that, yes, he did buy methamphetamine from a gay "escort" but "never used it. I was tempted, but never used it." Oh? And, yes, he now remembers that he did in fact receive a massage from this man he insisted only hours before he had never met. Of course. Where else would a man go to get a good massage if not a male prostitute? The next thing we'll hear, he paid for a blow job, but didn't come. Or didn't... well, let's not touch that one, eh?

You know, Bush, I personally have no problem with same sex sex. If a guy wants a blow job--or whatever--from another guy, who am I to come between them? Perish the thought. I also have no problem with same sex marriage. I acknowledge that you have moral qualms on the subject... or that it's convenient for you to say that you do, loudly and often, in order to appeal to that voter "base" that everyone keeps talking about. But the issue does seem--forgive the expression--to be blowing up in your face right at the moment. First your congressman Foley comes out of the closet, with some very nasty stuff about those underage pages; and now your Haggard, leading gay sex basher and vocal gay marriage opponent... and the recently retired head of the National Association of Evangelicals.

I do have a problem with those who preach one thing and practice another. My judgment: they're dishonest, they're hypocritical, they're out of integity with themselves and with others. But it's one thing do be dishonest and hypocritical and out of integrity in private. It's quite another when you indulge in political hay-making with your dishonesty, your hypocrisy, and your lack of integrity. Because then it affects me. It affects us all. It makes a mockery our democracy and our character as a nation. If people like this are advising the President and helping to shape and drive the national agenda, what does it say about us?

So what are you going to say about this, Bush? Surely you have to say something. The pastor was apparently a frequent advisor, a man who--as they say--had the President's ear. Hmmmm. I understand that it might be embarrassing for you to speak on such matters, so shortly before the election. You have terrorists on your mind. But your silence, I think, might be taken by some voters as cowardly in this circumstance. I'm interested to know what you'll do.

3 comments:

denn said...

Bush names Lee Raymond, the retired chief of Exxon Mobil, to head a key study to help America chart a cleaner course for our energy needs

Talk about putting the fox in charge of the henhouse...

the New York Times accuses Bush of ignoring climate change

Paul Krugman writes that Bechtel is leaving Iraq without power, clean water and sewage treatment, but with $2.3 billion of US taxpayers' money in pocket

The strangle hold tightens, as money changes hands.
t r u t h o u t | 11.03

PK said...

denn, I read that! I just can't believe all that is happening, and it seems to be just fine with all of his 'base'... Peter, what gets my brain to thinking is the fact that all these people appear to have 'the presidents ear', if this is so, I wonder what he does when Laura isn't around? I mean, birds of a feather tend to flock together. Gives one pause for thought...

denn said...

There are so many business scams going on, no ordinary voter could ever keep up. Get a load of this one.

If you are a California voter, you might have heard about the big celebrity protests in Malibu a few weeks ago. Everyone from Barbra Striesand to Sting showed up to protest a planned LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) terminal that BHP Billiton wants to build 14 miles off the coast at Oxnard.

BHP Billiton, a giant Australian mining company, is one of four companies hoping to build LNG terminals off the southern California coast to receive liquefied natural gas shipped from sources in Russia, Australia, Indonesia and South America. The sprawling off-shore industrial facilities will unload the chilled gas from tankers, warm it back to a gaseous state, and then pipe it into California's gas grid.

There are many reasons for neighbors to be upset about this kind of industrial development off their coast. Safety is a big issue. The BHP Billiton facility is a new, untested design. An accident could produce a fireball miles in diameter that would incinerate everything in its way. Discharges would impact marine life, and the terminal would emit 200 tons of pollutants and up to 25 million tons of greenhouse gases every year. It would become the largest polluter in Ventura County.

But this is much more than a "not in my back yard" concern. LNG terminals are the receptacles that will plug California into a whole new energy regime.

The LNG energy regime is at odds with California's direction as a renewable, clean energy leader. This is a direction that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says he is committed to, but his actions say otherwise.

In September, after fighting against it for months, Schwarzenegger signed California's global warming bill, AB 32. He also signed into law a companion bill, SB 1368, that requires all new power generation to meet greenhouse gas emission standards. The purpose of SB 1368 was to stop power companies from circumventing AB 32 by building new dirty coal plants out of state to supply California with electricity. The bottom line for the new standards is that they cannot emit more greenhouse gases than a regular natural gas power plant. The problem is, LNG is not regular natural gas.......
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110406F.shtml