We've seen it at every front and within the very people selected to portray that image including Condeleeza Rice and John Bolton. It is an underlying arrogance that only we can be right. It is a pomposity of grandiose nature that WE, the United States of America are not - no, President George W. Bush is the final judge and answer.
Unstated on most occasions is the underlying portrayal that the reason that George W. Bush is the final answer is that he "speaks for God"; that this administration is in fact (in their belief) the hand of God Almighty.
Not since the days of King George of England have we seen such pomposity and this was the basic tenet espoused within my 1998 essay. There was then, and is now, this inner belief that George W. Bush is the final answer. We saw it within the first ten days within the White House when Karen Hughes lectured news writers that George W. Bush was the "Commander in Chief"; elevating the military title versus the civilian leadership mantle of 'President'.
Such a focus on Commander in Chief should have signaled to all Americans of the self- centered, all powerful supreme ruler mentality that was being assembled.
Yes, I did write within an essay later and compare George W. Bush and his inner psyche alongside other historical leaders of the World. I wrote that the week after Karen Hughes tried to sell George Bush through a comparison to Winston Churchill, by the way. That should give slight context. But more important context, this was a serious essay, not a rant. It was a product of a Command and General Staff College (Army) style study of leadership.
And the findings were very simple. The basic tenets and approaches of George W. Bush emulated Adolf Hitler far more than Winston Churchill. Mussolini and Chairman Mao were far more recluse and Mussolini was far more paranoid than Bush. But Churchill always had the people's short and long term interests at heart. You never saw evidence of a political slant, or the anxiousness to stamp a slanted agenda to any action. My attempt was to refute that Bush was at all Churchillian. He was far more pompous and filled with himself. He was far more a radical of social change and far less willing to listen to viewpoints other than his own. Like Hitler, he wasn't a student who learned and grew from his mistakes; he was petty and insulent and refused to admit shortcoming or failure probably because it indicated weakness within his own mind. And these were traits he had displayed not only within this administration but before within advice to his Father, and within his business dealings including his four failed businesses prior to the Texas Rangers "windfall" provided by the Rainwaters of Ft. Worth.
Warriors and Diplomats should always be taught to be the best and toughest student of the leaders of their own effort and all others within the arena.
It is knowing George W. Bush that makes us understand our policy or lack thereof, and our focus and direction.
I won't label him as a Christian fundamentalist, but must observe that a Christian fundamentalist tact has been prevalent throughout his administration.
As a Christian, I'm comfortable in making that remark. I married into a Methodist denominational approach, and the fact that I might change admittedly indicates that I am able to listen, be tolerant and to learn and possibly even grow. And since I contend that Jesus Christ was the only perfect man and he died on a Cross, then I don't instill 100% faith in the words of any rector, preacher, politician or neighbor. I do not follow the actions of any man blindly, for I believe that would indeed be allowing the Devil's work to interfere with that of my Savior.
The point is, this President stamps us all by his actions. And the actions of the radical or the fundamentalist is so clearly a path for perpetual war and discord throughout the World. And that is not our objective in America. I admittedly have become a student of American and World history over these past eight years since my onset of severe illness. America was never founded as a Fundamentalist Christian nation as some may claim. In fact, the Declaration of Independence most clearly sets out the vision and architecture of this new democratic republic.
Certainly God, played a role within the lives of each of the signers. But there was a clear line of separation drawn between the imposition of God and the nation's goals and objectives.
This nation was isolationist until the twentieth century.
Certainly we've grown beyond that isolation. But we have not grown beyond the struggles of a "church state" (I hate the big academic terms being applied to these common sense happenings).
And I believe it is this attempt to radicalize America, that is the biggest threat to her structure and her future; a far bigger threat than any threat from an Islamic Nation, A Jewish lobby, or a radical fundamentalist cell.
The World's day-to-day events should serve as a laboratory for us all. We can easily see in this world of instant news, what works and what fails.
Unstated on most occasions is the underlying portrayal that the reason that George W. Bush is the final answer is that he "speaks for God"; that this administration is in fact (in their belief) the hand of God Almighty.
Not since the days of King George of England have we seen such pomposity and this was the basic tenet espoused within my 1998 essay. There was then, and is now, this inner belief that George W. Bush is the final answer. We saw it within the first ten days within the White House when Karen Hughes lectured news writers that George W. Bush was the "Commander in Chief"; elevating the military title versus the civilian leadership mantle of 'President'.
Such a focus on Commander in Chief should have signaled to all Americans of the self- centered, all powerful supreme ruler mentality that was being assembled.
And the findings were very simple. The basic tenets and approaches of George W. Bush emulated Adolf Hitler far more than Winston Churchill. Mussolini and Chairman Mao were far more recluse and Mussolini was far more paranoid than Bush. But Churchill always had the people's short and long term interests at heart. You never saw evidence of a political slant, or the anxiousness to stamp a slanted agenda to any action. My attempt was to refute that Bush was at all Churchillian. He was far more pompous and filled with himself. He was far more a radical of social change and far less willing to listen to viewpoints other than his own. Like Hitler, he wasn't a student who learned and grew from his mistakes; he was petty and insulent and refused to admit shortcoming or failure probably because it indicated weakness within his own mind. And these were traits he had displayed not only within this administration but before within advice to his Father, and within his business dealings including his four failed businesses prior to the Texas Rangers "windfall" provided by the Rainwaters of Ft. Worth.
Warriors and Diplomats should always be taught to be the best and toughest student of the leaders of their own effort and all others within the arena.
It is knowing George W. Bush that makes us understand our policy or lack thereof, and our focus and direction.
I won't label him as a Christian fundamentalist, but must observe that a Christian fundamentalist tact has been prevalent throughout his administration.
As a Christian, I'm comfortable in making that remark. I married into a Methodist denominational approach, and the fact that I might change admittedly indicates that I am able to listen, be tolerant and to learn and possibly even grow. And since I contend that Jesus Christ was the only perfect man and he died on a Cross, then I don't instill 100% faith in the words of any rector, preacher, politician or neighbor. I do not follow the actions of any man blindly, for I believe that would indeed be allowing the Devil's work to interfere with that of my Savior.
The point is, this President stamps us all by his actions. And the actions of the radical or the fundamentalist is so clearly a path for perpetual war and discord throughout the World. And that is not our objective in America. I admittedly have become a student of American and World history over these past eight years since my onset of severe illness. America was never founded as a Fundamentalist Christian nation as some may claim. In fact, the Declaration of Independence most clearly sets out the vision and architecture of this new democratic republic.
Certainly God, played a role within the lives of each of the signers. But there was a clear line of separation drawn between the imposition of God and the nation's goals and objectives.
This nation was isolationist until the twentieth century.
Certainly we've grown beyond that isolation. But we have not grown beyond the struggles of a "church state" (I hate the big academic terms being applied to these common sense happenings).
And I believe it is this attempt to radicalize America, that is the biggest threat to her structure and her future; a far bigger threat than any threat from an Islamic Nation, A Jewish lobby, or a radical fundamentalist cell.
The World's day-to-day events should serve as a laboratory for us all. We can easily see in this world of instant news, what works and what fails.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
