I can understand that. But, whereas the Bush's doing of it is almost messianic in some of the speeches (yeah, I know you won't like that language), much of the rhetoric of it is not credible.
Did you read Brooks column in this month's "Atlantic" that I posted? You and I used to think that our secular approach was the wave of the future, as people gave up Religion and moved toward rationality, but Brooks points out that the "Heavenly Host" is becoming even larger, and our secular attitude is becoming a rapidly dwindling minority. You should try to adopt the more nuanced approach that I am using, and quit being so binary about them.
That only leads folk, definitely including myself, to think there is a reason beneath the reasons.
I think you are trying to find a nice way to say that you cannot admit that Bush's believes in what he is doing. That you believe he has some hidden motive that you cannot ferret out, or that you will not say. You may think he is wants to "dominate the world," or it is "all about oil." You hint around about it, but you won't say it. Whatever it is, you won't give the man his due. Too bad. |
