Bush: ‘If it’s About Christianity vs. Islam, We’ll Lose’

Outside the Beltway ^ | 9/18/06 | James Joyner

[LibWhacker]

President Bush told a group of radio talk show hosts that the war on terror must be framed in terms of values, not religion.

Coulter found herself in the uncharacteristic position of being upstaged by her introducer, Mike Gallagher. He told the audience he was fresh back from an hour-and-45-minute session which President Bush held in the Oval Office Friday afternoon with him and four other conservative talk show hosts: Atlanta’s Neal Boortz, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and Michael Medved. Rush Limbaugh couldn’t make it, he said.

Though he said this session was supposed to be off the record, Gallagher described it at some length, including Bush’s observation to the right-wing radio jocks that the War on Terror has to be about right versus wrong, “because if it’s about Christianity versus Islam, we’ll lose.”

“Remind me never to invite you to an off-the-record session,” Coulter said after his introduction.

Indeed.

Still, if Bush said what Gallagher said he did, he’s right. Islam is, of course, a big piece of the puzzle. But the battle over ideas has to be fought by finding common moral ground, not bashing Islam in general.

It’s no small irony that this was revealed while introducing, Ann “invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity” Coulter.

[ItsForTheChildren]

Maybe its because Rush has already framed this as a religious war.

[PetroniusMaximus]

These men are not the traitors to the spirit and character of America!

The pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, ACLU communists - THEY are they enemies within.

They are the fifth column.

[Steel Wolf]

As long as Muslims are fighting Muslims, we have less to worry about than if they ever unite. Don't kid yourself, they will probably overcome their divisions within your lifetime.

You were 100% on the money, right up until this point.

A unification of the Muslim sects sounds scary, but you know as well as I that if both sides got nuclear weapons, they'd use them on each other long before they did us. They're no different than medieval Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox societies who were more than happy to spill each other's blood. Aside from a few crusades into Muslim held areas, that's pretty much all they did.

Even now, hundreds of years later, it's considered a fairly novel thing that so many non-Catholic Christians have come forward to support the Pope's words. The idea that everyone's going to forget their differences and become Catholic is as out there as the idea that Sunni Salafists are going to give up on that line and become Shi'ites.

[presently no screen name]

Having listened to Gallagher in the past, I agree w/your assessment of him.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"As I was reading your post it struck me that Christian and Islamic fundamentalism may share a common understating of the coming rapture of end time. My fear is these guys are planning to take the rest of us with them. Perhaps the problems of modernity are not limited to the Islamic world."


Congratulation. You are now part of the problem.

Go join DU.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"Allah is the perfect being while the Christians also believe God is perfect, how can this be so unless Allah and God are the same being with two faces?"

What you wind up with is a "two-faced" God.

[MNJohnnie]

Please stop confusing rabid emotion based hysteria for facts.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"They're no different than medieval Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox societies who were more than happy to spill each other's blood. Aside from a few crusades into Muslim held areas, that's pretty much all they did."


You need to speak to your educator about a refund.

[spatso]

"Congratulation. You are now part of the problem."

If it allows me to avoid the rapture for another 1,000 years, count me in.

[Old Professer]

A modern day Janus, enlightenment is disappointment.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"If it allows me to avoid the rapture for another 1,000 years, count me in."

It won't.

I've already seen the attitude you expressed fomenting in the writings of liberal elites. These "smarter-then-thou" secularists want to re frame this war on terror as a "War on Religious Fundamentalism" and turn the power of the State against all "fundamentalist" believers (Christian or Muslim) - regardless of their temperament or intentions.

BTW - you might want to check this out:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts
"As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc."

[ZULU]

Uhh, what did I say that you would consider "emotion based hysteria"?

[Old Professer]

In a world populated by followers, the leaders all begin to look the same.

[spatso]

"The "moderate" Salafis advise not using violence and terror to achieve their goals, because they are outnumbered, except in the ummah, where the goal of reuniting the Caliphate is the goal."

Regardless the reason, even if the reason is assured mutual destruction, reason must prevail. Benedict's call to Islam is clear, "A profound encounter of faith and reason is taking place...Not to act "with logos" is contrary to God's nature." In the first instance Benedict is speaking of the Christian experience. At the same time, he is calling on Islam to temper the passion of faith with reason.

[spatso]

"We oppose all forms of liberalism"

A laundry list of in the form of a vanity rant that rejects the foundations of a liberal democracy is really not very helpful. If there is something that characterizes a conservatives nature it is our belief in the rule of law and a representative liberal democracy that asserts the right of the individual over the will of the collective.

I think you might want to try again taking into account my right to be whatever to hell I want to be. I happen to be a person of faith. But, that is a matter of choice on my part. Don't tell me or anyone else how I can choose to be an autonomous person exercising my individual freedom. You lose me the moment you start telling me what I have to be. Who put you in charge of the faith police. Which religions are on your list acceptable faiths?

[Steel Wolf]

"They're no different than medieval Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox societies who were more than happy to spill each other's blood. Aside from a few crusades into Muslim held areas, that's pretty much all they did."

You need to speak to your educator about a refund.

Of course, I realize perfectly well that the Middle Ages was a Renaissance, if you will, of interfaith understanding and outreach. No Christian would so much as speak ill of a fellow Christian of a different sect, and actual violence was unheard of.

Sometimes I just get these crazy ideas that medieval Christianity wasn't very Christian, and led to a number of wars, purges, and upheavals before finally getting back to its roots, and settling down into the reasonable, responsible religion it is today.

I'll see if Gov Schwartznegger will send me a check.

[Steel Wolf]

In a world populated by followers, the leaders all begin to look the same.

I'm sorry, which post are you referring to?

[girlangler]

Yes, as a journqalist (smalltime of course) I have to say that is a MAJOR no no, to publish or broadcast a pre-determined off the record comment.

[girlangler]

Yes, as a journqalist (smalltime of course) I have to say that is a MAJOR no no, to publish or broadcast a pre-determined off the record comment.

[PetroniusMaximus]

"I think you might want to try again taking into account my right to be whatever to hell I want to be."

Are you sure you are on the right thread? Please show me where I did that?



"Who put you in charge of the faith police. Which religions are on your list acceptable faiths?"

The ones that don't equate conservative Christianity with radical Islam. (for reference, see your post #213)

Say, are you A Rosie O'Donnell kind of Freeper???

"Rosie: Radical Christians pose Islamofascist threat (Rosie O'Donnell Moron Eruption Alert)"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1701019/posts