David Kuo
Posted on 10/16/2006 2:09:32 PM PDT by Conservative Coulter Fan
David Kuo |
WASHINGTON – Top White House political advisers embraced evangelical supporters publicly to get their votes while mocking them privately as "nuts" and "goofy," according to a new book by David Kuo, the former No. 2 man in President Bush's so-called "faith-based" initiatives program.
In "Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction," Kuo also says it's time for conservative Christians to take a time out from politics and to re-evaluate their priorities. The book hits stores today.
Kuo quit the White House in 2003. Now he accuses Karl Rove's political staff of cynically hijacking the faith-based initiatives idea for electoral gain.
White House strategists "knew 'the nuts' were politically invaluable, but that was the extent of their usefulness," Kuo writes.
Kuo appeared last night on CBS's "60 Minutes," where he called on evangelicals to back off of politics – to fast and consider what they are doing to help the poor rather than focusing on issues like abortion and homosexuality.
Asked if White House officials really mocked conservative Christians, Kuo told Lesley Stahl, "Oh, absolutely. You name the important Christian leader and I have heard them mocked by serious people in serious places."
Specifically, Kuo says people in the White House political affairs office referred to Pat Robertson as "insane," Jerry Falwell as "ridiculous" and that James Dobson "had to be controlled." President Bush, he wrote, talked about his compassion agenda, but never really fought for it.
"The president of the United States promised he would be the leading lobbying on behalf of the poor. What better lobbyist could anybody get?" Kuo wonders.
What happened?
"The lobbyist didn't follow through," he claims.
"What about 9/11?" Stahl asks. "All the priorities got turned about."
"I was there before 9/11. I know what happened before 9/11. … The trend before 9/11 was … president makes a big announcement and nothing happens," Kuo replies.
At the time, Bush proposed for the first time that he would spend $8 billion dollars on programs for the poor.
"I think it's one of the most important political speeches given in the last generation. I really do," says Kuo. "It laid out a whole new philosophy for Republicans."
After the election, to much fanfare, President Bush created the office of faith-based initiatives to increase funds to religious charities.
But Kuo says there were problems right off the bat. For one, he says the office dropped very quickly down the list of priorities.
Kuo was motivated to join the White House team because of the promise of spending $8 billion on programs for the poor. He was disappointed at how little was actually allocated.
He blames evangelicals themselves for the indifference on that issue. He took Stahl to a convention of evangelical groups and walked around the display booths, looking for any reference to the poor.
"You've got homosexuality in your kid's school, and you've got human cloning, and partial birth abortion and divorce and stem cell," Kuo remarked. "Not a mention of the poor."
"This message that has been sent out to Christians for a long time now: that Jesus came primarily for a political agenda, and recently primarily a right-wing political agenda – as if this culture war is a war for God. And it's not a war for God, it's a war for politics. And that's a huge difference," says Kuo.
He said: "God and politics had become very much fused together into a sort of a single entity. Where, in a way, politics was the fourth part of the trinity. God the father, God the son, God the holy spirit, God the politician."
The White House calls Kuo's book "ridiculous," and Kuo's old boss, Jim Towey, who ran the faith based office until this past June, says Kuo is "naïve and simplistic."
"I think it's dangerous to take a snapshot of a few months or even a year and draw conclusions," Towey says. "Ya know, I can look you in the eye and say the president did what he could do."
Kuo says he went to the White House political affairs office, then run by Ken Mehlman, and offered to hold events at taxpayer expense for Republicans in tight races as a way of energizing religious voters.
Kuo says Mehlman, now head of the Republican National Committee, was "thrilled."
Asked if in retrospect this was morally wrong, Kuo says, "I feel like it was more spiritually wrong. You're taking the sacred and you're making it profane. You're taking Jesus and reducing him to some precinct captain, to some get-out-the-vote guy."
"I have this burden on my heart that the name of God is just being destroyed in the name of politics," Kuo says. "I felt like I had to write this."
Kuo says it's time for evangelical Christians to take a step back – "to have a fast from politics. People are being manipulated. Good well-meaning people are being told, 'Send your money to this Christian advocacy group or that.' And that's the answer. It's just not the answer. It's not the answer."
I hadn't realized you were so naive. And easily misled.
Nor do I.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." --James Madison
Exactly! I always get ticked off when people say Christians should support the liberal philosophy because it is generous to the poor, while the conservative philosophy is all about greed. IMHO, liberals want the government to take care of the poverty problem for them because they are either too lazy or too greedy to do it themselves. Its a cop-out because it absolves someone from any responsibility to the poor since its the governments problem now.
Robertson has did good but he is a fruit. Dr. Dobson is the only one listed I respect. The other two have been all over the place politically even though their efforts have been well intentioned but they are far more credible than anything the left offers from their quarter.
I believe the absolute worst thing that Christians can do is sit out an election at this point in history. What Christians and Conservatives need to do is make sure conservative candidates who are well spoken and capable make it onto ballots no matter what the National party wants. They didn't want Ronald Reagan either but he showed them. Republicans haven't won like that since he left office. People need something to believe in, not prepackaged vague issues where you roll out gay marriage whenever it is convenient but won't date speak about it with any conviction.
That explains it. The liberals are getting desperate. They are slinging mud in all sorts of directions just hoping something might stick. This story rates in the top ten BS list.
I really am not interested in faith-based programs, as I said, and I'm more interested in evangelicals taking a look at Bush's entire record and drawing the only logical conclusion...he throws a bone here and there, but that's pretty much it.
Also, he kept talking about promises made by Bush to help the poor during the campaign. I followed that campaign very closely and don't remember any discussion about the poor and special goverment programs to help them.
1.Turnout
2.Turnout
3.Turnout
Thanks David Kuo for throwing the bigass monkey-wrench into the geers of victory.
This book's timing says it all. If he wanted to make a point he would release it after the election. I don't think he would sell an less books but he would be too late on the talk shows (like 60 Minutes last night) to influence the election.
Divide, and conquer.
The MSM will help.
Pat Robertson went off the deep end when he tried to defend China's forced abortion policy..
And where are conservative christians supposed to go?...to liberal christian churches where planned parenthood brochures are there for the taking?....please this is such a calculated scam
I do. I dont think this is the kind of thing that should get out especially before a midterm election, but I believe a percentage of it is true....
and I agree with the aides to a point, though not the goofy part, but as a conservative and a Roman Catholic I feel a bit of alienation from the bible belt evangelical mantra that the born again folks make no attempt to hide from me, including some of them and their intolerance from my beliefs. Also, my views on the early history of man and the universe is 180° from my POV.
I feel although I do agree mostly with evangelicals on most issues, there is that 20% or so that leaves me cold. I suppose we have to bond together for the 80% good we share in common, but I can see some White House aides having a good laugh at the expense of these folks....Its not right, but It probably happens.
David probably thought the first check should go to his "Church of Me First". When he realized he wasn't going to get rich, he called George Soros and asked how much for an advance on a book to trash President Bush. I think he might be confusing Judas for Jesus. Wrong role model there David.
He's not just "whining about the poor", but about how government doesn't hand out enough money to the "poor".
But as for his main thesis, yep, the Bush administration is composed primarily of intelligent rational adults, who quite naturally regard evangelical rabble-rousers as "nuts". Frankly I'd be terrified if our massive military strength was the under the control of people who don't recognize that Pat Robertson is insane.
It doesn't surprise me really that you believe everythng you read.
DAvid Kuo never says Bush mocked them, just some of his "political advisors". Although I've said some pretty harsh things about Pat Robertson myself....
Anyway, the President never said he was going to find 8 billion MORE in spending for the poor. He said he was going to try to redirect 8 billion in spending for the poor into his "faith-based" initiative, opening up the charity pot of gold to religious groups.
That didn't go anywhere because the democrats took over the Senate in June of 2001, and said they wouldn't consider the plan.
Ehem...please be careful here to distinguish between Bible-believing fundamental evangelicals who are considered "radical" and "trouble-makers" by today's MSM and the truly bizarre Christians who can't justify their beliefs with what the Bible says.
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.