My generous side likes to think he is being intentionally gracious and staying out of his successor's way. My more cynical side figures that he's lying low until his astronomical unpopularity abates and he's less likely to be the target of the national anger about the war in Iraq, the authorization of torture, the overcooking of the financial system, and a general sullying of America's image around the world.Who wants to pay big money to hear speeches from a president whose legacy is widely regarded as disastrous?
Conservative Christians do -- or at least, the organizers of a series of religious festivals called "Celebrators" think they do. In full-page color ads placed in state Baptist papers and other publications. Celebrators is touting Bush as the headliner for a "Celebrate America Patriotic Service" during its October 5-8 shebang in Sevierville, TN, while Laura Bush will be featured at a similar celebration in Branson, MO later in October.
"Celebrators" events cater mainly to senior adults, who often come by busloads and are largely conservative in matters of both faith and politics. It'll be interesting to see what kind of crowd the former president and preacher David Jeremiah draw to the event.
I suspect most of those who will attend remain enamored with "W," who's swagger-appeal will no doubt continue for diehard fans. And for those in the crowd who've left the Bush bandwagon, at least they're likely to be forgiving.
12 comments:
George W. Bush and David Jeremiah? I can think of only one demographic that would want tickets to that event. Just the idea of this pairing gives me the heebeegeebees. Interestingly, it took this post to get me to attempt to spell and use the word "heebeegeebees"...
In answer to the question, "Who wants to pay big money to hear speeches from a president whose legacy is widely regarded as disastrous?", let me suggest a fairly recent example: all those who attended (and celebrated) the keynoting of Presidents Clinton and Carter at the New Baptist Covenant event last year.
As with most things in this forum, it's all a matter of perspective.
DC,
I think there's a disparity in the example you've given. Clinton and Carter were removed from their offices for a rather lengthy period before the NBC. This event is within a year of Bush's presidency ending to the jubilation of most of the country. Pres. Bush did not even attend the Republican Party Convention this year, which is unheard of for a sitting president. I can see him being chosen in a few years for some events after he has had a chance to do other work, like Pres. Carter has with Habitat for Humanity but at this moment? The NBC was held at a time that even the most ardent Republicans could appreciate the former presidents. This event can only attract those who supported Bush with fervor.
Joshua,
I'm not surprised you think there's a disparity in my example. In fact, it's highly unlikely that "the most ardent Republicans could appreciate the former Presidents," for reasons of both in- and out-of-office policy and personal behavior.
The fact remains that the NBC provided a platform for many to "pay big money to hear speeches from a president whose legacy is widely regarded as disastrous" (times 2).
I do applaud Jimmy Carter's work with Habitat for Humanity, however. May his tribe increase.
If I remember correctly, the NBC was free to all who attended. I don't recall paying an entrance fee to hear any of the keynote speakers.
Let me also add that I am in no way defending President Bush's invitation as a headliner at the Baptist gathering in question. Not because I have much against Bush, but because I think it's a mistake to politicize such events. That's the very mistake that de-railed the New Baptist Covenant from the outset (if its stated goal was its actual goal).
As you will recall, the "ardent Republican" Mike Huckabee was briefly on the NBC program but quickly withdrew due to the event's inherently political nature and left-leaning speaker lineup (his words, not mine). Based on the speaker lineup, I was actually surprised he agreed to participate in the first place. I was not at all surprised when he withdrew, ostensibly due to President Carter's ungentlemanly anti-Bush comments. I suspect Huckabee was looking for an escape as soon as he saw the speaker lineup. Characteristically, Jimmy Carter gave him an easy out.
My point is that when an event intended to unite Baptists/Christians highlights partisan politicians the likes of Bush, Carter, or Clinton, that event effectively halves its constituency for political reasons from the start.
Given that you have defended The Alliance of Baptists and disparaged David Jeremiah in the course of a single week in this forum, we need all the help we can get if we're ever going to find points of genuine agreement as believers! Having discussions about which politicians should join the conversation doesn't help the cause, does it?
Joshua Brown and DC,
For what its worth:
I have to agree with DC on the New Baptist Covenant's selection of Carter and Clinton (well, Clinton a whole lot more than Carter) as spokespersons for this event, really turned my stomach when it came to the New Baptist Covenant. I don't remember "President" Carter (too young) but I commend his work since. I am not a fan of Clinton, or W. Bush either. I thought this was a divisive move, politically, for Baptists, when the call was for unity.
I agree with Joshua's assessment of the demographic who will turn out for Bush and Jeremiah.
Though I am not in agreement with the direction of the SBC, I am concerned, as many are pointing out, that the two Baptist "denominations" are divided down Republican and Democratic lines, rather than theological lines.
I think that the SBC is blind to think that the Republican Party reprensents Christian values.
I hope that CBF does not make the same mistake with the Democratic Party.
DC,
I don't think the issue is whether Bush should be allowed in the conversation or not. My point, and I believe Dr. Cartledge's, is that Pres. Bush's appearance at this event so close to the end of his presidency will only attract a very particular people. Meanwhile Carter and Clinton had time away from office when the NBC took place, I simply don't think it's the same thing. I'm not denying Bush or Jeremiah their right to be a part of the conversation, but I do strongly oppose many of their opinions.
Also, I don't think that Mike Huckabee can be used as an example of the "ardent Republican" I was talking about. Mike Huckabee is a politician; I'm referring to citizens who are Republicans. I might add that I don't doubt the validity of your point - everything is based on perspective - I just don't think the NBC has the same dynamics as this event. Your point about the polarizing aspects of politicians is correct, but I think that time away from the situation has the ability to decrease the amount of polarization.
I have to believe a thorough reading of Steven Miller's new book on Graham, Nixon and the Rise of the Southern GOP can only enhance an understanding and add to the conversation addressing the kerygma of this item Cartledge is investigating.
OK, Joshua, this horse is about dead. I think we can at least agree that you and Tony strongly oppose many of Bush's opinions/positions, and I and most "ardent Republicans" strongly oppose many of Clinton's and Carter's. My guess is that for either Tony, you, me, and most "ardent Republicans" time won't effect much change on that score.
I guess we'll have to continue our disagreement on the equivalent "dynamic" of the two events in question. I'm confident both did and will attract a particular kind of people. Like I said, this horse is now dead.
Former President Bush is pro-life(not pro-abortion),believes in the biblical teaching of marriage as a man and a woman,and is a follower of Jesus Christ as his redeemer.At no time have I heard, or heard of either him or his wife calling America a mean spirited nation, or commenting that they have ever been anything but proud to be citizens of this GREAT nation.These things can, and do inspire me,and we all need inspiration at this time.
Post a Comment