…and of course, there is so much wrong with it. I’ll comment on a few points, and then leave you with Bush’s final statement on being “pro-life” in order to generate discussion.
Mr. President, this is the first head of state, Pope Benedict the XVI, you will ever greet on a tarmac. I was stunned to learn this. Why are you going and greeting him at an airstrip? Usually the heads of states come here.
THE PRESIDENT: Because he is a really important figure in a lot of ways. One, he speaks for millions. Two, he doesn’t come as a politician; he comes as a man of faith. And, three, that I so subscribe to his notion that there are — there’s right and wrong in life, that moral relativism has a danger of undermining the capacity to have more hopeful and free societies, that I want to honor his convictions, as well.
First, no, he speaks for billions. Secondly, to boil the Pope’s convictions down to the “notion” that “there’s right and wrong in life” may make EWTN watchers nod their heads in recognition of some vague agreement between Bush and the Pope, but is in fact a dangerous simplification. Of course there is “right and wrong in life.” The hard part is figuring out and committing to the particulars. On the particulars, Bush and Benedict hardly agree.
You read his book on Europe, I’m told.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I read parts of it, yes.
Bush’s initial reply here was omitted from the video. Regarding relations between the U.S. and Europe, Bush went on to say
My main objective is to make sure our country is strong and solid and remains in the lead. One of the tenets of my foreign policy is that there is an Almighty, and a gift of that Almighty to every man, woman and child is freedom. And, you know, His Holiness speaks with that kind of clarity.
Here Bush juxtaposes a statement about the Pope’s “clarity of speech” with a statement about how Bush’s own objective is U.S. superiority, as if the Pope in any way shares this view. He, of course, does not.
I’m also, as you know, a believer in the value of human life for the — whether it’s — you know, the most vulnerable amongst us. And he speaks clearly to that, as well.
Does this even require a comment?
When asked about his recent trip to Africa, his administration’s increase of aid and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the interviewer asked
Is there a compulsion of faith here, personally with this aid?
Absolutely. Well, it’s a combination of faith and practicality. From the practical perspective, hopelessness is the only way for ideologues who murder the innocent to be able to recruit their followers. No one who’s got a vision as dark and dim as al Qaeda can possibly say to somebody, follow me, my vision is hopeful or positive. Its like, you’re so hopeless, this is your only out. And therefore, dealing with disease and hunger and despair helps defeat this — these bunch of ideologues.
And then, secondly, I believe it’s in our individual and collective interests to use our great blessings to help others, whether it be at home or abroad. And so, “to whom much is given, much is required” is a part of my belief. And I say to people all the time that it’s in our national — it’s in our moral interests.
“Faith and practicality,” he says, then goes on to say that actually, it’s a matter of practicality and self-interest, dropping a scripture quote as decoration on top. Correcting himself at the end of the quote, he changes “it’s in our national interest” to the puzzling phrase “it’s in our moral interest.” Which means — what exactly?
The interviewer then goes on to ask about Iraq, completely side-stepping the Pope’s judgment of the war and his ongoing pleas for the war to end. Instead of focusing on that, the interviewer says, the Pope will focus on the murder of Christians in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. Bush appears relieved that the EWTN interviewer obviously does not share the Church’s critical view of the war, and that this spokesman for a “Catholic network” does not wish to speak in any way for the majority of Catholics in the U.S. who in fact oppose the war.
Apparently believing that Catholics are less intelligent than the rest of America, Bush then repeats the lie that Iraq attacked the U.S. on 9/11:
Even here on Capitol Hill, we’re hearing talk of withdrawals. They want this drawdown. General Petraeus is at this very hour saying we shouldn’t be doing this, we should have a pause. What is your take? Now, even members of your own administration in the Defense Department are saying we might not be able to respond to other events if we have our troops spread this thin.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I disagree with those people. There’s nothing — the real threat for the 21st century is dealing with these thugs and killers. They’re the ones who attacked us. We got to defeat them overseas so we don’t face them here.
EWTN’s interviewer goes on to ask Bush about how his faith keeps him “positive and upbeat” even in the midst of criticism and his decision to attend the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in China (his stammering is amusing).
Finally, Bush is asked about the future of American politics and whether he will ever see a pro-choice Republican run for president in his lifetime:
Do you think it’s important, though, to have a pro-life President on the Republican ticket? What might be the ramifications?
THE PRESIDENT: I think it’s important for people to understand that a culture of life is in our national interests and that — it’s also important to understand that the politics of abortion isn’t going to change until people’s hearts change, and fully understand the meaning of life and what it means for a society to value life in all forms — whether it be the life of the unborn, or the life of the elderly; whether it be the life of the less fortunate among us, or the life of the rich guy.
As he has done in the past, Bush co-opts the term “culture of life” without knowing or being committed to the fullness of what the means from a Catholic perspective. Indeed, for Bush, the promotion of a “culture of life” is in our national interests rather than simply being right. Second, Bush’s thinking on changing the “politics of abortion” by “changing people’s hearts” doesn’t sound all that different from most of his pro-choice opponents, does it?
Well, what else could we expect from EWTN? Your thoughts on the interview? Let the (combox) games begin.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In