Reading notes

This is striking imagery in the wake of Bush’s commutation of Libby’s sentence: these guys have found the exploit in our system of government — a previously unrecognized vulnerability through which it can be destroyed for profit — and that exploit is its dependence on shame. (That is, against men unconstrained by shame we have little protection.)

Kung Fu Monkey writes about this today:

Our representatives — and to a great degree we as a culture — are completely buffaloed by shamelessness. You reveal a man’s corrupt, or lying, or incompetent, and what does he do? He resigns. He attempts to escape attention, often to aid in his escape of legal pursuit. Public shame has up to now been the silver bullet of American political life. But people who are willing to just do the wrong thing and wait you out, to be publicly guilty … dammmnnnn.

Naturally I think of exploit in the context of operating systems, browsers, and other software. And I think that’s an apt analogy: these guys are malicious hackers who’ve found a hole in the system and are stealing every credit card number and password they can find, as swiftly and voraciously as possible.

This topic shame is of related anthropological/theological interest (though IANAA) insofar as it was presented to me in seminary classes as a primary hermeneutic for understanding Hebrew scripture: honor-shame culture permeates, shapes, even defines human behavior throughout the Old Testament. And beyond, of course, but it’s especially evident in most ancient cultures, where it was explicit instead of implicit as now.

[via Firedoglake]

Further, Glenn Greenwald, as usual, pierces to the heart of the matter, and brings to mind Madison’s assertion that our system was designed “to be run by devils” in not relying on good motivations to function. Oops:

It is no surprise that we have political leaders who are corrupt and abuse their power. Our whole political system is premised on the expectation that this will happen. But that expectation was accompanied by the attempt by the Founders to create as many safeguards and checks on those abuses as possible. Over the last six years, all of those safeguards have failed completely.

We have a radical and lawless government that has run rampant over the last six years precisely because the institutions designed to stop that abuse have not only stood idly by, but have actively defended and participated in it.

I cannot tell if this is but a step in the right direction, or an early glimpse of an incoming tidal wave of change. Sidney Blumenthal writes at Salon:

Another Bush legal official, even now at the commanding heights of power, admits that the administration’s policies are largely discredited. In its defense, he says without a hint of irony or sarcasm, “Not everything we’ve done has been illegal.” …

I guess that’s the upside. Downside for administration officials is only takes one thing, not everything, as basis for criminal conviction. Downside for us is that many of the things they’ve done that are illegal, however short of “everything,” have consequences as big as earthquakes far into the future.

On June 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, the most conservative in the country, issued a decision striking at the heart of Bush’s conception of the presidency. In al-Marri v. Wright, the court ruled that Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, a resident of Qatar, arrested as a student at Bradley University in the United States, accused of aiding al-Qaida, could not be held in indefinite detention as an “enemy combatant” and must be remanded to the civilian criminal court system. …

“The President,” the court said, “claims power that far exceeds that granted him by the Constitution.” This extraordinary decision, citing the Framers, declared Bush’s actions — and his imperial presidency — null and void. …

Few, if any, presidents have ever been the subject of such a devastating legal decision. While presidential actions have been ruled illegal or unconstitutional in the past, they were individual acts. But in the case of Bush, the al-Marri decision not only discredits Bush’s position but denies his idea of his presidential legitimacy in the American tradition. The decision also declares that Bush’s idea is a mortal threat to the Constitution. And this ruling was issued by the most conservative court in the land.

To this cautious good-news assessment I can only add that sane thinking by conservative minds, as this decision reveals, reminds me (as I often need reminding) that the conservative worldview is not itself the festering malignant sore on the face of our democracy. The festering malignant sore is the beliefs and actions of current practitioners who claim the conservative mantle but exhibit none of its virtues.

I sincerely hope this trend, as reported by Thomas Schaller in the Baltimore Sun, is true:

“Evangelicals — especially the new generation of pastors and young people — are deserting the religious right in droves,” wrote Jim Wallis, author of God’s Politics, in a February commentary in Time. “The evangelical social agenda is now much broader and deeper, engaging issues like poverty and economic justice, global warming, HIV/AIDS, sex trafficking, genocide in Darfur and the ethics of the war in Iraq.”

As I’ve said many times, I see the Religious Right as having little connection to biblical Christianity other than serving as an example of what Jesus said not to be and do.

OTOH caring about poverty, economic justice, healing, stewardship of creation, and eliminating killing and war, as Jim says is now part of the evangelical social agenda — now these things are at the heart of biblical Christianity!

So there’s hope. And hope for change remains vital for the hearts of certain white folk (as of November 2006):

Though exit polls showed only a slight improvement for Democrats among white evangelicals, who remained loyal to the GOP, Democrats received a rise in support from Catholics and secular voters.

Any Christian (of any variety) who still identifies with the GOP is not paying attention to one or the other. I think the two radically different worldviews — Christian and Republican — cannot be reconciled:

You will fully recognize them by their fruits. Do people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles?

Even so, every healthy (sound) tree bears good fruit [worthy of admiration], but the sickly (decaying, worthless) tree bears bad (worthless) fruit.

A good (healthy) tree cannot bear bad (worthless) fruit, nor can a bad (diseased) tree bear excellent fruit [worthy of admiration].

I think in history there’s seldom been a more diseased tree than today’s U.S. Republican Party. Thank God most of us see that now. (Endless unjustified war is an unmistakeably bad fruit no one can ignore forever; it stinks to high heaven.)

I infer article author Thomas Schaller may not be as convinced as Wallis that the transformation of evangelical Christianity is well under way, given his focus on how the harm evangelicals do by voting Republican is being minimized, rather than on the good they can do by voting more consistent with their faith’s core values, which are (by today’s definitions) liberal/progressive.

Even that is progress worthy of praise, though: First do no harm.

I’ve tried to convey this well, again and again here over the years (for example), but nobody conveys Jesus’ point of view (as revealed in scripture) better than OPOL does today, imagining what Jesus is saying at this very moment.

What ever made any of you think I was a rightwinger or would endorse or approve of anything the rightwingers do, say, or believe? …

I am not an advocate of war … not even the ‘good’ ones. If you folks would follow my most basic teachings, there’d never be another one. …

Somehow I feel like you guys are not paying attention. Despite my legion of ‘followers’ around the world, an estimated one billion people in the world suffer from hunger and malnutrition. About 24,000 people die every day from hunger or hunger-related causes. Three-fourths of the deaths are children under the age of five. While little children are starving in droves, you morons are blowing each other up with rockets and bombs!

The comment topics are worthy continuations on the theme, revealing (for example, on cheap grace) and bearing deep truths (for example, Bono’s quote that “God dwells in cardboard boxes”).

Thanks, OPOL and commenters.

Azindy’s History of Rapture Doctrine is a nicely done historical/information essay that illustrates my contention that Rapture “theology” is only one step removed from just making shit up.

Most striking theological quote (from David B. Currie):

“This theology is appealing only as long as the pain is someone else’s. … Quite simply, the rapturist system contains no Cross.”

Given its fruit[s] of hubris and destruction, I assess that Rapture “theology” is one of the most effective strategies for leading people astray that the Enemy has ever come up with.

Mikem’s Daily Kos diary today asks When will US deaths in Iraq exceed those from 9/11? The comment thread contains an observation that exceeds even the gravity of considering when Bush’s war of choice in Iraq will have killed more Americans than Osama bin Laden did (2,814) [sadly, very soon; we’re at 2,588].

Inclusiveheart observes:

At the death rate of 100 people per day that has held steady in Iraq for the last month or so, Iraq is suffering a September 11th monthly.

Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11. Yet as a consequence of U.S. action they’re paying a comparable human cost. Not just once, but month by month, grief by grief, over and over.

Is all the forgiveness in the world enough to accommodate this injustice?

Or will we reap what we sow instead?

2006-09-04 update:

According to CNN, we crossed this line yesterday:
U.S. deaths in Iraq, war on terror surpass 9/11 toll (September 3, 2006)