world

Bush mixes sports, politics at Olympics

51 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

51 Comments
Login to comment

I hope Bush managed to say a few prayers for the thousands of innocent men, women and children who have been murdered in Iraq by his Christian army.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

buttamimi; There is no such thing as a Bush christian army.

If you refer to our liberations of Iraq and Afghanistan, these innocents were murdered by the bad guys.

Bush went to the Olympics to spread freedom , religous and human rights, a very honorable thing to do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The president also took in the U.S.-China men's basketball game"

At first I mis-read that as "The president also took part in the U.S.-China men's basketball game." I can imagine Bush spinning the ball on his finger, then leaping to the net for a score ha ha ha!

I saw that he also showed up at the women's beach volleyball venue to practice with some of the bikini-clad players, a very honorable thing to do!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Onward Christian Soldiers? Marching as to war? It seems to me that's kind of in-your-face. For a "loving religion", something like In the Garden would have been a far better choice.

I'm in favor of freedom of religion. If that means having the right to have your own personal relationship with a deity, everyone already has that. If it means that religions have the right to be political--even peacefully and "lovingly"--then there is some difficulty with Caesar, God and rendering.

Freedom of religion in China need not look like freedom of religion in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gee, I'm sure the Russians are really worried about how we feel about them stomping over Georgia when our Commander in Chief can't seem to pull himself away from the games to come home.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Freedom of religion in China need not look like freedom of religion in the US.

What should freedom of religion in China look like?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Freedom of religion in China need not look like freedom of religion in the US." Religion is not freedom. Freedom doesn't include religion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib,

What does freedom of religion in the US look like? What does freedom of religion in Greece look like? What does freedom of religion in Israel look like? Do they all look the same to you?

My comment wasn't prescriptive. So, I would have to say, "I don't know, but if you are willing to stipulate that freedom of religion can mean different things in different countries, I'd be willing to give it some thought."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush needs to stick in the US and push for freedom of speech in the US before hitting China. Lately, you have movie stars such as John Voight facing a political black list by bloggers for praising McCain. You have people losing their jobs for speaking their minds You have people who have said things, with most people not even knowing what the word means and assuming it means something else and getting fired. Talk about trying start an organization where taxes are the subject and the IRS comes down on you. Let people know you are against illegal immigration and the ACLU will fire you if you are a teacher.

As for religion, what freedom do people in the US have any longer? Christmas lights in my area of Chicago have been dimmed and a neighborhood enforcement exists. I was told by one guy from Atsugi base that base housing has asked people to minimize their lights the past Christmas too.. a US base! You can't wear a cross getting on to a plane, you are asked to hide it. Tattoos in gyms has been ok'ed in many places, as long as they don't show religious expressions. Some religions have holidays that are celebrated on the national level and others aren't.

Yup, but Bush finds it necessary to push China to have freedoms that people in the US have lost!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

george bush needs to stay with sports. he's a bismal failure as a world leader.

Enjoy yourself george. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hey, did you see him try to shoot? He ain't good at sports either and I really hate that in a man.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush was quoted before the Olympics criticizing those who "tried to politicize the Olympics", and here he is (as everyone with a jot of sense expected) politicizing the Olympics.

And trying to religionize them, to boot.

I'd say "shame on you, Bush", but I hate chastising the ethically deaf.

Get your religion out of office, Shrubbie. Nobody needs your particular form of oppression.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nobody needs your particular form of oppression.

LOL. Yeah. "Oppression." China locks up, tortures and kills Falun Gong practicioners for mixing tai chi with a simple system of ethics and morality but it is George Bush who is "oppressing" people by asking that China allow freedom of religion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ReaganLegend: I hate to break old news to you, but the armed forces have a well-known pernicious core of religious zealots who revel in persecuting "heretics".

Calling the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq "an act of war by his Christian Army" is quite a fair call.

But I think you do the US military a disservice by calling them "the bad guys", since they aren't all bad. Many of them were forced into service, and are not happy about murdering innocents.

If only Republicans had a shred of honor and integrity, perhaps they'd understand that they can't be Christians while espousing war.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

omg bush its a joke. he cant stop saying cliche even when hes not in his own cowntry. he said a lot of things but not any kind of meaning between his words.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

and THATS its the kind of thing that give us all arguments to everybody say hes not so smart as he thing he is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

an act of war by his Christian Army" is quite a fair call." Ah, so its ok for me to say to the Muslim invasion is coming is fair as well? Perhaps China seeing how religion don't work in other parts of the world they choose to keep it out. And they should and so should everyone. Don't bring your religion to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

there are alot of things in the US self that aren't democratic or political freedom. You can't point to others while you have flaws yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"bush ( is ) a joke"

Millions of oppressed Chinese don't think so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge: I think it's called black humor. It's not really funny if you want a happy life, but in an absurdist and fatalistic sense it's really quite ludicrous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong: Depends. Is it in the process of coming, or are you just predicting it?

Bush's literal war on other religions is a current fact, not a possible future worry. So it's fair to describe it as his Christian army.

If you have evidence that the Muslims are currently invading, then you can fairly describe it that way. If you are claiming it will happen, then it's not a fair description.

And I am not bringing my religion anywhere, since I have nothing to bring.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“It just goes to show that God is universal,” Bush said. “No state, man or woman should fear the influence of loving religion.”

How is that a separation of church and state?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

undecidedbout08:

I did not say that a call for freedom is an act of oppression. How silly you sound!

I said that Bush's war on the people of Iraq in the false name of freedom is a particular type of oppression. (Unless you consider "freedom from life" to be freedom, in which I have nothing to say to you.)

I, who am not oppressing anyone at the moment, can freely criticize China for its actions.

Bush, on the other hand, is a terrible hypocrite to do so. Do you see the difference?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

gogogo:

You do know that Bush is part of that group of religious nutjobs in the US who think there is no separation of Church and State, don't you?

This isn't hyperbole. There are a large number of so-called Fundamentalists who proudly state this warped view, and Bush has made occasional statements confirming himself as a member of this group.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Naruki: Bush's literal war on other religions is a current fact, not a possible future worry. So it's fair to describe it as his Christian army." First of all, there is nothing Christian about Bush anything.

If you have evidence that the Muslims are currently invading, then you can fairly describe it that way. If you are claiming it will happen, then it's not a fair description." Well, let's see. Max influx of immigration tipping over voting systems to suit them. London has sections passing Shiia laws. Influence in over three dozen countries. You even have the Church of England's Church calling on people to adopt "some" elements of Islam. Islam is taking over Germany, it has taken over Somalia and has bought a place back to the 12th century.

You do know that Bush is part of that group of religious nutjobs in the US who think there is no separation of Church and State, don't you?" Hmm, in one way I'll agree. But when I see these people backing down to Islamic groups demands that they allow schools, gyms, and area seclusive for them and them only right in NYC, I will beg to differ. Several years ago, Christian churches were not allowed to advertise on Buses, Trains, and Ferries in NYC, now only one group is - Muslims. You want to bring out this Muslims innocent, Bush Christians are not crap, you need to look at more news than top layer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong,

It seems to me that you believe that religion is not helpful to civilized societies. I tend to agree with you, but not with your fervor. I don't think you are exactly right when you say that religion is not freedom and freedom doesn't include religion. But part of my difficulty here is definitional.

But I will say this: I don't think complete separation of church and state is possible. Full stop. The only way to separate it completely is for the state to cut it off. I just have my doubts whether any society should try to do that or not. It seems to me that (as in the Soviet Union and China) this has never worked either.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, he's said about enough for now. Bring george home before he embarrasses himself. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LOL. Yeah. "Oppression." China locks up, tortures and kills Falun Gong practicioners for mixing tai chi with a simple system of ethics and morality but it is George Bush who is "oppressing" people by asking that China allow freedom of religion.

Oh Please! it was the U.S. that supported the oppression in Chile when the Military was in power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From Bush the liberator to Bush the crusader. This man takes his causes seriously.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush mixes sports, politics at Olympics

Plain and simple: A bad move.

There really is no good that can come of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Although many people do not like the word, cusade is the mission Bush is on. A rcusade of spreading freedom worldwide. Whether it be at a sports event or whatever, Bush will stick to his guns, and spread the good message.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry for bad spelling, both "crusade" spelt wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush will stick to his guns

You got that part right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sez: understand, I didn't wake up one day and just start having a disdain for religion. I can not think of any time in history when two religions got along and accepted each other and I have not seen any country in the "free" world where a total separation was made or even really attempted.

I also seen religion affect a doctors decision that I would prefer not to go into.

We are too far advance to continue to believe something thought of 2000 years ago.

I would accept, and I think China does for the most part, a bit of Buddhist beliefs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong,

I don't want to quarrel. As I said before, I basically agree with you. I would just say, however, that if we continue to believe things thought and written 2000 years ago, we may not be all that advanced.

So, I would rather prescribe methadone instead of cold turkey. Plus, there is some possibility that some of the things written 2000 years ago may be true--as, for example, in the case of the Buddhist beliefs you mention.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

presto345: He he he. Good catch.

skipthesong: You seem VERY confused about my position, among other facts.

First, I was not denying a "Muslim invasion", I was asking if you have proof. You claim to, and that means you can then produce some evidence to support your claim. In that case, go right ahead and call it that, and then back it up with proof (not just anecdotal evidence) if someone challenges it. I was not challenging it.

Next, if you want to deny Bush's Christianity based on his lack of adherence to the principals that Christ espoused, then it would be fair to deny pretty much ALL self-professed Christians. Bush IS a Christian, and he's done many truly atrocious things that Christianity either approves of or at least condones. The military core of zealots are not his fault, per se, but he has certainly given them the message to carry onward, Christian soldiers.

And finally, nowhere did I say Muslims are innocent. Honestly, check your reading skills. You seem to be confusing me with someone who thinks religions are okay.

AlliedForces: Don't worry about bad spelling, be concerned about bad logic. Bush is certainly spreading something worldwide, but it isn't freedom. Not unless you think freedom smells like a sewage tank.

Why don't you respond to his blatant hypocrisy in bringing his politics to the Olympics after criticizing others for doing that? He is undeniably a hypocrite here, but you act like he did nothing wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sez, I only mentioned Buddhists because from what I know, they are the only one I haven't seen knocking on my door nor setting mandates in government.

I just believe that religion really hasn't bought any good onto the world. Whether you believe in god is not the issue for me. Its the grouping of thought, rules set, and methods of enforcement. Personally, I don't think religions have any freedoms. This and that you are doomed to hell or death. It has also separated people even I keep hearing people that it brings people together. I think banning religions, but allowing you to believe in a god or what ever should suffice.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Naruki: I read your post as I read others in equating the war on terror to the Christian crusades, who by which were no more than a few boys and fairy tales. I personally believe Islam wants to regain what was once theirs and I also believe that they would prefer the world to adhere to Muslim beliefs. I don't believe they are very much willing, if they had the upper hand, to live amongst others. Perhaps Christians are the same too. I just haven't seen much proof of that in my life.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong:

There is no such thing as a war on terror. That's marketing spin for "war on poor people who won't give us their money". You don't make war on desperate people fighting back the only way they can in order to stop them from fighting back. You stop attacking them to begin with.

There is no doubt Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq was all about money and power, as were, frankly, the Crusades. But he sells that to the gullible under the guise of pushing freedom, whereas the Crusades were supposedly pushing Christianity.

The chilling thing is that Bush is following the playbook laid out by Nazi leader Goering (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.asp). Skip to the bottom and read the quotes.

Bush IS a Christian, and he certainly uses his faith to justify his horrible actions to himself, his family, and his countrymen. And they, in turn, use their faith to believe him. Faith is belief in spite of facts, and this is why it is dangerous.

But he's also a war profiteer who is making money hand over fist. To him, this is probably God's way of saying he's right.

Christianity, being in control of most of the world, usually has no need to use overt attacks. They cause enough misery, suffering, and death simply by making or influencing laws.

Islam, a younger religion, has to fight harder to beat their rivals, or at least stop being bullied by them.

Both are filled with "people of faith", and that is what makes them dangerous.

I am all for freedom of religion, so long as it stays the heck out of government (and other public institutions). Bush is not only tearing down the wall of separation, he is doing his best to install religious people in high offices and devolve our country to some golden age that only exists in his head.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Christianity, being in control of most of the world," No, Christianity is dead!

That's marketing spin for "war on poor people who won't give us their money"" No, having people follow religous rules is a war on poor people.

Islam, a younger religion, has to fight harder to beat their rivals, or at least stop being bullied by them." Well, you counter a great many posters here who tell me Islam is older than Judaism, which is why Jews should not be in Palestine. As far as them fighting harder, well, they are and they are doing quite well. They almost have every country tied up into believing theirs is a great and peaceful religion. China is the only country that has any sense in regards to this religion. And, I support them banning it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Christianity is dead!

What a happy dream. Unfortunately, the reality is that Christians still make up approximately 33% of the world population, putting them more than 10% higher than the next closest competitor, Islam. (http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html)

Islam older than Judaism? Who said something like that? How absurd! Judaism is the source of Islam! And Islam only started in the early 600s. That's AD, not before Christ. Islam is younger than Christianity.

But Islam is no different than any other cult. By cult, I mean religion. The difference between cult and religion seems to be membership size, not validity, so I just call them all cults until they can prove me wrong.

Islam hasn't fooled any country regarding its level of peace. Neither has Christianity or any other cult. Individuals may be fooled, but then again they are fooled into thinking the opposite, as well.

For example, the Bush Regime's war machine has done an excellent (i.e., perfectly immoral) job of demonizing Islam. Plenty of people think all Muslims are terrorists, despite living and working with many of them in peace and prosperity.

Did you read the link about Goering? You really should.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Naruki,

wait, the above post almost looks as though you agree with me. But, then, "the Bush Regime's war machine has done an excellent (i.e., perfectly immoral) job of demonizing Islam. Plenty of people think all Muslims are terrorists, despite living and working with many of them in peace and prosperity." First of all, for a religion that advocates killing infidels and passing on fatwas they have done their own share of that stereotype. Additionally, there is no reason to hate a person because of their religion even if you hate their religion. I disagree with the 33% of the world being Christian. Islam holds all lands from the Mid Atlantic to South Pacific. Land mass wise they have all beat. Now, I don't know what Chinese think. Most Chinese I know are proud of China's recent advancements and those advancements have come with the absence of religion. If there is a small minority in areas of China that are backwards and feel oppressed, I would suggest don't go putting your hands around them and feeling sorry for them off the bat, which many many do. Perhaps it is they who really have the problem.

Why should China disrupt a perfect score on advancement and bring back religion? For those Falun gong members who are jailed, well that is like arguing whether or not devil worship should be legal or not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is no doubt Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq was all about money and power, as were, frankly, the Crusades.

If there is 'no doubt' could you post here some proof of what you assert?

How, exactly, did Bush make money? Power? He'll leave office and retire to his ranch.

Putin has set himself up as president for life - just like Saddam Hussein did.

If it was all about securing cheap Iraqi oil why has the price of oil skyrocketed? If people like you ("progressive", "liberal"?) saw it all coming why didn't the concerned and like-minded politicians who you vote for undercut Bush and the cabal that has supposedly benefited from the war in Iraq?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skip:

the above post almost looks as though you agree with me

Wow, it's almost like you read part of what I wrote for once.

Are you actually reading ANY of the links I gave you? I didn't make this stuff up.

If you aren't going to do even a tiny bit of easy fact-checking, you are not going to impress anybody as an honest participant in this discussion.

You are welcome to disagree with the links I supplied. Just supply some of your own. But at least show you've read them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For example, the Bush Regime's war machine has done an excellent (i.e., perfectly immoral) job of demonizing Islam.

Again - can we get an example?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

undecidedbout08:

I've already got a reply to you that you have ignored. Answer it, honestly.

If that topic can be resolved, then we can try this new topic you are bringing up.

But until you answer the previous one, you are just muckraking instead of discussing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Undecidedbout08 What did GW do for your country ? How did he boost the economy ? How did he make a world a safer place ? What accomplishment did he do for the USA ? Please entertain me with your thoughts. The economy is destroyed. He didn't react quickly with Katrina. He sent the troops in the wrong direction by going into Iraq. Colon Powell went to the U.N. with false claims. (wimpy arrogant brainwashed conservative) Please tell me Ohhh Noble blogger. Please tell me your thoughts

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've already got a reply to you that you have ignored. Answer it, honestly.

No you haven't. How, exactly, has the Bush administration 'demonized' Islam?

truthXhurts - You're changing the subject.

What is this lie that Bush used? Don't try and blame Powell. Just get the facts and deliver.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

naruki: I'll look at the links. Very links usually change my mind. Please, I am not behind a PC and browsing links is a hassle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

undecidedbout08:

Don't lie, now. Check out the comment I made at 05:27 PM JST - 11th August:

undecidedbout08:

I did not say that a call for freedom is an act of oppression. How silly you sound!

I said that Bush's war on the people of Iraq in the false name of freedom is a particular type of oppression. (Unless you consider "freedom from life" to be freedom, in which I have nothing to say to you.)

I, who am not oppressing anyone at the moment, can freely criticize China for its actions.

Bush, on the other hand, is a terrible hypocrite to do so. Do you see the difference?

Now, are you going to answer that first comment? And tell the truth, this time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong:

Are you posting from your cellphone? Ouch.

Even if you accept the links as true, I don't expect them to change your mind. Mainly because I'm not disagreeing with you as much as you seem to think.

I do expect them to broaden your perspective a bit, unless you simply reject them without a fair hearing. Hopefully you won't do that.

Take your time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites