Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
January 07, 2005Thus Saith DeLayBy Vince LeibowitzGuest Post By Vince Leibowitz This morning, I recieved several e-mails from Democratic lists I'm on attacking Tom DeLay over a scripture reading during the Congressional Prayer Service earlier this week. Always weary of e-mail rumors from listservs, I decided to investigate further to see if Tom DeLay did, in fact, hop on the Religious High-Horse. Sure enough, he did. The only major media outlet I could find mentioning Tom DeLay reading scripture which many are interpreting as him saying the Tsunami victims got what they deserved was the "Quick Takes" column in the Chicago Sun-Times, which noted: "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay [read] from Scripture at [the]Congressional Prayer Breakfast Wednesday comparing those not faithful to Christianity to "a fool who built his house on sand," noting that "the floods came, and the winds blew, and buffeted the house, and it collapsed and was completely ruined." Why has the mainstream media been silent on DeLay's latest gaffe? Bloggers have been far from slient on the issue. Via various bloggers like American Coprophagia, we know that DeLay read the following scripture, but I'm unsure of the version of the bible he used (it appears to be the King James Version):
Scott over at DemWatch had this to say about DeLay's latest folly:
Oddly enough, right-wing Focus on the Family stayed away from the DeLay affair entirely when it published its sappy press release about the Congressional prayer service. You can view the entire prayer service via C-Span. You can also right click on this link to save an MP3 of DeLay's reading, via DemWatch. Vince Leibowitz is County Chairman of the Democratic Party of Van Zandt County. He is a regular contributor to the Political State Report and founder of the now discontinued Texas politics blog, Free State Standard. He and his two dogs, Ellie and Lyndon, reside in Canton. Posted by Vince Leibowitz at January 7, 2005 01:04 PM | TrackBackComments
I'm the last person on earth to defend DeLay, but I've always understood those verses to be about faith. And not to be pedantic, but how do we know that reading wasn't chosen in advance, maybe even by someone else? In the Catholic Church, readings are proscribed for a whole year. (Speaking of which, in some circles these verses are used to claim that Catholics are going to hell.) All I'm saying is I'd like to have all the facts before I kick up a fuss on this. Posted by: Charles Kuffner at January 7, 2005 06:55 PMCharles, you missed the point. It was totally inappropriate, regardless of whether or not the verses were pre-selected. Complete insensitivity, showing a lack of understanding and typically faux Xian. Posted by: PC at January 7, 2005 11:38 PMLets not be too nuanced about this...DeLay, in all likelihood, probably really does believe that the tsunami victims died as a result of the wrath of God because of their sinful ways. That's standard Christian fundamentalist bullshit, and DeLay buys (and tries to sell it) hook, line and sinker. Posted by: Dennis at January 8, 2005 06:05 AMCharles, I get what you are saying, and it may well be that DeLay didn't intend to imply what people are saying he did. However, I do find it odd that he (or someone) would pick that scripture. Further, if it was selected in advance, it seems to me that a good advance man, someone on DeLay's staff, or DeLay himself might--just might--have decided it wasn't kosher to read given the circumstances. I'd also speculate that the religious right selects its own bible verses! LOL Posted by: Vince Leibowitz at January 9, 2005 02:16 AMPost a comment
|
|