Bachmann: 9/11 Hits Were God's Judgment Against United States

If There Is One Thing I Enjoy About Republicans ...

... it would be their tendency to keep the spotlight on their own shortcomings. It's farcical.

To wit, we have today cause to think back to the 2008 election, and that time during the primaries when everyone was supposed to be obsessed with Rev. Jeremiah Wright—a preacher and former Marine medic who tended to an American president during surgery—being angry about the way American society treated black people.

Apparently, he said some bad things about America that made white people uncomfortable.

But they're not so uncomfortable, as we saw, with genocidal white preachers (Rod Parsley, spiritual advisor to John McCain presidential campaign), or white preachers who condemned the United States (John Hagee, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and whatever the hell Sarah Palin's pastor's name was).

Okay, so how about a white member of Congress?

It’s no secret that our nation may very well be experiencing the hand of judgment. It’s no secret that we all are concerned that our nation may be in a time of decline. If that is in fact so, what is the answer? The answer is what we are doing here today: humbling ourselves before an almighty God, crying out to an almighty God, saying not of ourselves but you, would you save us oh God? We repent of our sins, we turn away from them, we seek you, we seek your ways. That’s something that we’re doing today, that we did on the National Day of Prayer, it’s something that we have chosen to do as well on another landmark day later this year on September 11. Our nation has seen judgment not once but twice on September 11. That’s why we’re going to have ‘9/11 Pray’ on that day. Is there anything better that we can do on that day rather than to humble ourselves and to pray to an almighty God?

—Rep. Michele Bachmann​

That's right, my fellow Americans, Michele Bachmann said what happened on that terrible day in 2001 was God's Will, His Judgment, His Punishment.

And Benghazi, too.

See, it's Americans' fault, according to Bachmann; God sent the bad guys because we desereved to get hit.

And, in truth, while we joke about the evangelical right wing being like the Taliban, I didn't really expect the foremost anti-Muslim bigot in Congress to actually agree with Al Qaeda.

So there we have it. Osama bin Laden was just doing God's will. At least, so says Michele Bachmann.
____________________

Notes:

Mantyla, Kyle. "Bachmann: 9/11 and Benghazi Were God's Judgment". Right Wing Watch. May 10, 2013. RightWingWatch.org. May 10, 2013. http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bachmann-911-and-benghazi-were-gods-judgment

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Blaming tragedies and natural disasters on man's sins isn't a new phenomenon. American Evangelicals spend quite a bit of their time cursing homosexuals/adulterers/pick-your-poison for the wrath they brought from God in the form of Katrina, floods, war, or what have you.

What's interesting about this is how it doesn't necessarily stray far from the liberal mindset that 9/11 was deserved because of our actions in the region the attacks emanated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Funny, I don't recall hearing any elected Democrat saying it was God's will or 9/11 was deserved because of our actions in the Middle East. As a matter of fact, I don't recall any mainstream Democrat making such a claim. In fact, I don't recall any Democrat ever making such a statement. Perhaps you can find some to back up your claims . . . then again maybe not?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Er ... um ... okay

(1) It's a whole different ballgame. To the one, you have a complex array of economic and political factors affecting outcomes in a region. To the other, you have a cheap excuse that it's just God's will. Perhaps you're right, though, and the problem is that conservatives just aren't smart enough to figure out the complexities so this is their way of saying it?

(2) There was great condemnation of a black man who said, "God bless America? No, God damn America!" But the white guy who said God would reach out his hand against America (Palin's preacher)? No big deal. The genocidal spiritual advisor to the McCain campaign (Pastor Rod Parsley)? No big deal. John Hagee preaching that Hurricane Katrina was God's wrath against America? No big deal. The nation's foremost televangelist blaming 9/11 on women and homosexuals for bringing God's wrath against America? Well, Pat Robertson is still influential on the right wing, so no big deal. The point here is the hypocrisy.

(3) I still think it's funny that Michele Bachmann agrees with the late Osama bin Laden.

 

I have to agree. But it does make sense it a way. They are two birds of the same feather. I have to admit right wingers are a constant source of hilarity. The sad part is they are not kidding, and people take them seriously.

 

I never said Democrats said anything of the sort. Try reading the post again.

So the issue is merely that she invoked God, not that she blamed America for the attacks? That seems to speak against the thrust of your post, but I guess I could have read it wrong.

My point was that it boils down to blaming America, which is a mentality shared by the fringe on either side of the aisle. Obviously it's funny, I just think it's also ironic that this will be touted as "typical conservative behavior" when it exists on both sides.

I didn't say that, and I wouldn't agree with that. This also isn't "their" way of saying anything; these were Bachmann's words, though the entirety of the religious right would almost certainly agree with her. To that end, I would say that she likely doesn't have the smarts to understand the complexities of the troubles in that region.

I agree, but I wouldn't draw the line at race. The salient difference between Rev. Wright and the others you mentioned is affiliation, not skin color. Had Obama attended a church with a white pastor giving the same message or similar, it would have received the same reaction from the right. Hypocrisy? Absolutely. But it's got nothing to do with race.

The corollaries are quite interesting--does she, then, disagree with the War on Terror? After all, if bin Laden was acting on God's behalf, aren't we going against God's will? Is bin Laden a martyr in Evangelical circles? If he was doing God's work, does that mean he was chosen by God?

I would give my left nut to have been in the room with her when that drivel came out of her mouth.

 

Slight Complications

I would say the issue is more that one is an attempt to delve into the logic of a situation while the other is merely writing it off to superstition.

Would you say that America does no wrong?

I know, it's not much of a response, but I think the whole "blaming America" thing is a worthless trope; there is a difference between blaming America and comprehending the dynamics of a situation, and I can promise you that, "They hate us for our freedom", is bullshit.

I think it was last year when we had an episode in which a member resented being accused of being conservative. The problem, though, was that he kept reciting conservative talking points that had nothing to do with reality.

Rather than risk a repeat of those histrionics, I would simply point out that the "both sides" argument is a conservative talking point that, apparently, you've bought into.

Let us use, for a moment, an analogy: Birthers and Truthers. Some conservatives would remind that there were liberal Truthers, which is true, but the Truthers never occupied eleven percent of the House Democratic caucus, and never tried to pass a Truther bill.

The "both sides" argument has a certain baseline. All politicians lie to some degree; they spin, hustle, twist, and dance around the truth. But there is a difference between acknowledging this fact and seeking to exploit it. Nobody needs pretend that liberals or Democrats are perfect in order to acknowledge that conservatives and Republicans have absolutely lost the plot.

As to typical conservative behavior, though, I did note specific examples of the God's wrath argument; it isn't just one crazy member of Congress from Minnesota pushing this shit. And, when you look at a broader spectrum of issues, ludicrous and even contradictory superstitious crap is something we've gotten a lot of from the right wing in recent years. Additionally, this sort of behavior is gaining popularity among conservative voters.

And the idea that conservatives are simply poor communicators might have some applicable merit. I occasionally recall Pam Stenzel, a Bush administration teen abstinence advocate who makes a living lying to children about sex and sexuality. In a room full of Christians who had pledged allegiance to the Christian flag of America, she explained her frustration at being asked about the success rate of abstinence education.

At Reclaiming America for Christ, Stenzel told her audience about a conversation she'd had with a skeptical businessman on an airplane. The man had asked about abstinence education's success rate, a question she regarded as risible.

"What he's asking," she said, "is 'does it work?' You know what? Doesn't matter. 'Cause guess what? My job is not to keep teenagers from having sex. The public school's job should not be to keep teens from having sex."

Then her voice rose and turned angry as she shouted, "Our job should be to tell kids the truth!" And I should say that up 'til then, I agreed with her. But here's what she means by the truth:

"People of God," she cried, "can I beg you to commit yourself to truth? Not what works, to truth! I don't care if it works, because at the end of the day, I'm not answering to you. I'm answering to God.

"Let me tell you something, People of God, that is radical, and I can only say it here," she said. "AIDS is not the enemy. HPV and a hysterectomy at twenty is not the enemy. An unplanned pregnancy is not the enemy. My child believing that they can shake their fist in the face of a holy God and sin without consequence, and my child spending eternity separated from God, is the enemy! I will not teach my child that they can sin safely!"

(Goldberg)​

Naturally, the assembled crowd loved that.

Gay marriage? No, really, how does acknowledging a homosexual union denigrate heterosexual marriage?

There was the whole rape controversy with Republicans last year during the election cycle. Shut that whole thing down? Gift from God? (No, really, they can't stop. The California Republican Assembly, a conservative volunteer group, just dismissed its president because she wouldn't let it go.

Gun violence? Well, there's that lovely conspiracy theory that universal background checks for firearms purchases is just a ruse to keep guns out of the hands of evangelical Christians. That one's being pushed by the AFA and FRC, which are usually more infamous for their rabid fear of homosexuals. And, yes, it has made its way to Congress, as Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO)—he of "tar baby" infamy—has demanded that the Army apologize to Christians for including domestic extremists on its list of threats.

Look, there comes a point when a Republican saying something immensely stupid, superstitious, and hateful isn't news because, well, it happens so often.

Typical behavior? Compared to the millions of everyday Americans who are also conservative? Well, I would hope they're smarter than Bachmann, but the public representation of the conservative outlook isn't doing so well.

Well, I wouldn't necessarily agree with it, either. Rather, I'm leaving the door open for other interpretations. But, as such, I would point out that it doesn't necessarily matter whether you said it or not; I was trying to be sympathetic to the ridiculous notion that an evolving search for logic and scientific data is somehow the equivalent of a fixed article of faith.

In truth, I'm uncertain how to respond here. The first three options to mind are:

• [hysterical laughter]

• You're kidding, right?

• Do you mind if I ask where you were during the 2008 election cycle?​

The Wright controversy was about an idea called Black Liberation Theology, which conservatives cast as some militant, genocidal bogeyman in order to get the public scared of black people again. And they're still at it.

Well, yes, there is that implication that Osama bin Laden was an instrument of God. But I think it's more likely, based on Bachmann's past, that she just didn't think that through.

Well, as long as you're not using it, sure. But it's a bad deal; the sensation of awesome and crushing amazement is ephemeral, and you'd have to get a stupid t-shirt: I gave my left nut to pray with Michele Bachmann at the U.S. Capitol, and all I got was this lousy t-shirt and a shovelful of bullshit.

Besides, it's just easier to watch it on YouTube.
____________________

Notes:

KUOW. "Michelle Goldberg: The Rise of Christian Nationalism". Speakers' Forum. October 18, 2007. KUOW.org. May 10, 2013. http://www2.kuow.org/program.php?id=13646

Wrigley, Will. "Celeste Greig Ousted As California Republican Assembly President After Rape Comment". The Huffington Post. May 7, 2013. HuffingtonPost.com. May 10, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/celeste-greig-ousted_n_3223867.html

National Public Radio. "Black Liberation Theology, in its Founder's Words". Fresh Air. March 31, 2008. NPR.org. May 10, 2013. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89236116

Williams, L. A. "Obama and Black Liberation Theology: has it shaped his worldview?". Renew America. May 5, 2008. RenewAmerica.com. May 13, 2013. http://www.renewamerica.com/article/080505

Hallowell, Billy. "This is How Obama 'Founding Father' Rev. Wright, His Church & Black Liberation Theology Shaped the President's Worldview". The Blaze. October 15, 2012. TheBlaze.com. May 13, 2013. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ion-theology-shaped-the-presidents-worldview/

 

LOL, So Democrats are not “liberals"?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Obvious Points

Well, you know, it depends on who you ask. As I've said many times before, voting for Democrats is often as much of a concession as I can make to conservatives.

And it's true that the farther left you go on the political spectrum, the more willing people are, generally speaking, to read the American rap sheet aloud.

Well, check that. Right-wingers do it, too, but the difference is obvious. That is, one side might complain about the injustice of capitalism exploiting people around the world while the other complains about the injustice of having health care.

And setting aside the question of deserved, I would also recall my first words upon confirming that 9/11 was really happening: "Well, someone finally went and did it."

I mean, come on. Show of hands. Who didn't know something like that was going to happen one day?

Wait. I shouldn't ask that question, since I actually knew someone who had no clue what was happening that day.

Okay, so ... yeah. The only surprises were the time and date, that it happened there and then.

It's not really a question of what is deserved. Rather, it's a logical question of human behavior. You fuck with people long enough, they'll fuck back.

 

Not too different in substance to the Bachman quote.

 

Considering we have no idea what she means by god, as everyone has a different view of it.

She might mean what ever entity runs planet earth decided it should happen. To the ptb it may be like that, and how they listen to whom ever, and do what ever they will to go along with it.

I am sure something dark is out there humans can tap into, who knows is this what runs earth, and that which you all worship.

Maybe thats what she means, maybe not. Maybe thats why 911 happened, maybe not.

One thing i am sure about is something dark runs planet earth and its not us. I think the ptb take orders from it, and what ever it says they probably follow.

So who knows about 911, i am sure none of you lot know they truth, and neither does she. But whom ever she means by god, may not be whom you think of as god.

I am also sure that as above so below, there is something to that saying. As above america has enemies, and it has allies, like it does on earth. So before you start saying this is bull, you should understand that your only speaking for yourself, and not whom really runs earth.

When you hear statements like this do not be so dismissive, as you do not know how the earth is run, and whom likes america or not?

Also remember for the rest of your life, what ever is that thing, may not like what you see as america. Do not think you speak for what it is, and do not ever think that just because you like america, that it likes it.

I always call america land of lucifer, and i still stick by that. They know something out there doesn't like them. I am not sure what it is, but i know america is scared of it.

 

I see. So it's America's fault, it's just the reason that's laughable.

No, but just as you wouldn't say a woman who drinks too much or dates the wrong guy is responsible for the ensuing rape, I wouldn't say America is responsible for the ensuing terrorist attacks.

If your comprehension of this particular situation's dynamics is that America is ultimately responsible for bringing the wrath of international terrorism upon itself, then what's the bloody difference?

Well, it's bullshit to the extent that it's not why they attack us.

I seem to remember an episode in which a fringe liberal referred to every argument he disagreed with as a "conservative talking point" and was reduced to ad hominem before even making one legitimate rebuttal.

I'm not saying there aren't certain behaviors or attributes exclusive (or mostly exclusive) to one side or the other, so you can save the long, rambling pseudo-blog post that's sure to follow. (Shit, I'm too late) I'm simply making the point that both sides have found their reasons for blaming America for the terrorist attacks. For the conservatives, they view it as an act of God; for liberals, it's in "the dynamics of the situation."

I don't see that woman as being a poor communicator, nor do I think you were actually serious about Bachmann's inability to explain the details. This is Jesus Freakery 101. There's no substance to it, and she's not failing to articulate some broader, better point.

If that's what it really were, you'd have a point.

It was about a quote, primarily, not an ideology. The reason "God damn America" was played ad nauseum was to paint Obama as being anti-American. The right-wing sites and blogs delved deeper into the actual philosophy of Black Liberation Theory, but their condemnation of it wasn't racist, it was typical smear. From one of the links you provided:

"Obama's relationship to his church and pastor, Jeremiah Wright, are no small matter. Some may declare we need to move on to the issues, but this in itself is an issue of great consequence," said the Rev. Mark Creech, executive director of the Christian Action League. "Here is a Presidential candidate, mind you, who has been the longstanding member of a church that subscribes to Black Liberation Theology — a theology that has its roots in Marxism, racism and anti-American sentiment. ​

Linking Obama to this movement is no different than linking him to Bill Ayers. It's not about race, it's about politics.

Obviously. I would just love to have heard her stammer through some half-assed answer--if she didn't get up and walk out instead.

 

I'm afraid you have misrepresented her. She said it was ''the hand of judgement'' that was experienced by America that morning, and that we should ''humble ourselves and pray to an almighty God'.

I know people don't really feel they have to get it right, when attacking a national/global scapegoat, but for the purpose of discussion you should realise there is a difference between ''judgment/willl'' and ''God's judgement/will''.

Just out of curiosity, how would your monologue read were you to accept that you've slightly exaggerated what she said?

jan.

 

So whose hand was she referring to as "the hand of judgment" ? Or if not a hand, whose judgment if not God's?

Linking Obama to radical "Black Liberation" ideology is all about racial politics, unavoidably. There is very little about the rightwing vendettta against Obama that is not inextricably tangled in race, and certainly linking him to scary black people is not among that little.

So if the English language is being employed normally here, you are drawing a parallel between a woman drinking too much and dating the wrong guy, and a country engendering hatred and motivating terrorism by mistreating other people. You are postulating an equivalence between rape and revenge, in the assignment of responsibility to the victim (and blame to the perp, earlier).

You want to rethink that a bit?

 

This and That

We might take a moment to consider whether or not our neighbor recognizes that the "political" argument based on a straw man of black militancy and supremacism intended to frighten whites.

• • •​

I'll actually start with a blog post. It's just a welcome post to a blog I'm tinkering with, but it contains an excerpt of Aldous Huxley's Jesting Pilate:

The philosophical Martian would admire the dung-searchers for having discovered a use for dung; no other animal, he would point out, has had the wit to do more than manufacture it.

We are not Martians and our training makes us reluctant to think of ourselves as animals.​

The whole excerpt is actually worth your time, I promise. But I would ask you to take a moment to consider the Martian Eye. It is a valence of emotional removal from a scientific endeavor.

To wit, is there any method, in your opinion, for assessing the workings of humanity and society in a geopolitical context that does not include moral blame?

Dispassionate assessment of human issues is often difficult in a way that other academic inquiry isn't. But as we wander through history, with all its implications, certain realities reveal themselves thematically despite our general disdain toward their implications.

Let us try a general, peripheral notion first. Do you believe people are inherently evil? How many of our Bible-believing neighbors do you think would say people are inherently evil?

The thing is that it is, technically, a doctrinal article of faith. The Bible. Genesis. Eden. Original Sin. And you will see manifestations of it in the living faith. All these years later, my mother still doesn't understand why I never returned to the church she attended in Oregon after my one foray into its sanctuary. It was a Christmas pageant about the need for Jesus in our lives, and included a scene in which a grandmother explained to her five year-old granddaughter that, "We are all born full of black icky stuff that we cannot get rid of unless we ask Jesus to cleanse our hearts." And, you know, some of these people would still be horrified at the idea assertion that they accuse humanity of inherent evil.

Yet the presupposition is so sublime that we can see it wherever we look. The obvious one is recidivism, setting aside the documentable concerns about certain forms of sex offense, we might also consider what happened to people during the drug war. A friend of mine noted this weekend, as we talked about pot legalization in our state, that someone who wants a bong rip before taking a ninety-minute bus ride to a stable job is somehow a threat to society that needs to be worried about, yet nobody freaks out if you've got a doctor who will give you the pills you need to get through the day without mowing down the office with a gun. It was an interesting consideration that strikes close to home. When I stop smoking pot for a period—usually for supply or financial reasons—the transition is fairly easy. Sure, I might be particularly annoyed for a day, but nobody seems to notice compared to my usual degree of inherent annoyance at the world around me. But if I tried to drop my anti-depressant so abruptly, the dangers—a word I use advisedly—can become life-threatening.

But for the last thirty years, we've been throwing people in prison for drug possession. These are people who might not have been any real threat to the community, like the New Jersey guy who got twenty-five years for a roach and the single Tylox in a prescription bottle with his girlfriend's name on it that she says she put in his pocket for him to hold at a concert.

Meanwhile, our eternal love affair with economizing and optimizing has created a situation in which many prisons are arguably factories for violent criminals. We have fulfilled a sublimated expectation of Original Sin. It is a self-justifying cycle.

But this assessment can come without moral blame insofar as we need not say anyone deserves the gang violence or other ill produce of the drug war. It is, simply, an observable process, and if we accept Brown's proposition of the Freudian dialectic of neurosis, we see that no supervillain is required to pull these strings.

However, neuroses are very good at hiding from us. In many cases, we need some sort of intervention influence to identify and address neurotic loops, knots, and warps. But if we cannot engage the discussion without accounting for these neuroses because people are afraid of moral blame, we're never going to get a handle on the problem.

Similarly, with geopolitical history, there are processes at work causing and contributing to various human troubles that we can identify and address.

Your application of rape shaming, in this case, is erroneous. First, there is a difference between the human politics of sexual abuse and expectation to the one, and the geopolitics of societies to the other. Secondly, a more appropriate comparison would be to examine the attitudes, outlooks, and behaviors in the larger society that contribute to the rape phenomenon.

In the end, if we are unable to address the processes and phenomena contributing to a particular negative outcome because we're too squeamish about the idea of moral blame, we will never address the problem.

There are considerations to explore in the geopolitical context that would examine what actions by aspects of American society helped cause the trouble that so pissed off these people that they would declare themselves open enemies.

In an academic examination, moral blame is beside the point.

Declaring God's will as punishment for sins? Well, that's pretty much exclusively a faith argument of moral blame.

 

First of all she didn't say it was 'God's hand, but later on she mentions God, so there is no reason (outside your own interpretation) to suggest that she meant God.
The ''hand of judgement'' could mean bringing judgment upon oneself. If one dirinks and drive, has an accident, it can be said they brought that on themselves.

jan.

 

Nope. The woman is not responsible for what a rapist does, and the country is not responsible for what terrorists do. Period.

 

Desperate Hair Day

I think it's a pretty desperate hair you're pretending to split.

She identifies as a Christian, regardless of the stupid cruelty that comes out of her mouth. She was at a Christian political event. And the answer is to repent of our sins, apparently.

In a contextual vacuum, I might acknowledge that you're near to having a legitimate point, but it's not a contextual vacuum and you aren't.

The Christian version of God is asserted to be the Alpha and Omega, without Whose will nothing happens.

Unless, of course, it's something bad. Then Christians pretend God is impotent.

Sorry, Jan, but this time you're so far out on a limb it's simply beyond stupid.