Religious leaders resign from Bush’s Katrina committee in disgust

This is a fascinating story, not only because of the resignations, but also because the resignations tell us a great deal about how the [tag]Bush[/tag] gang operates.

Nearly all the religious leaders serving on a committee created by the Bush-Clinton [tag]Katrina Fund[/tag] to disburse money to [tag]churches[/tag] destroyed by [tag]Hurricane Katrina[/tag] have [tag]quit[/tag] their posts, claiming their advice was ignored.

Four of nine board members confirmed their [tag]resignations[/tag] on Thursday. Last week, two others — Bishop [tag]T.D. Jakes[/tag], the prominent Dallas megachurch pastor, and the Rev. [tag]William H. Gray[/tag] III, former president of the United Negro College Fund — resigned as co-chairs.

And Gray and Jakes say they have received the resignation letter of a seventh board member, the Rev. William Shaw, president of the National Baptist Convention, USA. He did not immediately return a phone call Thursday night.

In the religious community, these are some of the biggest heavy-hitters the White House could find. Bush brought them in, apparently, for public relations purposes. These pastors thought they could help make a difference, they offered sensible recommendations, and the president’s aides proceeded to blow them off. To their credit, the religious leaders decided to [tag]resign[/tag] rather than give Bush cover.

As Gray told the AP, “I’ve learned in life that if people say they want your advice and then they change it, ignore it, or undermine it, then they really don’t want it.”

The conflict between the ministers and the Bush gang started over a simple question of accountability.

The Katrina Fund created a committee devoted to helping rebuild houses of worship abd was set to receive about $20 million. Bush set up this advisory committee with interfaith leaders to help determine which churches, synagogues, and mosques faced the greatest need. It started well, but quickly deteriorated.

Initially, Gray said, the committee assumed it would make around 500 awards, each for $35,000. But as the applications began trickling in, staff members in New Orleans realized there were far fewer applicants than they had initially assumed. That meant they could increase the award amount, and the board agreed in consultation with the co-chairs of the fund that the grant ceiling would be increased to $100,000, Gray said. They also agreed each of the churches or religious institutions receiving the charity’s money would first be inspected, he said.

Numerous disagreements ensued, but Jakes and Gray said the last straw was the fund’s decision to cut checks to 38 houses of worship, each for $35,000, without first conducting an audit to ensure the church exists. (emphasis added)

Imam Abdelhafiz Bensrieti, who was also on the committee before resigning in disgust, said Bush aides simply wanted the religious leaders to “[tag]rubber stamp[/tag]” their decisions. Of course they did. Who would believe that the Bush gang would invite outsiders, who have not sworn loyalty to the president and a GOP agenda, to help actually shape a coherent policy?

It’s not necessarily about religion — Team Bush routinely likes to just cut checks without concern for accountability — but it’s of particular interest that the president seems to have offended some of the most prominent ministers in the country.

Karl Rove probably thought bringing them in would be a political coup; it backfired.

“Karl Rove probably thought bringing them in would be a political coup; it backfired.” – CB

Only if anyone pays attention. Nice to know SOMEONE finds Bushite practices unacceptable.

  • It’s a slow process, but I’m always glad when the mask of the Republicans is peeled back and people can see the ugliness behind it

  • Ummm… I like hearing about screw-ups by the current administration (including Rove) as much as the next liberal, but… I don’t see anything in this story that suggests that the current POTUS and his staff are involved. The Bush-Clinton Katrina fund was set up by Bush Sr. and Clinton, and seems to be run by people outside the POTUS administration.

    If you can point to a place where the staff that has bungled this work is directly connected to the current POTUS administration, I’d be much obliged, but I’d rather not open us liberals up to charges of misrepresenting the facts… 😉

  • Well no doubt you’ve all seen the clip of John Dean being interviewed by Keith Olbermann on Crooks and Liars [RE: Dean’s book–Conservatives Without Conscience].

    If not… watch it all the way to the end when Dean talks about the empirical evidence for 23% of the population being certifiable fascists.

    Really this is nothing new.

    Indeed I am surprised that Dean was surprised at what he discovered.

    The evidence has been afloat since before Aldous wrote his two most perceptive books [BNW & BNW revisited].

    I suspect people always raise a Spockian eyebrow at some of my posts that infer that there is a genetic difference between republicans and democrats.

    But there is.

    There is all kinds of evidence out there.

    Did you hear the one about the psych. study that shows conservatives feel less pain than liberals? I suspect that sort of fundamental difference is genetic…

    At any rate…. does it come as any surprise that a party composed of genetic authoritarians would chase away mininsters who themselves are genetic authoritarians?

    Hell… it is like a bad basketball team: there is not enough ball to go around.

    At any rate…
    When all is said and done…

    There is little difference between those who utter:

    Heil Hitler.
    Heil Bush.
    Heil Jesus.
    Heil Mohammed.
    &
    Heil bin Laden.

    It is all the same sick human gene…
    A gene that I suppose. helped us survive once upon a Ice Age time…

    Watch the Dean clip…and you will know where I am coming from.

    And after you watch that…
    Ask yourself:

    Does this species have the wherewithal to solve global warming?

  • It proves the George W. Bush administration is more interested in elaborate photo-ops without any substance. They are a bunch of liars who know what to say but refuse to put appropriate action to their words. They know their buddies in Congress would not hold them accountable.

  • I agree with Scott. The Honorary Co-Chairs include Bill Clinton. The operational Co-Chairs include Clinton’s former Sec. of Labor. This is a shame, scandal, and pox on the houses of politicians collectively. As much as I would love to tar BushCo with it, that would be over-reaching.

  • I don’t see anything in this story that suggests that the current POTUS and his staff are involved.

    As I understand it, the White House picked the committe members — including the religious leaders — and chose the staff, arguing that it was necessary because the administration would have to help implement the Fund’s proposals.

    I can dig a little deeper to see who, more specifically, the ministers were criticizing, but if we’re talking about people hand-picked by the White House, the “Bush gang” label certainly seems to apply.

  • I would agree with you, Carpetbagger… I was just wondering where the connection was. The only thing I could find on the Web regarding Bush Jr. and his administration being involved were that Bush Jr. asked Bush Sr. and Clinton to set up the Katrina fund, based on the model of their efforts after the tsunami in Southeast Asia. There are also some vague statements that the fund would consult and work with other organizations which may involve government entities.

    Either way, if much of this is being manipulated or dictated by the Bush Jr. administration, I would wonder why Clinton and other Democrats are involved (or remaining involved). They probably feel that the charitable work that would result is worth it, or they got duped… 🙁

  • CANCER, remember, IS GROWTH.

    THE U.S. ECONOMY IS ECONOMICALLY CANCER RIDDEN

    UNDER BUSH

    !

  • I agree with Scott– it would be nice to pin this on Dubya and his gang but that connection is not established in the post.

  • I am of two minds here. I clearly see the point about the tenuous links to Bushie. Yet, since when did truth and accuracy rule the day in politics, especially in this Rovian time?

    So, I say screw them. Anything even tangentially related to BushCo is all their f*cking fault.

  • I can’t believe this but I’m defending the White House and criticizing you on this one. You jumped the gun on this one. Even if 43 helped pick the BCKatrina staff, there is still no real tie to the White House unless you can show there was WH oversight. At this stage, nothing yet has been proved and you shouldn’t have linked to the story.

    I know it’s tempting to criticize these malevolent boobs but we expect better from you. And 99% of the time, you are better. But not this time.

  • koreyel writes: I suspect people always raise a Spockian eyebrow at some of my posts that infer that there is a genetic difference between republicans and democrats. But there is. There is all kinds of evidence out there.

    Of course there’s a genetic difference, koreyel, and it goes all the way back to the split of the family tree from the line that became chimps and bonobos and the line that became humans, our most recent branching off from our simian cousins. The bonobos split from the chimp line very shortly thereafter. I’m afraid humans ended up with both genes, which are somehow unevenly distributed or, more likely, unevenly expressed due to environmental influences and/or the luck of the genetic draw.

    About 5 million years ago our closest primate ancestors split off from the line that eventually became humans. Just half a million years later the line that became bonobos (which many people understandably confuse with chimps) split off from the line that became chimps. So the two of them are barely closer to each other evolutionarily than we are to either of them.

    Now here’s the interesting thing: the more common chimp, troglodytus, has some seriously violent tendencies. Males kill babies, they hunt monkeys and eat them and other mammals, they even fight and kill each other. Bonobos, on the other hand, have replaced aggression, or even the barest hint of conflict, with sex. They fuck at the slightest provocation—or no provocation at all. All kinds, too: male/male, female/female (very common) and of course male/female. They do tongue kissing, face to face (the missionary position), oral sex, the whole works. And almost constantly. And their societies are matriarchal; the females band together to keep the males from becoming dominant. My theory (in the I.D. sense of theory, that is—hey, if they can do it I can do it) is that there are human genetic dispositions to both the aggression and warlike behavior of the chimps and, conversely, to the “make love, not war” behavior of the bonobos. And humans have both sets of genes. In Republicans the troglodytus gene is dominant and thus their brutal behavior to others and their male dominance orientation. In those where the bonobo gene is dominant you’ll find the strikingly humanlike bonobo behavior of compassion, cooperation, and—okay, I’ll admit it—hedonism. Environmental influences can vary the tendencies of gene expression, but all other things being equal, patriarchal conservatives are having to deal with the undue influence of their troglodytus genes.

    Pity them…

  • Most ministers are slime, and only in it for the money. The term “Mega-church” is indicative of the the Moneychangers. They don’t give a damned about the members, only about themselves, which is why they’d allow themselves to be used by Bush.

  • Comments are closed.