Actually, the exact words were more like, he “extends” his prayers to her.
As if that were not bad enough, he also claimed to extend my prayers to her.
I want the world to know, that I do not and have never prayed to Mrs. Ford.
After Thought
Actually, the exact words were more like, he “extends” his prayers to her.
As if that were not bad enough, he also claimed to extend my prayers to her.
I want the world to know, that I do not and have never prayed to Mrs. Ford.
I think he just meant that he would be praying for her.
I suspect that Bush meant that he prayed for (not to) Ms. Ford. One can extend one’s prayers to someone by extending the scope of one’s prayers to cover or address that person.
That part of his speech was just poorly worded, and open to the sort of teasing you provide. Shame on his writer for wording it that way.
However, you passed over the more heterdox aspect of his speech, namely the concluding remark, “May god bless Gerald Ford.”
Not only does the web version disrespectfully fail to capitalize the name of God, the remark is – in essense and certainly in form – a prayer for the dead. As such, we should eschew it.
-Turretinfan
We will never have a truly great president to laud and honor until we have a president expending his energies over his entire term of office rallying Congress and voters to demolish all but the necessary skeleton of Federal power. The same goes for the states’ chief executives and bureaucratic fiefdoms
The same executives would do the same by the power of vetoing each and every piece of legislation that expands or maintains the current US Federal tyranny. (How sad is this populous in general in that such men will never be elevated to seats of power, and men that would rule rightly in those seats do not wish in this context to serve).
We need more than leaders with personal restraint. We need leaders who are willing to legally condemn, hang and bury all laws and institutions of government that hinder or deprive God-given civil liberties of persons with their personal property without due process.
It is no good have a “due procedure†for taking someone’s liberty to raise one’s children as one sees fit, worship according to conscience, smoke on private or public property, own as many and whatever kind of fire arm desired or speak truth privately and publicly.
(Oh yeah, or for bombing another nation into the stone age, wreaking death and disease upon a captive population and hanging one’s counter-part on the gallows. Just another example of why more than democracy is required. The democratically elected Congress consented actively and passively to all of this).
Whether informed by man’s unstrung will or democracy informed by a holy ____(fill in the blank), religious commitments will govern. Religion will always have ultimate political consequences because religion informs the voters’ votes in ultimate issues, like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Democracy enacts the religion du jour (During the service at the National Catheter, a eulogizing priest of the religion du jour pimped homosexual license and female clergy in the Episcopal Church US in the name of the deceased Mr. Ford).
Thus, it is not necessarily an accident that President 41 “extended his prayers toward†Former First Lady Ford. His was perhaps an accident of speech and also an accidental revelation of the affections (however much W’s words demeaned the Widow Ford, which I think they did).
When one has held the power of life and death in one’s mouth and hand, being prayed toward or untoward in prayer is not a problem psychologically or ethically for a devil or a rube.
Correction to my above post: In referring to George W. Bush, I mistakenly alluded to him as the 41st US President. He is the 43rd. His father is the 41st.
A little chicken skat for my day. Now, off to the grand. I shall brush my teeth.
Oh, boo hoo.
Running out ideas for posts, apparently…
Hmmm, Keith may be on to something in light of the last kvetch about hummers.
Hang in there fellas. There’s more meat and potatoes in the pressure cooker.
Haha. I’m still looking forward to that post on just war theory. :P
Keith– I thought that had been put to bed. See comments #8 and following here . At least, enough has been said (and not answered) to justify all of our complaints about the war-mongering of our beloved Führer.
TF (#2) — good catch. I frankly cdn’t even stomach reading the whole speech, short though it was.
I think we shd consider that the lower-case ‘g’ (which is still there, on the gop site) is intentional. It is “revelation of the method”– godtalk to at once bait, bag, and mock the Christian Right.
When you consider the number of people that write, proof-read, and advise on these speeches, I don’t think it is at all pedantic or nit-picky to look carefully at the semantics of our beloved Führer’s words.
Of course we all know what it is “meant” to “mean.” (Meaning itself must be taken figuratively with these people.) But these are the kind of words that would be used by someone who, it wouldn’t surprise me to find, didn’t pray for Mrs. Ford at all, not even once.
Words rattle by like so many empty box cars.
Probably some valley-girl intern actually wrote the first draft of the speech. “Hmm, let’s see… we should include something religious here; prayer is something like that, isn’t it? I’ll call Heather and see. Let’s have the President extend his prayer to Mrs. Ford– what could be a greater honor than that? She should feel very honored.”
When the Almighty is reduced to a ceremonial, honorific placeholder to express good feelings, it is indeed taking the Lord’s name in vain.
Dear Fellow TF,
Thanks!
As for its etymology, I wouldn’t be surprised if you were right.
Another possibility was that the original wording was:
“extend our condolences to Mrs. Ford and family.”
which was revised to a second “religiousified”
“extend our condolences and prayers to Mrs. Ford and family.”
and then revised to a third draft masking the afterthought with the idiomatically awkward
“extend to Mrs Ford and family our prayers and condolences.”
So perhaps it was afterthought, or perhaps it was just so much vapid religious-sounding verbage.
Similar vapid verbage can be found in other Bush announcements:
[*] “This morning our hearts and prayers are with our fellow citizens along the Gulf Coast who have suffered so much from Hurricane Katrina …” (comment: prayers are with them? from the V-J day commeration speech 8/30/2005)
[*] “We send our prayers and heartfelt condolences to the loved ones whose hearts are broken……” (about the same as “extend” – from a “War on Terror” announcement 1/4/2006)
[*] “You triumphed over brutal enemies, liberated continents, and answered the prayers of millions across the Earth…..” (spoken to Veterans of Foreign Wars on 8/22/2005)
And, of course, a particular gruesome combination of afterthought, religiousity, and Arminian theology bears pointing out:
[*] “Americans united in prayer … came to the aid of neighbors in need … and resolved that our enemies would not have the last word. The spirit of our people is the source of America’s strength. And we go forward with trust in that spirit, confidence in our purpose – and faith in a loving God who made us to be free.” (Regarding the American response to the events of September 11, spoken on September 11, 2006)
As for your last comment, I certainly agree that “When the Almighty is reduced to a ceremonial, honorific placeholder to express good feelings, it is indeed taking the Lord’s name in vain.”
-TurretinFan