More on Dobson/voter registration from the WaPo.  While, as has been said here, I am not all for what Dobson is doing, this piece is just left-wing fear mongering.

KLo makes a Mormons and politics joke.  Apparently, the Mormon question concerns not the candidate, but the contest!  Lowell:  Groan!

Speaking of the Corner, the discussion stemming from Heather MacDonald’s piece continues.  Here is one of my favorite entries of the day and here Amy Wellborn tracks the whole thing.  Lowell:  I love that Jonah entry too.  Read it, everyone!

Romney in Mississippi - fascinating for two reasons.  1) I have a lot of family in Mississippi - well-placed, Democrat family, that are using Katrina as a huge wedge issue in the current election cycle.  2) I asked the Governor about what he, as president, would do in a similar situation, He had some good answers - I wish they had made this press report. 

This is non-news as far as I am concerned.  It’s about the political giving of the Romney’s private charitable foundation.  It is totally unremarkable that (1) Rich people have charitable foundations and; (2) That those foundations would give to things those rich people are interested in.  What makes the story interesting is after looking solely at politics, here is the last sentence of the piece

The foundation has donated more than $2.9 million to more than 40 healthcare groups, schools, and other charitable organizations since 1999, including $2.2 million to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, according to a Globe review of IRS documents that are publicly available.

Aside from the political giving, the only specific beneficiary of the foundation mentioned is the CJCLDS.  Would this be an attempt to plant the seeds of “the Mormon issue”?

Lowell:  A little LDS background:  Charitable giving is part of Mormon life. As an active Mormon, Romney tithes 10% of his annual increase to the Church.  Also, LDS Philanthropies is the Church’s charitable arm; if you browse around you’ll get a sense of the activities Romney’s foundation money went to.  As John notes, it is very common for affluent people to have a foundation, and by all accounts Romney made millions from his venture capital company, so he has a lot to give.  I can report that it is also very common for well-off Mormons to include the Church in their philanthropic giving.

There are two things to dislike about this piece.  First, it takes a shot at “the Republican establishment” like this was the ’60’s and it is from the inside of the GOP!  Do we really want to be appealing to 60’s liberal mentality inside our own party - even in the name of setting up the author’s choice (Gingrich) in a Reaganesque stance.  Frankly, I am more closely aligned with Gingrich on most issues than Romney, but find Gingrich completely unelectable, there is way too much baggage.  I’ll take a Republican president I disagree with on some things before a Democrat one any day.

Secondly, the piece echoes the increasingly “conventional wisdom” on the religious question, almost gratuitously.  That we need to have a conversation on the role of religion is undoubted, but this consistent one and two sentence potshot on the side stuff has just got to stop - it amounts to a whispering campaign out in the open.  To pundits everywhere - TAKE YOUR SHOT OR LEAVE IT BE!

Lowell:  This author is more than just a pundit.  I think he’s a Gingrich operative, very slyly trying to plant a seed:  Romney is the candidate of (drum roll here) the GOP elites, like the Rockefeller Republicans of the 60’s and so forth.  (Of course, Newt is no elite, he’s still out there leading the conservative insurgency.  Isn’t he?)  And there’s that religion thing again!  Oh, dear, what will Mitt do about that?  All in all, pretty slimy gamesmanship, in my view.  If Newt wants to run he ought to throw his hat into the ring and, instead of playing games, try to win based on his ideas and his ability to get elected.  I think he’ll do well with the former and poorly with the latter.

Gaffe update:  George Allen’s “Macaca problems” haven’t dissipated yet, but probably will.  I wonder how this sort of thing plays with religious voters?  I also wonder if the (allegedly) bullying tone tone of Allen’s interaction with the Webb campaign worker will have any effect, or how Romney’s “tar baby” comment will look by comparison?  I also wonder if I should not try to find something more substantive to wonder about?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Reading List | No Comments yet » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

Recently:

• “Meeting the Challenges of Today:” Neal Maxwell, Secularism, and The Separation of Church and Politics
• Wednesday Quick Links
• Prop 8 - Problem or Solution?
• Legality, Religiousity, Post-Prop 8 Ugliness and the Case Against Huckabee
• Prop 8 and religion: A moral or political issue, or both?
• RED MEAT! Hewitt, Huckabee and Anti-Mormonism
• Say What?!
• In The Wake Of Prop 8
• A Catholic Defense of Mormon Support (and other religions’ support) for Prop 8
• Being The Target