Article VI Blog

PLEASE BE SURE AND TAKE THE POLL IN OUR RIGHT COLUMN.  It's to help us better understand our readership and how to serve them.

Next time you run into somebody charging Romney with "saying what the audience wants to hear" – please, play this for them.  It is, of course, what by now is the infamous "Hillary tries to sound southern" clip.  What was she thinking?  I mean really – all she manages to pull off is condescending.

Newsweek has a religious literacy quiz.  (HT: Papamarcsblog)  I got a perfect score and I am not the least bit impressed with myself.  The results are a bit scary to me.  Roughly 65% of respondents missed 2 or more questions out of 15, and we are not talking really tough questions here.  Frankly, anybody scoring less than perfect on this puppy would be smart to keep their ideas about religion to themselves.

Lowell:  Despite a case of nerves over the possibility of scoring lower than John, I also came out perfect.  I think this sort of thing is good.  Warning:  There were two questions about Mormonism that could be tricky for some people . . . .

Democrats should just not talk about religion.  Between Hillary trying to sound like a southern preacher (above) and now Edwards trying to sound religious they'd just be better off being quiet.  Jim Geraghty does such a good job of tearing into Edwards that I won't bother.

What I will say though is that by submitting to an interview of this type Edwards takes political dialogue in this country in a place it really shouldn't go.  Consider some of the questions:

• What parts of American life do you think would most outrage Jesus?
• Do you have a favorite prayer?
• In what ways do you feel God is happiest with you right now?
• Do you feel like there's a way in which God is disappointed with you now?

These are questions giving Edwards the opportunity to say what is and is not real religious belief and/or practice.  They are questions of theology – personal theology – but theology nonetheless.  This crosses the church/state line in a way that a reasonable religious Republican would not.  Yeah, Jimmy Carter answered some questions lke that, but can you recall Ronald Reagan or Bush the first of the current Bush talking about their faith in that kind of detail?  I can't.

Bad move Edwards.

Lowell:  When it comes to relligion, candidates need to avoid looking like they are either "faking it" or trying too hard.  Edwards looks like he may be doing both.

Giuliani asks for privacy regarding his "family"  Well, Rudy has said Romney's religion is off limits.  Hotline says family is a great measure of character.  Tough question, like religion, family is somewhat determinative, certainly indicative, of character, but also like religion there are limitations to that determinative power and some things are just not fair game in a campaign.  There are too few specifics available here in terms of what the press was asking to make a call, but it is an interesting question.  As a general principle, I think it is fair to say the more transparent a candidate is willing to be about family, the better his character is likely to be.

Lowell adds:  The key, as John notes, is transparency.  Romney is in the fortunate and admirable position of being able to be completely transparent about his family; he has nothing to be embarrassed about.  Good for him.  McCain forthrightly confesses that he was "the bad guy" in his first marriage, and I think almost every voter accepts that.  Good for him, too.  Giuliani has a bigger problem.  Perhaps he would serve himself well by simply saying, "Like so many Americans I've made some missteps in my personal life.  I've learned from those and will use those experiences to help me be more compassionate toward those who have similar stories in their own lives.  After all, what else can we do with mistakes but learn from them?"  I think people would accept that; I would even see it as a mark of character.

But let's take this family discussion back to where it belongs:  Its impact on the issue of religion in presidential politics.  Politico interviewed Romney at CPAC and touched briefly on The Question:

Politico: Are you concerned that only people of vague faith will be able to run, if someone who’s strong and vocal about their faith gets picked apart, as your Mormon faith has been?

 

Romney: When people don’t know a great deal about a person’s faith, they’re just not sure what it means. And as they focus in on my faith, I think that they’ll see Ann and my marriage, they’ll see our family and they’ll say Hey, there‘s nothing wrong with that. Whatever has produced those guys has got to be OK. And I don’t mean by that they we’re perfect — we’re a long way from that. But our faith has certainly made us better than we certainly would have been otherwise. I’m proud of the fact that my parents were of my faith, and I’ve learned from them. I think you will find that the people of America, as they get to know us better, will be pretty darn comfortable with us as a couple and me as a politician.

I think we will see that "marriage-family-faith" response from Romney repeatedly.  As we will discuss here next week, Hugh Hewitt's book, A Mormon in The White House? addresses the Romney faith-family connection in some detail.  It's a winner issue for the Governor.

Back to John.

Howard Fineman on CPAC.  Money quote:

So here we have: an Indian Southern Baptist evangelical daughter of Hindus with a mixed Georgia-Delhi accent working hard for a Mormon Harvard-trained patrician whose faith she regards as a “cult”—her words—but who, in her mind, represents the GOP’s best chance for keeping the White House in Republican hands. “I like his business mind set,” she told me.

You have GOT to love that!

Posted in Reading List | 2 Comments » |  Print this post |  Email This Post

Recently Posted:

• Civic Religion and How To Lose
• News Of The Week – Romney and The Field, Presidential Religion, Rallies, and more…
• Crossing Weak Bridges and Blaming The Wrong Party
• Mitt, Mosques, Mormons, Obama’s Religion, Also-Ran’s and More…
• SLATE – Lower Than…