Today’s Reading List – May 18, 2007 | Article VI Blog

A leftie takes a shot at Sharpton:

I’m a firm believer in the freedom of speech. I don’t care what Sharpton says about Mormons. And I don’t care what Imus says about black girls. What I care about is when someone like Sharpton infers Mormons don’t believe in God only a few short weeks after getting a disc jockey fired.

Say what you will about Imus, but he was an equal opportunity offender. Sharpton, on the other hand, is selective. He can say whatever he wants about your group of people, but he’ll be all over your case, bringing down your career, if you say something offensive—read: opportunistic—about his.

If Evangelicals exclude Romney because of his faith, it is precisely this logic that will doom Evangelicals in future elections. What's more, this is very clear thinking, very sharp reasoning, and I agree with it. It's not just that the lefties will use it against us, it's that we will have disqualified ourselves – at least made ourselves as much of a laughingstock as Sharpton has made himself.

Worse, because the lefties very much want to use this argument against us, if Romney loses, this is how they will paint it, or at least try to, regardless of the actual facts. That is why it is terribly important for all Evangelicals that have any political interest to make themselves loud and clear about The Question. We simply cannot let the lefties and their MSM allies make this assertion – we will lose if there is not an avalanche of evidence to the contrary.

Speaking of which, Froma Harrop writing at Real Clear Politics discusses preachers and the press. It is an interesting look at how spin gets spun. We all need to think about it as we see what the press has and is doing regarding The Question, and what they might do in the future.

There is absolutely nothing in this article about The Question, which is why it is refreshing. This is some of the first serious political writing from a major outlet on the campaign I have seen that treats Romney as a serious contender without mentioning religion. It is all about how Romney and McCain appear to be aiming for each other. I am not at all sure that is correct, it is just refreshing to note the absence of The Question. I wonder if McCain's associates can keep it that way?

NPR, in the wake of Falwell's passing, takes a look at the changes in the "Religious Right." Like the story discussed above there is a lot of wishful thinking in the analysis, but one thing is definitely true: The Religious Right is not a solid voting bloc, even if NPR is somewhat clueless about the factions and divisions. That fact alone is why the continued haranguing that Evangelicals will never vote for a Mormon is somewhat nonsensical. Evangelicals are just not that much in lockstep about anything. And yet, when they are not trying to co-opt a significant group of us on a particular issue, as they are in this story concerning issues related to the environment, they try to portray us as precisely in that lockstep. Once again, we have to be loud with our opinions to prevent them from writing them for us.

Lowell adds a couple of notes: I was reflecting on a Mike Allen Politico piece that we linked to on Wednesday, about a person who has sent out a

blast e-mail to radio talk show hosts . . . headed, "Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters? The Mormon Church vs. the United States of America." It went on for eight pages, with color photos, about "secret names and many other bizarre proceedings" of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

A series of sensational "Mormons believe" bullet points concluded: "If Mitt Romney does not follow what the prophet of the Mormon Church dictates, he will be an apostate."

It occurred to me that this absolutely makes our point about the MSM not getting enough on this story, even when they are the story.

In a truly ironic comment, Allen refers to the e-mail's author as "a fringe figure who is not likely to be embraced by Romney's GOP rivals or taken seriously by mainstream journalists." Excuse me, but isn't Allen a mainstream journalist, and isn't he giving very high-profile space to this "fringe figure?"

This Pennsylvania writer did not think much of Time Magazine's treatment of Romney or The Question.

On the other end of the political spectrum, this ordained minister, who is the California Director of Norman Lear's People for the American Way, gets some things right, but thinks the biggest problem in religion and politics is "ultraconservative Christian leaders." So how come the high-profile attacks come from liberals?

John comments: This one cracks me up –

Democratic strategists may also be tempted to exploit religion if Romney is the Republican nominee.

May?…if? Oh, I think "Democratic strategists" (Weisberg, Linker, et.al.) are way past the temptation and into the execution phase.

Back to Lowell:

And finally, a Boston NPR show introduces an interview podcast with these words:

But with both McCain and Giuliani carrying baggage of their own, the Mormon ex-governor of Massachusetts is still very much in the race. [Emphasis added.]

Like I said, they just can't get enough of it.

Share and Enjoy: