"No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
As a public service, and without further comment, we post this excerpt from Dennis Prager’s radio show.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, Prejudice, Religious Bigotry | Comment on this post » | 
Print this post
| 
Email This Post
Obama said a long time ago that he was going to use “weird” as a meme in a general election run against Mitt Romney. At the time everyone knew he meant “Mormon.” But there have a been some interesting developments in the primary race that could change his mind.
Essentially, the Mormon issue has shown local appeal, but is not playing generally – and might even be backfiring with moderates and independents. Gingrich misplayed it in Florida and got trounced. Santorum’s surrogates played it and he had no traction at all. (Note to Santorum – lose this guy and lose him publicly. The plausible deniability is spent.) Iowa was a virtual tie and the Evangelical vote split in Florida. You can bet your bottom dollar the “not Romney” votes from there will either go Romney or stay home in the general – they will not go Obama.
People may indeed think Mormonism “weird,” but in a world where we are all a little weird, we don’t like being attacked for it. Tone matters too. Romney payed hardball in Florida but Gingrich was just flat out nasty. A “vitriolic” and “spiteful” Obama might not be a good idea.
Which brings me to the Obama administration’s latest swipe at folks of faith:
The Obama Administration is standing by a decision to require all insurance plans to cover the use of contraceptives, but said Friday it would give some employers an additional year to comply.
The rule, which goes into effect August 1, 2012, requires all insurance plans to cover the cost of birth control. Many non-profits with religious affiliations, such as Catholic universities and hospitals, say that will force them to violate their basic tenets.
The Department of Health and Services announced Friday those employers would have until August 1, 2013, to meet the new requirement.
The push back from the Catholic church has been enormous – you can read about here, here and here. Politically, this is a very shrewd move on Obama’s part, even if it is onerous. The policy is based on his conviction that “most Americans” think the religious prohibitions against contraception and abortion are “weird.” But as things are shaping up, that conclusion has to be called into question. By making an announcement, any announcement, he has pushed the issue to the fore so he can test the waters before the general. By making THIS announcement he has 1) appealed to his base by keeping the policy in place, 2) appealed to moderates with the “reasonable” delay, and 3) really punted the issue into the next administration – hoping inertia, or his victory in November, will prevent it from being changed.
Unfortunately, this is policy, not simply an effort to shape public perception of someone in an election cycle. This matters.
Tuesday our friend Timothy Dalrymple suggested some “course corrections” to Governor Romney. Given what an effective spokesperson against a religion test Dalrymple has been this cycle, Team Romney would do well to listen.
Point #1: It’s never, never “all about the economy.”
[...]
Point #2: Don’t give up on evangelicals. Some very public evangelicals have very publicly denounced you and your faith. Your cherished religious community, the community in which you were raised by loving parents, in which you’ve raised your own children, the same community that you have served so tirelessly over decades, was slandered as a “cult” by an influential pastor. You, ergo, were portrayed as a cult member. Many evangelical leaders defended this choice of wording, and few have spoken out even against the more obvious efflorescences of anti-Mormon bigotry. To make matters worse, an entire generation of conservative evangelical activists/leaders gathered in Texas to rally around some candidate other than you. So it would be perfectly understandable if you felt that you had little incentive — or no stomach — for further engagement with evangelicals.
[...]
Of those evangelicals who oppose you, few do so passionately, and most are compelled not by prejudice but by misinformation about your record and your positions. In other words, many evangelicals support you now, and many more are willing to support you if they can be convinced that your stances on abortion, the family and religious liberties are sincere and impassioned, and not simply assumed for political convenience.
[...]
Point #3: Own your faith.
This may be the most important point of all. Your discipline is the stuff of legend. And after your father’s campaign for the presidency ran off the rails when he referred to a “brainwashing” on the Vietnam issue, the exercise of an extraordinarily meticulous self-control has become a pervasive theme in your family. But these things are largely responsible for the “Romneybot” moniker. Your behavior seems a little too programmed, too scripted, and therefore artificial. It makes it hard for many people to connect with you. And although Richard Land meant it in a different (and incorrect) sense, I believe he was inadvertently onto something when he said you’re “not Mormon enough” for many evangelicals.
You love God. You strive to follow God’s leading in your life. Although we would differ on the metaphysics of Christ’s nature, in practice your personal relationship with Jesus Christ looks an awful lot like the one that evangelicals enjoy. These are not things that northeasterners typically wear on their sleeves, and your campaign is understandably reluctant to shine a spotlight on your Mormonism. Evangelicals would grow more uncomfortable with you if they thought you were going to be making an argument on behalf of Mormonism throughout your presidency. So you should not engage in apologetics. But they will grow more comfortable with you if they see the depth, the vitality, and the heartfelt authenticity of your relationship with God. They will grow more comfortable if they better understand your pastoral experience (let’s call it what it is) as ward bishop and stake president. You have rich experiences in missions and preaching and pastoral counseling, and in all these ways you connected with ordinary people, ordinary workers, in the struggles of everyday life.
This ruling by the Obama administration gives Romney the perfect opportunity to follow this advise – simply by getting in front of the issue. This ruling by the Obama administration could be the force that heals the rift inside the Republican coalition. Mitt Romney in front of this issue accomplishes two very important things – it pulls social conservatives into camp Romney and in so doing it neutralizes “weird.” If that happens, Obama will have no choice but to get shrill and Gingrich just showed us how that will go.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, Doctrinal Obedience, Political Strategy, Religious Bigotry, Religious Freedom, Understanding Religion | 7 Comments » | Print this post
| Email This Post
In the rush to say something, anything, after a big electoral event like Florida yesterday things can get said that are revealing. On the smart side of things Robert Costa wondered if Gingrich is now a wounded animal, often more dangerous than a healthy one:
Speaking to supporters on Monday, Gingrich was defiant. Enraged by Romney’s “dishonest” television ads, he pledged to stay in the hunt until the convention, almost out of spite.
[...]
Indeed, as Romney said tonight, addressing his cheering supporters, “a competitive primary does not divide us, it prepares us.” If he’s right, Florida will have been a tumultuous stepping stone. If not, his negative ads, along with Gingrich’s barbs, may be only the start of an extended, bitter battle.
But a wounded animal tends to lash out and not exercise strategery. Consider this tweet from an obvious Newt supporter:
This is why I can’t stand Mitt and a lot of his supporters…they are whine like a toddles and have the same level of self awareness of one.
COPY EDITOR! Honestly, I thought I was bad at typing and spelling (Thank you Lowell!). Anyway, we spent all last week looking at Gingrich’s total lack of self-awareness among his many other character flaws. Fortunately, people are not bears. When wounded they lash out, and they lash out with the increased vigor of an adrenaline rush. But such adrenaline rushes also tend to block out the higher functions of the cerebral cortex. Thus we get, “I know I am, but what are you.” If this is what we have to worry about from a wounded Team Gingrich, I have better things to worry about.
Mitt Romney may have taken his opposition to sound bit heaven to this morning. He did an interview with CNN, from which a single sentence has been excerpted and is already being tweeted and facebooked and spread throughout the land:
“I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I’ll fix it.”
Now, it’ll be interesting to watch this. Romney is, of course, talking on a policy level, not a personal concern level. But that doesn’t undo the damage such a quote can inflict. I also think that is a much more potent weapon in the general than it is now. So, will it be held in check or will its power be wasted by Team Gingrich?
Whatever, Team Romney needs to get on this fast and hard or else “I’m not concerned about the very poor,” is going to join “I was for the 47 billion before I was against it,” in the pantheon of killer sound bites.
The benevolence of the Mormon Chruch should be more renown than it is, but nobody wants to pay attention to the good stuff about the LDS. A South Carolina professor has now studied the vote out of that state and found that religion played a significant role. Well shucks, we know that – and the results out of Florida confirmed it. But people suspicious of Romney’s faith are running out of places to go. Friend David French pointed out in a special piece for CNN that Evangelicals will soon be abandoning Gingrich in droves:
But they also understand that we don’t discard our core values for the sake of political victories. Fidelity, honesty, humility and charity matter.
No one doubts that God forgives, but only God knows Newt Gingrich’s heart. We only know his actions, and we know that he has a history of deceiving even those who are closest to him.
Three other Republican candidates are anti-abortion. Three other Republican candidates have been faithful and honest in their personal and professional lives. With honest alternatives to choose from, evangelicals will soon abandon Gingrich.
Santorum is a good man that deserves a better shot than he has received, too late now. Paul is a good man, but a political looney tune. They have no place to go but to Romney.
A lot of people are worried about a divided Republican base, fortunately…
The really no longer relevant NYTimes has been carrying a series of blog posts about Mormonism. They have many ominous titles:
My favorite is the horror movie title sounding, There is a Dark Side To Mormonism. (Can you hear the organ sting?) These are all far-left hits pieces about Mormon being “anti-gay” or believing that the sexes are actually, you know, different from one another. This is all stuff we conventional Christians hold very much in common with Mormons. I believe come the general election, given this kind of attack, we will see our similarities more than our differences.
Besides, according to the left we are all crazy:
Coming this spring: The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science — and Reality by Chris Mooney.
Of course.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, Reading List | 2 Comments » | Print this post
| Email This Post
As a follow-up to our post earlier today, we add here this excerpt from Mitt Romney’s 2008 speech accepting the Becket Fund’s Canterbury Medal. The citation was for “Courage in the Defense of Religious Freedom.”
This excellent speech, showing a relaxed, confident Romney, needs to be better known.
(HT: Hot Air.)
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, Religious Freedom | Comment on this post » | Print this post
| Email This Post
Newt Gingrich accused Mitt Romney of repeatedly disregarding the religious rights of Americans at a campaign stop in Tampa Monday, telling reporters that his opponent had a “lack of concern for religious liberty.”
When it comes to how they handle faith, Gingrich said, Romney and President Barack Obama are cut from the same cloth.
“You want a war on the Catholic Church by Obama? Guess what: Romney refused to allow Catholic hospitals to have conscience in their dealing with certain circumstances,” Gingrich said, apparently referring to the handling of emergency contraception in universal health care laws.
He went on, speaking to a CNN reporter as a pack of press surrounded him: “Romney cut off kosher food to elderly Jews on Medicare. Both of them have the same lack of concern for religious liberty.”
Gingrich escalated the attack in his remarks in an airplane hangar, saying Americans deserve a “government that respects our religions.”
“I’m a little bit tired of being lectured about respecting every … religion on the planet, I would like him to respect our religion,” he said. A campaign spokesman confirmed Gingrich was referring to Romney.
What? I mean seriously – WHAT? The kosher meal crack has already been shown to be a lie. Jennifer Rubin:
His attacks on Mitt Romney have gotten loonier by the day. The latest is that Romney denied kosher meals to Medicare patients while he was governor of Massachusetts. According to the Romney camp, he issued numerous vetoes during his tenure for cost-cutting measures and restored funding for the kosher meals. The New York Post backs up Romney’s account: “The Massachusetts Legislature approved an amendment to restore the $600,000 to finance the kosher meals allowing a ‘most vulnerable segment of our population’ to ‘enjoy a special dignity,’ according to the Jewish Community Council.”
OK – lying – that’s not new with Gingrich, but he usually reserves his lies for talking about himself. Now he is lying about Romney and his record. Rubin handled the kosher meal issue pretty well. I am getting tired of people conflating Massachusetts healthcare with what Romney wanted to do. Romney vetoed efforts by the Democrat legislature to do what Gingrich complains about, and the legislature overrode the veto. There is no credible way to lay that one in Romney’s lap.
But all of that would have been just politics at their ugly usual save for that last crack by the Newtser:
“I’m a little bit tired of being lectured about respecting every … religion on the planet, I would like him to respect our religion,” he said. A campaign spokesman confirmed Gingrich was referring to Romney.
At a minimum that’s a dog whistle. Look, I understand there is a significant group of people out there who do not want to vote for Romney because of his faith - and I am sure that they are upset that their argument has been shot down to the point that virtually all reasonable people feel it illegitimate. But that does not change the facts. Apparently, however, Gingrich is willing to change some other facts in order to get that religious argument back into the debate.
What is worst of all is that in the middle of a very serious war on religion in all its expressions from the government along precisely the lines that Gingrich outlines, he is willing to aim his barbs at others on his team rather than at those that deserve the fire. Newt Gingrich clearly is about nothing but Newt Gingrich.
Everyone knows Sarah Palin, a noted Gingrich supporter, has a much-visited Facebook page. It looks like any defense of Romney’s Mormonism on Palin’s page is promptly removed. Consider these two screen shots:
See that middle post – with the girl’s picture beside it (we have erased the names for obvious reasons). It reads:
I was told if we defend the Church of Jesus Christ, Latter Day Saints, we are then banned form your Facebook page. I would hope “RELIGIOUS FREEDOM” is still part of your beliefs, and this is not true. I am a catholic, yet I have researched hte LDS< visited their headquarters in SLC when there on vacation. I have many firends who are members of the LDS, and a family member who converted to the Mormon Religion. I am sick of the bashing of a religion by supposed Conservatives and Republicans. It must end!
Now, take a look at the screenshot below. It is taken from that same place on Palin’s Facebook page about 5 hours later; the comment just quoted is missing. This blog does not provide room for us to reproduce these screenshots full size and maintain readability; just click the picture and it will come up full size.
These screenshots were sent to us by loyal reader Chanelle Jones, who emailed us. We’ll let her tell her own story:
Some one [ed. note: on the Facebook page] said that Romney was a Mormon that vowed to destroy America … which comment is still available BTW – I can find it if you want … she said a couple other things that were pretty nasty towards our religion and Romney. My brother left a comment asking that the offensive comment be removed and remember to keep Church and State seperate. His comment was deleted and then he was banned. He emailed me, frustrated, and out of couriosity I checked it out. I then left a comment pointing out that Sarah was censoring her comments and violating freedom of speech. I asked that she remember what our nation was founded on … freedom of religion … and also asked to have the offensive comments removed. One reader left a comment of “Wow … censorship?” His and my comments were then deleted and I was banned. BUT the same vile comment {and now many others} were left for all to see. I really wish I could have seen it coming and took a screen shot of it. That’s why when I saw the comment today I did and then watched it.
Well, that pretty much speaks for itself. Sarah Palin is a private citizen and entitled to handle her Facebook page as she sees fit, but she is an influential private citizen and by defending Gingrich in this fashion, she paints him with the same bigoted brush she has painted herself.
Newt Gingrich and, sadly, Sarah Palin have just disqualified themselves from serious consideration for high office.
ADDENDUM – 5 HOURS AFTER INITIAL PUBLICATION
The Wall Street Journal gives us more on Gingrich’s statements:
“He has no understanding of the importance of conscience or the importance of religious liberty in this country,” said Mr. Gingrich of Mr. Romney, who is a Mormon. “I will make religious liberty your right, to go with God with no government interference.”
Now wait just a doggone minute. I thought Newt Gingrich was an historian. And yet saying that Mitt Romney, a Mormon, “has no understanding of the importance of conscience or the importance of religious liberty in this country,” may be one of the most historically ignorant statements made in this cycle. A good deal of the religious liberty law that has been written or decided in this nation is a direct result of Mormons and their early practices. I don’t think there is a religion in this nation that has more direct experience with religious liberty than the Mormons.
This nation now stands by silently while Islamic men practice polygamy in major urban centers. Can you imagine what a different nation this would be if the same had been true for the Mormons practice? The settling of the west and the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad would be very different and less consequential stories than they actually are. Some historian.
And then, the “importance of conscience.” Well, Newt Gingrich followed his own conscience into serial adultery – ’nuff said.
Should Florida come out as the polls predict and Romney wins, we will be able to consider Gingrich’s downward spiral into this sort of ignorant pathetic tripe pitiable, but humorous. But for the next few hours at least it’s just wrong, nasty and ugly.
As to John’s comments above I’ll just note that in 2008 Mitt Romney shared the Canterbury Medal for religious freedom with Elie Wiesel and a few others.
The Canterbury Medal is the Becket Fund’s highest honor. It recognizes courage in the defense of religious liberty and is named for Canterbury Cathedral, where Thomas à Becket was martyred by the knights of King Henry II for his own defense of religious freedom. The Canterbury Medal is thus given annually to one “who has resolutely and publicly refused to render to Caesar that which is God’s.”
Gingrich’s criticism of Romney is absurd and embarrassing. A “lack of concern for religious liberty?” Oh, please.
.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications, News Media Bias, Religious Bigotry, Religious Freedom | 9 Comments » | Print this post
| Email This Post
Newt Gingrich loves history.
He will understand then why the Republican Party must not nominate him. We tried nominating an aging former Speaker of the House scarred by scandal and lost an election we should have won.
Newt Gingrich is James G. Blaine for the twenty-first century.
Like Gingrich, former Speaker Blaine was a man of amazing accomplishments and talents. Also like Gingrich he had longed for the White House, but had seen it won by lesser men.
Finally, in a weak field his time came. But a run for President of the United States has always stripped a man of every fig leaf that covers his nakedness. Few of us could stand such scrutiny and James G. Blaine could not.
He had used his time near power to enrich himself and the scandals of his past were tattooed over his record obscuring all the good he had done.
And he had done great good.
The scrutiny to be President is greater than that of almost any job and few can stand it. Rogues have become President, see Warren G. Harding, and cads have been able to do some good, see Franklin D. Roosevelt, but mostly when a roué runs he is exposed.
Even the most honorable candidate, like Theodore Roosevelt, will not have unblemished history, but the scars we see will be those of victory over human failings, not indulging in them. Blaine’s problems were captured in the political cartoon “The Tattooed Man” a terrible heritage for a man who tried to go further than character would allow.
The President of the United States has three basic jobs: head of state, head of government, and Commander in Chief. Like Blaine, Newt Gingrich has made himself unfit for all of them.
The role of head of state gives you access to the largest pulpit in the world, what Theodore Roosevelt called the “bully pulpit.” Fortunately, it is a civic pulpit and not a religious one. We are electing a civil role model to represent us to the planet on human concerns, not a pope, pastor, or priest to pray for us to God.
Some might argue that a candidate like Romney has broken the Ten Commandments by a “defective theology.” Fortunately for Governor Romney, we need him to argue for human life, liberty, and happiness—not stand as a prophet or priest before the Almighty.
Speaker Gingrich has, I am told, developed a sound theology toward divine things, but has sadly a bad history in loving humans well. If electing a President to talk about theology to the nation, the traditional Christian might prefer Gingrich to Romney.
But the bully pulpit should never be used that way and will not be used that way. Instead, in these times it must be used to defend the right to life and traditional marriage.
By his choices, Mr. Gingrich has marred his ability to make that case beyond all hope. He cannot use the bully pulpit as we need him to use it.
Mr. Gingrich has attempted the role of “head of government” in the past. A weakened Bill Clinton seemed unable to govern and Mr. Gingrich wrested control of the agenda from him.
The result was a disaster for the Republican Party and helped reelect Bill Clinton. Mr. Gingrich has never run anything successfully. His campaign this year is constantly marred by staff turnover, organizational flaws, and lack of funding. Mr. Gingrich is undisciplined mentally and rhetorically.
While a good campaigner may not be able to be a good head of government, a bad campaigner surely will never get the chance. Each failure in House leadership and failure in controlling his own “consulting” organizations branded Mr. Gingrich.
A lifetime of failure to govern leaves him unfit for the next level.
The President is also the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. As a civilian he must command non-civilians, but this requires having their respect. A President also has the ability to press the nuclear button, start a war by imprudence, or destroy the peace with an errant word.
Mr. Gingrich has never shown the prudence in speech or action we need from the man with the bomb.
None of this is to deny Mr. Gingrich’s skills. He is and has been a major player in American politics. He is a transformational figure with great gifts, but like an equally gifted man, James G. Blaine, his weaknesses mean he never will or should be President.
Like Gingrich, most of us should never run for President. We covet the grace that God gives but the media has not and never will give. We wish to be judged as men and women and not as Leaders of the Free World.
We temper our expectations to our character and past errors.
God has a good work for Mr. Gingrich, but over the years he chose to use his connections to enrich himself. That tattoo will not vanish. He indulged his desires at the expense of his character. That tattoo will not vanish. He has refused to discipline his intellect.
For his own good and the good of the party, Mr. Gingrich should retire to head a think tank or teach at a college lest he be remembered simply as a freak in the nominating show: the Tattooed Man of 2012.
Posted in Candidate Qualifications | 3 Comments » | Print this post
| Email This Post
