The Ugliness to Come
I am not happy at the prospect that Mitt Romney will be the Republican Party nominee in 2012. I regard with horror his embrace of Romneycare, his willingness to tout that tyrannical measure as “a model for the other states” and “a model for the nation,” his misrepresentation of what it means for the people of Massachusetts, and his statement in June of this year – well after the anthropogenic global warming campaign had been exposed as a scam – that
I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that. I don’t know how much our contribution is to that, because I know that there have been periods of greater heat and warmth in the past but I believe we contribute to that. And so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.
And I don’t buy the argument, made by a Romney supporter on this site, that statements like this one constitute “tepid lip service to warmism” on the part of a man who is opposed to government action in this sphere – for this amounts to saying, “Trust him. He’s lying.” No politician can say what he has said without, at the same time, recommending government action. The latter is implicit in the former. I would like to see the Republican Party nominate a candidate opposed in principle to the individual mandate, willing to denounce junk science, hostile to social engineering, and eager to roll back in every way feasible the administrative entitlements state -- and I find it hard to believe that Mitt Romney is such a man.
It is one thing, however, to criticize Governor Romney on the basis of his record in and out of office and on the basis of the political stands he has taken. It is another thing to inject religion into the debate. I do not know a great deal about Mormon doctrine, and I am not much interested in exploring the details. I do know a fair number of Mormons, however. I have spoken at Brigham Young University on a number of occasions in the past, and I am scheduled to do so again on Thursday, 3 November (I will also be giving a paper at Yale University on Monday, 31 October). I am sure that there are scoundrels who are Mormons. Every other faith with which I am familiar has its fair share. But the Mormons I have met are an admirable lot. The men are manly; the women are feminine; and they are all thoughtful. I do not fully know how the Mormon Church does this. But my experience is that it forms men and women of good character – and that is the only regard in which I think it legitimate to weigh Mitt Romney’s religion when judging him as a potential Republican Presidential nominee. I wish that the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, my own denomination, was as effective as the Mormon Church appears to be in the moral formation of its members, and I suspect that we have a thing or two to learn from the Mormons.
I was not surprised that Robert Jeffress, a Baptist pastor from Texas who is a Rick Perry supporter, injected the religious question into the debate. There is bad blood between Mormons and evangelical Christians; and, in the 2008 race, Mike Huckabee, to his shame, exploited those resentments. Nor was I surprised that the comedian Bill Maher raised the matter in his routine at George Washington University on Saturday night. He is notorious as an anti-religious bigot.
But I would not have thought that Maureen Dowd – who was reared a Catholic and is old enough to remember the anti-Catholic bigotry displayed by some evangelical Protestant ministers in 1960, when John F. Kennedy was a Presidential candidate – should have contributed to this. But contribute she did in yesterday’s New York Times.
I will not dignify her piece by quoting from it. To be frank, her willingness to stir this witch’s brew makes me sick. You can and should read it with care yourself – for it is a portent of the ugliness that is to come. If Mitt Romney is our nominee – as, I suspect, he will be – Barack Obama and those within the establishment media who made up what one member of Journolist so accurately described in 2008 as “the unofficial campaign” are going to do everything within their power to fan the embers of religious bigotry in this country.
I would like to think that this would have no great effect. To this end, we and others like us should do everything that we can to shame into silence not only those in our own midst, such as Robert Jeffress, but also the Bill Mahers and the Maureen Dowds of the world. If Governor Romney is to be found wanting by Republicans or by the American electorate, it should be on the basis of his record as a businessman, his political record as Governor of Massachusetts, and his public statements – and not on the basis of the faith of his fathers.
Herman Cain and Rick Perry, the time is now. You and your supporters could do yourselves and your country no end of good by denouncing Bill Maher and Maureen Dowd! The only legitimate questions are: what sort of man is Mitt Romney, what is his record of accomplishment, and what does he really think about the issues before the country. The theology of the Mormon Church is politically irrelevant.
- Comment (112)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
May '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Paul A. Rahe
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
katievs:
The separation of church and state (which I endorse completely) does not mean that religion is to be relegated to the private sphere. · Oct 20 at 10:49am
It does not mean that the moral beliefs taught by a religious faith have no influence on the conduct of its members in the public square, but the religion itself is a private matter. · Oct 20 at 12:22pm
I disagree that this is what it means. Nor does the view seem to me borne out by our history where vigorous public debate on religious questions and matters has been the norm, and along with public religious expression.
What our form of government doesn't allow is a religious test for office (e.g. only Protestant Christians are eligible) or federal laws that either establish or curtail the free exercise of religion.
It does allow though--of course it allows--for questions and problems related to religious teachings and potential bearings on public life to be raised and debated openly.
Dec '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
The difficulty posed by Islam has little or nothing to do with theology and dogma. It has to do with a refusal on the part of Muslims to accept that, in a modern, liberal political community, religion is a private matter.
Their religion does not permit the separation of church and state. That's the problem.
...
Aren't the new constitutions of Afghanistan and Iraq based on Sharia Law and fundamentalist Islamic theology? Both Egypt and Libya seem to be on a trajectory to fundamentalist Islamic governance.
Which Muslim countries have any meaningful separation of church and state ... Turkey? Indonesia? · Oct 20 at 12:04pm
Tunisia, for sure. Turkey, to some extent. Indonesia, perhaps. The problem is that Islam as a religion carries with it a Holy Law. Some Protestants think -- or once thought -- in similar terms. The law of the Massachusetts Bay Colony came from Deuteronomy and Leviticus. · Oct 20 at 12:30pm
Professor, how do you have the time to write so prolifically? You surely are the Mozart of political analysis!
May '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Beasley I think it has far less to do with the religious merits of one particular theology or another, and more to do with how reasonable the beliefs a person subscribes to are. ....
It's not about one particular theology vs. another, but what a person has rationally accepted as truth vs. what is accepted by the general public. ·
And who gets to decide who are the arbiters of what is 'reasonable'? Evangelicals? Catholics? The secular Left? As our nation gets more and more secular and godless, it will become more likely that the general public will reject any devoutly religious person.
Remember the hell they put John Ashcroft through because he had the nerve to be an Evangelical Christian? How about, more recently, how Michele Bachmann had to defend her Biblical beliefs about wives being submissive to their husbands? Given the opportunity, the Left will not just paint Mormons as kooks, believe me. And by joining in to denounce Mormon beliefs, Evangelicals are only condoning future, similar treatment of people of ALL faiths, themselves included.
May '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Beasley: Some may say that this is below the civility level of Ricochet, but I would recomend that anyone interested watch the episode of SouthPark titled "All about the Mormons." It's a 22 minute history of the church. It is not flattering, but it is not fictional either. It cherry picks things many would refer to as absurdities, related to the church's founding.
These are the points that will be brought up the moment Romney is the nominee. And they will be points Romney or a surrogate will need to deflect.
I hope you are not suggesting that people will watch this to actually learn about the Church's history. That would be absurd since this is a comedy cartoon made by people hostile to the Church and (I presume) religion in general. Similar cherry-picking, mocking cartoons could be made about any denomination, obviously.
I think how you intend this is for people to watch it to find out what kind of attacks the Left will make on a Mormon candidate. Yes, if Romney is the nominee we must brace ourselves for (as Prof. Rahe called it) the ugliness to come.
Apr '11
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Beasley: SouthPark titled "All about the Mormons." ... It cherry picks things many would refer to as absurdities, related to the church's founding.
These are the points that will be brought up the moment Romney is the nominee. And they will be points Romney or a surrogate will need to deflect.
In the wonderful book, How I Won the War, the narrator, a British platoon commander, finds himself at the end of WWII, trying to keep peace between the Communists and the anti-Communists in a Greek village. He adopted the tactic, whenever one side or the other brought a complaint, of throwing in a bit of cricket-based slang. When the Greeks said "Wha'?", he would start reading from the cricket rule book. When the Brits withdrew, the Greeks were forming a Reds vs. Whites cricket league.
Likewise, we should have ready a list of rejoinders:
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."no sillier than the labor theory of value."
<<"Mormon woof-woof">>..."no sillier than the idea that taxing the productive will increase productivity."
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."at least they don't think the country is full of 'shovel-ready' projects".
<<"Mormon woof-woof">>..."but they don't run a Cash-for-Clunkers program that buys oil for $600/barrel".
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."at least they don't believe we can replace oil wells with windmills".
Additions to the list are invited.
Edited on October 20, 2011 at 10:19pmJun '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Paul A. Rahe
Colin B Lane
Samwise Gamgee
Colin B Lan
No one is suggesting that religion should not "remain in our discussions."
Paul A. Rahe
The theology of the Mormon Church is politically irrelevant. ·
Oct 20 at 11:53am
I happen to think the two statements are very compatible, but not explicable in a way that will honor the 200 word limit or recognize that 68 comments in, you and I might be the only two left on this thread. I suspect over a glass of wine, we could reach violent agreement on this one. · Oct 20 at 12:03pm
I agree. · Oct 20 at 12:27pm
Oh, so the fact that Romney is a Mormon is relevant but not what Mormons actually profess?
makes sense....
Jul '11
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Beasley
CandE:
I'm not saying it should be an issue, I'm just betting that come general election time, it will be. · Oct 20 at 12:07pm
Edited on Oct 20 at 12:14 pm
Thanks for clarifying that. I see your point, and unfortunately there are people who will sink to that level of bigotry (Mr. Gamgee's protestations notwithstanding, it's an apt description of this decision making process). We've already seen evidence that Obama intends to play this card.
If Romney does become the nominee, my response to people who pull out the "Mormonism is weird" card will be the same that I posted earlier: Go on the candidates record, not suppositions about their theology. If you really think the church matters, then look at the leaders' and members' doings, not their dogma.
-E
Re: The Ugliness to Come
jetstream
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
The difficulty posed by Islam has little or nothing to do with theology and dogma. It has to do with a refusal on the part of Muslims to accept that, in a modern, liberal political community, religion is a private matter.
Their religion does not permit the separation of church and state. That's the problem.
...
Aren't the new constitutions of Afghanistan and Iraq based on Sharia Law and fundamentalist Islamic theology? Both Egypt and Libya seem to be on a trajectory to fundamentalist Islamic governance.
Which Muslim countries have any meaningful separation of church and state ... Turkey? Indonesia? · Oct 20 at 12:04pm
Tunisia, for sure. Turkey, to some extent. Indonesia, perhaps. The problem is that Islam as a religion carries with it a Holy Law. Some Protestants think -- or once thought -- in similar terms. The law of the Massachusetts Bay Colony came from Deuteronomy and Leviticus. · Oct 20 at 12:30pm
Professor, how do you have the time to write so prolifically? You surely are the Mozart of political analysis! · Oct 20 at 12:41pm
Single malt Scotch helps.
Re: The Ugliness to Come
concerned citizen
Beasley I think it has far less to do with the religious merits of one particular theology or another, and more to do with how reasonable the beliefs a person subscribes to are. ....
It's not about one particular theology vs. another, but what a person has rationally accepted as truth vs. what is accepted by the general public. ·
And who gets to decide who are the arbiters of what is 'reasonable'? Evangelicals? Catholics? The secular Left? As our nation gets more and more secular and godless, it will become more likely that the general public will reject any devoutly religious person.
Remember the hell they put John Ashcroft through because he had the nerve to be an Evangelical Christian? How about, more recently, how Michele Bachmann had to defend her Biblical beliefs about wives being submissive to their husbands? Given the opportunity, the Left will not just paint Mormons as kooks, believe me. And by joining in to denounce Mormon beliefs, Evangelicals are only condoning future, similar treatment of people of ALL faiths, themselves included. · Oct 20 at 1:02pm
Amen.
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Samwise Gamgee
Paul A. Rahe
Colin B Lane
Samwise Gamgee
Colin B Lan
No one is suggesting that religion should not "remain in our discussions."
Paul A. Rahe
The theology of the Mormon Church is politically irrelevant. ·
Oct 20 at 11:53am
I happen to think the two statements are very compatible, but not explicable in a way that will honor the 200 word limit or recognize that 68 comments in, you and I might be the only two left on this thread. I suspect over a glass of wine, we could reach violent agreement on this one. · Oct 20 at 12:03pm
I agree. · Oct 20 at 12:27pm
Oh, so the fact that Romney is a Mormon is relevant but not what Mormons actually profess?
makes sense.... · Oct 20 at 1:34pm
What Mormons profess that is pertinent to public policy might well be pertinent. But, as far as I can tell they profess nothing that is pertinent to public policy that observant Jews, Catholics, Baptists, and Presbyterian do not also profess. His being a Mormon is no big deal . . . for us politically. It may be -- it probably is -- a big deal for him personally.
Sep '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
The difficulty posed by Islam has little or nothing to do with theology and dogma. It has to do with a refusal on the part of Muslims to accept that, in a modern, liberal political community, religion is a private matter.
Their religion does not permit the separation of church and state. That's the problem.
...
A
Single malt Scotch helps. · Oct 20 at 2:10pm
It also increases mental acuity during live chats.
Dec '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
concerned citizen
Beasley I think it has far less to do with the religious merits of one particular theology or another, and more to do with how reasonable the beliefs a person subscribes to are. ....
It's not about one particular theology vs. another, but what a person has rationally accepted as truth vs. what is accepted by the general public. ·
And who gets to decide who are the arbiters of what is 'reasonable'? Evangelicals? Catholics? The secular Left? As our nation gets more and more secular and godless, it will become more likely that the general public will reject any devoutly religious person.
(...) Given the opportunity, the Left will not just paint Mormons as kooks, believe me. And by joining in to denounce Mormon beliefs, Evangelicals are only condoning future, similar treatment of people of ALL faiths, themselves included. ·
I absolutely agree. My fear is that the media will continue to proclaim themselves the arbiter regardless of the reasonableness of their own positions. I hope that evangelicals don't jump on that bandwagon, but after their broad support for Obama in 2008, I really don't know what to expect.
Dec '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
concerned citizen
Beasley: Some may say that this is below the civility level of Ricochet, but I would recomend that anyone interested watch the episode of SouthPark titled "All about the Mormons." It's a 22 minute history of the church. It is not flattering, but it is not fictional either. It cherry picks things many would refer to as absurdities, related to the church's founding..
I hope you are not suggesting that people will watch this to actually learn about the Church's history. That would be absurd since this is a comedy cartoon made by people hostile to the Church and (I presume) religion in general. Similar cherry-picking, mocking cartoons could be made about any denomination, obviously.
I think how you intend this is for people to watch it to find out what kind of attacks the Left will make on a Mormon candidate. Yes, if Romney is the nominee we must brace ourselves for (as Prof. Rahe called it) the ugliness to come. · Oct 20 at 1:14pm
Your second point is where I was headed, though I'm finding I was not as clear as I thought.
Dec '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Grendel
In the wonderful book, How I Won the War, the narrator, a British platoon commander, finds himself at the end of WWII, trying to keep peace between the Communists and the anti-Communists in a Greek village. He adopted the tactic, whenever one side or the other brought a complaint, of throwing in a bit of cricket-based slang. When the Greeks said "Wha'?", he would start reading from the cricket rule book. When the Brits withdrew, the Greeks were forming a Reds vs. Whites cricket league.
Likewise, we should have ready a list of rejoinders:
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."no sillier than the labor theory of value."
<<"Mormon woof-woof">>..."no sillier than the idea that taxing the productive will increase productivity."
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."at least they don't think the country is full of 'shovel-ready' projects".
<<"Mormon woof-woof">>..."but they don't run a Cash-for-Clunkers program that buys oil for $600/barrel".
<<"Mormon blah-blah">>..."at least they don't believe we can replace oil wells with windmills".
This is terrific.
There's is an intellectual itch I've been trying to scratch all afternoon on this thread, and this really did the trick. Thank you.
I beg pardon of anyone who may be feeling cross at me for going about it in a somewhat clumsy manner, I meant no offense.
Edited on October 21, 2011 at 12:16amMay '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Pseudodionysius
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
The difficulty posed by Islam has little or nothing to do with theology and dogma. It has to do with a refusal on the part of Muslims to accept that, in a modern, liberal political community, religion is a private matter.
Their religion does not permit the separation of church and state. That's the problem.
...
A
Single malt Scotch helps. · Oct 20 at 2:10pm
It also increases mental acuity during live chats. · Oct 20 at 2:28pm
It somehow doesn't have that effect on me. I did learn from my Irish grandfather to love single malt. He drank it till he died just shy of 100.
Re: The Ugliness to Come
katievs
Pseudodionysius
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
Paul A. Rahe
jetstream
katievs
Paul A. Rahe
The difficulty posed by Islam has little or nothing to do with theology and dogma. It has to do with a refusal on the part of Muslims to accept that, in a modern, liberal political community, religion is a private matter.
Their religion does not permit the separation of church and state. That's the problem.
...
A
Single malt Scotch helps. · Oct 20 at 2:10pm
It also increases mental acuity during live chats. · Oct 20 at 2:28pm
It somehow doesn't have that effect on me. I did learn from my Irish grandfather to love single malt. He drank it till he died just shy of 100. · Oct 20 at 3:16pm
Let him be an example to me. I want to live long enough to be able to take my wife out to dinner when she is two-thirds my age.
Mar '11
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Robert Jeffress is a convenient club with which the MSM may bash Perry for his beliefs. If Romney wins the nomination, his beliefs become the club with which he will be bashed.
I am a Lutheran, not especially evangelical no matter what the church renamed itself in 1988. I've worked with Mormons before and one was one of the handful of bosses I've had who never once told me a demonstrable lie. (His boss could lie to a preacher about what's in the Bible.) If it is Mitt, I expect to hear a lot from the MSM about Mormon theology. Some of it might even be true, but some of it will undoubtedly be vile slander. Some of it will be theologically amusing, theologically infuriating, or theologically irrelevant.
None of it -- none of it -- will affect my vote come November 6, 2013.
Unfortunately, I do think that there will be those who are affected. I just hope that it isn't enough to give us four more years of this rubbish.
Re: The Ugliness to Come
Percival: Robert Jeffress is a convenient club with which the MSM may bash Perry for his beliefs. If Romney wins the nomination, his beliefs become the club with which he will be bashed.
I am a Lutheran, not especially evangelical no matter what the church renamed itself in 1988. I've worked with Mormons before and one was one of the handful of bosses I've had who never once told me a demonstrable lie. (His boss could lie to a preacher about what's in the Bible.) If it is Mitt, I expect to hear a lot from the MSM about Mormon theology. Some of it might even be true, but some of it will undoubtedly be vile slander. Some of it will be theologically amusing, theologically infuriating, or theologically irrelevant.
None of it -- none of it -- will affect my vote come November 6, 2013.
Unfortunately, I do think that there will be those who are affected. I just hope that it isn't enough to give us four more years of this rubbish. · Oct 20 at 4:38pm
Amen.
Oct '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come
The Amazing aspect of Romney's already closing the deal is that he is a sure loser in November of 2012. It would have been like George H. Bush running against Jimmy Carter in 1980. Carter gets re-elected. We also have no Reagan in 2012.
Bain Capital is a private equity investment business. The classic business that Bain did during Romney's tenure was to buy businesses in trouble and turn them around. It worked about 45% to 65% of the time during Romney's tenure, depending on what you read.
The first step in any turned around by a company like Bain is to immediately fire people. Romney's Romney Care and Obama Care are mandatory and force people to buy health insurance.Romney made his money by firing people will be the commercials.
Romney talks about being the private sector, but never explains what he did specifically. The other Republicans either have no idea what Bain did or amazingly do not see it as a venerability. The fact no one sees this or comments on here on Ricochet as a problem is stunning. Romney is a loser in 2012.
Oct '10
Re: The Ugliness to Come