If the first narrative we've looked at in Rick Santorum's rise is that he could be the next Reagan (and therefore the polls showing him losing to Obama at this point would be consistent) there is a second narrative that's worth looking at. In this narrative Santorum is surging because he is the only candidate willing to challenge Obama on social grounds--specifically: Obama's religion.
The Conventional Wisdom here is that a religious war is a loser for the GOP and that social issues--in a time of recession (whatever the official numbers say) is the wrong conversation to be having. But in this narrative the economy might just recover and with the administration (in collusion with the liberal press) faking the numbers anyway, the best mode of attack is to go directly at the heart of Obama's bankrupt philosophy--the one which drives him--and attack that.
The Narrative
The narrative is this: "Obama is driven by Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist-corruption of Catholicism, which informs all his policy and behavior--this is the core of his motivation and once exposed by a righteous Christian, he will crumble."
In the narrative, Santorum is very possible that righteous Christian (Catholic).
To be sure, he's hitting Obama directly in the theology department:
What Is Necessary For This To Be True?
In order for this narrative to be true:
However, it is certainly true that Obama's religion is, if not a point of controversy, at least in question. But this may actually provide Obama with something of a unique defense against being a practitioner of BLT: no one is sure what he really is! Consider:
Well ... that settles it.
Conclusion: Although there is some question as to whether Obama is a Black Liberation Christian he is most likely Christian (even Santorum says he accepts that) and his pastor was BLT.
The 'bright-line' here is a connection, of course, between Obama's church and ObamaCare--which is said to be at best Socialist--the gateway drug to Marxism.
However, there is another 'bright-line' connection. In the coming months, especially if Mitt Romney is the nominee, it is likely we will see what the Republicans dub the class-warfare attack: making Romney out to be the 1% (well, really, the .001% or something) vs. everyone else. This stance has a particular resonance with a subset of Tea Party voters, the Tenthers.
Tenthers are people who hold strongly with the Tenth Amendment as the basis for their ideological and political outlook. The Tenth Amendment is the one that circumscribes the power of the federal government:
Oops. That compares him favorably to, uhm, Reagan. Okay, let's compare spending to % of GDP ...
That's a bit better. Anyway, 15 Trillion in debt ain't peanuts.
Conclusion: The case that Obama is theologically guided is interesting--but not convincing. It's not clear to me that even most Tenthers find the connection to theology compelling (although I think most would find the logic of it reasonable). In any event, I'm going to say this chain is weak. Lots of people including Clinton have tried to reform health care or run big government programs and have not had their religion questioned.
Would Anyone Care?
Will people care if Santorum "hits him where it counts--right in the religion?" The answer seems to be:less than they used to. Gallup finds 70-25 find that "religion is losing influence in America." Gallup also finds Americans split on the influence they wish Organized Religion to have. However, we can assume that (a) to a certain set of people religion is very important and a really bad religion would be important to many people (I think no matter what Gallup says, we are not ready for an athiest--much less, say, satanist president ... and ... unitarian ... :: shudder :: ). Consider this article which suggests (amongst many other things) Romney's Mormonism cost him votes in Iowa.
It may also be that in an economic recovery, social issues are a better play.
Over All
With religious voters Rick Santorum does, indeed, have a winning hand when it comes to President Obama. Obama's religion is an issue for the hard-core faithful. He does not inspire people to find him either seriously spiritual or, if they do, it's the wrong kind--and for this subset of people it's killer (as we see potential evidence of in Romney's Mormon issues). However, for the vast majority of voters--even religious ones--the president's faith and Santorum's attack on it is probably a gaffe. One Hot Air poster noted that even if true, those types of attacks must be made by a surrogate. I think that's where this currently stands. I don't think this narrative holds up especially well.
The Conventional Wisdom here is that a religious war is a loser for the GOP and that social issues--in a time of recession (whatever the official numbers say) is the wrong conversation to be having. But in this narrative the economy might just recover and with the administration (in collusion with the liberal press) faking the numbers anyway, the best mode of attack is to go directly at the heart of Obama's bankrupt philosophy--the one which drives him--and attack that.
The Narrative
The narrative is this: "Obama is driven by Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist-corruption of Catholicism, which informs all his policy and behavior--this is the core of his motivation and once exposed by a righteous Christian, he will crumble."
In the narrative, Santorum is very possible that righteous Christian (Catholic).
To be sure, he's hitting Obama directly in the theology department:
Santorum commented in Ohio Saturday that the president believes in "some phony ideal, some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible, a different theology."He later clarified to say this was based on Obama's environmentalism--but to some people this is either a dog whistle, a gaffe, or a back-track. This because they believe that no matter what he says later, he was right on the money.
What Is Necessary For This To Be True?
In order for this narrative to be true:
- Obama must be driven by Black Liberation Theology.
- Black Liberation Theology must inform his government policies.
- People must care once the truth is exposed.
Is Obama Driven By Black Liberation Theology?
Black Liberation Theology, according to Wikipedia:
Black liberation theology, is a relatively new theological perspective found in someChristian churches in the United States. It is an instance of the liberation theology which originated from Catholic Theologians in the 1950's. Liberation theology observes that Jesus Christ was a religious leader seeking greater justice for the oppressed and occupied people of Israel and views his teachings as both an inspiration and a model for others to seek freedom from injustice.According to this, Jeremiah Wight, Obama's controversial pastor, is, if not a BLT (ha!) practitioner himself certainly sympathetic to it and friends with one of its major writers. It is not shocking that a major black church would borrow from the movement however, and it's not a bright line to suggest that Obama himself is politically driven by what his pastor says. There are many cases where a major candidate's pastor says things that the candidate should not be held accountable for (the link is to Perry's pastor calling Mormonism a cult).
However, it is certainly true that Obama's religion is, if not a point of controversy, at least in question. But this may actually provide Obama with something of a unique defense against being a practitioner of BLT: no one is sure what he really is! Consider:
- As of 2010 one in five respondents identified Obama as a Muslim.
- Obama (in office, as of 2011) attended St. John's Episcopal Church but it was "a rare event."
- His dad was a Muslim, his mother agnostic, his grandparents ... were Unitarian.
- A lot of people suspect he's an atheist anyway (see his 'Clinging to God and Guns' comment!)
Given all of this it's got to be hard to actually pin BLT on him when any of these would work well (...Unitarian ... :: shudder ::).
We'll ask google: What Religion is Barack Obama? "Best guess for Barack Obama Religion is Christianity"
Well ... that settles it.
Conclusion: Although there is some question as to whether Obama is a Black Liberation Christian he is most likely Christian (even Santorum says he accepts that) and his pastor was BLT.
Does Black Liberation Theology Drive Government Policy?
It's pretty easy to say that any theology will drive policy. However a few specific claims are made that are worth looking at. The first is that BLT is inherently Marxist.The argument references the writings of significant BLT theologians and their discussion of Marx.
In 1979, Cornel West offered a critical integration of Marxism and black theology in his essay, "Black Theology and Marxist Thought" because of the shared human experience of oppressed peoples as victims. West sees a strong correlation between black theology and Marxist thought because "both focus on the plight of the exploited, oppressed and degraded peoples of the world, their relative powerlessness and possible empowerment." This common focus prompts West to call for "a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers" -- a dialogue that centers on the possibility of "mutually arrived-at political action."
The 'bright-line' here is a connection, of course, between Obama's church and ObamaCare--which is said to be at best Socialist--the gateway drug to Marxism.
However, there is another 'bright-line' connection. In the coming months, especially if Mitt Romney is the nominee, it is likely we will see what the Republicans dub the class-warfare attack: making Romney out to be the 1% (well, really, the .001% or something) vs. everyone else. This stance has a particular resonance with a subset of Tea Party voters, the Tenthers.
Tenthers are people who hold strongly with the Tenth Amendment as the basis for their ideological and political outlook. The Tenth Amendment is the one that circumscribes the power of the federal government:
The Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.This doesn't seem especially related to Obama's religion--but some of them link the TenthAmendment specifically to the Tenth Commandment (in case you forgot, it's the coveting one):
The Tenth Commandment: You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.For these guys the linkage is clear--the more of a big government guy you are, the more you are in violation of the 10th Commandment and therefore not a Christian! There can be little question that Obama is something of a "big government" guy: See the chart Google gives for "Government Spending Under Obama."
Oops. That compares him favorably to, uhm, Reagan. Okay, let's compare spending to % of GDP ...
That's a bit better. Anyway, 15 Trillion in debt ain't peanuts.
Conclusion: The case that Obama is theologically guided is interesting--but not convincing. It's not clear to me that even most Tenthers find the connection to theology compelling (although I think most would find the logic of it reasonable). In any event, I'm going to say this chain is weak. Lots of people including Clinton have tried to reform health care or run big government programs and have not had their religion questioned.
Would Anyone Care?
Will people care if Santorum "hits him where it counts--right in the religion?" The answer seems to be:less than they used to. Gallup finds 70-25 find that "religion is losing influence in America." Gallup also finds Americans split on the influence they wish Organized Religion to have. However, we can assume that (a) to a certain set of people religion is very important and a really bad religion would be important to many people (I think no matter what Gallup says, we are not ready for an athiest--much less, say, satanist president ... and ... unitarian ... :: shudder :: ). Consider this article which suggests (amongst many other things) Romney's Mormonism cost him votes in Iowa.
It may also be that in an economic recovery, social issues are a better play.
Santorum, especially, has a real opportunity to run a sort of populist conservative campaign. If he’s smart and disciplined (unfortunately, a big if) — Santorum could tap into his blue collar, social conservative appeal to advocate an anti-corporate cronyism and an anti-cultural elitism message. He could run a populist general election campaign against both the revolving-door, bailout-receiving “fat cats” who give millions to Obama — and against the big Hollywood cultural elites working to undermine traditional American institutions.But most of the people I'm seeing don't think so:
With Santorum launching one social issues bomb after another, there is no time to talk about the economy. Is this the Democratic Party’s dream, or what? In a national poll that came out today, Santorum is leading Mitt Romney by eight points among likely Republican voters. Can Republicans possibly be that foolish? Is it conceivable that a president with Obama’s lousy record could coast to victory, virtually by default, because the Republicans nominate a candidate who would rather talk about gynecology than debt? At the moment, that prospect does not seem far-fetched.Conclusion: Even if Rick Santorum is the ultimate culture warrior the smart money says this is not the way to win the 2012 election. The religious thrust might have been more powerful decades ago--but today it's a real risk.
Over All
With religious voters Rick Santorum does, indeed, have a winning hand when it comes to President Obama. Obama's religion is an issue for the hard-core faithful. He does not inspire people to find him either seriously spiritual or, if they do, it's the wrong kind--and for this subset of people it's killer (as we see potential evidence of in Romney's Mormon issues). However, for the vast majority of voters--even religious ones--the president's faith and Santorum's attack on it is probably a gaffe. One Hot Air poster noted that even if true, those types of attacks must be made by a surrogate. I think that's where this currently stands. I don't think this narrative holds up especially well.
No comments:
Post a Comment