Danforth gives GOP excellent advice … which they will no doubt ignore

No matter how persuasive or accurate their claims, when a Democrat insists that Republicans are overly influenced by far-right theocratic conservatives, it falls on deaf ears. But when Republicans say the same thing about their own party, it’s time to take notice.

Connecticut’s Chris Shays (R), for example, sounded pretty disgusted when he told the New York Times, “This Republican Party of Lincoln has become a party of theocracy.” Former New Jersey governor and former EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman (R) has been making similar comments for months.

But, much to my chagrin, these two are dismissed as New England RINOs whose opinions aren’t relevant to the party or its leaders. What Republicans really need is a respected figure who has offers a similar message, but whose judgment carries more weight.

John Danforth, who had an incredible op-ed column in the New York Times today, fits the bill perfectly.

By a series of recent initiatives, Republicans have transformed our party into the political arm of conservative Christians. The elements of this transformation have included advocacy of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, opposition to stem cell research involving both frozen embryos and human cells in petri dishes, and the extraordinary effort to keep Terri Schiavo hooked up to a feeding tube.

Standing alone, each of these initiatives has its advocates, within the Republican Party and beyond. But the distinct elements do not stand alone. Rather they are parts of a larger package, an agenda of positions common to conservative Christians and the dominant wing of the Republican Party.

The essay gives every indication that this is a man who’s not only disappointed, but is stunned to see his party stray so far from its foundation.

It’s important to note that Danforth is not just some Rockefeller Republican from the northeast. He’s an “elder statesman” in the GOP after a career that’s included stints as Missouri’s attorney general, a three-term U.S. senator, and Bush’s Ambassador to the United Nations. Perhaps more importantly, Danforth is not a secularist, anxious to separate Republicans from matters of faith — he’s an Episcopal minister.

Bush recently described Danforth as “a man of strong convictions, unquestioned integrity, and great decency. He is a man of calm and judicious temperament.” That’s an assessment that is shared broadly throughout the GOP establishment, which is what makes his op-ed today all the more significant.

[I]n recent times, we Republicans have allowed this shared agenda to become secondary to the agenda of Christian conservatives. As a senator, I worried every day about the size of the federal deficit. I did not spend a single minute worrying about the effect of gays on the institution of marriage. Today it seems to be the other way around.

The historic principles of the Republican Party offer America its best hope for a prosperous and secure future. Our current fixation on a religious agenda has turned us in the wrong direction. It is time for Republicans to rediscover our roots.

Notice that it may have been the Schiavo matter that brought these concerns to the forefront, but Danforth sees his party taking its marching orders from the religious right on a host of policy issues, including conservatives’ beloved constitutional amendment on gay marriage.

The question then becomes whether the Republicans will heed Danforth’s advice. Since far-right Christian conservatives call the shots with the GOP at the federal level and in state parties nationwide, it seems unlikely we’ll see changes anytime soon. At a minimum, however, Danforth’s shot across Tom DeLay’s bow should generate some necessary discussion about the guiding principles of the party.

Its about time. Maybe even the Repugs are waking up to the fact that they are being railroaded into a corner.

  • The Republicans are in a catch 22 in this situation. The religious right is a notoriously prickly group and need to be constanly coddled or they’ll quickly pack up their toys and leave but looking like pawns of the religious right will inexorably erode public support for the GOP. Such is life when you pander to extremists.

  • While my seat in a hotbed of Republicanism my be skewing my viewpoint, I gotta take issue with ChiJohn…the Reps I know aren’t being railroaded, they’re running as far to the right as fast as they can, and dragging the country with them.

    Disclaimer: My opinions are not representative of Indiana University, or of the reactionary, elitist, neo-con policies of Mitch Daniels and his drooling syncophants; and will undoubtedly result in my being abducted into a “State of Indiana” RV by black-suited agents of some unknown Hoosier security agency…

  • W/r/t Danforth. He is an Episcopalian as am I. I just wanted to pint out that although Danforth is a minister, as are all Christians, it is more appropriate to refer to him as an Episcopal priest. That is, unless you’re some kind of Roman Catholic trying to make a point about the validity of our orders.

  • I don’t think Danforth’s opinion will have any effect on the Repubs whatsoever. They’re already too far gone.

    How long before Danforth is made to publicly grovel at the feet of the “true Rebublicans” and beg for forgiveness, or is vilified as an unpatriotic terrorist sympathizer when he doesn’t?

  • Why shouldn’t the religious right be prickly? For most of the 20th century, GOP policies were not the stuff that grass roots movements are made of. ‘What’s good for GM is good for the country’ may resonate with the uber rich, and even some uber rich wanna-be’s, but it doesn’t exactly inspire average citizens to hit the streets and campaign door to door. This, coupled with the advantages of incumbancy and the then relatively low congressional wages, helped keep Democrats in the majority at the Federal, and many State levels for literally decades.

    Once the GOP began pandering to the religious right, it gained something it had previously lacked – highly motivated ground troops. But, for all the bluster, the fanatics have seen very little in the form of payback. This was no big deal as long as the GOP could point and say ‘If only we controlled…’ But now that the GOP has control of all three branches of government – even the not-so-bright may begin to suspect that promises of a theocracy in the past were, perhaps, less than sincere.

    But, I think that the fanatics should not give up hope. Prescription benefits, huge deficits, unchecked profiteering in Iraq, and a continuous assault on civil liberties have put non-religious conservatives and libertarian leaning moderates on notice that the GOP has no serious interest in their values or causes. The President’s current budget and nation wide assault on social security is pretty much a direct attack on not just the urban poor, but the well being of many ‘red’ state residents as well. If you hose your fellow travellers on principle, and hurt your non-boardroom base in its pocket book, options seriously erode.

    I think that the GOP will become ever more openly theocratic, at least in the short term. Maybe Shrub won’t openly declare himself as the Second Coming, but hate, fear, and fanaticism are really the only game plan his team knows.

    -jjf

  • Danforth’s family is way too rich for them to force him to do anything. And his political career is over, so they can’t threaten him that way. OTOH the wingnuts will never listen to him.

  • I’ve said it before and I will say it a million times. I have no real problem with right wing radical religious nutball representatives and senators pushing their agenda. I am much more offended by the so called moderate republicans who have rolled over and empowered these clowns to do what they are doing. They are the ones who have allowed this to happen, and they are the ones who at this moment of time can stop this nonsense. But they don’t as they are afraid. Spineless bitches. All of them. Especially the poodle McCain.

  • I’d feel better about Danforth if he hand’t thrown himself so eagerly into the mudpit on behalf of his hack protege, Clarence Thomas. I think we’re haggling about the price here.

  • David Swan, Forget not the other side of that equation. If the religious radicals pack up their bags, where would they go with them?

  • I suspect that many evangelical Christians would be reluctant to regard John Danforth as a fellow Christian. After all, evangelicals define the Christian faith as “having a personal relationship with the Lord,” and I don’t think Episcopalians qualify, even (or especially) if they’re priests.

    And didn’t Pat Robertson once identify Episcopalians and Presbyterians as apostles of Satan?

  • I’d just like to point out that it was only a few short months ago that Democrats wanted to emulate this “values” bullshit and “learn to talk about religion.” Guess what? Not talking about religion is often the way most Americans want their POLITICIANS to talk about religion.

  • Comments are closed.