Note to religious right: the GOP isn’t that into you

March 27, 2006

As the “War on Christians” conference gets underway in DC today, the religious right wants the GOP establishment to know that their movement won’t be taken for granted.

Social-conservative groups have warned Republicans that their voters feel unappreciated and frustrated with Congress and that the party must get more aggressive on such values issues as marriage, human cloning, religious freedom and abortion if they want a decent turnout from the conservative base in November. […]

“I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Let’s address values issues,” wrote conservative activist Gary Bauer last week in a memo to friends and supporters, noting that 19 states have amended their state constitutions to protect marriage with an average approval vote of 70 percent, yet many lawmakers still shy away.

“What I don’t get is, why there is so much reticence on the part of our public servants to defend normal marriage beyond an obligatory press release or applause line in a stump speech?” he said.

I think Bauer is being sincere; he genuinely doesn’t understand why James Dobson’s wish list hasn’t been embraced in full by the GOP leadership as Congress’ legislative agenda. The poor guy seems to have no idea that congressional Republicans believe that giving the religious right what it wanted would be electoral suicide.

Jim Backlin, vice president for legislative affairs at the Christian Coalition, told the Washington Times, “Just those three alone — marriage, abortion and religious freedom … that would be really exciting to our grass roots, and it’d probably ensure that the Republicans keep the House and Senate.” I can’t even begin to understand what makes the Christian Coalition believe this.

First, the GOP would only drive independents and moderate Republicans further away in an election year that’s already slated to go the Dems’ way. But even more importantly, what Backlin doesn’t seem to realize is that his big-ticket demands — most notably an anti-gay constitutional amendment — won’t pass. Republicans may enjoy sizable majorities in both chambers, but there still isn’t enough support for the top religious right agenda items.

This wouldn’t motivate the far-right grassroots; it’d demoralize them. They got everything they wanted in 2004, and two years later ended up with a bunch of defeated bills? When Republicans control every branch of the federal government?

Dobson & Co. won’t like it, but 2006 will be just like every other year. The religious right will hear GOP leaders say all the right things, and then do practically nothing. If the far-right base doesn’t like it, they’ll have to teach their party a lesson and stay home in November.

Jim Backlin, vice president for legislative affairs at the Christian Coalition, told the Washington Times, “Just those three alone — marriage, abortion and religious freedom … that would be really exciting to our grass roots, and it’d probably ensure that the Republicans keep the House and Senate.”

These are the same pro-family groups that get invites from the Bush Administration to represent the United States at United Nations conferences, then caucus with the likes of Sudan or Libya to oppose liberal protections for women and children. They of course ignore the fact that there is no religious freedom in many of these countries they hang with.

Would be nice if they could do a better job of picking their friends.

  • I continue to find it amazing that our “friends” believe in beheading, growing and trafficking in opium, practical enslavement of women and children, actual enslavement in some cases, execution for non-approved religious choice, genocide, torture, etc., etc.

    And, for once, I’m not just targeting the Bush Crime Family (though they’re more brazen about it). I guess the only one who ever spoke out against such practices, actually made policy about them, was Jimmy Carter.

  • I’m not sure Dobson & Co would really (that is, sincerely) care–they get their reward in the form of our tax dollars subsidizing the faith-based boondoggle.

    What Bauer maybe doesn’t realize is that the GOP just bought out the religious right with that faith-based money, or at least those with sufficient media presence. It’s almost like a campaign contribution, buying media spokespersons. But we can’t necessarily assume Bauer is being sincere, either. Bauer could be simply acting the part and letting the grassroots let off a little steam before doing what GOP legislators always do–ultimately toe the party line.

  • If the far-right base doesn’t like it, they’ll have to teach their party a lesson and stay home in November.

    From your blog to God’s browser, Mr. Carpetbagger. We can only hope this happens.

  • The question is: How desperate will Republicans be by late Spring or early Summer?

    If things continue to go badly for them, and I get the sense things will get worse, Republicans are going to be desperate enough to embrace at least some of the Religious Right’s wish list. Reading the Washington Times story, it’s not all that clear the religious right is demanding victories on these issues. They just want these items on the legislative agenda, and for the GOP to start paying (at least) more lip service to their agenda. Republicans have already met them halfway by pledging to to bring anti-abortion, “pro-religious freedom,” anti-human cloning, anti-gay legislation up for a vote this year.

    From a red state perspective, nothing gets the loonies fired up and at the polls quite like abortion, homosexuals, and religion. Gay marriage was the hot-button issue in Missouri in 2004, and Republicans won on it in both state and federal races. Stem cell research and abortion are already shaping up to be the hot button issues in 2006. It’s easy from a “liberal” perspective to write off these issues and find good news in a split between the GOP and the Religious Right. But on election day, I think any differences will be resolved and the Religious Right will be at the polls. Democrats would be making a huge mistake by laughing this off.

  • They say that (and have said that) but Dobson or someone will be called for a one-on-one meeting with Rover or Bush or someone else and be talked down – I mean up- to on how the administration is really on their side and it is all to Democrats in Congress. They will be given promises and convince themselves that the administration does care and is trying to get them what (or some of what) they want. They will leave with a newly invigorated sense that this administration is on their side.

    Of course at some point in the not to distant future, another Schiavo or Rahman will appear or some religious nutter will obsesses over the War on Christmas, War on Easter, gay marriage, gay adoption, abortion, etc., etc., etc – that shows up in the news and this will start all over.

    They may realize they are being used and be rightly pissed over it, but I doubt they will do anything about it becuase if they do then they know they will be relegated to the nutty fringe where most of them belong and where they will igored as they should.

  • WTF do they mean by religious freedom?? In what way are they being persecuted or prevented from following their faith??

  • They really believe that they are in the majority, they’re really that delusional because they only listen to “Christian” talk and music stations and only watch Fox News.

    They are so disconnected from the real world that it’s frightening..

  • “WTF do they mean by religious freedom?? In what way are they being persecuted or prevented from following their faith??” – Pratik Patel

    They mean the right of evangelical ministers in the Air Force Academy to tell jewish students that they are going to hell if they don’t convert to christianity.

    What scares me is that these guys are chaplains in the military academy where we teach officers to fly planes that carry nuclear weapons that can be dropped on ANYTHING.

    Good by Hollywood, den of iniquity!

  • I believe by “religious freedom”, he means allowing government sponsorship of Christianity. Freedom for the fundies to dictate what marriage is, how consenting adults can have sex, what media content people can buy, etc. You know, real freedom. Oh, and maybe a law to get some of us goddamn atheists to say “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holidays”.

  • Weird how they don’t want to protect progressive churchs’ freedom to sanctify gay marriage.

  • the “war on christmas” nonsense really got me, too.

    as if. why do christians seem to always feel they are victim here – the put upon minority religion of the usa. the complex they have when denied the obvious, such as stone ten commandment monuments not belonging on court house property – or, praying not belonging in our schools. ?

    what #4 said. surely as democrats we know we can’t afford to be casual re casting a vote in november.

    whether our votes will be recorded accurately or not, is a whole ‘nother question.

  • No, no, no Edo (#4), you know God does not read liberal blogs. This is why the Washington Post didn’t feel the need to have a matching Blue State Blogger to offset their divinely chosen Red State Blogger. And they are praying over who should replace him as we speak.

  • Well, it’s nice to see that this administration will tell even their base anything they want to hear and then not follow through on it. It’s worked so far in other areas of government, so why not for the religious right. Most of them can’t read anyway. As they say down south, “Fool me once……I won’t get fooled again.”

  • Oh, hey, I remember Jimmy goin’ to baptist church every week… IMHO, those folks are sorta weird… Of course, the era of Jimmy Carter is when the religious loonies defected from the democrats to the republicans… I guess Kennedy and LBJ musta been okay for ’em, but Nixon or Ford not so much…

    Now if y’all just pointed as much hate at the religious loonies in the middle east as you do to those in our own neighborhood…

  • “Now if y’all just pointed as much hate at the religious loonies in the middle east as you do to those in our own neighborhood…” – Bogieville

    It’s called fear. Fear that they want to take away our rights (like to get a blow job from our wife, for instance).

    The Wahabi want to kill us, sure. But they are a lot further away and a lot less likely to succeed.

    Good defense means preparing against the most dangerous opponent. Right now, that means Dobson et al.

    And why can’t I hate religious extremists who are claiming I’m going to hell for my religion????

  • The dominant faction in the Republican party are the economic conservatives, whose agenda is to redistribute income and wealth from working people and the poor to the haves and have mores. For most of these people the religious conservatives are convenient ideots who serve the useful purpose of getting the poor and working people to vote for politicians who are shafting them economically.

  • # 7

    I, too, am sick and tired of the religious loonies’ incessant complaints about being they victimized.

    No one forces their women to have abortions; no one forces their children into gay relationships, and/or gay marriage; no one forces them to watch / read pornography (they don’t mind graphic violence, though); no one prevents them from worshipping whomever thay want; no one prevents them from entering their churches, etc…

    In fact, it is the religious right — a minority in this country — that wants to victimize the majority by imposing its medieval views on the rest of us.

    The “victimization” stance is just a smokescreen designed to hide these people’s real agenda: establish an American version of an oppressive theocracy.

    We have to push back as hard as we can and shout them down every time they make their preposterous “victimization” claims.

  • It’s called fear. Fear that they want to take away our rights (like to get a blow job from our wife, for instance).

    “Our” wife? Dude, you win – you are WAY more liberal than I am.

  • re: #18…

    Uh… Wealth isn’t redistributed. It is created. When I make more money, someone else doesn’t become poorer. I think the real problem at hand in our society is that we value football players and lawyers more than scientists and engineers – rap stars and “reality” tv more than doctors or _educated_ (guys, there _is_ a difference) teachers. At least for those kids who get out of government grade schools knowing how to read…

    And who are the “working people?” Most of the “wealthy” folks I know either worked their asses off to get it (and then retired), or they’re in the process of working their asses off… Going in at 6:00 in the morning, getting off at 7:00, and taking stuff home. The one thing they are NOT doing is sitting around waiting for someone to give them something. Regardless of how they’ve been teaching it in your social economics classes, wealth doesn’t materialize magically – it comes from creating and selling something.

    Oh, and I just LOVE it how some of the statistics are double-dipped… A retiree may be listed as “poor” because of a lower year-to-year income, but “rich” because of asset base. Sheesh.

    Remember that the “retirement” program that you guys are probably going to pay the most into (because most of you probably won’t save, trusting the goverment to take care of you) is non-transferable “social security.” You can’t give it to your kids.

    Also, if the mantra of a steady and static pool of wealth is correct, wouldn’t it be more efficient to take it from someone who has it?

  • Uh… Wealth isn’t redistributed. It is created.

    Wealth is created mostly by wage labor, but it most certainly is redistributed.

    When interest rates go up, wealth is redistributed upward.

    When a middle-class family survives an artificially-induced recession by cashing in their 401(k) or home equity, wealth is redistributed upward.

    When the middle class eventually has to bear increased taxes to repay massive gov’t debt, wealth is redistributed upward.

    When the government forbids itself to bid for volume discounts on drugs from big pharma, wealth is redistributed upward.

    … and on and on

  • Creation and redistribution are two different concepts. Apparently, Bogieville cannot figure his ideological ass from his economic elbow.

    And even people who got a C in an Economics 101 class know that wealth is a stock as opposed to a flow like income.

  • “The one thing they are NOT doing is sitting around waiting for someone to give them something.”

    No, the truly wealthy are using their off time, their time on the golf course or the executive locker room, to hire lobbyists to get the government to give them something–tax breaks, repeal of taxes, sweetheart government contracts, loopholes in the laws, exemptions from regulations that might squeeze their profits. The best part of it is that it comes at the expense of all those dull, unenergetic little people who don’t have the genius and ambition to get past paying their taxes and following the rules and maybe hoping that the government will keep its end of the bargains that have been made time and again over decades.

    And when those admirable wealthy people kick into high gear, they bypass the lobbyists altogether and donate enough money to get actual face-time with the capos at the table.

    Yes, the wealthy are very busy, indeed. The wanna-be’s and parvenus that are showing up at six and leaving at seven? Suckers. They’re not really members of the club; they’re visiting on a day pass.

    • Comments are closed.