Bill Frist’s decision to participate in a Family Research Council conference on Dems’ alleged opposition to religious judicial nominees is turning into a real fiasco. What was once just another venue to tout the nuclear option has quickly become a public relations problem for which there is no easy escape route.
For one thing, negotiating with Senate Dems after implicitly accusing them of anti-Christian bigotry is a little tricky. At this point, in fact, Dems are apoplectic. Harry Reid said last last week that Frist’s role in the far-right confere is “really beyond the pale. He should rise above this. God does not take part in partisan politics.” Dick Durbin agreed saying, “This goes too far, and I hope Sen. Frist would stop and reflect.”
But forget the Dems for a moment; Frist’s role in this extremist event is generating a problem for the Majority Leader that has exceeded merely offending Senate Dems. Indeed, Frist now has to deal with Senate Republicans who sound disappointed in his decision. Lindsey Graham, for example, told Newsweek, “Questioning a senator’s motives in that way is a very dangerous precedent. That goes to a level where the Senate has never gone before. It is a very unhealthy turn of events.”
Likewise, Chuck Hagel, whose help Frist desperately needs, sounded displeased on CNN yesterday.
“When we talk religion and government, neither should become an instrument for the other. And I see drifting here in different directions that are I don’t think healthy, for our country.”
When Wolf Blitzer followed up and asked if Hagel would prefer Frist didn’t participate in the FRC event, Hagel said he wouldn’t second-guess Frist’s decisions, but added, “But again I say neither religion nor government should become an instrument for the other.”
In addition to offending Dems and worrying Republicans, Frist has upset the Jewish community — in part because of his coziness with Christian extremists and in part because the FRC conference coincides with Passover.
There’s the ADL…
Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said in a statement that he was “deeply troubled” by Dr. Frist’s participation. “Whatever one’s views may be on this or any other issue,” Mr. Foxman said, “playing the religious card is as unacceptable as playing the race card.”
…as well as David Saperstein.
Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, said Frist’s participation “is more than troubling. It is disingenuous, dangerous and demagogic.” He said the Senate leader “must not give legitimacy to those who claim they hold a monopoly on faith.”
And as if that weren’t enough, Frist has also outraged influential newspaper editorial boards. Newsweek’s “CW Watch” column said Frist’s argument — that “all against him are anti-faith” — is “shameless.” The Washington Post, meanwhile, said Frist’s decision to participate in this conference is “beyond the pale.”
Mr. Frist is not responsible for the rhetoric of others. But it will be a distressing new low in the debased debate over judges if the Senate leader appears at an event predicated on slander, unless he makes clear that he does not condone such slander. Whatever one says about the aggressive Democratic use of the filibuster — which we do not support — it simply is not motivated by anti-religious sentiment. There are people of faith and goodwill on both sides of the issue. If he attends, Mr. Frist should make clear that he knows as much.
And the New York Times had a tremendous item on the subject over the weekend.
Right-wing Christian groups and the Republican politicians they bankroll have done much since the last election to impose their particular religious views on all Americans. But nothing comes close to the shameful declaration of religious war by Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, over the selection of judges for federal courts…. It is one thing when private groups foment this kind of intolerance. It is another thing entirely when it’s done by the highest-ranking member of the United States Senate, who swore on the Bible to uphold a Constitution that forbids the imposition of religious views on Americans.
In my heart of hearts, I suspect Bill Frist just wanted another right-wing evangelical audience to talk about the nuclear option. Chances are, his staff saw that the FRC was hosting an event and Frist asked if he could have a few minutes for his filibuster pitch. He may very well not have even known that the conference was going to lash out at Dems as being anti-Christian.
But the FRC did and now Frist is stuck. Does he back out and end the controversy? If he does, he risks upsetting a powerful religious right group in advance of his presidential campaign. On the other hand, if Frist keeps his role in this right-wing conference, he’ll be seen as an extremist and will further damage his already-weak standing.
Decisions, decisions.