The Romney Paradox
Thursday December 6, 2007
Background: The Establishment Clause
Although Mike Huckabee leads the polls in Iowa, the narrative of the Republican primaries seems to center on two candidates: Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. My gut tells me that one of these two men will most likely end up as the Republican nominee, both because of their ability to raise funds and because they have done an excellent job of establishing themselves as leaders for their respective wings of the party. In Giuliani you have the tough-on-crime, secular, neoconservative New York Republican. His extramarital affair with the woman who is now his third wife led him to end his second marriage by press conference. He is also pro-choice, pro-gay, and unabashedly modern.
Then you have Mitt Romney. He used to be a secular, all-business Republican, too--but he gave it all up to run for President. Now he's no longer pro-choice, no longer pro-gay, no longer all that modern in his thinking. And unlike Giuliani, he has a personal history that matches his policy platform: He and his wife will be celebrating their 40th wedding anniversary next year, and his five adult sons are his most visible campaign volunteers.
Despite his complicated history on social issues as Massachusetts governor, he has done an excellent job of presenting himself as the Religious Right's ideal presidential candidate. Oh, except for one thing: He's a Mormon.
In a secular, modern America--one led by a Democrat or by somebody like, say, Rudy Giuliani--this wouldn't matter. It shouldn't ever matter. The President of the United States was never supposed to be the high priest of some imaginary Church of the United States. Article VI of the Constitution even goes so far as to say that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
But among some elements of the Republican base--the folks who make a big issue of the fact that Barack Obama spent part of his early childhood in a predominantly Muslim country--religious orthodoxy matters. When a February 2007 Gallup poll reported that 24% of likely voters would not support an otherwise qualified Mormon for president (in a similar 1999 poll, the number was 21%), it highlighted a serious problem that Mitt Romney must face. If he is to be the candidate of the Religious Right, he has to explain why he is a better Christian than his more theologically orthodox opponents, one of whom (Huckabee) is an ordained Southern Baptist minister.
And as Salon.com's Andrew O'Hehir points out, Romney can't do this by using a Kennedy-style argument for religious pluralism:
See also:
|
Then you have Mitt Romney. He used to be a secular, all-business Republican, too--but he gave it all up to run for President. Now he's no longer pro-choice, no longer pro-gay, no longer all that modern in his thinking. And unlike Giuliani, he has a personal history that matches his policy platform: He and his wife will be celebrating their 40th wedding anniversary next year, and his five adult sons are his most visible campaign volunteers.
Despite his complicated history on social issues as Massachusetts governor, he has done an excellent job of presenting himself as the Religious Right's ideal presidential candidate. Oh, except for one thing: He's a Mormon.
In a secular, modern America--one led by a Democrat or by somebody like, say, Rudy Giuliani--this wouldn't matter. It shouldn't ever matter. The President of the United States was never supposed to be the high priest of some imaginary Church of the United States. Article VI of the Constitution even goes so far as to say that "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
But among some elements of the Republican base--the folks who make a big issue of the fact that Barack Obama spent part of his early childhood in a predominantly Muslim country--religious orthodoxy matters. When a February 2007 Gallup poll reported that 24% of likely voters would not support an otherwise qualified Mormon for president (in a similar 1999 poll, the number was 21%), it highlighted a serious problem that Mitt Romney must face. If he is to be the candidate of the Religious Right, he has to explain why he is a better Christian than his more theologically orthodox opponents, one of whom (Huckabee) is an ordained Southern Baptist minister.
And as Salon.com's Andrew O'Hehir points out, Romney can't do this by using a Kennedy-style argument for religious pluralism:
Romney needs to appease a constituency that conspicuously does not believe in the absolute separation of church and state, that favors public funding of religious education (or at least certain varieties of it) and has frequently sought to impose theological ideas or religious structures in the public sphere. He's not trying to convince right-wing evangelical Christians that he would govern as a secular president; he's trying to convince them that his ideas about religion are close enough to theirs, in some general way, that they should overlook the differences.Later today, Mitt Romney will have to deliver a speech to the most theologically conservative Christian voters in America explaining why someone who belongs to a relatively new, radically different Christian tradition reflects their values better than opponents with stronger conservative track records and a more theologically orthodox identity. If he's successful in this effort, he will be the next Republican presidential nominee. If he isn't, he won't. With less than a month to go until the Iowa caucus, there is no margin for error.
In aiming his candidacy at a born-again audience, Romney has made his faith into a campaign issue, much as George W. Bush did in 2000. But while Bush's version of repentant-sinner spirituality made him appealing to a wide swath of Americans, both devout and less so, Romney is now facing the fact that his religion makes many of the same people uncomfortable.
See also:
Comments
To Whom It May Concern
My daughter was wrongfully taken away.She was a victim of a hate crime, she had a gun and bat put to her face and was tormented and beat up by 30-40 black kids guys and girls cause she’s white she was not the only one ON NOV 4TH,2007 and the police did nothing.My daughter was fearful for her life cause they threatened to put a bomb in her school.We had problems getting her to go back to school and when we finally did there was a bomb scare no lie she thought it was for her so I went to court and dss for help and they turned against me,now they have taken my daughter away.She was also beat up prior to NOV 4TH 2007 and also asked to perform a sexual act on a boy at school and when she refused he punched her in the face and then threw her over the table,also she was threatened by 6-8th graders do to NOV 4TH that they would kill her and her niece and friends involved if charges weren’t dropped on one girl arrested who whos caught with a stolen purse from one of the victims. Now instead of everyone helping everyone is gong against her.We have all documents that prove everything.But judge duffy does not listen to the parents or investagate.She removed a child that did not need removing this will not be the first child this has been done too.This judge COLLEEN DUFFY does not review documents properly you have all these people with all this authority lying to cover their mistakes instead of admitting they were wrong and fixing them Like for example when they called the school that day on FEB 15,2008 Jamie was in the office and over heard they were coming to get her so she pannic and left she was scared, We went to the school my son and I when we arrived there were about 20 police officers and Jamie was already in the back of the police car i saw she was scared and couldn’t breathe I asked if they could put the window down so she could get some air and they refused now cause of there mistake and letting jamie hear the conversation about what they were about to do they are trying to say i called my daughter to tell her to run and thats impossible so now theres in order of pertection against me and I can not speak to her on the phone and only one supervised visit every two weeks,Once again there screwed up and there tryin to cover them selves so they put the blame on me. NOW DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT …..was aware that i was working with the school to try to ,Which is wrong and not fair to the children and the parents,Yes there are children that are being abused and negleted but in this case that is not it at all.Their hurting familys instead of helping them.Now you have a child taken away from a perfect home and a loving family and was already having a mental breakdown from all these attacks.She at one time wouldn’t even come out of her room for awhile she was never the same after that day but we were working with her to change that when we were half way there until the judge COLLEEN DUFFY went and had her removed.The judge COLLEEN DUFFY and CPS was aware that i was working with the school to try to resolve it. Everyone at her school was working with her and understood and tried everything to make her comfortable she was even eating lunch in the office with MR.BERIENTOS and some days I would pick her up cause she was to afraid to be in the cafeteria do to what happened she didn’t feel safe anymore.Now since the judge has removed her from me and her family and friends it’s worse.We went to court on JAN 28,2008 the judge COLLEEN DUFFY wanted her attendance called in everyday till the next court date which was FEB 15,2008,Jamie was in school everyday until FEB 4,2008 due to me her mom almost dying! She rushed me to the neoroligist which he said thank god she was home at the time cause I could have died if I didnt get there when I did I even had a letter from him cause whats going on also at lunch out with me one day she got hit by a car she was not hurt just shakened up I took her back to school and they told me to take her home!Then another day her school nurse called and insisted she needed to go to the eye doctor and the only appointment they had was MAY 14TH after school but the school said she couldn’t wait that long.So I called dss and spoke to MR. TIM COLBERN to get permission and he said yes I could take her at 8:30AM so I did the appointment was on FEB 14TH 2008 the day before court then I took her right back to school after the doctor.Then the school was concerned when we returned because she could not see straight due to the drops he put in her eyes.Judge COLLEEN DUFFY did not care about my daughters Mental or Physical well being.My daughter has gone threw hell since third grade.We have lost my two brothers her dad and now her grandmother is dying they wouldn’t even let her go to the hospital on MARCH 4TH,2008 to see her grandmother on her birthday wich might be her last.Judge COLLEEN DUFFY has no heart! My daughter was seeing a therapist (LIZ ABLE) from family services.Jamie was finally making a break thru and her attorney told and pleaded with the judge not to remove the child from a loving and caring mother cause it would set her back months.Judge COLLEEN DUFFY’S actions is cruel and maybe beyond repair.The county attorney never checked anything about the attacks or bomb scare at my daughters school.Neither did he check out the police reports regarding the attack on Saratoga NOV 4TH 2007.WE We will be returning to court on MARCH 18,2008 AT 9:OO AM just to see if my sister can get custidody.
PLEASE YOUR HELP IS GREATLEY NEEDED TO HELP RETURN MY DAUGHTER BACK TO HER LOVING AND CARING HOME.ITS NOT FAIR THERES NO REASON SHE SHOULD BE CAUGHT UP IN THE SYSTEM AND PUT AWAY WHEN SHE AND OTHERS ARE THE VICTIMS.
SINCERLY MS.MARIA RICCIARDI
(914)494-3527