Mega Churches and Mega Drunks

On Tuesday, MSNBC‘s Chris Matthews suggested that Christians, specifically conservative evangelical Christians, have no place in the American political system. Newsbusters’ Mark Finkelstein said Matthews attacked Jeb Bush for a planned appearance at Liberty University. His criticism, however, wasn’t limited to Bush.

“It seems to me watching this thing, somewhat dispassionately, I’ve noticed for example that Jeb Bush is now going to give a commencement speech at Liberty University,” he said. “You know he’s a Roman Catholic convert. His family was Episcopalian. And somehow he finds himself comfortable in that evangelical crowd.”

“His father had to do some of that stooping last time he ran. He had to go out and say things he was born again and all that,” he added. “He had to say things he was never taught religiously in his growing-up years.” Matthews then included all Republicans in his rant.

“They have to do all this–Ted Cruz was at Regent or Liberty,” he said. “They’re all — does the Republican candidate in 2016 have to be focused on the religious right? Do you have to tag that base before you can be the nominee?” he asked as though conservative Christians have no right to be involved in the American political system. Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union, informed Matthews that Christians are an important part of GOP politics.

“Well, there’s two things there,” he said. “First of all, evangelical voters, this is a totally legitimate group of people to go after.”

Matthews responded by asking if Republicans “have to tag up with” Christians. Schlapp explained that for many, faith is extremely important, especially in politics.

“Look, the question of faith in our politics is important,” he told Matthews. “And evangelical Christians, born-again voters are an important constituency. And it’s a very important consistency for the Republicans.

Matthews suggestion that Christians should be excluded from American politics is nothing new. Writing at the Christian Post, Karen Kramer said religious liberty is the central theme of what she called “the new civil war.” Moreover, she said Christians are partly to blame for not standing up for their rights.

Kramer said Christians “have stood idle while a vocal minority has placed unfair burdens” on them. “Even though we face formidable foreign enemies, the battle within our own nation could be our demise because we’re fighting for our very soul,” she said.

Finkelstein speculated what would happen if Matthews had targeted another religion. “Let’s play some political madlibs and imagine that instead of ‘stooping to that evangelical crowd,’ Matthews had criticized a candidate who spoke at an Islamic center for ‘stooping to that Muslim crowd,’” Finkelstein said. “Cue the cries of religious bigotry!”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2015/0418/From-Loretta-Lynch-to-Iran-Obama-s-had-enough-of-the-GOP

<style type="text/css">
.nojs {display:block;} body {margin-bottom:2em;} </style>

Washington — With a tone of outrage and eye-rolling dismissiveness, President Barack Obama and his White House team are working out their aggressions on Republicans. Well into the final quarter of Obama’s presidency the White House approach is, if you can’t join ’em, beat ’em.

Even with a whiff of bipartisanship in the air, the president is going on offense and building on a strategy employed since Democrats lost control of the Senate. Disagree with a Republican? The White House approach is to single a lawmaker out, pick a fight and don’t mince words.

In just the past week, the president and his spokesman have targeted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republican Sens. John McCain and Charles Grassley, on topics from climate change to the Iran nuclear deal to the delayed confirmation of attorney general nominee Loretta Lynch.

This is a White House unleashed, forgoing niceties for the kind of blunt talk some of Obama’s allies have been demanding for some time. But the rhetoric carries risks of sounding peevish and signals that a president who once ran on the promise of changing the tone in Washington has fully embraced its political combat.

On Friday, Obama delivered a testy lecture to Republicans, decrying the long wait Lynch has faced since she was nominated in early November.

“Enough. Enough!” he said, addressing Senate Republicans. “This is embarrassing, a process like this.”

Last Saturday, Obama hit McCain especially hard, after his 2008 presidential rival declared a major setback in the Iran nuclear talks after Iran’s supreme leader, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, demanded that sanctions against Tehran had to be lifted immediately after a deal went into place. (The preliminary deal says the sanctions will be lifted as Iran proves it is complying with limits on its nuclear program.)

Obama cast McCain’s criticism as an assault on the credibility of Secretary of State John Kerry.

“That’s an indication of the degree to which partisanship has crossed all boundaries,” Obama said. “That’s a problem. It needs to stop.”

He went on: “We have Mitch McConnell trying to tell the world, oh, don’t have confidence in the U.S. government’s abilities to fulfill any climate change pledge that we might make.”

On Thursday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest singled out Grassley, declaring comments he made about the Lynch vote “duplicitous.”

Asked how harsh words might help his cause, Earnest replied: “Being nice has gotten us a 160-day delay. So maybe after they look up ‘duplicitous’ in the dictionary we’ll get a different result.”

It was the kind of “ouch” moment seldom heard from the White House.

Republicans have their own eye-rolling response.