Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Palin-Haters of the Theocratic Right

Those on the secular humanist left who are convinced that Sarah Palin is a "theocrat" must have never heard of John Lofton. The former Washington Times columnist has been involved in two presidential campaigns, as an advisor to Pat Buchanan's efforts in the 1990s and as Communications Director for the 2004 run by Michael Peroutka as the nominee of the Constitution Party. In Lofton's view from the extreme religious right, Gov. Palin just isn't Christian enough:
"Sarah Palin's assertion that the issue of whether moms with small children should or should not work outside the home is a 'petty, little, superficial, meaningless thing' reveals, with a vengeance, that she is a hard-core feminist, with no Christian/Biblical view whatsoever of what a wife/mom ought to be. Her referring to those who believe moms should work in the home to raise their own children as 'Neanderthals' is a slap in the face to millions of moms struggling to do this in obedience to God and His Word."
From his blog The American View, Lofton rails at Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and any other female who dares to do anything other than remain barefoot, pregnant and completely subservient to the man of the house. Lofton and his ilk are textbook examples of the dangers inherent in pridefully interpreting the scriptures without understanding them. Lofton, for example, admitted to Fr. Mitchell Pacwa (during a debate over whether we can ask the saints for their intercessions in our prayers) that he doesn't know Greek. How can one interpret scripture without having a command of not only Greek, but Hebrew and Aramaic as well? Further, if God intended for women to be little more than virtual house slaves, He never would have allowed Deborah to become a judge in Israel or the daughters of Philip to be prophetesses.

The left is so far to the left on the political spectrum that its view of the right compresses all conservatives into a monolith, much as a telephoto lens makes objects appear to be much closer to one another than they really are. Leftists fail to see that there are degrees of separation between the three general types of conservatives. For those of us in the "conservative mainstream" who consider ourselves to be Reagan conservatives, we have on our left the Vichy Republicans and Conservative Lites. That is where you will find the David Frums, Peggy Noonans and Kathleen Parkers. They are progressives who fancy themselves to be conservatives and thus the ones that liberals love to quote and the left frequently invite as guests on their media shows. On our right are the John Loftons and others who have aligned themselves with the Constitution Party. They believe in the Constitution, but their belief requires that it be interpreted strictly along Biblical lines, or at least according to their interpretation of The Bible.

Standing with us in the mainstream of conservatism is Sarah Palin. While we believe that America owes a debt to the faith of our founders, we reject the notion that we need Christian "mullahs" to define that faith for us. Our Jewish brothers and sisters would no doubt draw the short straws under such an arrangement, one which would be a complete anathema to the founders. Indeed, George Washington wrote, in his letter to the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island:
"May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the Father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy."
Based on Lofton's argument with Fr. Pacwa, we suspect that Catholics would not be considered Christians in good standing by Lofton's definition. He is also on record as saying that he "never met a Christian who readily agreed that... Mormons are Christians." Lofton must not get out much. We never cease to be amazed by Christians who evidently believe that the good Lord just can't get his job done without their indispensable and unerring assistance.

Mainstream conservatives refer to the nation's founding upon "Judeo-Christian" values, not just Christian values. Lofton rejects this view in favor of that of Jewish scholar Arthur Cohen, who wrote that the Judeo-Christian tradition "is a myth which buries under the fine silt of rhetoric the authentic, meaningful, and irrevocable distinction which exists between Jewish belief and Christian belief."

It's not yet a cliche to say that when the far left and the far right are firing all of their guns at you, you must be right over the target. The secular humanist left should turn its eyes and its wrath away from Sarah Palin and other Reagan conservatives toward the real theocrats. To find a starting place for their examination of theocrats, they need look no further than Mullah Lofton and his like-minded fellows out there on the far-flung fringes of the right.

- JP


  1. I really do not have much say in the matter but there are Catholic Jews and if Mormons want to say they are Christian then they are Christian. Jesus would not turn them away as non believers.
    I heard a Catholic Jewish program one Sunday. They are Jews who belive that the Messiah has come. Jesus is probably pleased that they acknowledge him.

  2. Can you please define a 'Reagan Conservative'. And more specifically, how does Sarah Palin compare to President Reagan?

  3. Reagan conservatives believe in four general principles of conservatism:

    1. Smaller federal government
    2. Strong national security
    3. Fiscal responsibility
    4. Respect for traditional values

    Sarah Palin is not Ronald Reagan reborn, but she is perhaps his leading disciple. Like Reagan, she comes from ordinary beginnings and rose to political stardom through hard work and extraordinary political instincts. Also like Reagan, she has an enduring optimism.

    Reagan built a coalition of movement conservatives, economic libertarians and blue collar Democrats and independents which propelled him to two landslide presidential elections. The coalition fell apart under the two Bush presidencies, neither of which even attempted to exercise real fiscal restraint. Sarah Palin is in the process of trying to put that coalition back together.

    - JP

  4. I would think that all Republicans embrace these principles. It just seems that some are throwing around the RINO label on subjective matters that I think are more closely tied to the definition of number 4.

    I personally see Sarah Palin as the antithesis of Ronald Reagan. President Reagan was President of SAG and served (and completed) two terms as governor of California. His resume' was deep before entering the national landscape. But more importantly, he was a leader among leaders.

  5. If you honestly think that all Republicans embrace those principles, then you don't have even the slightest clue. Both Poppa Bush and Dubya failed to reign in either spending or the size of government. A number of Vichy Republicans (they were called "Country Club Republicans" and "Rockerfeller Republicans" in Reagan's day) stand squarely against a number of traditional values. Haven't you ever heard of such "progressive" Republicans as David Frum and Colin Powell? That two of the four principles of Reagan conservatism violated right there.

    And if you see Gov. Palin as "the antithesis of Reagan" you clearly don't know much about either person. Yes there are differences in the their backgrounds, but there are also striking similarities. Neither one got a law degree, attended a prestigious Ivy League school or rose to power by virtue of a family name or a spouse.

    The same tactics that were used against Reagan in his day are being employed against Sarah Palin today. Both are/were marginalized and ridiculed by progressive elites. Both were tagged by the extreme left as "extremists," though the label was misapplied. Media elites and their leftist masters stigmatized Reagan as "a dumb cowboy." Today they stigmatize Palin as "a dumb snowbilly." To the contrary, both were long on common-sense and natural political instincts.

    I never said Palin was Reagan’s equal, nor does she claim to be. I merely pointed out that there are similarities in their backgrounds, in how they are treated by their political opponents, in their attitudes and in their positions on the issues.

    And no other politician today stands closer to Reagan or embraces his principles and shares his optimism in American and Americans than does Gov. Palin. You have not been able to dispute those facts because they are indisputable.

    - JP