Catholic Santorum winning the South ... our next Prez ?

[eireannq]

I’m with you, but between Santorum and Obama, I would vote for Santorum…lesser of two evils to me.

Santorum’s health care plan… Don’t get sick, because if you do, you’re on your own!

 

[_Abyssinia]

Business owners: Health care reform would be stifling

m.timesrecordnews.com/news/2012/apr/04/business-owners-health-care-reform-would-be

 

[Bocephus]

Santorum’s health care plan… Don’t get sick, because if you do, you’re on your own!

Obamas health care plan…don’t even worry about gettin sick you gotta make it out of the womb alive first.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

No one on this thread has said any of what you wrote.

I think that he did not accuse any posters on this Forum of such, just that he encountered it elsewhere.

PS, the name calling and hate on the left is shocking to me as well.

I agree. Both sides have said things that are wholly unchristian and uncharitable.

 

[ishii]

ishii
Time for just a couple responses.
I’ve read a lot of CS Lewis in the past. Great literature. However, I do have trouble with Christians - many of them Protestant evangelists - who run around emphasizing Satan. He can become a major boogey-man, an excuse for wrong-doing (‘the devil made me do it’), etc. Lots of superstition revolves around Satan, too. When Santorum focuses on Satan, plus much more of what he says, I view him as risky to be in the White House. By the way, I just saw him interviewed on EWTN’s Arroyo’s World Over. Talk about separation of church and state. Arroyo and EWTN apparently don’t believe in it. I wonder how many Catholic Democrats he is alienating further from the Church. In all fairness, the GOP ought to be paying EWTN for the free air time it gives to its candidates and talking points.

Not only is CS Lewis great literature, he is a great theologian. Mere Christianity and Screwtape Letters are great books. He correctly pointed out the ways the devil will try to trip us up. The devil will do anything to cause us to endanger our own souls - including appealing to a sense of sophistication. In Lewis’ time there were people who said, “*come now, you don’t mean to say that this devil really exists, now do you?” *

My favorite quote from CS Lewis is this:

Whichever he adopts, your main task will be the same. Let him begin by treating the Patriotism or the Pacifism as a part of his religion. The let him, under the influence of partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him onto the stage at which the religion becomes merely a part of the ‘cause’, in which Christianity is valued chiefly because of the excellent arguments it can produce in favour of the British war-effort or of Pacifism. The attitude which you want to guard against is that in which temporal affairs are treated primarily as material for obedience. Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing. Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades, matter more to him than prayers and sacraments and charity, he is ours — and the more ‘religious’ (on those terms) the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here.”

I think now, in the Catholic church and in other churches, (and perhaps especially in Catholic run universities) there are many who seem to be particularly susceptible to the above strategy. It is in those who see as the Church’s main mission as that of creating here on earth, the most just, egalitarian, progressive society free of racism, classism, sexism, war, poverty, etc. There are those in the Church who will vote for any kind of policies that are against the Church if they think those policies will bring about their own leftist idea of “heaven on earth.” You will notice these kinds of people when you here them say things like, " *I know Obama supports abortion rights, but he also is for funding school lunches for kids and helping the poor, so I’m voting for him." * Or " sure Obama is forcing the Catholic Church to go against its own faith, but its all for the cause of healthcare for all so I’m voting for Obama." Such as attitude is in danger of falling into the trap set by that demon in Screwtape Letters. CS Lewis was a very prescient and wise man. Do not underestimate the devil, Roy5. We shouldn’t be so afraid that we see him everywhere and can’t act for fear of being tempted, but don’t go to the other extreme and downplay his influence in this world we live in. Ultimately we have our own free will - the devil can’t force us to do evil, but the devil is definitely working hard during these times. All you have to do is read the newspaper to see how successful he is.

Ishii

 

[KateKimmer]

I hope Not!

 

[ishii]

ishii

   As LBJohnson warned when he signed the civil rights legislation, 'there goes the South'. What was once the most Democratic part of the nation is now the most Republican. How can one dispute that race has played a role in that change?.

I don’t know what kind of racism there was in the south among GOP voters right after the Civil Rights bill. But you’re making a mistake in saying that the south in the 1960’s and the south in the year 2012 are somehow the same. They aren’t. The issues are different. In the 50’s and 60’s it was about segregation. In the 70’s busing became an issue. Right now I think the main issues that motivate conservative voters in the south are the rise of secularism, gay marriage and abortion - the social issues primarily. And they are pro-military, generally. Southern voters are not merely the continuation of the old Dixiecrat voters of the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s. The south has been evolving for decades. Do you know that Democrat Jimmy Carter swept the south in 1976? No, it is the steady, leftward, secular lurch by the Democrat party which has caused the south to reliably vote GOP. Democrat Clinton/Gore won some key southern states in 1922& 1996. So it would appear that LBJ’s “there goes the south” statement does not quite prove the point you’re making. The old, “southern voters vote GOP because they’re racist” is a tired myth that you should really abandon.

Ishii

 

[Roy5]

I don’t know what kind of racism there was in the south among GOP voters right after the Civil Rights bill. But you’re making a mistake in saying that the south in the 1960’s and the south in the year 2012 are somehow the same. They aren’t. The issues are different. In the 50’s and 60’s it was about segregation. In the 70’s busing became an issue. Right now I think the main issues that motivate conservative voters in the south are the rise of secularism, gay marriage and abortion - the social issues primarily. And they are pro-military, generally. Southern voters are not merely the continuation of the old Dixiecrat voters of the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s. The south has been evolving for decades. Do you know that Democrat Jimmy Carter swept the south in 1976? No, it is the steady, leftward, secular lurch by the Democrat party which has caused the south to reliably vote GOP. Democrat Clinton/Gore won some key southern states in 1922& 1996. So it would appear that LBJ’s “there goes the south” statement does not quite prove the point you’re making. The old, “southern voters vote GOP because they’re racist” is a tired myth that you should really abandon.

Ishii

Granted, many Southerners are Protestant evangelicals, who generally agree with traditional Catholicism on such issues as abortion and gay marriage. In fact, they are more against such cultural trends than most Catholics. However, there still is racism in the South - among both whites and blacks, by the way. White prejudice is inherited from the past, deeply engrained, and among many African-Americans there is a deep-rooted suspicion and resentment of whites, also a product of the past. This current Trayvon Martin episode is bringing both prejudices to the forefront. This is NOT to say that racism is the only factor. It isn't. But failing to acknowledge the obvious is just that - closing one's eyes to a reality rooted in the history of the region. 

 I am alienated - and many others, too, I suspect - but the degree of bitterness evident against Obama. And the lies spread about his religion - that, for example, he is a secret Muslim or a Black Liberation Christian, that he is deliberately seeking to undermine America, that he may be the anti-Christ and other such nonsense. Read his "Dreams from My Father" and he goes into detail about his religion. I also become tired of hearing that he won't wear a flag pin, that he doesn't place his hand over his heart during the pledge and other such blatant falsehoods. Obama is my president and I respect that office enough to respect him. I may end up voting for Romney (no, I could not vote for Santorum, Gingrich or Ron Paul), but I may be driven to vote for Obama if this hate-campaign grows during the campaign. Obama is a decent man, just as G. W. Bush was a decent man. These efforts to undermine the integrity and character of decent people offends me and injures America. Debate policy differences and stop the attempts at character assassination.  

 As for Carter, he was a son of the deep South, the first to run for president since the Civil War. (Johnson really represented the southwest rather than the deep South.) Carter also was seen as an Evangelical. These two facts made him popular among many conservative Christians in Dixie. That said, there are areas of the south, especially in metropolitan areas and in the upper south, where the mentality of moderation has attracted more and more well-educated voters. That's why states like Virginia and North Carolina - for example - could support Obama.  

 My problems with Romney include his obvious flip-flopping to win far right-wing votes and some hesitation to give Mormonism the prestige that could come with a Mormon in the White House. I am troubled, too, by what he presents as his hawkish foreign policy. We've had more than enough wars and don't need a new one over Iran. Santorum and Gingrich are worse than Romney on that issue, and if that were the only issue I would have to vote for Ron Paul. But Paul is off the wall on too many of his other policies. 

 God bless the president, whomever it is, and God bless America and the world with peace, justice, and a mutual respect among all creeds, colors, cultures and countries.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Whichever he adopts, your main task will be the same. Let him begin by treating the Patriotism or the Pacifism as a part of his religion. The let him, under the influence of partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him onto the stage at which the religion becomes merely a part of the ‘cause’, in which Christianity is valued chiefly because of the excellent arguments it can produce in favour of the British war-effort or of Pacifism. The attitude which you want to guard against is that in which temporal affairs are treated primarily as material for obedience. Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing. Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades, matter more to him than prayers and sacraments and charity, he is ours — and the more ‘religious’ (on those terms) the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here.”

I’ll have to read that book again. It’s too good to read just once.

I think now, in the Catholic church and in other churches, (and perhaps especially in Catholic run universities) there are many who seem to be particularly susceptible to the above strategy. **It is in those who see as the Church’s main mission as that of creating here on earth, the most just, egalitarian, progressive society free of racism, classism, sexism, war, poverty, etc. ** There are those in the Church who will vote for any kind of policies that are against the Church if they think those policies will bring about their own leftist idea of “heaven on earth.” You will notice these kinds of people when you here them say things like, " *I know Obama supports abortion rights, but he also is for funding school lunches for kids and helping the poor, so I’m voting for him." * Or " sure Obama is forcing the Catholic Church to go against its own faith, but its all for the cause of healthcare for all so I’m voting for Obama." Such as attitude is in danger of falling into the trap set by that demon in Screwtape Letters. CS Lewis was a very prescient and wise man. Do not underestimate the devil, Roy5. We shouldn’t be so afraid that we see him everywhere and can’t act for fear of being tempted, but don’t go to the other extreme and downplay his influence in this world we live in. Ultimately we have our own free will - the devil can’t force us to do evil, but the devil is definitely working hard during these times. All you have to do is read the newspaper to see how successful he is.

Ishii

Great post Ishii. It is only by following Christ that justice and peace will be achieved. Christ showed us how to live. Unfortunately there are many who either don’t believe in Christ or try to twist his teaching.

To be Church is rightly to be in Christ’s Kingdom on earth.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

It is only by following Christ that justice and peace will be achieved. Christ showed us how to live. Unfortunately there are many who either don’t believe in Christ or try to twist his teaching.

Unquestionably true, but the stumbing block lies in your last sentence.

 

[Roselle]

Was quickly reading that is appears Santorum’s campaign is in dire straights. He looks to be reassessing where to go from here. From this re-examination we possibly might see a unity ticket between the two southern candidates. Seems unlikely, but who knows, this has been an unusual GOP nomination process.

“Desperate Times…A Unity Ticket?”

commentarymagazine.com/2012/04/05/santorum-gingrich-unity-ticket/

excerpt from Alana Goodman’s article:

Desperate times call for desperate measures:

Rick Santorum is reassessing his campaign strategy this weekend, but he’s still committed to stopping Mitt Romney.

“BREAKING NEWS: Santo meeting in Virginia now w conservative leaders,” Time’s Mark Halperin tweeted. “Talk re the path forward, Santo-Newt unity effort to stop Romney.” Translation: Santorum meeting in Virginia now with conservative leaders. They are talking about the path forward, a Santorum-Newt unity effort to stop Romney.

Halperin added that a “Santor[um] source, responding to speculation: ‘He is NOT dropping out before Pennsylvania.’ [Meeting is about the] best way to proceed, not whether to.”

There have been rumors about a Santorum-Gingrich unity ticket before, but they always seemed highly unlikely for two reasons. The first was that Santorum would be taking a very big risk by promising Newt the VP slot, especially back when he had a chance to win the nomination cleanly and pick a more practical running mate, i.e., Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan. The second obstacle was Gingrich’s main bankroller, Sheldon Adelson, who has made it pretty clear he’s not a Santorum fan…

 

[KateKimmer]

my opinion, and this is just MY opinion…I think romney has it in the bag.
and I plan on voting for him!
Especially if he add Marco as VP.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

Was quickly reading that is appears Santorum’s campaign is in dire straights. He looks to be reassessing where to go from here. From this re-examination we possibly might see a unity ticket between the two southern candidates. Seems unlikely, but who knows, this has been an unusual GOP nomination process.

“Desperate Times…A Unity Ticket?”

commentarymagazine.com/2012/04/05/santorum-gingrich-unity-ticket/

excerpt from Alana Goodman’s article:

Or that both are committed to staying in the race to force a brokered convention so one of them can win

 

[Et_Cetera]

Roy5- You articulate your and my position much better than I ever could. Thank you. I always feel that I am somehow “anti-church” because I am supporting the President in this election. I too was a long time Republican who moved away from the Republican Party when I thought it was becoming too extreme. I am a moderate and I don’t like extremes on either side and feel that negotiation is the way you get things done. I was also troubled by the terrible public discourse since the day President Obama won the election… When the right wing media came out the day after the election… calling him names like the “messiah” the “anti-christ” and questioning where he was born. . You had to wonder where all that hate came from before he even set foot in the White House. After attending a couple of the town hall meetings during the health care debate…I was shocked at the name calling that went on there as well. I stood up and made a comment that people should set aside their preconceived ideas and I defended Pres. Obama. After the meeting I was stopped by a man who told me I was wrong and yelled in my face that we would be sorry for putting a @@@@@@ black Muslim in the White House. You are right - prejudice is behind much of what you hear. Definitely, not from everyone. Many people are color blind and their dislike is simply based on policy. I respect that…but am sure that is not the case with many people. Blessings to you.

The extremism of the current Republican Party was also a factor in my moving toward the Left. The birth certificate rhetoric was embarrassing. I don’t know why conservatives pander so much to these new fringe groups; they’re vocal but not as large as they seem, in my opinion.

 

[Nec5]

The extremism of the current Republican Party was also a factor in my moving toward the Left.

It is not so much that the right has become extreme as it is that the country is accelerating toward the left. Therefore, everything that was once viewed as conservative or normal (i.e. valuing the unborn, regarding same sex relations as abominations, etc) is now “extreme”, yet these positions haven’t really changed. The culture, on the other hand, has definitely changed and moved readily toward the sewer.

 

[Et_Cetera]

I don’t think it’s normal to view same sex couples as an abomination. Years from now, I hope this country looks on homosexual oppression with regret.

 

[GEddie]

I don’t think it’s normal to view same sex couples as an abomination. Years from now, I hope this country looks on homosexual oppression with regret.

The word was “relations”, not “couples”.

It is the behavior, not the human beings involved, that had been perceived as an abomination.

Don’t be too disappointed if what you call “oppression” doesn’t go away. More likely, the sexual liberation parade of the past half century will stop, and the pendulum will swing the other way.

ICXC NIKA

 

[ishii]

my opinion, and this is just MY opinion…I think romney has it in the bag.
and I plan on voting for him!
Especially if he add Marco as VP.

I like Rubio too - or Paul Ryan.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

The extremism of the current Republican Party was also a factor in my moving toward the Left. The birth certificate rhetoric was embarrassing. I don’t know why conservatives pander so much to these new fringe groups; they’re vocal but not as large as they seem, in my opinion.

How would you move left because of extremism? A move left would seem to imlply a philosophical change of heart as regards the role of government in society more than just a reaction to tactics. Perhaps you could elaborate. Btw, nice signature - Prufrock “rocks”.

Ishii

 

[Jerry_Miah]

ishii

Time for just a couple responses.

I've read a lot of CS Lewis in the past. Great literature. However, I do have trouble with Christians - many of them Protestant evangelists - who run around emphasizing Satan. He can become a major boogey-man, an excuse for wrong-doing ('the devil made me do it'), etc. Lots of superstition revolves around Satan, too. When Santorum focuses on Satan, plus much more of what he says, I view him as risky to be in the White House. By the way, I just saw him interviewed on EWTN's Arroyo's World Over. Talk about separation of church and state. Arroyo and EWTN apparently don't believe in it. I wonder how many Catholic Democrats he is alienating further from the Church. In all fairness, the GOP ought to be paying EWTN for the free air time it gives to its candidates and talking points. 

 I'm not interested in playing the race card, as the Sharptons and Jacksons are doing in the current Martin case (and at every opportunity. when a mike is available).  I detest racial prejudice and racial politics. The simple truth, however, is that the old South was solidly Democratic. As LBJohnson warned when he signed the civil rights legislation, 'there goes the South'. What was once the most Democratic part of the nation is now the most Republican. How can one dispute that race has played a role in that change?

 One recent experience. I was seated by a woman I did not know at a luncheon. She started a one-on-one conversation: "We have to get rid of that evil man in the White House." I quietly suggested that he was our President and I respected both him and the office. She then targeted his wife. "She's nothing but an uppity 'N----".  I could not bear the bigotry and suggested that Mrs. Obama seemed to be a gifted wife, a graduate of leading colleges, a good mother, that she was seeking to help Veterans' families, pushing for better diets, etc. That made no difference to this woman. "Why does she have to act so uppity? Who does she think she is?" Now, tell me, is that racism or what? 

  I'm well aware that most Republicans are not racists. After all, I come from a solid GOP background and most of my kinfolk still vote GOP - automatically. But racism is one factor that leads to excessive hatred of Obama among some. I am thoroughly convinced of that. Not to see this is to be blind to reality. Since childhood I have been committed to "liberty and justice for all" - something I learned to recite in  'notorious' public schools. They always seem to pick out a few bad apples among the public schools and then smear the whole system. It has caused me to wonder why thousands of parochial schools have closed, including the one in my home village. My family always had qualms about religious segregation as well as racial segregation. The main problem in the public schools stems from problems in society - fatherless children, delinquent parents, etc. I lived in New York City 20 years and became very familiar with all this.

  I have enormous admiration for the devoted priests and nuns in the Church. The Church has done (and still does) superb work in health care, education, etc, I am not so sure about the hierarchy and have developed considerable skepticism, in part because of narrow and arrogant media like EWTN and the way in which the hierarchy, here and abroad, tried so hard to cover over the sex scandal that has so badly hurt the Church. I also favor such reforms as the right of priests to marry if they wish, a more substantial role for women in the church (Deacons?), the end of the foolish ban on artificial birth control, etc, As for abortion and other issues, I agree with the Church. I also wish such Catholics as Santorum focused more attention upon peaceful alternatives instead of belligerent 'we will bomb them' rhetoric that misleads and alarms the American people. If we move forward by faith we do not need to kill countless more innocent young Americans, Iranis, etc. I place my trust in God and not in bigger and better chariots of war.

  Have a blessed Easter, which assures us that ultimately right defeats wrong, good wins over evil, and life gains the victory over death. Let us make religion a bridge rather than a barrier.

Thanks for saying all this so I don’t have to