Comments on: Blame it on the Evangelicals (?)

by: MSS

Tue, 24 Oct 2024 15:16:04 +0000

I think it is safe to say that while Reagan wooed evengelicals (a word I do not like in this context, but anyway…), no president before Bush was as tight with them. And never has any US party been as disciplined and ideological as the GOP was for most of the past six years. The mobilized “evangelicals” and their near-total loyalty to the party are a big part of that. So, yes, it makes sense to me that many of the party’s current problems can be attributed to the most lyaly mass portion of the coalition and its willingness to offer total loyalty to a very authoritarian, imperialist, and, yes, apocalyptic administration.

Of course, I have read neither the book nor the column, and am unlikely to do so.

by: Talmadge East

Mon, 23 Oct 2024 16:01:57 +0000

I think doc. Taylor is correct in pointing out that Reagan wooed evangelicals more than any other Presidential candidate before him. I mean, “I know you can’t endorse me, but I endorse you.” Falwell & the Majority must have been eating out of his hands.

by: Dr. Steven Taylor

Mon, 23 Oct 2024 14:52:34 +0000

Bleeding Obvious:

I will grant the statement–however, I find it difficult to connect those things regardless. And I was reacting not to the book, but to the book review.

Have you read the book? Care to enlighten us?

Also: evangelicals were strong during the Reagan era as well. There are issues of casuality regardless of what argument is made.

by: Harry

Mon, 23 Oct 2024 13:25:10 +0000

Well, he did work in the obligatory “blame it on Bill Clinton” angle.

by: Bleeding Obvious

Mon, 23 Oct 2024 12:30:54 +0000

“It is wholly unclear to me how Christian fundamentalism would lead, per se, to the mess that is Iraq, to fiscal irresponsibility, to substantial corruption in the Congress (e.g., DeLay, Ney, Cunningham and others), to incompetence over Katrina or to any number of other issues.”

It might become slightly clearer to you if you try reading the book.