John McCain keeps saying things like this:

…”I urge my friends who complain about the influence of the religious Right, get out there and get busy. That’s what they do! Now, if we believe in the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, the big-tent party, then we have to get out there and show that. The fact is, some of us have sat idly by while those very active people have basically set the agenda for our party. I get attacked every day because I’m working with Ted Kennedy. How can I work with Kennedy? Because I want to get something done!” …

This interview is confusing. Is he saying there is room in the Republican party for traditionally religious folk and others? That is true enough, but his later comments (”those very active people. . .”) imply he opposes the agenda they set and that he doesn’t care for them. McCain has made that kind of noise before this.

Why is he doing such a thing? McCain has a good pro-life record in the Senate and he is a genuine war hero. He ought to be the sort of candidate folk here at Middlebrow should be very happy about. However, my chums (Torrey-speak for our brightest and best grads) on the ground in Arizona who are involved in politics don’t trust him.

McCain too often, as a politician, seems willing to do or say anything it takes to be respected by the sort of people (see New York Times writers) who should not be respected by traditional conservatives. He also seems to have no clue about the nature of the “religious right” or what we are like. I would be happy to have him come and speak to my students and get to know how bright they are, but I fear he would say one thing to them (see his speech at Liberty University) and then stab them in the back with an Esquire-like interview.

Doesn’t McCain realize in the age of google Liberty-folk can get his Esquire comments without getting the magazine? Old politics allowed you to segment your message. New politics do not.

Has McCain fallen into the Kerry trap of thinking his great deeds as a young man merit a pass on anything else he does or says? Or is he just after that large Esquire-Republicans vote?

I am not voting for Pastor of America when I vote for President. However, I am looking for someone who sees the “serious religion is evil crowd” as not the sort of people they want as best friends. I don’t mind honest disagreement with some of a President’s policies, but it is hard to deal with a party leader who wants you out of the party or thinks (without reason or based on bad reasons) you are bad for it.

So John McCain are serious Christians like Hewitt, Moreland, Willard harming the nation? Are they hateful? Are the smaller fry here at Middlebrow unworthy of being part of the party of Lincoln? When Teddy left the Republican party, which had used old boy tactics to purge his followers (see the actual Republican voting block) to the tune of “Onward Christian Soldiers” was he part of the “religious right?”

When Lincoln (though no Evangelical) curried favor with Evangelical pastors and worked hard for Evangelical votes to become President as Richard Carwardine’s recent book shows. . . was he part of the religious right? He supported Evangelicals and one can see his speeches heading in the direction of their language and theology over his time as President. Read this.

My family has been part of the Republican Party since the time of Lincoln. . . right back to the formation of our home state of West Virginia when Republican Reynolds folk were part of leaving Virginia when she left the Union. . . so it is hard to be told that we don’t belong. TR and Lincoln were elected with Evangelical votes, using Evangelical language, and now you sound like we are the new folk at the party.

McCain cannot win in the primaries, which seems a shame, if he is a religious bigot. . . or worse someone who is willing to pander to secularist bigotry in order to curry favor.