Posted on 01/17/2005 12:20:04 AM PST by nickcarraway
Democrats, reeling from the Republicans' success at courting churchgoers, are focusing new attention on a religious and political anomaly: Jim Wallis, one of the few prominent left-leaning leaders among evangelical Protestants.
At the start of the Congressional session, Senate Democrats invited Mr. Wallis to address their members at a private session to discuss issues. A group of about 15 House Democrats invited him to a breakfast discussion about dispelling their party's secular image. And NBC News has enlisted him to appear as a guest during its inauguration coverage opposite Dr. James C. Dobson, one of the most prominent evangelical conservatives.
Last week, Mr. Wallis's publisher, a religious imprint of HarperCollins, released his new book, "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It," moving it up from a publication date this spring to coincide with the inauguration. It immediately jumped to the top of the best-seller list at Amazon.com, where it hovered between No. 2 and No. 7 over the weekend.
Mr. Wallis, the founder and editor of the Christian magazine Sojourners, has written two previous books on similar themes, "Who Speaks for God?" and "The Soul of Politics," without making much of a splash, but since the November presidential election he has drawn a new level of attention, especially from Democrats and liberals.
"Failure makes you reassess," he said. "The Democratic Party has increasingly had a problem as being perceived as secular fundamentalists."
James P. Manley, a spokesman for the Senate minority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said the reason Mr. Reid, a Mormon, had invited Mr. Wallis to speak was obvious. "It is clear from the results of the election that we Democrats need to be much more forceful and clear in communicating their faith and values to the electorate," Mr. Manley said.
"He can help us communicate with the rising number of evangelicals in the country, which is right now a Republican constituency," Mr. Manley said, "but which Wallis argues could easily become part of the Democratic constituency as well."
Mr. Wallis, a registered Democrat, told the senators that the Bible contains more than 3,000 references to alleviating poverty. He said Democrats needed to do a better job of explaining the moral and religious foundations of policies intended to help the poor, protect the environment and reduce violence.
He also urged the Democrats to look for middle ground on the social issues most troubling to religious traditionalists, like obscenity and abortion. Whatever their stance on abortion rights, he argued, Democrats need to treat its occurrence as a moral problem and propose ways to reduce it.
Several Roman Catholic senators, recalling that during the last election some conservative bishops condemned Catholic politicians who supported abortion rights, asked pointed questions on the subject, one person present said.
A few days later, Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts echoed some of the same themes in a speech, calling for the party to "speak more directly to the issues of deep conscience" and emphasizing efforts to lower the abortion rate while preserving abortion rights.
Stephanie Cutter, a spokeswoman for Mr. Kennedy, said that he and Mr. Wallis had talked often over the years but that the part of the speech that most reflected his influence was a discussion of poverty, not the senator's thoughts about abortion.
Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, a Catholic who has led Democratic efforts to appeal to religious voters and who invited Mr. Wallis to talk with House Democrats, said many were frustrated at the public perception of the party as secular despite their personal devotion to their respective faiths. As a sympathetic evangelical Christian, Mr. Wallis could help "understand what the perceptions are," she said, applauding him for calling the federal budget "a moral issue."
But Dr. Richard Land, president of the ethics and religious liberty commission of the 16-million-member Southern Baptist Convention, called Mr. Wallis "a left-wing evangelical" ill-qualified to instruct Democrats on conservative Christian values. "The Democrats are turning to the guy they can find that is least scary to them," Dr. Land said.
He argued that Mr. Wallis misunderstood conservative evangelical voters because he conflated the moral issue of alleviating poverty with the practical issue of whether Democratic policies are the way to do it.
"I don't know anybody who is in favor of poverty," Dr. Land said. "He doesn't seem to have adequately comprehended that the debate is over, based on the 30-year experiment, about whether big government or free markets work better at producing wealth for everybody."
Leftists talking to Leftists. Now there's a start in the Democrats' quest to reconnect to Flyover Country Americans! (laughing)
Since the core fundamentals of the democrat party are exactly what they are perceived to be it is clear that their intent is not to change but to mask the truth.
Ooh, looks like they want to play bait-and-switch. What else is new...
Nice way to sum it up
Their secular base hates God Talk and draws the line at inviting people of genuine faith into their party. Its more of the same old, same old "How Can Fool 'Em Better Next Time" hooey. Since they won't change their policies, they're not going to attract mainstream Americans back into voting for the Democrats. They still seem to think there's nothing wrong with the product, they just need to slap a slicker label on it.
Oh, but ya'all were very clear: you have no faith or values.
The Bible is also quite clear that 10% of your income should be sufficient to address the problem. How will the demonrats squirm around that? Propose reducing taxes so that all transfer payments = 10% of income? I'd like to see them try (no, really, I would).
Duhh! I answered my own question. 10% IS sufficient to address the problem. It's the other 40% in administrative costs that keep taxes where they should (according to the rats) be.
Yep. Jean Francois would only mention God and Catholicism when he was asked to. That's how allergic the Democrats have become of anything that sniffs the slightest of divinity. They have a long way to go before people who regularly attend church and synagogue will even consider pulling the levers for them.
There were pictures of it weekly
The left STILL doesn't get it
More lib book deals and conveniently coordinated DNC tactics...
I wonder how many Bible references there are to mandatory, forced redistribution of wealth from haves to have nots, with no success in alleviating, much less in eliminating, poverty among a society.
Mormon Democrat. That should be an oxymoron (as opposed to an oxyMormon), but it's not. Still, it was good to see Bush win Utah by a higher margin than any other state.
Rotsa Ruck.
Uh, sure...
Harry Reid is pro-life. That doesn't sit well with the NOW NAGS, Planned Parenthood and NARAL.
Yeah, you know, everytime leadership is discussed among many evangelicals, the name Jim Wallis immediately comes up. <\delusion>
Check 16
One liberal does not a religious flock make. The Democrats have an inability to talk to people on the other side of the divide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.