ROMNEY HELPS EXPOSE THE GOP/FUNDIE NARRATIVE

(h/t Atrios)

Mitt Romney's Apologia has brought needed attention to the pseudo-religious crap the GOP has been wallowing in lo these many years and revealed serious cracks in Karl Rove's once mighty Coalition.

My first thought about Mitt's speech is that it excludes Buddhism and Taoism, two religions that don't have a God. In fact, Buddhism may not even have an eternal afterlife (and surely no Hell):

In some early texts the Buddha left unanswered certain questions regarding the destiny of persons who have reached this ultimate goal. He even refused to speculate as to whether fully purified saints, after death, continued to exist or ceased to exist. Such questions, he maintained, were not relevant to the practice of the path and could not in any event be answered from within the confines of ordinary human existence. Indeed, he asserted that any discussion of the nature of nirvana would only distort or misrepresent it. But he also asserted with even more insistence that nirvana can be experienced—and experienced in the present existence—by those who, knowing the Buddhist truth, practice the Buddhist path. ¹

Even Ramesh Ponnuru of the wingnut NRO feels that atheists and agnostics should have been given some respect, "It would have been nice if Romney, while making room for people of all faiths in this country, could have also made some room for people with none." That's a pretty amazing statement coming from a leading conservative magazine. Blue Texan at Firedoglake kindly provides excerts of Peggy Noonan column in which crazy Peggy takes pretty much the same stance at Ramesh but is MUCH MORE honest:

There was one significant mistake in the speech. I do not know why Romney did not include nonbelievers in his moving portrait of the great American family. We were founded by believing Christians, but soon enough Jeremiah Johnson, and the old proud agnostic mountain men, and the village atheist, and the Brahmin doubter, were there, and they too are part of us, part of this wonderful thing we have. Why did Mr. Romney not do the obvious thing and include them? My guess: It would have been reported, and some idiots would have seen it and been offended that this Romney character likes to laud atheists. And he would have lost the idiot vote.

My feeling is we've bowed too far to the idiots.

There's some unintended irony in Noonan calling others idiots but at least she comes down on the correct side of the issue. David Brooks, a mediocre wingnut hack who happens to write a column for the Paper of Record also comes down on the side of us heathens:

The first casualty is the national community. Romney described a communityyesterday. Observant Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews and Muslims are inside that community. The nonobservant are not. There was not even a perfunctory sentence showing respect for the nonreligious.

Phila at Bouphonia astutely points out that Mitt's affirmation of the Separation of Church and State is like a slap in the face to many of the Fundies and their mouthpieces like Medved and Prager.

Overall, I have to give Mitt credit for exposing the fraudulent Christianity of the GOP. Memeo has more takes here and here.


¹Buddhism. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved December 7, 2007, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://search.eb.com/eb/article-68656