Great Huckabee quote, via The Stump, regarding his controversial "Merry Christmas" ad:
"If I had used the name of Jesus Christ in vain, and blurted it out as profanity, no one would be talking about it," he says. "Nobody. It would simply get ignored and accepted as the way we talk these days. But because I invoked his name on his own birthday, to say to America, 'Happy birthday, merry Christmas,' somehow everybody sees in it something that isn't even there. Have we so lost our national soul? Have we become so coarse that even the attempt to bring some civility to the political arena is met with nothing more than scorn, disdain, and disbelief?"
Noam adds: "This brought as many head-nods and murmurs of approval as I've seen on the campaign trail this year."
Consider that in light of this passage from today's NYTimes dispatch from Iowa:
But he does not light up a room the way some charismatic politicians, like a Barack Obama, might. He warms it up.“I would say he’s more personable and congenial than anything else,” said Howard Taylor, 52, a community college instructor in West Des Moines. “He’s the candidate who believes certain things the way I do, and for the same reasons I do. He doesn’t have to be electrifying.”
Somehow, the very lack of magnetism and fieriness has become one of the hallmarks of Mr. Huckabee’s campaign persona. He is the social conservative who is “not mad at anybody,” the Christian who does not rail against “happy holiday” cards issuing from the White House, but just puts on a red sweater and makes a campaign advertisement with “Silent Night” playing in the background.
“I believe he’s not looking at polls, like some of these other politicians do, Hillary Clinton especially,” said Doug Butler, 48, a Marshalltown executive. “If he wants to say ‘Merry Christmas,’ well he’s going to say it. This controversy is ridiculous.”
Notice that last quote? What the voter is responding to is not Huckabee's religiosity. He's responding to his authenticity. Or at least the appearance of it.
Contrast that to Mitt Romney, who, like it or not, is the very model of inauthenticity. This is why his flip-flops on abortion and homosexuality stick to him, reinforcing conservative voters' reservations about him, while Huck's flip-flops on, say, immigration, do not.
Speaking of inauthentic, here's the Mittster going all Clintonian on us, saying that when he claimed he saw his father marching with Martin Luther King -- which never happened -- he meant "saw" in a "figurative sense." Heh heh heh.

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
I liked the part (with Romney) about the Patriots winning the World Series ...
(Which would be news to Sawx Nation, of course!!)
I don't see why people wouldn't give him the benefit of the doubt on the "cross" being in there. We all know if you stare at a particular bookcase every day for years (assuming that's his home or office) that no one will notice it, because you only think of it as a bookcase. I'm a writer and the same thing happens when I edit my stuff. Obvious typos slip by me because, hey, I've poured over this and I know what I was saying.
The fact that he clearly says "Jesus Christ" and it is clearly religious in every sense, because hey, that's who he is. He is a minister, after all, and I find it refreshing that he is willing to just be himself. But I don't think they would deny they intended that to be there if they did. If he is so overtly stating everything else, why hide that?
There is no reason. So, I tend to buy that they just didn't see the cross when they made the thing. I didn't see the cross the first time through either. It looked like a window frame is what I thought when someone actually pointed out it looked like a cross.
Hey, people also found the Virgin Mary in a tortilla. I saw Jesus' face in an evangelical ministers cabinet once too. When I pointed it out, he said, "Wow, I've never saw that before." Familiarity would naturally not give them a second thought. I don't find that so implausible. I'm not saying that didn't intentionally put it there, but the simpler suggestion is that they didn't. And it seems people who are unwilling to give him that have an ax to grind.
I didn't see the cross the first time I viewed the ad, either. In fact, I believe I first saw the ad right here on Crunchy Con. The post was entitled "A Christmas Abomination" (sarcastically, I think), but I don't remember Rod alluding to the cross at all. Perhaps he hadn't yet noticed it, either. I agree with those who ask "Why would Huck suddenly go for subtlety? Why make the cross 'subliminal' when he comes right out and discusses 'the birth of Christ'?"
I'm giving Huck the benefit of the doubt, here. Like him or not, support him or not, his faith seems sincere to me.
Whether or not Mitt actually "saw" with his eyes or not, his father was a staunch Civil Rights supporter.
http://occidentalvalues.blogspot.com/2007/12/george-romney-and-martin-luther-king.html
SYNOPSIS:…at least four historical Books about MLK and 1960s politics state that King and Romney did March together...George Romney was a guest at King's funeral along with RFK...as Governor and HUD Secretary Romney was a noted non-black Civil Rights leader of his day...George Romney was recognized along with King and RFK as one of four leaders popular among disadvantaged black youths in a 1967 survey...link below to photograph of MLK and Lenore Romney (Mitt's mother)...link below to photo of Romney being heckled by racist protesters in 1960s for HUD efforts... and most important, George Romney himself, led a march of 10,000 people through Detroit to protest after Bloody Sunday occurred in Selma, Alabama...see below
Oh, I don't doubt the sincerity of Huck's faith. I just have a hard time believing that even if the cross was inadvertent, that they didn't notice it before the ad went out. Surely SOMEONE was looking at the ad quite closely. And if they didn't notice it, it says something, to me anyway, about the level of professionalism his campaign maintains.
Again, I don't have a problem with the cross being in there, I just have a problem with denying they noticed it before the ad went out. I like people being able to discuss faith in the public square, as long as you are not purposely trying to exclude people of other faiths from the discussion.
I wouldn't change my support (or lack of) for Huck based on this, though. And maybe I'm wrong. It's happened before. :-) Many times.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.