With clients like Focus on the Family, Franklin Graham, and Campus Crusade for Christ, Mark DeMoss may be the most prominent public relations executive in the evangelical world. A former chief of staff to Jerry Falwell, DeMoss became then-presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s chief liaison to evangelical leaders. God-o-Meter caught up with him this week to ask how John McCain—and Barack Obama—are doing among evangelical opinion shapers and voters.
How intensely has the McCain campaign lobbied for your support?
I’ve gotten one phone call from a campaign staffer, [director of messaging] Brett O’Donnell. Brett called a month ago and asked if I was opened to getting involved. I told him that I was involved with Mitt Romney not just because I liked the campaign, but because I felt like he was a special candidate at a special time. I told him that I’m a conservative a first and a Republican second. I was inclined to vote for Senator McCain but not to get involved beyond that.
So you’re supporting McCain but aren’t exactly enthusiastic about him?
It would be accurate to say I am not as enthusiastic about Senator McCain as I was about Mitt Romney, but I think anybody would say that about their first candidate of choice.
How is John McCain doing among evangelicals, a crucial Republican constituency?
The evangelical world or the conservative religious world is not his natural habitat, so he doesn’t strike me as being all that comfortable with it. I think that’s evidenced by the strong comments made in 2000 about Falwell and Robertson.
But he gave the 2006 commencement address at Liberty University, your alma mater.
For all of the attention devoted to his 2006 commencement address at Liberty, which I attended and where I met the Senator, I would not suggest that that was reflective of building stronger ties or relationships or making inroads in the evangelical community. For one thing, his commencement address made no mention of faith or a lot of the issues that religious conservatives care an awful lot about.
Now, he was in difficult spot with that address, because had he given a speech about values and his faith, he would have been accused of values and pandering. Instead, he gives a speech largely about foreign policy and he was criticized for being out of touch with his audience. So he was probably in a no-win situation in that commencement address.
Do you think that McCain hurt himself among evangelicals by publicly rejecting pastors John Hagee and Rod Parsley, or has that been overstated?
The Senator hurt himself by rejecting the endorsements of John Hagee and Rod Parsley in Texas and Ohio, and it was mistake to do that. Here were two conservative religious pastors who were probably out on a limb supporting him. And he responds to criticism over comments they made and rejects them. That was a slap in the face to evangelicals who are already somewhat suspect of Senator McCain. I would have some theological differences with both pastor Hagee and Parsley, but in terms of values, we would be political soul mates. This makes it harder for McCain to make the case to evangelicals and other religious conservatives that we understand you.
You represent some of the nation’s most powerful evangelicals. What do those leaders say about McCain?
This is one guy’s perspective, but I am surprised by how little I’ve seen or read in conservative circles about McCain since February. I don’t think I’ve gotten one email or letter or phone call from anybody in America in the last four months saying anything about this election or urging that we unite behind John McCain and put aside whatever differences we have. Back in the fall and winter, you’d get several things a day from conservatives saying, “The future of the Supreme Court is at stake. We have to stop Hillary Clinton. Get behind so and so—or don’t’ go with this guy.” It’s just very quiet. It could meant there’s a real sense of apathy or it could mean they’re’ waiting for the general election to begin. But it’s a surprise, given the way email networks work now.
Barack Obama is trying hard to win evangelical voters. Does that effort stand a chance?
If one third of white evangelicals voted for Bill Clinton the second time, at the height of Monica Lewinsky mess—that’s a statistic I didn’t believe at first but I double and triple checked it—I would not be surprised if that many or more voted for Barack Obama in this election. You’re seeing some movement among evangelicals as the term [evangelical] has become more pejorative. There’s a reaction among some evangelicals to swing out to the left in an effort to prove that evangelicals are really not that right wing. There’s some concern that maybe Republicans haven’t done that well. And there’s this fascination with Barack Obama. So I will not be surprised if he gets one third of the evangelical vote. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was 40-percent.
How much of that is because of the testimonial way he discusses his own faith?
Out of curiosity, I’ve been reading up on Obama’s personal faith these last couple weeks. I read all of Dreams From My Father and I got Audacity of Hope and so far I only read the chapter on faith. The chapter on faith in Audacity of Hope actually talked relatively little about his personal faith or his relationship with Christ. I underlined even the remotest references and there might be six or eight sentences at most. For example, he talks about joining Trinity and being baptized there. But for evangelicals, there’s a difference between being baptized—it’s not eh same as acknowledging a decision to accept Christ. He says in other places that he accepted Christ as his savior and I accept that, but if you read [Obama’s books] You’re not going to find the kind of personal testimony in the kind of terms that Mike Huckabee talked about.
I’m not saying he has to be a born again or he shouldn’t be president. But he’s going to appeal to a lot of [evangelicals] and raise questions in others. I learned recently of a young woman form a prominent evangelical family who’d been supporting a Republican candidate in the primaries and she stood for four hours in a stadium in a downpour waiting for Obama to speak and signed up to work for him afterward. That’s all it took. It speaks to what we’re hearing about him being a mesmerizing communicator. There will be others who ask tough questions [about Obama] and say “I’m not so sure.” But one of the things that the media had gotten really wrong in recent years that evangelicals are absolutely Republican. Polls don’t show that to be true.
2

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
The adherences of BLACK POWER & BLACK THEOLOGY have been deceived or … are very aware … that the racist, anti-American, anti-Israel theology of James Cone is nothing but a means of furthing a Marxist ideology.
__________
THE FOUNDATION OF TRINITY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST (TUCC) - BARACK OBAMA’S CHURCH FOR THE PAST TWENTY YEARS
… “The vision statement of Trinity United Church of Christ is based upon the systematized liberation theology that started in 1969 with the publication of Dr. James Cone’s book, Black Power and Black Theology.”
http://www.tucc.org/talking_points.htm
++++++++++++++
The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology
April 2, 2008
While Black Liberation Theology is not main stream in most black churches, many pastors in Wright’s generation are burdened by (James) Cone’s categories which laid the foundation for many to embrace Marxism and a distorted self-image of the perpetual “victim.”
… In FOR MY PEOPLE, Cone explains that “the Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism as a tool of social analysis can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are.”
More:
http://www.acton.org/commentary/443_marxist_roots_of_black_liberation_theology.php
+++++++++++++++++
QUOTES - “BLACK POWER & BLACK THEOLOGY” (James Cone)
“Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.” James Cone
“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” James Cone
“In the New Testament, Jesus is not for all, but for the oppressed, the poor and unwanted of society, and against oppressors … Either God is for black people in their fight for liberation and against the white oppressors, or he is not.” James Cone
it is offensive to read James Cones comments that we should kill God, or the white enemy for purposes of them not agreeing with the same way of thinking as they,,,,other than that, I am against abortian, and any form of it...I beleive that God is everybodys color, because we were created after His image, why does this kind of talk have to enter into our elections? We need a leader for our country that has Our Country top most in his or her agenda,,,Obama has blatantly said that he is not against abortion, and other anti christian statements, for that reason I have difficulty beleiving that he would have every person in our Great Country, held as important as his own special interests nationality, why won't he respect the anthem, or the flag, or other symbols of our United States that have been symbols for centuries? And I ask, why do we want someone who has this type of beleifs to run our country? Where will this take us?
Two things are wonderful about this country's politics and at the same time make it difficult for a Christian to clearly come out for one candidate or another without it being self evident. The first is the two party system, which for instance, allowed Bill Clinton to beat George H W Bush in Bush's reelection bid. Ross Perot effectively took votes that would have gone to Bush, which allowed Clinton to win with less than a majority of votes. Same is probably true of Ralph Nader and Al Gore.
If Ron Paul supports Bob Barr or does something to undercut John McCain, it will make it that much easier for Barack Obama to win. In Israeli or European style politics, we would all choose our own party, even a Christian party,for instance and then each party allies itself with other parties, who then choose a Prime Minister. Makes you feel that your vote is more effective, but often has poorer results in terms of policy. As flawed as it is, I still like our system better for a host of reasons we don't have time to get into here.
The other thing is that, in most cases historically, the courts have stopped the erosion of our Constitution by the legislative and executive branches. These days, however, although our legislative branch is supposed to make laws, it has been circumvented by activist courts. This presents the ridiculous reality of 4 members of the California Supreme court overturning a super-majority of voters who clearly stated that marriage is between a man and a woman. Of course the classic case is Rowe v Wade on the nationalal level. We also have the wonderful possibility of sending the Ca Supreme Court "packing" on this issue by amending the Constitution clearly prohibiting them from that position.
Most evangelicals would more naturally vote for McCain for his positions on abortion and more limited government, than for Obama's radical "government can fix all" schemes, for his radical position on abortion(even voting against providing for help for babies that survived abortion in the Illinois legislature)and his opportunity, should he get elected, to appoint "creative" judges to the Supreme Court(in this case literally because they will create new "rights" that don't exist in the Constitution). But John McCain has regularly "stuck his finger in the eyes" of evangelicals and that makes us less than enthusiastic to work for him, a huge issue in the effort to get out the vote in November.
Christians need to pray(more than ever) that God will intervene this year for righteousness, because much is at stake both foreign and domestic, as a result of this upcoming election.
I really do think it will be a BIG mistake on all of the Christian community if they vote for Obama. But if things are already laid out and God is in command[ as he is ]no vote will mean anything anyway.You see what is meant to be will be.All I can say is GOD BLESS AMERICA.Just keep your heart and mind on the the things you can do something about and not the things you can't, because God has it in control.I have been told time and time again to watch the year 2012. I just don't understand why Obama is turning his back on his church after all these years of his belive, and now he comes out as being christian. I hope the wool has a lot of holes in it.
Mark DeMoss:
Please provide a source for your claim that "one third of white evangelicals voted for Bill Clinton the second time". I suspect it was close to this, but I need a source in order to use it.
Second, I think your chronology is off. The Monica Lewinsky mess BEGAN during Clinton's 2nd term. She was unknown during the 1996 election. Please offer a correction because anyone who repeats this will look very foolish and damage their credibility since it is factually inaccurate.
Thanks for all you do,
Don Flynn
Nutley, NJ
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.