The Scarlet Cross

Mt. Shasta from Mt. Lassen summit- photo by JoAnn Sturman

Scott Sturman
fliesinyoureyes.com

Adherence to fringe ideologies or mindsets undermines the ability to serve effectively as President of the United States. Views which are considered acceptable by society have evolved throughout the country’s history. In 1959 John Kennedy’s Catholicism had many questioning whether the Pope would be running America. Nowadays his religious beliefs would scarcely be news worthy. Ironically, the press’s microscope and venom is reserved for more traditional sectarian targets. Imagine George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, or Abraham Lincoln on the campaign trail and having to defend their religious beliefs to the contemporary, secular, liberal press: “Sorry, fellas, your qualifications are impressive, but your religious views raise red flags with our editors.”

In today’s politically correct world it is chic to be non judgmental, hip, secular, and worldly. Woe to any public official who preaches personal responsibility or professes the importance of religion to achieve it. In a bizarre twist the cross has been made to signify bigotry, superstition, and unsophistication. We are led to believe it is a modern equivalent of Hester Prynne’s scarlet letter.

Given Obama’s dismal performance, it takes a fertile imagination to conceive of any accomplishment which will motivate his supporters in 2012. Hope? Change? Luck? Cash for Clunkers? Trillions of more stimulus money? Crucifixion? Yes, that’s more like it. Assassinate the character of conservative candidates and portray them as religious fanatics. Cull their backgrounds and embellish each and every faux pas committed from preschool to the present. It is a not so subtle message that Obama may be an incompetent dilly-dallier, but at least he is our clown.

Obama cavorted with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for twenty years and felt comfortable raising his children under the reverend’s guidance. Wright’s message was more hate and racism than fire and brimstone, but according to the media, the President was not listening. We are reassured the President is a deeply spiritual man, but the religious beliefs of Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney are far more troubling. The intelligent and well spoken Bachman, who cared for over 40 foster children, is a latter day Aimee Semple McPherson, and Perry, the successful and longest serving Governor of Texas, is an Elmer Gantry clone. Elect Romney and rather than be ruled by Kennedy’s Vatican, Salt Lake City will call the shots.

Obama’s media pals extol him for what he says, but ignore his deeds. A conservative candidate, particularly a religious one, is judged not only by past and present acts, but by future ones, as well. It is a heavy load to carry, if one is held accountable for hypothetical situations, however unlikely.

Publicly liberals embrace tolerance and proclaim themselves denizens of the moral high ground. In reality they are tolerant only of those who do not challenge their dogma. They are especially intolerant of anyone who expresses an independent point of view based on experience, faith, or science that is different than their own. So steadfast is this belief that liberals wrongly proclaim that conservatives with religious backgrounds necessarily will demonstrate the same intolerance as they pretend not to practice. This convenient stereotype has been nurtured successfully to great political advantage in the liberal press.

No amount of spin or distortion can hide the incessant failures of the Obama Administration. To give him a second chance to destroy the country for the sole purpose of keeping the Presidency out of the hands of a conservative who believes in God is absurd. But I thought Obama believed in God, too. What’s the difference?