The Christian Right Is Scoring Big Political Victories, State by State

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/christian-right-scoring-big-political-victories-state-state

***SNIP

Liberalism is kryptonite for the Christian Right. It’s no coincidence the Christian Right emerged as a force in national politics at the same time liberalism was read its last rites, with the election of Reagan in 1980. The decline of liberalism in America has failed the working- and middle-class.

With President Clinton’s embrace of the sanctity of the corporatized free market, and thus a continuation of Reagan/Bush economic policies, and with Obama continuing the legacy of Clinton, working-class and middle-class people have been left without an economic voice in Washington DC. In many ways, Clinton Democrats unwittingly helped turn the Christian Right into the political powerhouse it is today.

Under Clinton, Democrats deregulated Wall Street, destroyed unions, gutted welfare, and embraced the self-defeating economic myth that is globalization. When basic economic issues are removed from the table, when both parties embrace the mysticism of unfettered capitalism, deregulation and free trade, all that is left to distinguish the two parties are the social issues, such as god, guns and gays.

Clinton Democrats played the role of cheerleaders as Reaganomics dismantled the manufacturing sector, destroyed labor unions and cut social services to the poor.

Chris Hedges writes:

“We have betrayed the vast and growing underclass. Most believers within the Christian right are struggling to survive in a hostile world. We have failed them. Their very real despair is being manipulated and used by Christian fascists such as the Texas senator Ted Cruz. Give the working poor a living wage, benefits and job security and the reach of this movement will diminish. Refuse to ameliorate the suffering of the poor and working class and you ensure the ascendancy of a Christian fascism.”

[theHandpuppet]

1. Truer words, as the saying goes....

"Refuse to ameliorate the suffering of the poor and working class and you ensure the ascendancy of a Christian fascism."

[Trillo]

2. Could anything be worse than Christian fascism?

What will they do? Nail everyone to real, or metaphorical, crosses?

“Here, after all, is a rebellion against the ‘establishment’ that has wound up cutting the tax on inherited estates. Here is a movement whose response to the power structure is to make the rich even richer; whose answer to the inexorable degradation of working-class life it to lash out angrily as labor unions and liberal workplace-safety programs; whose solution to the rise of ignorance in America is to pull the rug out from under public education,” writes Thomas Frank.

[cantbeserious]

3. Actually - The Destruction Of Unions Began Under Reagan

eom

[former9thward]

9. The peak of union membership was 1954 when it was at 35%.

Not coincidentally that was about the time other nations in the world started to shake off WW II destruction and they began to compete with the U.S. Ever since then the competition has increased and economic pressure to get rid of unions has increased.

[cantbeserious]

13. Does Not Change What Reagan Did

eom

[former9thward]

14. It does not change what any President did.

But union membership was in a long time decline by the time Reagan tookoffice.

[cantbeserious]

15. Your Opinion - Others Would Disagree

eom

[former9thward]

16. Not my opinion.

It is a mathematical fact. It peaked in 1954 at 35% and has gone done ever since. Do you or "others" have facts which are different?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

[cantbeserious]

17. Your Opinion - Others Would Disagree

eom

[MisterP]

4. more neoliberalism and Dem candidates tied to The Family will put an end to this! :sarcasm:

[MindPilot]

7. All we have to do is vote correctly for the presumptive winner.

And everything will be rainbow unicorn farts and puppies!!

[leftstreet]

5. DURec

[MindPilot]

6. at least we have a slate of candidates from which to choose....

Anti-war, pro-union, progressives who will demilitarize the police, re-regulate the financial industry and prosecute war crimes.

unfortunately...

[raven mad]

24. I wish we did.

Sigh.

[Wella]

8. The article doesn't mention the specific political victories

Do you know what victories they are referring to?

[uppityperson]

10. The article talks about LGBT discrimination laws and abortion restrictions, specifically, on pg 1

[Wella]

11. But these are largely tissue and are coming down:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025446870

[uppityperson]

12. Marriage restriction isn't the only LGBTdiscrimination and nothing there about abortion restrictions

yes, money and effort is being spent to end marriage discrimination, but there are other discriminatory policies, and I see nothing there addressing the attempts to interfere with women's reproductive health care. Have you heard of Hobby Lobby legislation, allowing companies to chose what, if any, reproductive medicines insurance will cover rather than allowing covering what health care providers deem best for the patient? Have you heard of the continuing attempts to give an embryo the same rights as the person carrying it, from fertilization? Have you heard of legislative attempts and sucesses allowing businesses to actively discriminate against LGBT people?

I have.

Read the article. These are not "tissue", whatever that means, but can and do seriously affect many people.

[Wella]

18. I have heard of Hobby Lobby but that's not a governor's issue

That's a SCOTUS issue and I believe that, eventually, there will be single payer and that issue will go away.

[uppityperson]

20. It is, like the OP says, a Christian Right issue. As are increasing LGBT and other types women's

reproductive health care restrictions the Christian Right is working on.

[Wella]

21. But the main topic was about governors; Hobby Lobby is SCOTUS. There are two different solutions

The governors are really a GOTV issue. If you can get Democrats to vote in droves, you can make a dent in some state houses and/or governorships. SCOTUS is trickier. Not only do you have to have a Democratic President but you have to have a Senate that is supportive. And you have to wait for certain people to retire (one way or another). Right now, the only person who has mentioned retirement is Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and that's not a good thing.

[uppityperson]

22. National politica, Clinton, deregulation of Wall Street, welfare gutting are governor issues?

Ted Cruz is a governor?

Maybe you are reading a different clip than I am since none of those were governor or governor issues.

And again, the article does talk anout specific issues, lgbtandwomens reproductive health. "Do you know what victories they are referring to?"

[Wella]

23. "The Christian Right Is Scoring Big Political Victories, State by State" (State by State)

That is the TITLE of the article. This title is referring to state politics, yes? And the mechanisms of change.

None of what you mentioned is a state level phenomenon. And in terms of "victories" against GLBT, none of these references make any sense:

Ted Cruz--General angst. He can say what he wants, but his vote only counts along with hosts of others at the Federal level and his vote can be vetoed by the President.

Clinton (Bill) is overwith; Clinton (Hillary) not in any voting position yet; will pander to get elected.

Wall Street deregulation: What does this have to do with GLBT or the Christian right? This was an insider decision put together by both parties and signed by Bill Clinton. As far as I know, it doesn't affect sexuality or religion.

The real people you need to be worried about ARE the governors and the state houses. Department of Justice has made it clear that it stands with GLBT rights:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-department-to-give-married-same-sex-couples-sweeping-equal-protection/2014/02/08/36eafcae-90cc-11e3-b227-12a45d109e03_story.html

The Federal level also stands with a woman's right to choose and is cracking down on people who block access to clinics:

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/01/140094051/obama-takes-tougher-stance-on-abortion-protesters

In other words, at the Federal level, the fundamentalist Christians have no support. Yes, there are a lot of "pro life" or "pro family" Congress members/Senators, but none of them has been able to stop DOJ or what this President thinks is important in regard to GLBT and abortion rights.

The real resistance to these issues is at the state level. States with more religious populations ARE making it harder for women to get abortions and for gays to marry. There are certain laws that are being passed and certain religious protections AT THE STATE LEVEL that are being enacted.

That's not happening at the Federal level.

The Hobby Lobby case is actually based on a law passed in 1993:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act

It was this law that SCOTUS used to uphold Hobby Lobby. But the law is over 20 years old--hardly of recent vintage. And four justices interpreted this law differently in the Hobby Lobby decision.

That is why I said, the solutions are different. The state laws seem the overwhelming issue right now: Ted Cruz can't do a bloody thing if Holder is pulling DOJ in the other direction. A GOP Congress hasn't been able to budge DOJ one iota.

It's the state level where these things are taking root. That's what the title of the article was trying to get across.

[sendero]

19. It's amazing..

... how many people don't understand that it was CLINTON that gutted our economic miracle, much more so than Reagan. He got all the things done that Reagan couldn't.