Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Friday, October 27, 2006

War Support Among Evangelicals Collapses
Bush Incompetence Said to Delay Second Coming


In the past 30 days, support for the Iraq War among white evangelicals has fallen from 70 percent to 58 percent.

These numbers matter because evangelicals are a quarter of the people who actually bother to vote, and 78 percent of them voted Republican 2 years ago. Only 58 percent say they are satisfied with the party now, and Iraq and the Foley scandal are driving the discontent.

Of course, evangelicals like other Americans are seeing articles like this one in which Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki blames the US military for things going wrong in Iraq, denies that he has accepted the benchmarks set by the US ambassador, maintains he could do a better job with his own army if the US would just get out of the way, and downplays the role of Shiite militias in the country's violence. The tirades came in response to al-Maliki's perception that Bush is playing politics with Iraq for the election season, and is doing and saying things that could cause Maliki's government to fall. The tiff is not an edifying spectacle for the American public, which is paying $336 billion to watch it and has seen 24,000 of its troops dead and wounded.

On Wednesday, Sunni Arab guerrillas killed 4 Marines and a sailor.

A more colorful manifestation of the evangelicals disillusionment than the poll is the sermons of Houston-based evangelical preacher K.A. Paul. Here are some of the things he is running around the country saying about Iraq:


' The Houston-based preacher said he believes that the Bush administration has delayed the second coming because U.S. foreign policy has blocked Christian missionaries from working in Iraq, Iran and Syria. . . "Somebody needs to say enough is enough," he said to worshippers who stood, waved and called out in support. . . Paul, who claimed to support conservative political leaders in the past, is launching "a crusade to save America from the wrath of God and Republicans abusing their power," according to his press materials. . . "God is mad at this country," Paul told the congregation. He described the war in Iraq as "unnecessary genocide."


Can you say, "amen!" and "halleluja!"?

The only explanation of which I can think for the general collapse of this pillar of War party is that the political contests in mid-Atlantic and Southern states are generating television ads, candidate appearances and debates that highlight the catastrophe that is Iraq--and it is getting through to the church-goers at long last.

Mostly political discourse in the United States is dictated by the ruling party in Washington, and the mass media and press are most often nervous about getting out in front of the elected officials. But in an election season, the press is suddenly allowed to cover at least a narrow range of dissident views intensively-- that is, the views of political opponents of the incumbents. Since the vast majority of incumbents in the mid-Atlantic and Southern states are Republicans, the upshot is that a Democrat point of view is suddenly getting aired and reported on. And the Dems are mostly pretty critical of Bush's Iraq War.

You have to wonder, as well, if the Foley scandal has, so to speak, opened the evangelicals' ears to criticisms of the Republican Party status quo more generally, allowing the bad news about Iraq to sink in. I suggest it only because the story broke around the time that their approval for the Iraq War began to plummet.

Even in a relatively safe district for a Republican incumbent, such as southwest Alabama's 1st Congressional District, where Vivian Beckerle (Democrat) is challenging Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Mobile, at least there is a lively debate. You read this article carefully, and it turns out that this is the white Republican Baptist elite duking it out with . . . itself. Beckerle is a member of the Baptist church, a retired major in the Army reserves, and she was until recently a Republican herself. But now, she is a Democratic challenger to Bonner, and here is what the article says about her stance on Iraq:

' But her sharpest attacks were reserved for Iraq, where the 3½-year-old war has so far cost the lives of almost 2,800 American service members, with a financial price tag that has climbed into the hundreds of billions of dollars. Beckerle, a retired major in the U.S. Army Reserve, supports a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces within six months. At the Jackson forum, she accused the Bush administration of lying about the need for war and suggested Bonner should know that "maybe we shouldn't be there." '


This kind of challenge to Bush's Iraq War is being mounted in congressional districts and Senate races all over the South. The election is getting this discourse on the local news. Often in southern cities there is just one major newspaper, and it often is owned by a Republican and the headlines about Iraq for the past 3 years have been sunny. I travel a lot, and have seen those local newspapers folded on coffee tables in hotel lobbies, with headlines like "Iraq turning Corner, General Says." But I think the various kinds of Baptists down there are now hearing someone like Beckerle, who is one of their own and has all the right credentials to be credible on the subject, and some of them are developing doubts as a result.

This political campaigning dovetails with the crticisms of the war now being heard by a minority of preachers, such as K.A. Paul.

Places like Mobile, Alabama, are also seeing news articles that contain language like this one from October 18:

"Nine Americans killed in Iraq . . . Officials said three soldiers died Saturday of injuries after a roadside bomb went off near their vehicle in Baghdad. The victims were 35-year-old Staff Sgt. Joseph M. Kane of Darby, Pa., 25-year-old Spc. Timothy J. Lauer of Saegertown, Pa., and 48-year-old 1st Sgt. Charles M. King of Mobile, Alabama."


The spike in US casualties in October may be part of the nosedive in support for the war among evangelicals, but I think it is mostly that the usually closed US political information system has been temporarily opened up by election season.

The significance of the enormous decline in approval of the war among white evangelicals is that they are dispirited. A few may even vote Democrat. But generally speaking, the dispirited often simply do not vote at all. White evangelicals go to the polls at higher than average rates, so if they sit this one out because of discontent over Iraq (and the bumbling Bush interfering with Jesus's Second Coming), then the Dems take both chambers of Congress hands down.

8 Comments:

At 4:51 AM, Blogger karlof1 said...

"Mostly political discourse in the United States is dictated by the ruling party in Washington, and the mass media and press are most often nervous about getting out in front of the elected officials. But in an election season, the press is suddenly allowed to cover at least a narrow range of dissident views intensively-- that is, the views of political opponents of the incumbents."

Correct, occasionally the propaganda model develops holes and the doctrinal system ruptures, but seldom simultaneously. Yet, as Engdahl's piece and Clinton's presidency prove, the "War Party" is bipartisan and has a common goal, the portent of which I comment upon at my blog. If the political balance of power is changed, the work engaged citizens will need to perform only increases.

 
At 9:29 AM, Blogger BG said...

Mr. Cole, Perhaps I'm being a touch too sensitive: But the comment I think the various kinds of Baptists down there are now hearing someone like Beckerle is regionalist. Could you clarify? My problem in particular lies with the double assumption of ignorance and religious homogenity of the South. Please tell me if I am being overly-sensitive.

 
At 11:17 AM, Blogger Vigilante said...

Again, I take exception to the reference to Bush's un-provoked, unnecessary, largely unilateral invasion and unplanned occupation of Iraq (UULUIUOI) as a "war". It is an occupation. Occupations are neither won nor lost. They are ended.

 
At 11:45 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

That is, of course, unless the Bushiites use the Diebold Option.

Related article of interest, on hacking electronic voting machines , has been published in The Guardian today.

 
At 12:26 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Ever since I served as a medical corpsman in Vietnam, these religious patriots have turned my stomach. I wish they could have seen the truly tragic face of war on the wounded grunts, Vietnamese civilians and even VC guerillas. They were all victims of an insane foreign policy, which is again being happening in Iraq. Words cannot come close to describing the profound sorrow I feel over another unnecessary and immoral war. Sometimes I worry if I have been living an a parallel universe since my return from Vietnam. W.B. Yeats said it best in his poem, "The Second Coming." These evangelicals are really "slouching toward Bethelem" by their fanatic support of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And the center cannot hold much longer as the war continues to spin out of control and suck other nations of the Middle East into its vortex of destruction and death. Gore Vidal was right when he described America as The United States of Amnesia.
"You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs," a man told me defending the Iraq War once in a check-out at a grocery store.
"Well, Sir, I can see you've never been an egg," I replied. General Patton left me alone after that.
As the wounded grunts used to say commenting upon that elusive light at the end of the tunnel there: Will the last soldier leaving the country, please remember to turn off the lights? That kind of black humor is once again relevant to the foreign policy debacle in Iraq.
K.A. Paul called the war in Iraq "unnecessary genocide." Oh really. Has he been in a coma for the last three years?
Juan, I just don't know any longer about this country as it creeps toward an American kind of fascism here and abroad. I think it may be too late, even if the Democrats regain one or both houses in the midterm elections. I have a bad feeling in my gut and haven't felt this way since Vietnam.

 
At 2:50 PM, Blogger Michael Murry said...

Monty Python's "Life of Brian" contains some of my favorite cinema biblical rip-off moments. At the end of the movie, strung up on a cross awaiting his crucifixion in a case of mistaken identity, the anti-hero breaks out singing a rollicking version of "Always look on the bright side of life." Talk about denial!

Which thoughts (of the hapless and browbeaten Nuri al-Maliki, among other bad puppets) lead me to consider what happens ...

"When Scapegoats Look on the Bright Side of Life"

We'll try to "keep you posted" if we can
Whenever we decide to bomb your towns
You people have to understand our plan

To photograph some smiles and not your frowns
Our voters do not want to know your woes
They do not care about your falling-downs

We've frightened them with tales of gruesome foes
Who'll sail in rubber rafts to storm our shores
If we dare "cut and run" -- which only shows

How easily our sloganeering bores
The trained and dulled so that our line they toe
Allowing us to treat you as our whores

Though, "sovereign," you'd surely want to know
Why we, your occupiers, will not go

But this we cannot say just yet or soon
If ever, as no doubt you might suspect
Perhaps after we've gone back to the Moon

Or on to Mars, some old rocks to inspect
For if we told you what we had in mind
Our schemes to grab your oil you might reject

And since we've killed so many of your kind
You might kill more of ours, you ingrate swine!
How dare you try to place us in a bind

Refusing to endorse our latest line
Of propaganda coined to make you look
The fall guy in a moral not too fine;

A scapegoat story from an ancient book
That puts you on, and gets us off, the hook

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," Copyright 2006

 
At 3:02 PM, Blogger eatbees said...

Well, I don't know about giving this guy K.A. Paul play, even if he's saying things you want to hear. He seems like a publicity seeker and an ineffective one at that. This is from an AP article prominently posted on his own website, the context being a visit to House Speaker Hastert asking him to resign:

"Paul is best known as [Charles] Taylor's spiritual adviser, and he has often passed along messages from former Liberian president Taylor, who is in jail awaiting trial before a war crimes tribunal. Paul also claims to have counseled Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic and Haiti's rebel leader Guy Philippe."

Doesn't that combination seem both tawdry and unlikely? The article wonders how K.A. Paul managed the private one-on-one with Hastert in the first place, and concludes:

"'As an evangelistic figure in the United States, (Paul) has virtually no visibility,' [Billy Graham biographer Willam] Martin said. 'He knows some people highly placed in evangelical circles that could be the tie to Hastert.'"

Here is the article, currently on the evangelist's front page....

And another take on the Hastert meeting from TPMMuckraker.com.

Anyway, thanks for the good work. Please write more about the rumors that BushCo is planning a coup against al-Maliki, and how this might be driving the latest round of all-too-public divisiveness.

Marcel Cote
http://www.eatbees.com/blog/

 
At 9:48 PM, Blogger Michael Murry said...

Again, George Orwell long ago nailed the whole mission-creeping, slippery-slope imperial quagmire zeitgeist in an essay called "Catastrophic Gradualism." Given Deputy Dubya Bush's now-inoperative sound-bite that the disaster in Iraq represents "Catastrophic Success," Orwell's essay remains as timeless and true as ever. As he put it:

"There is a theory which has not yet been accurately formulated or given a name, but which is very widely accepted and is brought forward [often in American supermarket checkout lines] whenever it is necessary to justify some action which conflicts with the sense of decency of the average human being. It might be called, until some better name is found, the Theory of Catastrophic Gradualism. According to this theory, nothing is ever achieved without bloodshed, lies, tyranny and injustice, but on the other hand no considerable change for the better is to be expected as the result of even the greatest upheaval. ..."

"The formula usually employed is 'You can't make an omelet without breaking eggs.' And when one replies, 'Yes, but where is the omelet?' the answer is likely to be: 'Oh, well, you can't expect everything to happen all in a moment.'"

With Orwell's essay in mind -- together with my own bitter experiences in the Nixon-Kissinger Fig Leaf Contingent (Vietnam 1970-1972) -- I once wrote a poem called "Humpty Dumpty Omelets," in which I sought to exploit and exorcise my own demons through imagery associated with the language-mauling egg made famous by Lewis Carroll. (Those interested in quagmire-inspired subversive verse can find the poem at http://www.themisfortuneteller.com under the "Poetic License" sub-link.)

In any event, we should all remember to ask, the next time someone throws that snarky "You can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs" canard at us: "So, OK. When do we get the omelet? And when do we get to stop paying for all the broken eggs?"

 

Post a Comment

<< Home