We've all heard the reports of supporters of President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party announcing after the election that there would be layoffs in the lead-up to implementation of Obamacare. That has been concerning me for some time. I thought I would put my thoughts to word and see what responses and feedback I can elicit.
A word of warning to my religious brethren in the GOP who think that the Republican Platform should be replaced with the Gospel of Jesus Christ (or as one friend just joked, the Book of Mormon!), this is probably not going to sit well with you! No, I will not be roasting in Hell for these comments. Nice try. Think about this, please. I think there may be some real, true merit to my thoughts if not any proposals that arise from these theses.
There is absolutely zero incentive for a person with money to support the Democratic Party. The rhetoric of the political Left is "anti-rich," "anti-corporate," "anti-market," "anti-wealth"--pretty much as anti-anything economically productive under the sun!
The "rich," as the Democrats have labeled, attacked and demeaned them for generations, are actually those who are productive. I can understand why the "trust fund" great-grandchildren of a John D. Rockefeller, Sr. would be collectivist little scum. Everything has been handed to them their entire lives. Nobody named Rockefeller has had to work since John, Jr., and his greatest successes were in giving away his father's fortune through charitable activities. So their progeny have never had to actually be productive--ever!! That any of them graduated from high school is pretty impressive when it boils right down to it.
But a person who has pulled themselves up from the middle class, or lower, in their own lifetime to support the collectivist mentality of the Democratic Party can only allude to one of two psychoses:
1.) Either these people are suffering from bigot-phobia, or a fear of being labeled as a racist, perhaps for "corporate reasons," or in an attempt to establish a socially-friendly reputation for their company, thus ensuring their economic positions. Or,
2.) They are Jesus-phobes, and they are turned off by the startlingly apparent fascination the GOP has with everyone who walks around saying, "Praise JESUS," "Oh, thank you, JESUS," or praying, "In JESUS' Holy, heavenly name." Amen.
I have to admit, I don't know how we keep a single Jewish person in the GOP, guys! We Evangelicals certainly have a very high rate of offensiveness to a person who is either not passionately Christian in beliefs or simply doesn't "buy" into the religious line at all.
I have received many words of thanks from Jewish Republicans in public settings for my sensitivity to their diverse religious beliefs when I pray to bless a meal in a mixed setting. I go light on the "JESUS-speak"--terminology that would turn off a non-believer. And I go heavy on the "God in heaven," "God of our Fathers," "thank You for the blessings and rights You have bestowed upon us" and a very generic, "we pray these things to the Glory of Your Name. Amen." benedictory comments.
Perhaps not very appealing to the atheist rich guys. But certainly Jewish-friendly!
Now, I'm not advocating that we remove the big "G-o-d" from the Republican Platform as the Democrats got in trouble for attempting last year. But perhaps it would be wise for us to tone down some of the terminology, rhetoric and access certain big-name Evangelicals have to Party officials.
I'm not proposing turning our backs on God, the Gospel or the "J" in "WWJD?" (What Would Jesus Do?) But if the GOP is turning away potentially millions of potential supporters, financiers and such and instead are driving them to the opposition, perhaps it would be wise to recognize that this is not a church. We are not established to advance the Gospel. We do not gather to put on the world's greatest church service every four years. And we certainly do not all believe the same thing.
In short, perhaps we have made ourselves a stench to those who could give a rip what we believe. But since they suffer from the distinct perception that our beliefs turn them off and repel them like a political-theological bug zapper, maybe we could consider ways to tone down the religiously-themed rhetoric in an attempt to draw in millions of voters that we desperately need going forward in order to succeed at the polls.
The GOP is undergoing a very deep self-evaluation right now. These observations are certainly nothing new. Many have stated this already. Millions have been griping about the GOP (even making movies about it!) for years!
All I am proposing is a full consideration of the full extent to which we have repelled people otherwise friendly to supporting our Party because, well shoot--maybe they support the same economic principles we stand for!
We're talking about a person whose company was subject to the same laws of economics that every other company is subject to. And at the end of the day, they had to make the same decision to lay off workers and reduce expenses due to the costs they were going to be subject to under Obamacare, just because they were in business and employed a work force.
That screams potential GOP supporter to me. Except, what if they tell us, "You know, I just simply was utterly, completely and totally repelled by the religious people who dominate your Party."?
Again, it would not be the first time that we have heard this. But if we are cutting off our noses to spite our faces, the solution to this problem is readily apparent at that point.
Do we need to become more moderate? No. Not necessarily.
Do we need to adopt the opposite stances? No. Definitely not! Again, see the DNC last summer and the visceral, public reaction to their attempt to remove God from their Platform entirely. Bad idea as well.
But do we need to hang on every word of the Gospel when establishing our Party Platform?
Equally. And as assuredly. No. Perhaps, as is being discussed at present, a "re-messaging" is in order. Perhaps a de-emphasis of the religious and an emphasis, instead, on the economic would be in order.
Those of us familiar with Martin Luther know that this could be accomplished without even compromising on the underlying principles. We just change the terminology. Perhaps move the religious items further back in the actual Platform.
Messaging has been identified already as a major problem with the GOP. All I am saying is, perhaps we have only scratched the surface as far as the true effect our rhetoric and Platform terminology are having in driving potential supporters away.
And, therefore, if we address this issue head-on, deal with it diplomatically so as to simultaneously pacify both the religious and non-religious and get the terminology right going forward, we stand to gain greatly at the polls going forward.
The Democrats are leagues ahead of us at this early stage leading up to 2014. But they are firing on all 8 cylinders with the pedal to the floor. But the encouraging fact of the matter is--they are only beating us by scant margins in places like Ohio. And California is only 55% Democrat. That is an imminently winnable territory! In fact, I would go so far as to state that California is closer to being won for the Republican Party than Texas is to being won for the Democrats.
And if that is the case, then we are in much better shape than anyone could hope for. So if we get the messaging and rhetoric right we stand to gain greatly in coming elections.
And that should turn Democrats' red--in the face! And on the electoral map.
Words. It's only words, folks!
Comments