Why Are the Republicans Such Anti-Obama Liars?

Do you wonder why the Republicans tell such whopping lies about President Obama and his economic recovery plan ? Isn't one conservative value truth telling? Not when you are serving the "higher call" to save America for Jesus and/or perpetual war, as I explain in my book,Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back .

You see the Republican "base" is living in an alternative universe. These are the folks who believe that:

Guns make you safe,

The earth is 6000 years old,

Gays are evil and dangerous,

Iraq had something to do with 9/11

Obama is a Muslim,

Obama is a communist,

Obama is the Antichrist,

Lowering taxes for the super rich would help the economy,

Deregulating banks leads to prosperity.

Jesus is coming back soon to take all the evangelicals to heaven leaving anyone who can walk in a straight line and chew gum at the same time on earth,

Sara Palin's only problem is that the "elite media" was unfair to her,

Every word of the Bible is true -- literally,

We don't need trains that work, infrastructure that functions and new energy, just Jesus...

What I slowly realized (back in the 1980s before I fled the right) was that the religious right and Republican leadership that my dad and I were helping to gain power were not "conservatives" at all in the old sense of the word. They were anti-American religious revolutionaries.

The right had once been led by people like James Buckley and Senator Barry Goldwater who stood for the separation of church and state. The religious right, as it emerged in the late 1970s -- and consequently the Republican Party it took over -- was all about religiously-motivated "morality" which it used for nakedly political (and fund raising) purposes. This was a throwback to an earlier ugly time when 1930s fascist xenophobic hate-mongers like Father Charles Coughlin and his vicious anti-Roosevelt radio program were influential.

Father Coughlin would have loved today's congressional Republican leadership. He started a radio "ministry," moved it steadily to the populist right, then identified the "enemy"---in Coughlin's case Roosevelt, in today's Republican's case -- President Obama. Coughlin yesterday, Dobson and Limbaugh, Coulter today: new names, same hate.

In the 1970s and 80s the leaders of the religious right were gleefully betting on American moral failure in the way Limbaugh and the Republicans are now rooting for Obama's (and America's) economic failure in 2009. If secular, democratic, diverse gay-tolerant and pluralistic America survives, then wouldn't that prove that the Republicans are wrong about God only wanting to bless a "Christian" (white!) America of low taxes, and unregulated markets?

What began to bother me back in the 80s was that so many of my new "friends" on the religious right seemed to be rooting for one form of apocalypse or another. In the crudest form this was part of the evangelical fascination with the so-called End Times. The worse things got, the sooner Jesus would come back. But there was another component: the worse everything got the more it proved that America needed saving, by us!

And now the religious right infection (of wanting failure to score a moral/religious point) has become the the Republican illness: root for failure so "we" win ideologically!

Today the Republican Party is rooting for doom. And since the Republicans are now anti-American members of an Obama-must-fail insurgency, lies become a self-fulfilling prophecy: talk doom, and keep the economy in a panic and we may get what we wish for.

Don't conservative Republicans object to the lies? No, because the Republicans don't have any actual and traditional conservative followers left. The Republican base is now made up of religious and neoconservative ideologues, and the uneducated white underclass with a token person of color or two up front on TV to obscure the all-white, all reactionary all backward -- there-is-no-global-warming -- rube reality. Actual conservatives, let alone the educated classes, have long since fled.

The Republican religious nuts are rooting for Jesus to "rapture" them, not for America, and the neoconservatives are rooting for war and the Israeli hard liners, not for America. Truth (and sanity) are out the window.

So, what is the problem with lying to our faces, say, claiming that all American's taxes are going up when 95% of American's taxes are going to go down? Why not claim Obama is a socialist, even if he's not? Why not say anything at all to drive our country into a pit when losing is seen as winning? That, is all the Republicans have to offer America: more lies on a path to destruction from which the Republican "leadership" plans to resurrect themselves and "save" America from Obama.

Frank Schaeffer is author of Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back Now in paperback.

Comments

[Hope Lives]

And one more thing... how do these "churches" that fully admit they are political operations still get tax free status? If I were in the mainstream media I would be exposing every single church that claims tax free status while totally controlling the vote. I know how we could erase the deficit immediately and pay for all of the President's programs... tax these political organizations they call churches.

[Hope Lives]

Hi Frank! I read your columns when I need hope the most. I trust you and, having read "Crazy for God" I am a bit in awe of how intelligent you have to be. But I have a question. Why do you think they won't win again? We were totally controlled by the religious right under the Bush administration. They are back plotting and planning, the mainstream media picks up every republican sound bite, (and I'm talking NBC, the one I count on to be more unbiased), and I think it is beginning to cause some to question President Obama and he has only been in office a few weeks. But what is really frustrating is the real nut job stuff. If I were a reporter I would be reporting on how the right wing uses the Bible to frighten people half to death, to manipulate and to create a cult that is so cunning that people don't realize they've been had. But not one word of this is in the regular news. Why do you think they won't scare enough people to win the Senate in 2010? If they do, President Obama will never get anything done and they win again. Why?

[bhshore]

Dear Christian Neff ,

Your philosophy seems to some Republican lite or some bull. I see the remains of the republican party as Mr. Scheaffer wrote about being very accurate.

You'all want tax-cuts, tax-cuts and more tax cuts but:

Those who have benefited MOST - from the COMMONS ( roads, infrastructure, police, postal services) the wealthy should be taxed less then they are now WHEN THE BUSH TAX CUTS HAVE PROVEN TO BE UTTER FAILURES.

Turn back the Reagan tax cuts and reduce the deficit and rebuild America. Republicans argue against their own self interest.

IMAGINE saving $100- to -$500- a month with Universal Healthcare?
Where corps actually pay their corp 25% instead of hiding assets off shore?
Where we spend more on education, health, roads than the military?
Where corps dont write oil / energy / banking / financial policies.

WHAT ARE YOU REPUBLICANS SO SCARED OF? Islamo-facists, socialism, gays, uni-health -

Most of us are NOT scared and want you and your out-dated group of Republican­/conservat­ives to please sit down and shut up cause no matter how you try to spin the current economic crisis - it WAS THE REPUBLICANS FAULT - PUT WARS ON CREDIT CARDS, THEN CUT TAXES, OUT SOURCE JOBS , MOVE PLANTS TO CHINA TO SAVE ON LABOR, LIE (in a Christian way into a war) .....

and on and on - dude Scheaffer is SPOT ON - your outta touch

[WallStreetNobody]

"The Republican base is now made up of religious and neoconservative ideologues, and the uneducated white underclass with a token person of color or two up front on TV to obscure the all-white, all reactionary all backward -- there-is-n­o-global-w­arming -- rube reality. Actual conservatives, let alone the educated classes, have long since fled."

Game. Set. Match.

[Panglos]

When the craftiest terrorists arrive, they don't exactly wear neon signs that identify themselves as such. They camouflage themselves in whatever manner necessary to get others to trust them as much as possible. In the US, that means they carry Bibles and wrap themselves in American flags and other symbols of Americana.

[Christian Neff]

"We don't need trains that work, infrastructure that functions and new energy, just Jesus..." - Hey, he's all I need. But I personally would really appreciate the kind of train system in London (the Underground). Then again, why don't we, being one of the, if not the most, well-off countries in the world, spend some of our money to, I don't know, end world thirst (which is EXTREMELY cheap) or put a sizeable dent in world hunger (we could end that one, too, not nearly as expensive as you'd think)? Let's get Kim Jung Il out of power so that he can't keep forcing Korean citizens (men, women, and children) into work camps. How about ending the child soldiering and genocide in Uganda? Maybe we could work for peace in the middle east, instead of blaming everything on Israel. Instead of always working to make our already amazing lives better, why not make someone else's horrible life worth living?

[JimReed]

Christian Neff,
There is frustration on both sides. Christians don't like to be lumped together, but we see evangelical Christians voting 80% for Bush and 75% for Palin. The election led to choosing war. Many churches would like to say they are against war, but they did not stand up and speak out as we made our descent. The Christian leadership somehow led their congregations into the Republican party, but they are the last ones to see the problems that were caused.

[Christian Neff]

That's more or less a "lesser of two evils" kind of thing, at least in regards to McCain vs. Obama. War is only one thing on the average Christian's mind. There's also abortion, nationalized healthcare, countless other issues. In 2000, Bush wasn't campaigning "let's go to war" or anything along those lines. I don't think anyone guessed that we were going to be in a war two years later. And many churches view war as a "sad but necessary" move in certain cases. Whether or not Afghanistan or Iraq was one of those cases is entirely up to you. But take WWII for example. Should we have pushed to stay out of that war? I believe there are certain circumstances in which war is admissible, although it should never be a first resort by any means.

[Christian Neff]

Deregulating banks leads to prosperity." - I won't mention much on this, since I don't know a whole lot on it. I do know that the bank bailout situation was caused by government regulation. In 1999, the Clinton administration pushed banks to make loans to people that didn't meet the then-current credit requirements. These people bought houses with the loans the banks were forced to make. Seven or eight years later, under a shrinking housing market, these people could not pay their loans. The banks seized the houses, and now found themselves owning houses that were now worth half of what the banks had loaned out to pay for them. Multiply that times 100,000 houses, and you have all the bailouts we went through the last few months.

"Jesus is coming back soon to take all the evangelicals to heaven leaving anyone who can walk in a straight line and chew gum at the same time on earth," - This doesn't really have anything to do with politics, let alone the Republican party. Not sure why you brought it up.

"Sara Palin's only problem is that the "elite media" was unfair to her," - Maybe not the best choice for a vice-presidential candidate, but, let's face it, the media is so left-winged.

"Every word of the Bible is true -- literally," - Again, nothing to do with politics. And again, a majority of Christians don't subscribe completely to this view. (And not all Republicans are Christians, by the way.)

[Robert Griffin]

Dear Christian Neff,
Unenforced legislation helped lead to the mortgage crisis, as well as the tremendous marketing campaign for home purchases and 2nd mortgages. I have a friend who as a former missionary had no credit for home buying. The realtor built up a 'friendship' and was able to convince my friend that everything would work out wonderfully. Of course it didn't, though they haven't quite lost the house yet.

I know of too many people who received loans and credit which properly should have been denied them, NOT because the Clintons were urging that the banks lend to those who couldn't repay! Rather, due diligence in determining income would have shown that these applicants would not be able to repay the amounts lent them.

"Jesus is coming back..." Have you never heard 'it is foolish to polish the doorknobs when the Titanic is sinking'? I've talked to friends who believe that environmental issues are not a concern because Jesus will rescue them.

'Left-winged media'?! A centrist friend has recently pointed out that outside Pacific Radio (too far left for him) there are very very few left-wing talk show hosts. Very few centrists as well.

Be Well,
Bob Griffin

[Christian Neff]

I can't say much on the unenforced legislation since my experience studying economy has been a semester-long class in high school, and I didn't understand most of your response. I'll see if I can find someone to explain it to me, haha. That some self-proclaimed Christians don't care about the environment because "Jesus is coming back" is just sad. The Bible says to "care for the earth that God has given to you" or something along those lines. I've have never heard that from any Christians I know, however, so I don't know if that's a widely-held view in the Christian world. Also, I'm not talking about talk-show hosts or the like. I'm talking about MEDIA as in news networks. If you're looking for centrist talk shows, comedians like John Stewart or Steve Colbert would work. It sounds dumb, but they tend to point out the flaws in both sides.

[Russron]

Oh, the poor, poor banks. Forced by that evil gov i ment to give that money to the hopeless unwashed and undeserving.

Give me a break!

It wasn't regulation, but deregulation that brought this on. Had banks looked into loan documents, they might not have made those loans. But why worry about loaning money, when you can turn those loans around, package and sell to bigger fools who are also gambling? It was trading that marketed Loans as securities in what Jesus called "Money Changing" this mess.

And the Talibegenicals were all clamoring for less regulation--not more. Imagine if Banks were required to verify information in the loan documents? But they didn't and the regulatory cop was taken off the beat by not only The Securities Litigation Reform Act, but lack of oversight by the SEC. The SEC didn't look at Mortgage Backed Securities for reality under all that paper. Chris Cox's minions also had warnings about Madoff and "Sir Stanford" and the stupid hedge funds too!

Thanks to Deregulation, not only did these crooks get away with it--but with derivatives, they get to jump to the head of the line when institutions go under. While we wait in line in bankruptcy on Madoff, AIG, etc--Derivative Hedge Funds go and get the assets BEFORE THEY GET TO COURT. This thanks to the Republican 2005 Bankruptcy Deform Act.

Again, another Wet Kiss from the Repugs to the very rich (their own actually), at all our expense.

[Christian Neff]

"Obama is the Antichrist," - Not even close on this one. Although, you have to admit, the advertisement claiming Obama is the Messiah was one of the funniest pieces of propaganda I've ever seen.

"Lowering taxes for the super rich would help the economy," - It's not so much that it'll help the economy as much as it's fair. You make $30,000 a year, you pay about $2,000 in taxes, get it all back. The other guy makes $400,000 a year, pays $250,000 in taxes (because that's how our tax laws work), doesn't get anything back. To me, that's unfair. The guy who makes more has worked harder over his lifetime and deserves the money he's making. That he pays 70% to taxes seems unfair (let's exclude the CEOs of Pepsi-cola, etc.; can anyone really work hard enough to make a million dollars a year? By the way, those guys account for all of .0001% of the labor force. Not all the "rich" are that rich.) (PS: I seem to always get called a "rich, spoiled brat" when I bring up this argument. Let me just say right now that I'm pretty poor, and can't even afford college, which is what I'm currently working on being able to afford.) Lowering taxes of the rich, A.K.A. the big spenders, would increase the aggregate expenditure of our economy. This includes increases in private spending, firm spending, and government spending, household incomes. In short, it'd help the economy.

[Asmodeus]

I'm sorry, but being lucky enough to be raised with enough to go to school doesn't at all mean they worked any damned harder. In fact, if you look at the day of the average worker, versus the day of some over-fed tick of a CEO, I daresay 'A quick round of golf' or any such worthless activities would not come up in a custodian's or cashier's day. And make no mistake: That's what you're neoconservative values have brought this country to, Christian Neff. A nation of service-sector slaves. You made us the majority by far. Now you want to whine because we thusly have a larger say, and want to help ourselves, since helping the rich for the past 30 years has brought us to this utter ruin? Are you serious?

Go ahead and hit the street. No, not Wall Street. Ask everyone who passes buy if they wouldn't like to give you money to help the rich who wouldn't know a thing about real work, but screwed everything up for everyone, and now need the "Mythical Little Guy's" help. See if you don't get your face slapped off.

[Christian Neff]

Asmodeus,

I asked already to leave out the .0001% of the labor force consisting of CEOs, as I aready mentioned that no one should be able to make that much money, because no one could work hard enough for it. But any economic, or governmental system will consist of the .0001% who have made it to the top and roll in their millions. It's in every society, just a part of life. There isn't much we can do about it. By the way, my brother, a 20 year old waiter/student, has found more than a few times for "a quick round of golf," and I, a 17 year old cashier/student, have found my own rounds of golf here and there. Just because I'm poor doesn't mean I can't enjoy life. Also, I never asked for money for the rich. I specifically asked for money for the poor, the much poorer and needier than you or I.

[Robert Griffin]

Dear Mr. Neff,

The guy who makes more doesn't necessarily work more. I have heard too many times 'It takes MONEY to make money.' The book 'Rich Dad Poor Dad' points this out as well.

I am a salaried employee (database programmer), and hope to continue as such until I die. My working harder for my current employer (an air cargo company) will not increase their profits, and will therefore not increase my paycheck. My work helps my employer determine what the profits were, and what taxes are owed, and I am very happy to help in this and similar matters.

If you've paid any attention to E-Bay over the past several years or if you've observed any of the Renaissance Faires you will have seen evidence that the declining spendable income of the middle and lower middle classes under GWB has had a devastating effect in retail expenditure, even as the number of hyper-wealthy increased.

Be Well,
Bob Griffin

[Christian Neff]

Bob Griffin,

I would say that, as a whole, those who are "rich" must have contributed at least some kind of excess labor in order to rise to their current positions. Whether it be through talent, hard work, or some kind of job knowledge, etc. "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" is a great book, although I don't believe I read more than the first 7 or 8 chapters. I should probably finish it...I have not payed much attention to eBay, other than using it, but overall, I was under the impression that the US economy was steadily growing up until the last two years or so, at which point we maintained somewhat of a standstill, leading to the current first-quarter recession (or are we in the second-quarter, I'm not sure).

[Christian Neff]

Dear Mr. Schaeffer,

I find your opinion of the Republican party biased, outdated, and overall misrepresentative. The Republicans may have had a Armageddon-pushing agenda 20 years ago when you were a part of it, but, that's exactly it. It was twenty years ago. Those that you claim are a majority in the party are maybe 10%, but that's a fairly generous estimate.

"Guns make you safe" - how is this false or bad in any way? Guns make you safe. Guns can be used to kill you. So can a dog. So can a book for that matter. I'm sure (if it's printed in hardcover) that your book would make a very effective bludgeoning device.

"The earth is 6000 years old," - again, a little-held view even in the Christian world today. It's fairly inaccurate to say that this is the official standpoint of the religious-­right-Repu­blicans.

"Gays are evil and dangerous," - Sadly, this is slightly true, although to account it to the entire Republican party is yet another misrepresentation. People who are actually following a Christian standpoint on this would say something along of the lines of "Hate the sin, not the sinner." People that claim that God hates gays and that they will all burn in hell aren't quoting anything from the Bible.

[Danigirl65]

Thank you once again, Frank, for making sense of what the Republican party has become and why it will fail.

As somebody who believes we are the masters of our own destiny, Bush scared the heck out of me (cleaning it up for posting) when he starting claiming God was talking to him and advising him on foreign affairs.

As an independent, I've always voted bi-partisan in elections. After the past eight years of the Bush administration and the past 40 days of the No-thuglicans, I think I'll vote straight Democrat in the future.
The Republican party as it exists today, and as it threatens to be in the future, is not the future I want for my country, let alone the legacy I want to leave my niece.

Don't get me wrong, the Dems aren't perfect - no politician or party is - but the Republicans are moving backward and forward looks much better to me.

[lisakaz2]

Awesome post. I don't get the slippery slope of lying as the means to a supposedly moral end. How is that moral?

[OneLiberalLady]

It's amazing the power this minority wields. By constantly undermining any sense of progress on the economy, for example, their doomsday predictions become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Which is just what they want, after all.

[valkyrie607]

Thanks for explaining why the right wing tribalists hate America.

[fem56]

I seriously thought Bush was trying to bring on the Armageddon. Quite likely he wasn't but others I believe are; such an abuse of the magnificant teachings of Jesus. The author and meaning of Revelations are very controversial within the Christian church. It wasn't added to the bible until the fourth century and there was much debate on whether to add it in.
Adding to the list is the worship of all things Reagan. Now Reagan was a delightful man and not an evangelical Christian but he took advantage of the fact that the rich were taxed at a 70% level. He brought down the level way down. Of course that was stimulative. I think Obama wants to the tax the richest at 34% level about half the pre-reduction level. The Republicans such as Limbaugh (who is hardly a Christain as far as I can tell but an opportunist) absolutely worship Reagan. That is like Democrats worshipping Roosevelt. Learning from the past is one thing; worshiping the pastis another

[Indie2008]

It's true. When Rush Limbaugh says the Democrats are destroying the conservative agenda, he fails to tell his riled-up followers that the job was already completed by George Bush. That "conservative" is now just a code word for the radical right has yet to sink in to the consciousness of the GOP.