Perlstein: Is Obama's "religion of Secular Humanism" this election's viral RW meme?

Yes, you read that right. Seems really stupid doesn't it, that something so ... stupid ... could suck all the air out of an election campaign. Yet that's exactly what happened in 2004, with the swiftboatage of John Kerry. Stupid; and so very effective.

For Perlstein, the Kerry part of the story — the analogy that sets up the Romney prediction — started with a stupid little self-published booklet he discovered in 2004 floating around the fringes of a right-wing event.

Here's his intro (my emphasis and paragraphing):

Once upon a time, in early 2004, I attended one of hundreds of "Parties for the President" organized nationwide for grassroots volunteers who wanted to help reelected George W. Bush, at a modest middle class home in Portland, Oregon.

At one point, a nice old lady politely pressed into my hand a grubby little self-published pamphlet she had come upon, purporting to prove that Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry had faked the heroics that had won him three purple hearts in Vietnam. I added it to my mental store of the night's absurdities that I expected to hear rattling across the wingnutosphere the entire fall: "I still believe there are weapons of mass destruction"; "There is an agenda—to get rid of God in this country"; "John Kerry attended a party in which there was bad language!"

What I didn't expect was to see Kerry's war-hero cred earnestly debated night after night on CNN. Then came August and "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" — and that little old lady's fever dream began dominating the media discussion of the campaign, and the rest, as they say, is history.

That's the way, in my experience, the ecology of right-wing smears works: Insane horror stories – Clinton is running cocaine out of an Arkansas airport! Barack Obama had gay sex in the back of a limo! – bubble up from the collective conservative Id at the outset of an election year; professional conservatives in Washington identify the ones that seem most promising and launder them through the suckers in the "balance"-hungry mainstream media; and presto, before you know it, it's death-panel-palooza, 24/7.

Presto; yet this is not magic, but art. These are professionals. Watch and learn — here's how the process breaks down. They:

• Figure out how the rubes want to be lied to
• Figure out which lies have "legs"
• Figure out which lies also advance the Movement Conservative Project
• Focus-test all of the swamp-meat prose they come up with
• Deliver the stinkiest rot to the eager flies using the fly-seeking "professional" press
• Count the money (note to students: the MoveCon Project pays extremely well)

This is how it's done when the pros do it. There is nothing uncalculated about advertising. (Hint: Ask yourself why there are so many black men in the "can't get hard" ads. Go ahead, ask. There's an answer, and it's perfectly thought through.)

Perlstein has much more. He traces the history of this particular fantasia — from a 1961 Supreme Court decision footnote; to a 1974 near-miss court challenge to the "religion of Secular Humanism"; to its demonization in a 1984 right-wing classic; to ... well, read on. It's Perlstein doing what Perlstein does quite well — tell a great story.

I can't close without giving you this, the current season's seed, from the Rolling Stone article I've been quoting and Crooks and Liars. (If by chance you listen to this vid twice, ask yourself if the questioner isn't a shill, a ringer.To my ear she sounds way too focused on asking the question from a very precise angle.)

Romney in Wisconsin (that's Paul Ryan on stage with him):



In defense of Perlstein's prediction, the Catholic Bishops PAC is all over this one. I agree with Perlstein — it's not going away on its own.

GP

(To follow on Twitter or to send links: @Gaius_Publius)
 

Romney to give commencement at Falwell's Liberty U

Romney 2002:

"I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard."

Romney 2012:

"I believe people understand that I'm firmly pro-life," he said in a debate that same month.

Keep in mind that this isn't just a speech. It's the commencement address. Meaning, you get a speaker that you know clicks with your values. And Mitt Romney does not click with any of the values held by the Jerry Falwell crowd.

Now sure, the Mormon leadership clicks quite well with the Falwell crowd - both are extreme agents of intolerance. So on a basic hate level, the religious right and the Mormons have a lot in common. But not only is Mitt Romney untrue to the religious right, he hasn't exactly toed the Mormon line on gay rights or abortion over the years (which is typical Romney trying to have it both ways). Sure, he does toe the line now that's he's trying to win the nomination of a political party over-run by extreme conservatives. But historically Romney has been uber pro-gay and pro-choice.

Then what the heck is he doing speaking at Liberty University?

The answer is in the invite. The religious right is about as true to Christianity (and their own professed values) as Mitt Romney is to any of his previously professed beliefs. The very fact that the Falwell crowd would invite Mitt Romney, an arch liberal who shares none of their values, a man who once claimed to be more pro-gay then Ted Kennedy, to give a speech only given by those who share their values, shows why in the end Romney and the religious right are really the perfect fit.

Both are family values posers.

Hate group tries to claim credit for Komen debacle

The officially-designed religious right hate group, American Family Association, is now oddly (or typically) claiming credit for the failure of two Susan G. Komen events to pull in the support they previously expected. Here is AFA's latest email alert:

Nationwide, women are choosing to no longer support Komen and its partnership with Planned Parenthood.

A March 25 Komen race in Southern Arizona was short 7,267 participants of their goal of 11,000. The event also failed to meet their fundraising goal of $700,000 by over $100,000.

Another race in Indianapolis scheduled for next week is also expected to be at least 10,000 short of last year's 37,500 participants.

There's that.  Or maybe people are leaving Komen in droves specifically BECAUSE of what it did to Planned Parenthood. I don't know anyone progressive who would ever give another dime to Susan G. Komen after the Planned Parenthood debacle. So, gee, perhaps that's why their fundraising and turnout is suffering.

AFA is good at trying to claim victory from the jaws of the defeat. Probably because they're just not that good at this game. Hell, Joe and I beat them a few years ago when they got Ford Motor Company to stop advertising in gay publications. After we blew the issue up here on the blog, forcing other gay groups to finally get involved, Ford caved. AFA was ticked at us. I know they were, because someone inside subsequently defected and told me about the meetings.

So it's understandable why AFA feels the need to claim credit when it's not clear that any is due.  Otherwise, they'd have nothing to say.

Secret docs show lead anti- "gay marriage" group wanted to "fan" race war

Ben Smith at Buzzfeed sums up the secret documents that he calls "explosive":

Final line I'm amazed NOM put on paper: Goal of "fanning the hostility" btw blacks and gays

This is seriously f'd up.

A "confidential" internal document of the lead anti-"gay marriage" group, the National Organization for Marriage" (NOM), shows that the organization was not simply content at taking civil rights away from gay couples, they wanted to start a political race war between black, Latino and white Democrats, and they admitted it in writing. They outright admitted that "the" top goal of the anti-"gay marriage" movement is "fanning the hostility" between blacks and white gays, and between Latinos.

Here are their own words:

"The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks - two key democratic constituencies. We aim to find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage; to develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; and to provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots. No politician wants to take up and push an issue that splits the base of the party. Fanning the hostility raised in the wake of Prop 8 is key..."

That last line is referring to a blow up in the gay community following Prop 8 when an exit poll showed that an overwhelming majority of African-Americans voted in favor of the anti-gay amendment. In other words, the religious right wants to fan the flames of racial hatred between blacks and whites.

They write of the black community, and Latinos, as if they're mere puppets for the religious right to manipulate. They continue:

"Consider pushing a marriage amendment in Washington, D.C."

What they mean is, DC is a majority black and Democratic town with a large gay community. They want to start a race war in the nation's capital.

This line was also particularly crude:

"Find attractive young black Democrats to challenge white gay marriage advocates electorally."

Again, it's all about promoting a race war between blacks and whites in order to hurt gays and the Democratic party, to hell with what it does to the black community, the civil rights movement, or the future of this country.

None of this is a surprise. What is surprising is that they would put talk of fanning a race war in writing.

Here's a second document, below, and Joe has a third over at AMERICAblog Gay. We'll have much more on this tomorrow.

20100716 Doc 128b NOM Depo - Exhibit 2 - NOM Depo Exhibit 12 Nat'l Strategy for Winning 12-15-09