We now come to Part 8 of my book analysis of Kristin Kobes Du Mez’s book, Jesus and John Wayne. In this post, I will look at chapter 14, which looks at the Evangelicals in the Obama and years.
Chapter 14: Spiritual Bad Asses—Summary and Response
Obama and Jeremiah Wright
In this chapter, Kobes Du Mez (KDM) takes us through Evangelicalism during the Obama years. According to KDM, even though Obama was “an adult convert to Christianity” who could “speak with eloquence and theological sophistication about his faith” (233), white Evangelicals didn’t like him because he was black and had the middle name of “Hussein.” Even though many white Evangelicals didn’t hold explicit racist convictions, their faith was still nevertheless “intertwined with their whiteness” (234).
KDM points out that white Evangelicals certainly didn’t like Obama’s pastor, Jeremiah Wright, either, especially when preached from the pulpit, “God damn America” and quoted Malcom X. To address this, Obama gave what KDM characterizes as “one of the most powerful speeches of his political career.” In his Obama criticized some of Wright’s language, but said he couldn’t disown Wright, just like he couldn’t disown the black community or his white grandmother, because of them were a part of the America that he loved.
Once again, I feel KDM is foregoing any attempt at any real critical analysis regarding Evangelicals’ reaction to Obama. Instead, she reduces everything (in this case) to one reason: white Evangelicals are really racist. Of course, this claim is pretty much refuted by the fact that 24% of white Evangelicals voted for Obama in 2008. You first have to acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of certain voting blocks are going to vote a certain way no matter what (Evangelicals largely vote GOP; African Americans largely vote Democrat, etc.). That means, a large percentage of the vote is already “baked in.” Therefore, if 24% of white Evangelicals voted for Obama, that is quite telling. Now, are some white Evangelicals probably racist? Sure. Does that justify insinuating all white Evangelicals are racist, given the fact that Obama got the largest percentage of the white Evangelical vote in the last 20 years, possibly 40 years?
I’m not going to get into Jeremiah Wright, other than to say if a Republican candidate had a pastor who was screaming, “God damn America” over the abortion issue and quoting someone from the John Birch Society, I’m pretty sure liberals would be up in arms about it. And if that Republican candidate came out with a speech and criticized some of his pastor’s language, but said he couldn’t disown that pastor, I’m pretty sure liberals would still have a problem with it. I personally wouldn’t go to a church where the pastor routinely injected such inflammatory, political rhetoric into his sermons.
As for KDM’s gushing over Obama’s speech, and about his wonderful oratory skills in general. Call me cynical, but I just roll my eyes when I hear partisan commentators gush over how wonderful speeches made by any presidential candidate is, like political speeches mean anything. Yes, Obama had a nice delivery—I don’t care. This is not a slight at Obama, mind you. I am just saying that canned political speeches are carefully crafted by speech writers to snow a certain constituency. They are a show, nothing more, regardless of the speaker. We should all be aware enough to know, given the reality of the nastiness and corruption in politics, that nice-sounding speeches amount to nothing more than the whitewashing of tombs, no matter who delivers them. I immediately question the judgment of any person who goes ga-ga over any speech by a politician.
Evangelicals and Sarah Palin
When it came to McCain’s choosing of Sarah Palin as his VP choice, KDM says that Evangelicals were in a bit of a conundrum—after all, they believed only men should lead! KDM then mentions how John Piper wrote a blog post in which he said women shouldn’t run for VP, but in some instances (like 2008), wise people should still vote for her. Basically, Palin was a Bible-believing Christian, a creationist, anti-abortion, and pro-gun…and she was a former beauty queen, so she embodied “an ideal of feminine beauty that had been elevated to a new level of spiritual—and political—significance” (237).
Once again, KDM’s ideology and bias take precedence over critical thinking and objectivity. Sure, John Piper is going to say what he said…it’s John Piper! But to suggest that all Evangelicals were agonizing over whether or not they could vote for McCain-Palin because Palin was a woman is nonsense. At least in the Evangelical circles I grew up, conservative Evangelicals are generally opposed to having women be head pastors but have no qualms about women running for political office. I remember when McCain announced Palin would be his running mate in 2008. The very next day, virtually everyone at the small Evangelical Christian school at which I worked, teachers and students alike, were extremely excited. (I personally, thought it was funny, because heck, no one really knew anything about her yet). My point, though, is KDM’s characterization rings hollow.
The fact is, voters across the board tend to be shallow. Evangelicals weren’t “elevating” Palin’s feminine beauty to “spiritual significance.” They, like every other shallow voter, liked her because she was pretty. Let’s just be real here. Palin wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed, but a lot of Republicans and Evangelicals loved her because she was pretty, plain and simple–it’s like junior high! And let’s be completely honest, this dynamic isn’t limited to the Republican party. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is also not the brightest bulb in the batch, but oh my how liberals love her. Need I explain why? Did you guess, “Because she’s pretty?” If you get offended, just ask yourself, “Would either woman had even been given the time of day if they had not been pretty?” You know the answer, so just admit the obvious. It has nothing to do with elevating prettiness to “spiritual significance.” It has to do with the fact that a lot of voters are pretty shallow. I can rattle off countless names of women politicians in both parties who deserve more attention than either Palin or AOC, but they don’t because most of America is shallow. There, I said it.
Further Evangelical Opposition to Obama
KDM says that once Obama became president, certain Evangelical leaders like Franklin Graham questioned his Christian faith. And then there was the birther movement (fueled by none other than Donald Trump). During Obama’s presidency, there were a number of issues that came to the forefront of the “culture wars”: Gay marriage, the Affordable Care Act, the issue of whether or not the Christian owner of the Masterpiece Cakeshop had to provide wedding cakes for same-sex weddings, as well as transgender bathrooms.
KDM also spends a few pages talking about Eric Metaxes, who initially was a writer for Veggie Tales, then wrote biographies of William Wilberforce and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, where Evangelical Christians were the good guys who fought against slavery and the Nazis. He also wrote a book entitled, 7 Men and the Secret of Their Greatness, in which he held up John Wayne as one of his examples, and then lamented that America had started to tear down heroes like George Washington and Christopher Columbus. Metaxes also criticized Obama, so Evangelicals loved him. In addition, KDM mentions the rise in the popularity of Duck Dynasty, where the Robertson family was unapologetically Evangelical Christian, and the men were big, hairy, manly men. On top of that Phil Robertson spoke out against abortion, the hippie movement of the 60s, and homosexuality.
When it comes to the “culture war” issues, KDM is absolutely right. Voters in general, though, not just Evangelicals, have pretty much hunkered down in their respective ideological foxholes on these issues–and that’s a real problem. As for the “birther movement,” that whole thing was just odd. For one, for all the press it got, I could probably count on one hand people I knew who actually believed Obama wasn’t born in America. But again, maybe I’m an outlier here, but I simply didn’t know too many Evangelicals who really bought into the “birther movement.” As for Metaxes and Duck Dynasty, I really can’t comment because I never paid much attention to them. I’m sure they have their fans, but again, I’m not so sure their influence is as much as KDM makes it out to be. Maybe I’m wrong.
I don’t want to have an insanely long post, so I won’t cover chapter 15 here. I’ll save it for next time. Chapter 15 of KDM’s book covers the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump. Should be pretty tame!
