Login

Bigotry and Boorishness: I’m Rethinking My Prediction of Cory Booker 2020

Senator Booker, announcing that orthodox Christianity doesn't reflect the nation's values isn't a good election strategy

I know I predicted that the Democrats would field a presidential ticket of Cory Booker/Kamala Harris in 2020 to take on Trump/Pence, but I may have to revisit that before long. Unless someone gets to Booker and tells him he desperately needs to stop acting like he’s always doing an impression of Keegan-Michael Key doing an impression of Cory Booker, there’s no way this guy can get the nomination. It’s too comical. It’s too silly. All the time.

Take the recent desperate performance Booker gave at the confirmation hearings of Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo. Following his hilarious “THIS IS MY ANGRY FACE” routine where he seethed Hollywood-esque venom at DHS chief Kirstjen Nielsen, Booker really needed a strong comeback.

Instead, he once again looked like he was reading all the lines from “Great Interrogation Lines for Dummies” in the persona of Brick Tamland of Anchorman: “LOUD NOISES, LOUD NOISES!”

It was discomforting to say the least. At one point he thought he had Pompeo on the ropes. Leaning in to his microphone, Booker asked Pompeo about a speech he gave in 2015 where he quoted a prayer from a Christian minister:

“’America had worshipped other gods and called it multiculturalism. We’d endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle.’

"Those are your words," Booker said to Pompeo. "Is being gay a perversion?"

Pompeo replied by stating he had a "clear view" on whether gay marriage was "appropriate" while he was a politician in Kansas, and that he stands by those views today.

Booker continued to press Pompeo, saying he knows same-sex couples within the State Department who were married under Pompeo's leadership.

"You do not believe that should be allowed?" Booker said.

Pompeo answered by saying he treats gay couples who work at the CIA with "the exact same set of rights" as anyone else.

Booker concluded what he surely thought was a triumphant performance by declaring that Pompeo’s beliefs don’t reflect the nation’s values. And that’s the type of impassioned misstep that has me rethinking whether this guy can actually get the Democrat nomination. It’s an unforced error caused by a self-congratulatory confidence that allows you to get carried away in the moment and shove your foot in your mouth.

Booker, who attended an Episcopal church growing up but doesn’t ever have much to say on faith besides that he believes in God, just managed to announce that orthodox Christianity doesn’t reflect the nation’s values. Oof.

It may not be politically correct or cultured in the circles that Booker runs in, but Scripture is straight forward and unequivocal on the question of whether homosexual romantic and sexual conduct is a perversion of God’s will for human sexuality. It is. That doesn’t mean those of us who submit to God’s authority hate someone who commits the act any more than it means that we hate ourselves for perverting God’s will for human sexuality when we lust or commit adultery.

The fact that such a distinction is lost on Booker (and so many on the left) is an indication of a bigotry towards Christians that is born of ignorance and fueled by utter disinterest in understanding those who subscribe to the faith. There may come a time (perhaps sooner than later) that such bigotry is mainstreamed to the point of it being electorally beneficial to harbor it.

But I don’t think we’re there yet. And so if Booker wants to fulfill my prediction in 2020, he’s going to have to tone it down a notch. I just don’t know that I think he can.

How is discriminating against Pompeo for his religious views "less discriminatory"? Anti-Christian biotry is a requirement for any serious nominee of the Democrat Party. That said, being open and pointed about it is not good for the general election. This type of attitude will drive people to Trump, even if they don't like him. I haven't seen anything from Booker to make me think he is capable of being likable. That is the key to beating Trump or anyone else in a Presidential race. The most likely (or the least unlikable) candidate wins. I thought Hillary would buck that rule, but she didn't. I didn't like Obama, but he was capable of putting on a charming front to people that didn't pay attention. I don't think Booker has any of that. He does have tons of baggage of this sanctimonious fake outrage show. And a suicidal drug dealer friend that doesn't exist.

I don't Peter is arguing that his world view is held by a majority of Americans. I think he is arguing that Booker's is not. Most Americans won't favor bigotry against orthodox Christianity. Yet.

Booker takes a lot stands on gay marriage and sex between people of the same sex. Is he setting himself up to be the first black openly gay presidential candidate? Not that there is anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say.

I think you're underestimating the antipathy in this country towards Christians who actually hold Christian values as revealed in the Bible. His worldview wins the election in the Northeast, Left Coast, and Illinois. It puts all the purple states in play. And it makes the winning percentages far smaller in Red States with megacities.

Shrug. Within American society currently, it is not considered "discriminatory" in a bad sense to discriminate against bigots or non-inclusive individuals. Of which "orthodox Christianity" is certainly painted as.

(edited)

I didn't speak or try to argue on Booker's chances beyond that narrow, specific case so I'm not sure why you are going on about how unlikeable you think his is. And considering our previous discussion concerning elections, I think its best if we don't tread that path again.

There is no future and no hope in homosexual acts. Do we want a leader who offers neither?

1

Absolutely not! It seems the left wants diversity. So the most diverse candidate will be the winner of the Democratic primary. A black male, transgender, cross dressing, homosexual Muslim will be their candidate.

Apparently bigotry is in the eye of the beholder. Your statement makes no sense. To "discriminate" against bigots is by definition bigotry.

" Scripture is straight forward and unequivocal on the question of whether homosexual romantic and sexual conduct is a perversion of God’s will for human sexuality. It is. "

You know what?

More Scripture-literate people than Peter Heck have arrived at a different conclusion. And these individuals self-identify as "Christian" too.

You guys do NOT speak for all Christians any more than you speak for all Americans.

Are these enlightened ones more "Scripture-literate" than Paul?

2

"Booker, who attended an Episcopal church growing up"

Unfortunately, many authors are unaware that African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church that Booker attended as a child is not "Episcopal" in most sense of the word. Orthodox Christianity has, by and large, been abandoned by the largely-white mainline Episcopal (near-cousin to the Anglican church) and that African Methodist Episcopal Churches have more a Methodist doctrine but an Episcopalian form of church gov't and hierarchy. As with many denominations, adherence to Orthodox Christianity varies from congregation to congregation, some pursing social justice issues, some being quite conservative in their Christian thinking. All that to say, he's abandoned whatever he might have learned as a child in favor of Islam.

To your point, as a former Pharisee, Paul was absolutely an authority on the Torah, the prophets and poetic writings of the Old Testament, so thinking mlindroos' objection would be less about Paul's literacy and more about not liking what he was inspired to write. If so, just letting mlindroos know that picking and choosing what you do and do not want to believe in Scripture leaves you without any Scripture at all. But that could be for a different discussion...

You know what? People that have lots of letters after their names get things like this wrong all the time. We have an amazing ability to conclude the wrong thing because we started the entire investigation with the end in mind.

God speaks clearly, we choose to muddy in justification of our own desires.

I told those schmucks at RedState to editorialize against Booker and support Steve Lonegon in the New Jersey Senate Race when there was actually a chance of beating him (as close as the polls were, they didn't pick up Lonegon's enthusiasm and Booker's underwhelming support, which is why the race was even closer than expected) and they told me to get lost because they 'weren't interested" in covering the race. Well I bet they're interested now. This is what happens when you don't take preventative care. We could have stopped this idiot in 2013 but the Republican Party doesn't play to win.

"That doesn’t mean those of us who submit to God’s authority hate someone .................... when we lust or commit adultery....." unless that person is Donald Trump. Then it's not only OK to hate him, it's a sign of uber-Christianity. "To "discriminate" against bigots is by definition bigotry" is a comment that leads, logically, no just not taking a stand against anything, no matter how vile. I personally will continue to "discriminate" against murder, rape, child molestation, animal abuse and toxic political ignorance, knowing that those who fit into these categories are bigots regarding their own views and preferences and think I am one for opposing them. As the old C/W song says, you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything, and this squishy "whatever you do you can't be JUDGMENTAL" whine is the fallback position of the morally and intellectually indecisive.

"...the Republican Party doesn't play to win." Which is what I've been complaining about for years. They don't have a vision,. they don't have a plan and they don't even have a fundamental understanding of the opposition.

I would more say its about every society having acceptable and unacceptable behavior. Something necessary for society to function. You just happen to be on the losing end vis-a-vis the changing culture. Further, whether fair or not, that is how the world is. You can no more complain about it then you can complain about gravity.

You are right about Kamala Harris being on the ticket. Jersey Boy Booker, not so much.

Stories