Selectively Mormonizing public figures. It’s interesting that with all of Glenn Beck’s recent popularity (and notoriety) that he hasn’t been tagged more as a Mormon. The same has been the case for Sen. Reid.
Beck’s a ripe target for ridicule from his many critics. But that makes it all the more strange that his Mormon faith hasn’t come up like it did with Romney. Is it because he’s not threatening to certain Evangelicals?
(Possibly) Related posts:
Tags: Glenn Beck, mormon celebrities
-
David, you raise an interesting question of whether Beck is perceived as less threatening to evangelicals than Romney. What would make Romney more threatening, though?
A fear of a Saint becoming President? A fear that Romney’s heart wasn’t really with conservative evangelicals on social issues?
I’ve yet to see any mainstream coverage of Beck that goes into satisfying detail about his faith. I guess it’s much easier to focus on his crying, his taste for doomsday scenarios, and his sometimes angry outbursts.
-
Douglas,
Thanks for the visit.
I’m not sure what the answer is. All that comes to mind is Romney might have been more threatening as a Mormon President. To so legitimize the LDS Church would be a concern for some.
But you would think that the same people who found Romney threatening would feel the same about Beck’s increasing popularity and influence. Beck did have a flap with Focus on the Family a few months back. So he hasn’t completely escaped it. But for your purposes regarding media coverage he seems to have.
Also, I don’t mean to scapegoat all Evangelicals as I believe Romney’s “Mormonization” was the result of a vocal Evangelical minority amplified many times over by the relentless media coverage and speculation.
-
In Beck’s case, being the slightly odd conservative confirms stereotypes about what Mormons are like.
As for the difference between Reid and Romney: it is a matter of the office in question. A president holds all the executive powers of the United States. A senator, even the majority leader, is just one of 100 senators. The Congress is very powerful and the Senate has a powerful role in Congress, but an individual senator has little power by himself (or herself). This is why, according to Madison, the Congress was given most of the governmental powers at the national level.
People in general, and both parties, have long respected Mormons in both houses in Congress and in the Cabinet. The White House, however, is a different game.
Of course, I think that there was much more than Romney”s religion that lead to his defeat. But, I have argued this here before.
-
I hate to be the guy to plug his own post, but as it relates directly to your post, there were a couple of posts on this a few days ago (including one I wrote at the JI). Here’s the links:
http://usreligion.blogspot.com/2009/03/american-idiot-and-glen-beck.html
http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/glenn-beck-and-the-revivalism-of-mormon-millenarianism/
-
Chris,
You’re certainly right that Romney’s Mormon “problem” was not why he lost but I think the coverage of it greatly prevented him from getting any message out. It was a big complication that overshadowed whatever he did.
I also agree that there’s a big difference between being President and Senate Majority Leader. But when you have hit pieces from a Newsweek reporter (Jacob Weisberg’s “Romney’s Religion: A Mormon president? No way“) attacking Romney solely on his personal theology, it makes me wonder why there is no curiosity as to what Reid believes.
Yes, members of Congress get lost in a crowd of 535, but Reid’s still a top player in Washington. All the profile pieces on him mention he was a convert in passing but follow the narrative of his hardscrabble upbringing in Searchlight, NV. If anything, it would be interesting to hear why he and his wife (of Jewish upbringing I believe) decided to convert as young adults.
My theory is that since he is sufficiently liberal (as demonstrated by recent pro-choice statements) his personal beliefs don’t pose a problem and he’s given a pass.
Christopher –
Thanks for plugging your post. I actually intended to link to it myself but then got distracted by a squirrel outside and promptly forgot. You make some interesting points. I’m probably a prime target for Beck as a conservative Mormon but I don’t get it. He’s not as bad some conservative commentators but it sounds like he’s regurgitating stuff that has fallen by the wayside several decades ago.
It will be interesting to see if it sticks or if its just a short-term reaction to the election.
-
Dang squirrels.
Just out of curiosity, when you say that “it sounds like he’s regurgitating stuff that has fallen by the wayside several decades ago,” are you talking about his political argumentation? Who has it fallen by the wayside with? Mormons? Conservatives? Both?
-
Christopher –
Well that was speaking out of ignorance, which I shouldn’t have done.
What little I have heard of him and from your summary calling his schtick a revival of Mormon Millenarianism, my impression is that Skousen hasn’t been a hot topic among Mormons of late.
I certainly can’t speak for most Mormons, and don’t know the Utah scene that well (although I’m living here now) but as National Review-reading, talk radio listener (Rush, Hugh Hewitt, don’t care for Hannity or other Fox News types), I think I’m not too unusual in ignoring Beck’s apocalyptic preaching, what little I have heard of it.
But as anyone, I’m just going on my anecdotal observations, like you admitted in your post that you are. Having lived mostly back East, I realize I’m not your typical Utah Republican Mormon. But when I have lived out here, I haven’t heard anyone talk of Skousen or similar stuff either.
-
That’s what I figured. I was just trying to make sure I understood what you were/are saying. I appreciate the clarification.
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://asoftanswer.com/2009/04/02/selectively-mormonizing-public-figures/trackback/