Mark Twain once wrote, in response to a premature obituary that, "reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated."
The way too many in the media and the blogosphere write about the religious right in general, and Pat Robertson in particular, one would think that the movement was death warmed over.
Wishful thinking not withstanding, the religious right remains a powerful faction in American politics, and Pat Robertson remains a wealthy power broker with daily television audience that is one of the largest on cable television. True, he has become an embarrassment to many in his movement, who are now seeking to distance themselves in various ways. But this is more complicated than it may seem at first blush, because Robertson is also an embarrassment of riches for televangelism, for the religious right and for the Republican Party.
My colleague Jonathan Hutson lays it out in detail at Talk to Action.
Here is a taste of Hutson's remarkable report:
The man who defined televangelism in America has become an embarrassment, and neither his supporters nor his detractors know what to make of that universal observation. Critics assert that Pat Robertson's theology has been marginalized and that his influence has waned. But there's no evidence to support such claims. Indeed, some of Robertson's most vocal critics are leaders of organizations, such as the National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) and the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), which are working behind the scenes to exemplify his theology, exalt his work, and expand his outreach. Yet the mainstream media and bloggers miss the whole story, and thus misinterpret the story entirely.
Hutson notes that while the man who has epitomized televangelism in the U.S. was voted off the board of the National Religious Broadcasters, who also kinda withdrew thier invitation to speak -- his show the 700 Club was given an NRB award for Best Television Talk Show at its convention.
There is a tendency for most Americans to hoot at Robertson's excesses and then look the other way. But the simple fact is that Robertson remains powerful; many in his movement do not disagree with him so much as wish he was more politic about the way he says things.
This does not mean that Robertson is not vulnerable at the moment. What is does mean is that no one is thinking about how to seize on the opportunity. For example, there are many in other sectors of the Christian Right who are less beholden to Robertson and are openly critical. Consider this magazine profile cited by Hutson:
To find out what's really going on with the NRB and Robertson, check out "The Panda in Winter," Marvin Olasky's spicy cover story in the February 18 issue of World Magazine. The piece paints Robertson as an aging and embattled but still potent king, whose "trademark geniality" and "crinkling eyes" belied the fact that he still "flashed his claws at times" during a February interview in his Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) office.
For example, Robertson defended the usefulness of his comments on Hugo Chávez by again pointing a finger at the Venezuelan president while also dissing labor leader Cesar Chávez, founder of the United Farm Workers: "Take Hugo Chávez. People thought in America that he was a grape picker from California. They'd never heard of Hugo Chávez.... The nation has now been alerted to this man."
For the record, Robertson's summation of Cesar Chávez as "a grape picker from California" is about as dismissive and offensive as summing up Rosa Parks as a black lady on a bus.
Indeed. Buried in an interview with a conservative Christian magazine -- is yet another outrage.
So.
Where is the outrage?
[Crossposted from Political Cortex]
