Evangelicals are the New Black

In my inexplicable effort to keep at least one conservative blog on my regular reading list (tacitus has been a bit of a disaster lately) I paid a rare visit to Oxblog. In addition to the giddy, substance free endorsement of the heartwarming (the steal a phrase from the poorman) rags-to-fascism Alberto Gonzalez, the reader is treated to this brilliant bit of analysis.

Matt Yglesias wants to know exactly when John Kerry or any other Democratic candidate was condescending toward evangelicals. The answer to Matt’s rhetorical is “almost never”. But that’s not that point.

Negative attitudes towards evangelicals, justified or not, abound in the Blue State Media. Democratic candidates may avoid invoking them, but I don’t think that even Matt would deny that Christians, especially evangelicals, are looked down upon by the glitterati. After all, Matt himself refers to the them as “chumps” and suggests that they are “detached from reality”.

In essence, evangelicals face the same dilemma as African-Americans. They consider one major party to be anathema, thus ensuring that the other major party takes them for granted.

Let’s get this straight: Group A refuses to support Party X because party X supports policies that harm group A, and scores electoral points by demonizing group A in thinly veiled code.

Group B refuses to support party Y because the geographical base of party Y is located in close proximity to publishers whose publications group B doesn’t read, but has nevertheless come to believe may be condescending toward them.

But it’s basically the same thing.

Here’s my announcement for the day. I’ve been seeking out intelligent conservative commentary and analysis for the last few years, and I’ve occasionally found some of it, but not enough. We’ve now reached a point where the very modest yield of such a search can in no way justify the collateral damage incurred in the searching. My forays for the foreseeable future into the realm of conservative commentary will be limited to surgical strikes–quick looks at specific articles and posts recommended by people whose judgement I trust.

Well, and Brooks and Safire, because I suffer from the rare and tragic affliction of being constitutionally incapable of not reading the NYT op-ed page every damn day.