Chris Christie has appointed a Muslim judge. Herman Cain said he wouldn’t. So how is Chris Christie different from Herman Cain? Well here are some possibilities …
1) Christie is more tolerant of religious differences. This is possible, although now Cain has said that although he thinks many of them are terrorists whose houses of worship can only be located in places where the locals acquiesce, he sympathizes with Muslims and shares common values them.
2) Christie is focused on results. If a Muslim is the right person for the job, he’s going to choose a Muslim.
3) Christie actually has political responsibility, something that tends to moderate one’s positions. It’s a lot easier to be strident and uncompromising when one has no real responsibility beyond for any real constituents. Pizza purchasers are not constituents.
4) Christie is less willing to be seen as a bigot than Cain is. You can prove he’s big, but good luck with the bigot thing.
5) Christie isn’t interested in playing on fear and anger. It sure would be nice if it were true.
6) Christie is smarter than Cain. Maybe Christie knows many Muslims send their kids to Catholic schools. Maybe he is aware that there aren’t tons of Muslims marching for gay or reproductive rights. Maybe he knows that Imams don’t generally hang out with Gloria Steinem.
And I think we have a winner. Christie might well be a responsible, no-nonsense, closeted Quaker. I’m more willing, however, to see him as smart. He knows that Muslims tend to be conservative. He also knows that many of his constituents (including a sizeable Muslim population) won’t have a lot of tolerance for bigotry. He’s also un-encumbered with a lot of the right wing baggage that Cain carries with him, making him smart and more able to make choices based on logic and reason.
Whatever the reason they are different. Hopefully, though, now that Christie has committed to staying out of the Presidential race they will have something in common … neither will be elected President in 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment