The Recantation: A Former Die-Hard Conservative's Story of Why Texans Should Vote for Beto O'Rourke Tomorrow

While driving to college in Fort Worth one night about a decade ago, I saw a billboard advertising talk radio. It asked if I was “fed up with the liberal media on NPR?” Now, those who knew me back then may recall that I was rather… outspoken. Echoing Mike Pence, I’d declare loudly and often, that I was a “Christian, Conservative, Republican.” So, naturally, I had to find out what this NPR thing was all about. I found NPR on my radio. Expecting communist propaganda, I was surprised to hear a program talking about butterfly migration patterns in Washington.

I didn’t find that show particularly engaging, but it was interesting how quickly something I’d been ready to believe was an insidious propaganda machine out to destroy my worldview turned out to be so benign.

I’ve since discovered how that’s true of so many things, people, and ideas. Listening to those with a vested interest in villanizing a group of people or ideology never gives you a fair picture of what that group or ideology is all about. And context is always omitted.

Watching the debates between Beto and Ted Cruz reminded me of a debate I was in many years ago. My opponent and I had made it to the final round in our class debate tournament. The final round was not judged by our coach but rather by the class voting. My opponent’s arguments were exhaustively researched and were objectively better than mine. But the class voted for me. Why? Simple. I was a self-assured bombastic showboat – I wrapped myself in a giant metaphorical American flag and made it sound like disagreeing with me meant you were an unpatriotic communist who would lead us all to destruction.

So, when I tell you I know exactly what Ted Cruz and others like him are doing, know that it is because I did the same thing in every high school or college speech or debate. When, as a former Jerry Falwell style ideologue, I implore you to consider voting for Beto, please know that this is serious.

Let’s look at those three powerful words -

Christian
The impact Jesus had on history can’t be overstated. He took a legalistic, judgmental, and exclusionary system and tried to replace it with principles, forgiveness, and inclusion. He insisted that people – including those outside your tribe or religion - are more important than rules, laws, and religious orthodoxy. In a time when religion and government were inseperably intertwined in most places, he tried to separate them. And, tired of showey, prideful and, perhaps most annoying of all, the “humble-bragger” type leaders co-opting religion for their own ends, told people to pray in their closets. Most religions were corporate (family, culture, tribe, or nation-based) – he took it to the individual level.

Sure, he wasn’t the only one to advocate these ideas, but he was probably the most influential (even if many of his ideas were almost immediately discarded or co-opted for political ends by the Romans and the church leadership).

The ideas Jesus put forward were radical, especially considering the time and place in which he lived. Adherants should defend those ideas (love people over rules, acceptance rather than judgment, seperation of church and state, etc). But you know what we should not do? Use religion to justify political beliefs or votes. It’s shocking to me that I used to do this, when there’s absolutely nothing Jesus said that even implies that I should have done that.

We’ve got to stop letting politicians co-opt religion for political reasons. It makes it too easy for leaders to avoid tackling real issues in need of solutions (healthcare, education) and still earn votes by dividing us and fanning the flames of a culture war.

But, since a significant number of Evangelicals still (as I used to) justify their political views using religion, we’ve got to talk about the massive incompatability between the modern Republican Party and Jesus. And – to be clear - I’m talking solely about Jesus. Real Christianity. Not the Old Testament. And not Paul, who Thomas Jefferson aptly described as the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”

To start, Jesus never said anything about homosexuality. Or economic systems. Or the death penalty (although I’m going to go out on a limb and say - probably not a fan). Or abortion. Or guns. Or any of the myriad of other issues that the Religious Right (of which I was once an outspoken part) feel so strongly about.

So, what did Jesus talk about?

“Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.”

“But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation.”

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.”

That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of unbridled free-market capitalism.

And how would Jesus feel about this “migrant caravan” that Cruz and Trump are trying to capitalize on fears of?

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me no food, I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Jesus also spoke of loving not just your neighbor, but your enemy. And he condemned being judgmental. Not exactly a firm foundation upon which to fight a culture war against people who think, feel, or act in ways that offend us.

I’m pretty sure that if Jesus was teaching or preaching in Texas today, Ted Cruz would denounce him as a radical liberal socialist.

Conservative
Like so many on the right, despite Jesus’ warnings, I still like money. I saved and invested nearly every penny I made mowing lawns and building fences as a kid. Heck, I literally studied money in college. I don’t particularly enjoy paying taxes. But now I often vote for propositions and candidates who I know will cost me more in property or income taxes, if I think they’re good ideas that either help people less fortunate than me or will ensure a better future for us all.

I used to think, like Ted Cruz, that if only government would get out of the way (reduce regulations and taxes), the free market would sort everything out. Then I went to business school. Imagine a scenario with me: You’re a director at a large, publicly-traded company. You go into a board meeting and advocate that your company do something unprofitable, with no marketing or social responsibility visability, because it’s the ethical thing to do and will help people and make the world a better place. How does that play out?

One example that stuck with me was the Ford Pinto case. Ford realized that a design issue with the Pinto increased the likelihood of the car exploding and killing occupants in a collision. The company did a cost-benefit analysis and determined that it was cheaper to just settle the occassional lawsuit rather than fix the problem. Now, I love me a good cost-benefit analysis, but that’s cold.

It’s not that companies are evil. I mean, sure, some are at times, but most are just amoral profit-seeking entities. Which is how it’s supposed to be. That behavior, properly regulated, can and has produced postive results for society. But capitalism requires a proactive government to ensure that the power imbalance between us and corporations is balanced with consumer and employee protections. To ensure that market participants play by fair rules that encourage competition, don’t abuse employees, and don’t cause external harm that outweighs the market’s benefits. Without infrastructure, education, and proactive regulation, capitalism will destroy itself and us. This is not speculation – read about the working conditions people were subject to before the government intervened. Also, capitalism orgininated as an idea in the proto-industrial era. In a globalized information and service economy, we might need to tweak some things. I’m open to that now.

I also believed that anyone could “make it” if they just worked hard enough. And I still maintain that there’s some element of truth to that. But I’ll never forget a teacher training class I attended on how to work with children of poverty. They showed us a brain scan of a five-year-old raised in poverty and a five-year-old in the middle class. The difference in neural connections was staggering. This difference, while generalized, was attributed to differences in new experiences and interactions afforded to the kids as well as differences in nutrition. There it was – tangible evidence that poverty is not just a state of mind, it shapes the mind at a critical developmental period.

I’ll also never forget a student who I learned was kicked out of their home because they made a lifestyle choice that offended their parents’ religious convictions. That one really stuck with me. I was trying to teach them about cost-volume profit analysis while their world was falling apart.

Whereas I basically kept it on cruise control all through high school and college, others must overcome what might have been insurmountable obstacles for me to just get by.

Expecting people in poverty to just suck it up and try harder is cruel (and not what Jesus would do). Believing that the market will sort out things like healthcare and education in a just way is absurd. I won’t do it anymore. I now favor the availability of free early childhood education, subsidized or free childcare as appropriate, increased and more proactive social services, and evidence-based sex education. These things cost money, but they make society better. And I think, in the long-run, investing in our people will pay off in savings with regard to crime and criminal justice, welfare, health problems, and lost productivity. And a healthcare solution that seperates healthcare from employment might free people up to take entreprenurial risks that make our economy more dynamic without jeapordizing their family’s access to care.

Republican
It’s disingenuous and utterly ignorant of historical context to call the modern Republican party the party of “Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower.” Look at the electoral maps of Lincoln’s election and compare them to Trump’s. It’s easy to see that the ideological (and often biological) descendents of the conservative southern Democrats are now firmly entrenched on the Republican side of the asile. Southern conservatives switched sides after the civil rights initiatives passed under LBJ and in response to Nixon’s “southern strategy.” Teddy Roosevelt was one of the most progressive politicians in American history. Eisenhower advocated against runaway military spending, presided over the most massive public works project in American history, and enforced desegregation. Heck, even calling the current Republican party the “party of Nixon, Reagan, or Bush” is a stretch. For all his many faults, Nixon at least believed in solving problems. He created the Environmental Protection Agency and signed Title IX (prohibits gender bias at colleges and universities receiving Federal aid) into law. Reagan and Bush (H.W.) were both committed to international cooperation and expressed very favorable views of immigrants (including undocumented immigrants).

There’s so much about the history of the Republican Party to be proud of. But the respectable Republicans, like Texas Speaker of the House Joe Straus, are getting pushed out because the modern Republican Party doesn’t have any room for anything less than absolute ideological conformity. And that’s tragic.

I see genuine outrage from modern Republicans over perceived threats to gun rights, stores saying, “Happy Holidays” rather than “Merry Christmas,” and who can use what bathroom. I see very little genuine outrage from the party over poverty, discrimination, or other issues doing real harm to people. And that’s a worldview I cannot comprehend, much less hold myself.

I’ll never forget when I read a statement in the 2012 Republican Party of Texas platform condeming the teaching of “higher order thinking skills” in public schools on the grounds that those skills might “cause students to question parental authority and challenge long-held beliefs.” That was when I started to realize that I’d probably never have a place in the Republican Party again. An ideology that quivers in fear of children thinking critically and asking questions is hard to take seriously.

I’d love to be a Republican again someday. But I definitely can’t today. Please, Texas, reject partisanship and vote for Beto tomorrow.