Yesterday, I had a very interesting discussion with one of my co-workers. He understood socialism didn't work, etc. and supported Republicans for a long time on that basis. But now, he says, he divides America into those who favor the corporations (Republicans) and those who favor the individual (Democrats); he used to be afraid of those who were trying to take his money away (the left) but now he's more afraid of those who are trying to spy on him and take his freedoms away (the right).

Listening to him talk, he's not really so much opposed to a policy or set of policies; it's more personal, group-level animosity. Strangely, one of the primary things he says he hates about the right is the way they "fearmonger". I haven't yet confronted him with the contradiction: I oppose the left because I believe leftist policies are harmful. He fears the right because they behave and in the wrong way and are wrongly motivated. By fear.

Although he himself doesn't disbelieve in God, he believes that religion is behind all the world's problems. (This may be a product of his Catholic upbringing, sadly.) So he believes religion has no place in political discussion, thought, or action. He cited Romney's speech on religion as an example of a politician who was trying to get politics into religion.

Yet, to the contrary, whatever Romney's private feelings may have been, his speech said the exact opposite:

I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith. Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions... I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.

And, quite to the contrary, Romney has never made this faith the front issue (as he's knows it's a liability). I pointed out most media accounts of Romney raised questions of his religion, and he had to address it at some point.

So who does this co-worker support? He supports Barak Obama, who, ironically (and unlike Romney) inserts religion into many of his stump speeches. In particular:

... kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side, I felt I heard God's spirit beckoning me. I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth and carrying out His works...

[D]oing the Lord's work is a thread that's run through our politics since the very beginning. And it puts the lie to the notion that the separation of church and state in America means faith should have no role in public life.... My faith teaches me that I can sit in church and pray all I want, but I won't be fulfilling God's will unless I go out and do the Lord's work.

Mind you, he was saying this in the context of his potential service as President. He makes it clear, at point after point, that he views the implementation of various policies as "doing the Lord's work" by passing laws.

I'm thinking about quoting some of Obama's speech to him (with no attribution) -- after mentioning I'd read Romney's speech -- to see what he'd say about it. It would be interesting to see how he'd evaluate those phrases about politics being a way of "serving the Lord" if he thinks they'd come from Romney.

Conversely, I think about following it up with a quote from Romney (only attributed to "an opponent") about his job as President not being to serve any particular faith agenda. "Do you like that view better?" It will be interesting to see what he thinks about each, and how he'll explain that he supports the guy who explicitly thinks his politics come from God, and opposes the one who recognizes there may be some conflicts, and has promised to serve the nation, not his religion.

I suspect, like most Democrats, the answer will be, essentially, that he knows each one's heart: Romney is being deceptive by so saying (despite his track record in Massachusetts) and was "using religion" to get right wing votes, but Obama is essentially also insincere (which is a good thing) and just saying that because, well, because right wingers have forced everyone to say that to get votes. Or he's being sincere, but it's essentially still "the right wing"'s fault.

(In fact, I know he'll say Romney is insincere because he already said Romney's speech was just an insincere tactic to get votes. I pointed out the man went to church every Sunday, so it was hardly like he was lying if he said he possessed some kind of faith. My friend seemed nonplussed at this rather obvious point.)

So it has been, and will be interesting to watch. A man who is, in his own life, basically socially and fiscally conservative (has multiple kids, etc) is convinced to vote against everything he says he believes in by the exact technique he says he despises -- making one group of people afraid of another. He says he hates "fear-mongering" but when he talks, he expresses, over and over, only a fear of a group of people as driving his political alliances. He'd vote for a candidate who thinks his policies are God-given over one who says his policies will serve no particular church.

It would be merely interesting if he weren't but one flake in a blizzard.