On Friday’s PBS NewsHour, New York Times columnist David Brooks and PBS commentator Mark Shields teamed up to praise President Obama’s controversial remarks about Christianity at the National Prayer Breakfast as well as to shame the GOP over two potential presidential candidates' recent vaccine gaffes.
Speaking to co-host Judy Woodruff, Brooks slammed Senator Rand Paul and Governor Chris Christie as “kowtowing toward people who are suspicious of institutions and therefore suspicious of belief. And there has to be a leadership test for candidates.”
Brooks began his comments by eagerly attacking the two GOPers for their vaccine gaffes but conveniently failed to mention how both President Obama and Hillary Clinton made similar statements surrounding vaccines during the 2008 Democratic primary:
What’s disturbing about Christie and Paul is, I can’t imagine they believe that parents should be able to -- should be opting out of vaccines. I can’t believe Rand Paul really believes -- though he said I heard cases where kids were vaccinated and then there was mental damage. I can’t believe he believes that.
Mark Shields continued to play up the GOP comments on vaccines and suggested that the GOP represents a “rhetoric in this country” that encourages such attitudes:
It’s been on the ascent for almost a generation or more. And that is individual freedom, government interference, stay out of our lives, leave us alone, anything from Washington, you have to oppose, a federal mandate. And, you know, that has become the rhetoric.
--
In 1988, there were 350,000 cases of polio in this world. In 2012, there were 213. That’s because of vaccination. That’s because of Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin and the federal government and the public -- public effort in health.
And that to me is -- this is the reality. It’s beyond ideology. They were slaves to ideology. And Christie hasn’t -- just doesn’t have his footing. With Paul, it’s sort of an excess of where he comes from and where he treads and what he believes. But I think Christie comes off even worse than Paul or anybody else.
Earlier in the segment, Woodruff brought up President Obama’s controversial National Prayer Breakfast speech in which he compared ISIS to the Christian Crusades. Unlike the negative reaction Brooks and Shields had for the GOP regarding vaccines, the two had nothing but praise for President Obama.
Brooks proclaimed that Obama “has used that prayer breakfast year after year to talk about his own faith, his own faith journey, his own struggles. He’s used it -- he has come as a Christian....And so what he said was utterly normal and admirable and a recognition of historical fact and an urge towards some humility. And so I thought the protests were manufactured and falsely manufactured."
Mark Shields also found no fault in Obama’s attempt to draw a moral equivalency between ISIS and the Crusades:
I think what the president said is accurate. I do think that he’s been somewhat reluctant to acknowledge and admit and confront that this is an Islamic terrorist, that it is a perversion and to address that. But I thought the response -- I mean, these are the same people who are constantly criticizing the Islamic State people for not joining in the coalition, and saying you have got to condemn them. I just thought that it was over the top and undeserved.
Brooks made it clear that he supported President Obama’s anti-Christian rhetoric as he appeared on both PBS’s All Things Considered and NBC’s Meet the Press to express similar sentiments.
Speaking to NBC’s Chuck Todd, Brooks proclaimed that he was “totally pro-Obama on this. I think he said the right thing. Listen, it was a gospel of humility.” While discussing Obama’s speech with NPR’s Audie Cornish about the appropriateness of the speech, Brooks had no reservations about endorsing both its timing and content:
It's always the right week to speak the truth. So if what he said had been untrue, if, you know - but if the Crusades didn't happen, if the holy wars, the religious wars of the 16th century didn't happen, if Jim Crow didn't happen, then he would be saying something wrong. But he spoke the truth, and it's hard for me to get upset about somebody who said something honest.
See relevant transcript below.
PBS NewsHour
February 6, 2015
JUDY WOODRUFF: I want to ask quickly both of you about what the president said at this prayer breakfast yesterday, got a lot of attention. He was attempting to talk about -- saying that terrible things have been done in the name of Christianity, in the name of all religions, including Christianity, David. And he talked about the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, slavery. Republicans jumped on this and said false equivalency, you should be focusing on what extreme Muslims are doing today, and not talking about Christianity.
DAVID BROOKS: I think, if the president had come as an atheist to attack religion and to attack Christianity, the Republicans would have a point. That’s not what a president should be doing.
But that’s not how he came. He has used that prayer breakfast year after year to talk about his own faith, his own faith journey, his own struggles. He’s used it -- he has come as a Christian.And the things he said were things -- I have never met a Christian who disagreed with what he issued, that the religion has been perverted, that we have to walk humbly before the face of the lord, that God’s purposes are mysterious to us. This is not like some tangential, weird belief. This is at the core of every Christian’s faith and every Jew’s faith. And so what he said was utterly normal and admirable and a recognition of historical fact and an urge towards some humility. And so I thought the protests were manufactured and falsely manufactured.
MARK SHIELDS: The Bible says, slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling. That was used by slaveholders and by the defenders of slavery in this country. They quoted the Bible, and that terrible things have been done in the name of Christianity. The Crusades are hardly one of the proudest chapters of Christianity. But I think what the president said is accurate.
I do think that he’s been somewhat reluctant to acknowledge and admit and confront that this is an Islamic terrorist, that it is a perversion and to address that. But I thought the response -- I mean, these are the same people who are constantly criticizing the Islamic State people for not joining in the coalition, and saying you have got to condemn them. I just thought that it was over the top and undeserved.
WOODRUFF: Well, while we’re talking about American politics, a couple of Republicans, David, got themselves in hot water this week talking about vaccines and vaccinations.
Governor Chris Christie, Rand Paul both said in different ways, parents don’t need to vaccinate. Then they both walked it back a little bit. But damage? Are they damaged short-term, long-term, any damage from this whole episode?BROOKS: It’s not been a great week for Republicans shooting their mouths off. You know, first, let me celebrate a couple of people who said what the science says. Marco Rubio and some of the -- a lot of other leading Republicans said, the science is clear, you should get vaccinated, vaccinations should be universal, there should be vaccination. And they were completely accurate. To me, what’s disturbing about Christie and Paul is, I can’t imagine they believe that parents should be able to -- should be opting out of vaccines.
I can’t believe Rand Paul really believes -- though he said I heard cases where kids were vaccinated and then there was mental damage. I can’t believe he believes that. What he is doing is, he’s kowtowing toward people who are suspicious of institutions and therefore suspicious of belief. And there has to be a leadership test for candidates. Are you willing to tell people whose vote you want the truth when the science is very clear? And Marco Rubio passed that test this week. Christie and Paul are like getting C-minuses. And so that -- you have to stand up for truth, even if a constituency thinks otherwise.
SHIELDS: I want to be in David’s class if that’s a C-minus. I think they both flunked. Judy, there’s a rhetoric in this country. It’s been on the ascent for almost a generation or more. And that is individual freedom, government interference, stay out of our lives, leave us alone, anything from Washington, you have to oppose, a federal mandate. And, you know, that has become the rhetoric. And that was their response. The reality is quite simple. Americans do feel that the government is a pain in the neck and too much red tape and keep them out of their lives. But a trace of botulism found in one can of tuna fish outside of Pocatello, Idaho, and the universal American reaction is, where the hell is the federal government?
I want a report in my office in 24 hours, or heads will roll. We want a small, effective, efficient federal government on our side 24 hours a day, cheap. In 1988, there were 350,000 cases of polio in this world. In 2012, there were 213. That’s because of vaccination. That’s because of Jonas Salk and Albert Sabin and the federal government and the public -- public effort in health. And that to me is -- this is the reality. It’s beyond ideology. They were slaves to ideology. And Christie hasn’t -- just doesn’t have his footing. With Paul, it’s sort of an excess of where he comes from and where he treads and what he believes. But I think Christie comes off even worse than Paul or anybody else.
WOODRUFF: And the measles debate goes on. There are states now imposing new rules, school systems. I mean, it’s roiled up a discussion we thought was gone.
SHIELDS: ... your child’s health and survival.
WOODRUFF: Mark Shields, David Brooks, thank you.
