Kudos to Nicholas Kristof, one of the more reasonable left wingers at the New York Times, for recognizing the vileness of the common attitude of hatred and religious bigotry toward evangelical Christians among far too many of his fellow "enlightened" friends and neighbors.

There's still plenty to quibble with. Kristof is comically eager to make clear that he shares none of the heretical ideas attributed to the Christian right. He clearly recognizes that dinner invitations and career prospects would be limited, if his seeming sympathy ever led people to suspect he is deviating from the orthodoxies of the left. He wants his readers to know that he is only embracing tolerance, as if the word really means something.

But he also knows how to pitch to his audience:

There's also an odd lack of intellectual curiosity within the secular left about the Christian right. After 9/11, intellectuals rushed out to buy books about Islam. But on many campuses, it's easier to find people who can discuss the Upanishads than the "Left Behind" books about Jesus' Second Coming — which, with more than 40 million copies, are the best—selling American novels of our age. To be worldly, one should understand not only Tibetan Buddhism but also red—state Pentecostalism.

If only Upper West—Siders can be persuaded to regard the Christian right as exotic, maybe they will develop some modicum of curiosity about it. However, this misses the point. Such people adamantly refuse to learn about Tim LeHaye the best—selling novelist out of fear, not incuriosity.

There is an odd ethos of pride which many "intellectuals" have expressed to me. The single most common example is someone who denounces Rush Limbaugh as a simple—minded hater, and who proudly proclaims also that he or she has never listened to him for more than a few seconds at a time.

Still, Kristof deserves praise. He's quite open—minded for a "liberal."

Hat tip to Richard

Posted by Thomas  04 24 04

update by Ed:

I saw this and was impressed; then I started to reflect. This op—ed seems to be a mirror image of Krauthammer's op—ed a few months ago in which he took to task National Review, himself, other op—ed writers, Karl Rove and others for triumphantly declaring that a Dean victory would be ideal for Bush. He pointed out how this habit had just intensified a search among Dems for anyone but Dean.
Kristof seems to be preemptively warning the Dems and liberals to stop disparaging evangelicals because this would cause them to turn out in force for Bush.

Further update by Richard:

Maybe. I hve read a lot of Kristof columns — he is a liberal, but not the snortng, hating Krugman type. He wrote a few columns deploring the Muslim slaughter of Christians in Sudan. He grew up in eastern Oregon I believe, so probably knew quite a few believers.