Philosophically, Bush Gets Inspiration From an Unlikely Guru

A little more than a year ago, on a muggy July day packed with political symbolism, Texas Gov. George W. Bush delivered his first major policy address as a presidential candidate at an Indiana church.

As the national press hung on every word, Bush sketched his vision of a kinder, gentler brand of conservatism, one in which the government would turn to religious groups for help serving the poor. The word “compassion” popped up 15 times in 20 minutes.

Watching from afar, proud as a parent at a high school graduation, was Marvin Olasky, the inspiration for Bush’s philosophy of compassionate conservatism and one of the most unlikely gurus ever to attract the attention of a potential world leader.

Olasky--ex-Communist, ex-atheist, born-again Christian--has become a savior of sorts among Republicans, who see in his theories a way to create small government with a big heart.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich first raised his national profile in 1995, suggesting that Olasky’s vision was a model for the future of the GOP.

Now, Olasky’s idea that religion can play a role in providing government social services has found special resonance with Bush, a fellow Texan and fervent Christian who wrote the foreword to Olasky’s most recent book, a paean to faith-based charities published last month.

Olasky believes the current wall between church and state must be broken down to let religions use tax money to help the poor. An alcoholic needing treatment could take a government voucher to an evangelical abstinence program, for instance. Or a taxpayer could donate money to help fund a Buddhist self-help center.

As Olasky’s influence has grown, the University of Texas journalism professor has become the political equivalent of a double-wide trailer in tornado country, attracting roaring controversy.

In recent months, civil rights groups have attacked his views on religion as a menace to the church-state wall. Feminists are outraged by comments they say show that Olasky believes women are secondary as leaders. And some Jewish groups were angered by a recent article in which Olasky attacked a group of conservative newspaper columnists, all of whom turned out to be Jewish.

Even some other conservatives have joined the chorus, saying Olasky’s work lacks intellectual rigor and stokes negative stereotypes of Christian conservatives.

“We are concerned that someone of this stripe has the ear of a presidential candidate who self-admittedly is not an intellectual,” said Ira Foreman, head of the National Jewish Democratic Council.

Anti-Semitism Issue Is Raised

Some of the attacks, especially those that hint at possible anti-Semitism, have angered Olasky, 50, who was raised Jewish and has praised the work of Hebrew charities in his books. Others he brushes off as misreadings that ignore his life’s work, which include more than 13 scholarly books and hundreds of articles.

But he’s not backing down from his philosophy, which he said in a recent interview would even let groups like Scientologists and Wiccans use taxpayer funds to deliver services to the poor, so long as the programs were voluntary and proven effective.

“My tendency is to be inclusive. That can include Wiccans and Scientologists. If people are going to get mad at me, then so be it,” Olasky said.

Olasky is almost amused by the fierceness of the attacks against him. After years of portrayals in the media as an obscure academic with an oddball story, he now appears as a powerful Svengali bending Bush to a radical agenda.

Olasky scoffs at the notion, downplaying his role as “a very occasional, very informal, very unofficial” advisor who hasn’t had contact with Bush this year.

Bush officials echo that assessment, continuing a recent pattern of distancing Bush from the controversies that have dogged Olasky.

“He’s an outside, informal advisor,” said Dan Bartlett, a Bush spokesman. Bartlett noted that Bush had contact with Olasky only twice, though both times proved significant.

One came in 1996, when Olasky helped lead a task force to figure out how Bush could implement faith-based programs in Texas. The second was in 1999, when he worked on another Bush task force to do the same thing, but on a national level as part of his run for the presidency.

Olasky’s journey to prominence has been a long, strange circumnavigation between ideological poles, from Marxist to church elder.

Born in Massachusetts, Olasky grew up in a Jewish home, attending Hebrew school and celebrating his bar mitzvah at 13.

But a year later, the intellectually precocious youth told his parents he was actually an atheist. By the time he entered Yale, Olasky was running toward the left at full tilt. He protested the Vietnam War. He staged a five-day hunger strike. By 1972, he signed up to become a card carrying member of the Communist Party USA.

Then one night, while reading a passage from Lenin, Olasky asked himself the sort of question that keeps college students up at night: What if Lenin is wrong? What if there is a God?

Olasky decided God deserved a second look and began a slow process that culminated with his conversion to Christianity in 1976. He and his wife began attending a conservative Christian church they picked out of the phone book and never looked back.

Gingrich Helps Put Olasky in Spotlight

In 1983, Olasky arrived at the University of Texas, where he taught journalism.

In 1992, he published “The Tragedy of American Compassion,” the product of research into turn-of-the-century nongovernmental charities and their effectiveness. After a few thousand sold, the book seemed destined for the dollar bin at Books-a-Million.

But then, a rising Republican powerhouse from Georgia--Gingrich--discovered Olasky’s work. In his first speech in 1995 as speaker of the House, Gingrich hailed Olasky in the same breath as Alexis de Tocqueville as models for the future of the GOP.

Olasky, suddenly, was a GOP darling: in demand on the morning talk shows, running a think tank with Arianna Huffington, and advising the 1994 Texas Republican gubernatorial candidate--Bush.

But the spotlight didn’t really begin to burn until the pitched primary season between Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

In February, Olasky wrote an article accusing a group of conservative writers of being uncomfortable with Bush’s open embrace of religion. He implied they were “proselytes in the religion of Zeus”--a reference to a Tom Wolfe book.

As it turned out, all three writers were Jewish--which Olasky said he didn’t know at the time. Some Jewish organizations jumped on the seeming slight as an attack by a Christian conservative on Jews; others said they found no offense.

Olasky, himself a journalist who edits the Christian newsweekly World, smelled politics: “At least some of the people who are very partisanly motivated were trying to find ways of hurting Gov. Bush,” Olasky said.

Recently, Olasky’s writing has drawn scrutiny from women’s groups, in particular a passage from a 1998 religious newsletter interview in which he talked about the biblical tale of Deborah and Barak.

In the story, Barak says he will not go into war unless accompanied by Deborah, who was serving as a leader of Israel at the time.

“God does not forbid women to be leaders in society, generally speaking, but when that occurs it’s usually because of the abdication of men,” Olasky said. “As in the situation of Deborah and Barak, there’s a certain shame attached to it. I would vote for a woman for the presidency, in some situations, but again, there’s a certain shame attached. Why don’t you have a man who’s able to step forward?”

Women’s Groups Abhor Remarks

Olasky said the quote has been taken out of context and that he has no problem with a woman as president of the country or a corporation, though his own church forbids women to serve as elders.

That’s still not good enough for many women’s groups, who find Olasky’s statements offensive, no matter what the context.

“I hope he keeps talking and talking,” said Loretta Kane, a NOW vice president. “I hope he gets lot of media coverage saying he’s one of George W. Bush’s advisors.”