Pete Buttigeig: What You See Is Not What You Get


Mayor Pete Buttigeig of South Bend, Indiana is a full-blown relativist. He views the world through the lens of multiculturalism, historicism, gay rights, and radical feminism.

Buttigeig hopes to secure the Democratic Party nomination in order to become President of the United States. If elected, there would be no First Lady. He married his partner Chasten Glezman in June 2018.

His candidacy is showing traction, as Buttigeig puts it, “There’s this intangible energy you can just feel when I walk into a room.”

Like Bill Clinton, Buttigeig attended Harvard and was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford. Like Bill Clinton, he speaks well, dresses conservatively, and has sizable charm. And also like Bill Clinton, what you see he is not what you get.

Like Barack Obama, Buttigeig opposes laws forbidding partial-birth abortion. In spite of allowing newborns to be killed, Buttigeig believes in “inclusion and love”! For Buttigeig, love means ignoring Scriptural teaching that “reflect the moral expectations of the era in which they were recorded.”

I wonder where Buttigeig stands on “Thou shall not kill”? Do we toss that out too? Sorry, I forgot, Buttigeig already tossed that out by supporting partial-birth abortion.

His reason? Buttigeig worries “the involvement of a male government official like me is not helpful.” I’m not sure why maleness should preclude us men from objecting to killing babies at the moment of birth.

An Episcopalian, Buttigeig also ignores the scriptural teachings on marriage and homosexuality as a product of the past. My gut tells me being in a gay marriage will help him get the nomination. If the Democrats can’t elect the first woman president, they would settle for the first gay president.

Charles Kaiser writing for The Guardian describes a plausible scenario which pro-life Catholics should take seriously:

Is it too much to imagine that America could elect a gay president? I don’t think so. If the disaster of George Bush’s administration was sufficient to elect the first black president, I believe the catastrophe of Donald Trump could be just enough to put the first openly gay man in the White House. Especially a man like this.

The new ultra-liberal leadership of the Democratic Party would be ecstatic to have a gay nominee. They’ve thrown any notion of truth out the window, especially if it benefits Donald Trump.

Case in point, another Democratic candidate, Bernie Sanders, refused to recognize the devastation of Venezuela by President Maduro and support the global effort to legitimize Juan Guaidó.

If elected President, Buttigeig hopes the United States will take the lead on LGBT issues. In the same interview, Buttigeig accuses the Trump White House of dividing the country with “white identity politics.” He promises a “political rhetoric to make people feel big-hearted.”

I guess the protection of innocent babies isn’t part of feeling “big-hearted.”

As mayor of South Bend, Buttigeig has been a leader in denying the rights of pro-life groups. He used his veto power to negate a zoning decision of the South Bend city council allowing a pro-life organization to relocate to property next to an abortion clinic.

That’s the kind of “inclusion and love” we can expect from Buttigeig if he’s elected President.

Buttigeig has made it clear he will talk about his faith on the campaign trail. He believes there is a “Religious Left” which will help him get to the White House. That’s the same crowd who backed Hilary Clinton to the hilt on the issue of immigration.

From a Catholic perspective, Buttigeig can count on the Nuns on the Bus, America, Commonweal, and the National Catholic Reporter. No doubt ninety percent of the Notre Dame faculty will pitch in to help.

Having watched Buttigeig interviewed, what struck me the most what his calm response to challenging questions. Buttigeig doesn’t depend on the histrionics of Bronx Congresswoman of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to make his point. This will earn him the attention of a public tired of the screaming.

We are tired of far-left politicians flailing us with hardly-repressed anger and hardly-disguised accusations of bigotry. Buttigeig knows this, and his communications strategy is to get his foot in the door just by projecting a nice-guy image.

Make no mistake, this is a nice guy who wants to strip America of a moral legacy that he considers outdated. He will use as excuses his sensitivity to the ways whiteness and maleness have “misshaped” our cultural attitudes.

Buttigeig promises “inclusion and love” for everyone who agrees with his pro-abortion and pro-LBGT agenda. The rest of us will be dismissed as “divisive” and “puritanical.”

At present, Buttigeig is enjoying the “intangible energy” he feels walking into a room of supporters. Buttigeig, if nominated, will find the waters less calm, and his earnest conviviality will be tested by encounters with less infatuated voters.

Photo credit: marcn

The views expressed here are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of


About Author


Deal W. Hudson is former editor of Crisis Magazine and Director of the Solidarity Series at


  1. Something seems odd here. Mayor Buttigeig touts various items in his agenda but something kinda basic stands out to me. If he is so “pro feminist” why has he nothing to do with a woman as his life mate? And being pro abortion, and incapable of procreation resulting from his current relationship, goes hand in hand as far as I can see, with not particularly liking women.. It’s just a wonder to me.

  2. Why would pro-life Catholics consider the Trump administration to be a catastrophe? He has been the most pro-life president since as least Row v Wade.

  3. Michael Ottinger on

    I hadn’t heard much about him. It wasn’t until reading this article that I finally decided: He totally has my support.

  4. Tyler Anderson on

    Henry Clay said “All legislation … is founded upon the principle of mutual concession… Let him who elevates himself above humanity, above its weaknesses, its infirmities, its wants, its necessities, say, if he pleases, ‘I never will compromise’; but let no one who is not above the frailties of our common nature disdain compromise.”

    I agree with this – we shouldn’t find ourselves in a position where dialogue on issues as important as abortion cannot be discussed. You seem to agree, and fear that “The rest of us will be dismissed as ‘divisive’ and ‘puritanical.'”

    Yet, are you prepared to compromise with Buttigeig? It seems that you’ve already shut yourself out of a discussion, and assume that politically left leaning people will dismiss you without listening to your message. Yet isn’t this article a dismissal of Buttigeig because of his views on abortion? This article doesn’t once seriously call into question any of Buttigeig’s policy positions – it simply ignores them. Why not write an article that offers less of a spectacle to readers who already agree with you, and more of a substantial rebuke of abortion as a political position?

    • I went to his site and one thing he mentions is abolition of the Electoral college, which is puzzling from a flyover state candidate.

      What other policy positions has he declared that you like?

Leave A Reply