A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

I agree with one of the talking heads I heard this week. Weyrich's endorsement of Romney, Brownback's endorsement of McCain and Robertson's endorsement of Guilliani all further confirm the apparent splintering of the religious right movement.

In the meantime there is Terry Fox, prominent, long time hellfire and brimstone, gay hating, anti-abortion pastor of Immanuel Baptist Chruch in Wichita, Kansas who was dismissed by the church board because they said, "His activism was getting in the way of the Gospel." And within three months, other fundy pastors in Wichita were dismissed as well. Their congregations have grown tired of the weekly dose of the horrors of abortion and the eminence of the end times and the anti-Christ.

The Evangelical Crackup

In addition the highly successful mega-church movement with it's emphasis on the power of positive thinking and God's unconditional love seems to be functioning as an antidote for the toxic fumes of the apocalypse.

Christians, those who aren't insane with absolutism and guilt are growing tired of the scare tactics of the Bush administration. Their children are coming home in a box and they feel betrayed by the corruption and scandal. Many Christians, even fundies have morals after all. Many have values that go beyond hate and fear. Those I know personally feel betrayed by Bush. They have been telling me for some time now that they feel used. They feel they have no candidate and are declaring that they will vote for no one this election. They say that many of the members of their churches feel the same.

Many in the mega church movement are interested in Obama and his positive approach.

As the religious right disperses, so will the Republican party base grow weak. As Ralph Reed (I think it was Ralphy) long ago declared, the purely religious right candidate can't win, but a Republican candidate can't win without the support of an organized, solid religious right voter bloc.

But don't think that Robertson's fundies aren't still a significant bloc of the religious right. He's still got a TV show with an audience. Crazy people do vote, you know. I think Roberson's endorsement of Guilliani is likely related to the end time senero. Without Armageddon there can be no second coming. Many of the most extreme feel they need to help God out with his plan, ironic as that seems to be.

I think everyone's fed up with the Republicans, all but the rare 21 or so % who seem to be locked in no matter what. Surely these include Robertson's crazies. Guilliani is worse than Bush in his heavy handed power and control tactics.

I feel a bit of hope for humanity coming over me. I hope I'm not sorry.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Well, he did specifically ask whether George believed it to be a good thing "not from a political strategizing angle", but otherwise. So when you start your own answer to that question with "I do", one expects it to, you know, not be from a political strategizing angle.

Cycloptichorn's post is sooo two pages ago. You can't expect me to have, like, read it.

nimh wrote:

Thomas wrote:
Yet in the long run, when Giuliani needs to swing independents for the general election, voter attention will have moved on to other news. Then the endorsement will make no difference anymore either way.

This I agree with - except, of course, if some progressive group neatly recycles the images from Giuliani's press conference with Robertson in some attack ad.

I hope you're right. Giuliani is not my favorite candidate.

0 Replies

Re Rudy and Bernie Kerik and "family values" types like Robertson...

Kerik was moved up to police commissioner through an appointment by Giuliani even though more than half Rudy's cabinet opposed the nomination as the requirement of a college degree was not met. At this time, investigations determined that Kerik had mob associations. Rudy now says he "doesn't remember" such information, odd given his chest-puffing on hitting the mafia in New York.

After 9/11, an apartment at ground zero, donated for first responders, was taken over by Kerik for his personal use. This personal use included using it for rendevous with at least two mistresses (he was married at the time and his wife was pregnant). One mistress was Jeanette Pinero and another was Judith Regan.

Judith Regan was a "reporter" for the National Enquirer ("Chocoholic Mother Gives Birth to Chocolate Covered Baby!"). Later, she was hired by Rupert Murdoch to head up Regan Books (sleeze stuff, the most recent, the OJ Simpson book "I Did It") and briefly had a Fox TV show.

Clearly, here was a fellow who ought to move up in the republican/bush world and thus he was nominated by Bush for Secretary of Homeland Security.

Subsequently, he and Rudy went into business together and made the big bucks selling tasers.

0 Replies

Your innocence astounds me Bernie.

0 Replies

oh, that's right Spend........innocence, that describes Bernie exactly. He's wearing his little halo at this very moment.

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

I agree with one of the talking heads I heard this week. Weyrich's endorsement of Romney, Brownback's endorsement of McCain and Robertson's endorsement of Guilliani all further confirm the apparent splintering of the religious right movement.

I think your statement demonstrates a basic assumption that has never existed in the first place, that religious people were banded together as some huge group to throw their support behind certain people or causes. People like Pat Robertson and his ilk do not speak for most religious people and never have, in my opinion. This all stems out of the paranoia by the left over religion and the so called "religious right."

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Lola wrote:
I agree with one of the talking heads I heard this week. Weyrich's endorsement of Romney, Brownback's endorsement of McCain and Robertson's endorsement of Guilliani all further confirm the apparent splintering of the religious right movement.

I think your statement demonstrates a basic assumption that has never existed in the first place, that religious people were banded together as some huge group to throw their support behind certain people or causes. People like Pat Robertson and his ilk do not speak for most religious people and never have, in my opinion. This all stems out of the paranoia by the left over religion and the so called "religious right."

I don't assume that "religious people" were banded together, I know that certain evangelical groups, like National Research Council, Focus on the Family, blah blah blah...... have been organized since the early 1970s. Do your research, oakie. Where have you been? Even they don't deny it. They were all proud of their organization. But that's all in the past. It was a sizable group, splintered now. No one disputes the organization. If you don't know about it.......look it up. Amazing.

0 Replies

They have their organizations, fine, but that does not imply that people vote that way. Newspapers make endorsements, but do all subscribers vote the way their newspaper recommends? I doubt it. I frankly don't remember anybody that ran that agreed totally with any religious organization, unless it was Pat Robertson himself, who was supported by his own organization, but we saw how far he got. You also assume the organizations are made up of some ubiquitous group, which I don't think has ever been the case. I think the groups have always been splintered, and in this years Republican primary, there are more candidates to go around, and more choices, which serves to better illustrate the splinters.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

They have their organizations, fine, but that does not imply that people vote that way. Newspapers make endorsements, but do all subscribers vote the way their newspaper recommends? I doubt it. I frankly don't remember anybody that ran that agreed totally with any religious organization, unless it was Pat Robertson himself, who was supported by his own organization, but we saw how far he got. You also assume the organizations are made up of some ubiquitous group, which I don't think has ever been the case. I think the groups have always been splintered, and in this years Republican primary, there are more candidates to go around, and more choices, which serves to better illustrate the splinters.

oakie,

I don't know your background or how familiar you are with Evangelical churches. I was raised in an evangelical church and have until recently had a relative who was a highly visible leader in the Evangelical movement. I'm not a youngster either. Actually I've achieved the high status of 61 years. My family remains highly active in the church and with major Evangelical leaders. Believe me, many, if not most Evangelicals have been following the expectations of their pastor and church leadership in voting. Only recently have many Evangelicals begun to question the wisdom of political activity by the church. Times are changing. And that's good.

If you have different experience, let me know. I don't know you, but you may be influenced too much by the news accounts you're hearing or reading.

0 Replies

I am not far from your age, and frankly I have never met anyone that said they voted for whoever their preacher or church told them to. In the first place, it is not their job to tell people how to vote. I guess I am not familiar with your experience.

If you want to know the truth of it, as regards to Christianity, Jesus was not a political person, he said render unto Caeser what was Caeser's and that was about the extent of it.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

I am not far from your age, and frankly I have never met anyone that said they voted for whoever their preacher or church told them to. In the first place, it is not their job to tell people how to vote. I guess I am not familiar with your experience.

If you want to know the truth of it, as regards to Christianity, Jesus was not a political person, he said render unto Caeser what was Caeser's and that was about the extent of it.

Try to tell that to the Evangelicals. Many of them are headed toward Armeggedon, or bust. You must come from a much more benign church experience that I have. The Evangelicals I know are hell fire and brimstone.......idealizing that big know-it-all with the red face and puffed out chest in the pulpit making us feel so self righteous and gooooooooooood about how right we are. And then there's those humble souls who feel they have to do as they are told because it makes them feel safer to do so. But actually, the worst of them are just plain mean.

But then there's those who can think a bit for themselves when they finally see that they've made a mistake. They do care about people and are fed up with corruption, lies and war, after they've been hit over the head with it for so long they've finally grown disgusted. I couldn't believe those elders in Wichita, Kansas who threw Terry Fox out of their church. Delightful!

0 Replies

Has McCain received endorsement from any sector of the religious right?

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Has McCain received endorsement from any sector of the religious right?

Does Brownback's endorsement count for you?

0 Replies

Indeed it does. My memory seems to be disimproving.

By the way, Sunstein will be guest blogging at talking points memo.

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

okie wrote:
I am not far from your age, and frankly I have never met anyone that said they voted for whoever their preacher or church told them to. In the first place, it is not their job to tell people how to vote. I guess I am not familiar with your experience.

If you want to know the truth of it, as regards to Christianity, Jesus was not a political person, he said render unto Caeser what was Caeser's and that was about the extent of it.

Try to tell that to the Evangelicals. Many of them are headed toward Armeggedon, or bust. You must come from a much more benign church experience that I have. The Evangelicals I know are hell fire and brimstone.......idealizing that big know-it-all with the red face and puffed out chest in the pulpit making us feel so self righteous and gooooooooooood about how right we are. And then there's those humble souls who feel they have to do as they are told because it makes them feel safer to do so. But actually, the worst of them are just plain mean.

But then there's those who can think a bit for themselves when they finally see that they've made a mistake. They do care about people and are fed up with corruption, lies and war, after they've been hit over the head with it for so long they've finally grown disgusted. I couldn't believe those elders in Wichita, Kansas who threw Terry Fox out of their church. Delightful!

Sorry to hear about your experience. Voting should be a personal choice. I have no problem with religious people voicing their opinions to others, but that is all they are, opinions. Who Pat Robertson or James Dobson endorses, or anyone else endorses for that matter, I couldn't care less. I would think it should be the same way for Union bosses. Union members, teachers, etc. should vote for whomever they please, and what a union boss says should make no difference. Same for the black leaders. For them to try to herd all black people as their little puppets down to the polling place to vote is another very troubling thing.

One of the reasons I am a Republican is because in general, we tend to think and act as individuals instead of a bunch of groupees.

0 Replies

Quote:

One of the reasons I am a Republican is because in general, we tend to think and act as individuals instead of a bunch of groupees.

Yeah. "Dittoheads"...there's a fine example.
Or there's this... http://www.learcenter.org/html/projects/?cm=zogby

0 Replies

"While conservatives report very few trips to the cineplex, liberals are the most frequent moviegoers."

Just what I suspected, libs are into more fiction than reality.

But then that makes the red suit make sense too.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

"While conservatives report very few trips to the cineplex, liberals are the most frequent moviegoers."

Just what I suspected, libs are into more fiction than reality.

Nothing quite like selective reading, and a little spin to what you've actually read, to confirm your preconceived notions...

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

okie wrote:
"While conservatives report very few trips to the cineplex, liberals are the most frequent moviegoers."

Just what I suspected, libs are into more fiction than reality.

Nothing quite like selective reading, and a little spin to what you've actually read, to confirm your preconceived notions...

Okie and cognitive dissonance...enough potential energy there to light the streets of Sodom.

0 Replies

A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know