Posted on 03/25/2007 8:00:22 AM PDT by Blackirish
WHEN Mitt Romney emerged from a closed-door meeting at the recent National Religious Broadcasters convention, a handful of reporters, myself included, descended on him. What, we asked, was the toughest question put to him by evangelical leaders?
" 'How does America win against the jihad?' was at the top of the list, and the nuclear proliferation represented by Iran," the Republican presidential candidate said.
My fellow reporters groaned disbelievingly. What about battling the "radical homosexual agenda?" Or building a pro-life majority on the Supreme Court?
Maybe Romney was being coy. Or maybe his powwow with Christian-right activists happened just like he said it did, signaling a major development within the GOP's evangelical base: that the war on terror — and, more broadly, the confrontation with Islamic radicalism — have become "values" issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
The others are kind of irrelevant if you lose the WOT.
Huckabee is the darling of the right ? When did this happen ?
This article is so full of inaccuracies, I don't know where to begin .
I think the current crop of Republican candidates would all be tough on the WOT - it is a Republican issue - perhaps the one issue that binds the party together. Some candidates are stronger than others in certain areas - some have had to deal with it's impact directly, after the fact. Some have had participation & impact in voting on issues that pertain to the WOT. I believe all of them take the issue seriously and I cannot think of any of them that have indicated they would back down from the fight.
I agree with you. I do have some reservations about McPain though . I'm not quite sure where he stands on some crucial issues regarding the WOT.
Perhaps the NRB is just out of touch. Have they become such a darling of the mainstream of the Republican Party that they no longer place priority on the values issues that REALLY matter to people of faith? Marriage, family and life issues are still at the top of many religious Americans' agendas.
None of the MSM, and very few moderate Republicans understand how Evangelicals actually think!
Agreed. The MSM keeps referring to the social right as conservatives, a misnomer if I ever heard one.
It seems like a lot of evangelicals are thinking quite differently than the ragers on Free Republic.
" 'How does America win against the jihad?' was at the top of the list, and the nuclear proliferation represented by Iran," the Republican presidential candidate said.
I'm so pleased to know that FR evangelicals don't represent the real world thinking of most evangelicals.
Bill
That's very encouraging, and you are exactly right. But to hear it from the social right here on FR, the only things of importance are those agenda items they support, such as stem cells, creationism, prayer in school, Ten Commandments, control of gays, etc. They are tremendously out of touch with America...and apparently their fellow evangelicals.
I was on a Terri Schiavo thread recently that went onto 1000 posts. Guess what the issue was. It was a hit piece on Romney that said his presidential hopes are now dead. Why? He had the audacity to say in regard to questions about Terri Schiavo: "I believe that judges should not legislate, nor should the legislative branch involve itself in judicial matters.
That was so amazing to me that any one who called himself a conservative would question that. Boy, was I wrong!
Perhaps, but one thing is clear to me. I understand those on FR who call themselves evangelicals, and who also erroneously claim to be conservative.
The social right has no problem with Big Government so long as it supports and promotes their agenda.
The conservative credo of "limited government" is generally lost on them.
Indeed, as are many other conservative principles.
Perhaps, but one thing is clear to me. I understand those on FR who call themselves evangelicals, and who also erroneously claim to be conservative.
Oh kewl, maybe you would be so kind as to explain what it is that you understand! Why do you think FR Evangelicals can't be Conservatives?
I didn't say they can't. They just don't exhibit, well, conservative principles in many of their socially right debates. But you can see several other threads I have been on today to get a better picture. Conservatism and extremism simply don't go together.
Exactly. Also, Rudy was in SC a month or so ago and got great press. We're in the Bible Belt and if he can make it here, he can make it anywhere.
I've freepmailed a few people who handle the Rudy ping list and mentioned that you'd like to be added to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.