Posted on 07/12/2004 6:12:22 PM PDT by wagglebee
Social conservatives feel they are getting short shrift from the Republican National Committee’s lineup of speakers at the GOP convention in New York this year, reports the New York Times.
Thus far, prime time speaking slots are nearly bereft of those who share the views of the party's conservative majority - a vital voting bloc the Bush campaign desperately needs if it is to win in November.
Still, the Times writes:
Even though Karl Rove "emphasized the importance of turning out conservative churchgoers" who didn't vote in the numbers he expected in 2000, and even though they are a "major target of [GOP] voter registration efforts," it doesn't seem they will be well represented in prime time at the convention in NY.
The Rev. Donald E. Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association, told the Times the "Bush campaign had made mistakes, including its outreach to churches and the omission of more social conservatives from the convention so far. 'They have alienated people who they desperately need, big time,' he said."
The Bush/Cheney campaign has miffed some churchgoers with certain voter-registration tactics, including having congregations send the campaign their registries.
Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the conservative Southern Baptist Convention, told the Times: "I'm appalled that the Bush-Cheney campaign would intrude on a local congregation in this way."
President Bush is the only visible national conservative who has "turned up his own talk of opposition to abortion and especially same-sex marriage," which is up for debate in the Senate this week.
Moderates like McCain, Giuliani, Pataki, and Schwarzenegger will all speak in prime time at the GOP confab, but no true social conservative other than President Bush will garner precious, limited network airtime.
The most like-minded person with a featured speaking role is Senator Zell Miller, a Democrat from Georgia.
He drew fire from National Review's Washington editor Kate O'Beirne, who wrote, "When the only Reagan Republican to enjoy a prominent supporting role at the party's convention is a Democrat, the GOP has a serious identity problem."
The roster of speakers, she added, "is not the mark of a self-confident party establishment."
More ominous was the warning from long time conservative activist Paul Weyrich: "I hate to say it, but... If the president is embarrassed to be seen with conservatives at the convention, maybe conservatives will be embarrassed to be seen with the president on Election Day."
More conciliatory was Gary Bauer, a social conservative candidate who sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2000.
Noting the Bush backs the Constitutional amendment defining marriage as being solely between a man and woman, now being debated in the Senate, Bauer, the founder of the American Values organization, added. "We had been assured months ago that as this vote happened the president would take an active role - both publicly and on Capitol Hill. So they are keeping their word and my hat goes off to them for that."
But he told the Times, "If they are going to win the values debate - and it looks like there is going to be one - it is important for the president's words to be reinforced by other major personalities at the convention."
He added that his fellow social conservatives continue to push for greater representation at the convention, and said that the President should address abortion, same-sex marriage and similar issues prominently when he speaks to the convention.
Answering conservative critics, Bush campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt told the Times Sunday: "The Republican Party is a national party, and the convention lineup will reflect the broad national appeal of the Republican Party. When the speaker lineup is complete, it will reflect that."
You mean on the 8th at Radio City? They still won't release that tape.
There are those who equate conservative with intolerance.
You do. And the leftwing 'mainstream' agree.
I doubt the intellectual honesty of those so concerned with the social conservatives speaking at the event.
Yeah - they'll just futz-up the Party, right?
or is that left?
I don't need this poser's b.s.. Am I wrong?
I'm quite sure that Robert Reich is not on the invite list. ;o)
I didn't realize my alias had changed to sevry: admin. Glad it got through, anyway.
Oh, I forgot about that other etc, etc, thanks!
Kerry WILL destroy this country the rest of the way. Ain't no way I won't vote for Bush...but if the bots could stop deluding themselves for 5 seconds, they would realize that Mr. Weyrich is correct.
It has been proven that without strong enthusiastic base support, you can not win.
IMO, Bush is making a very large mistake. Deja-Vu.. We'll see who gets to eat crow on election day!!!
Or they are seeing proof of the suspicion that Bush is not likely to sing the same song or perhaps even the same melody in his last four.
If he doesn't they would feel responsible for whatever makes that agenda depart from what they would have supported. Rather than bear the "responsible" guilt they would prefer to sit on their hands in the election. It's signaling a "stay home" message.
Question is, where would it leave them if he deceived them by promises and actions and then performed the same unsupportable agenda. That answer could be a third party.
Most social conservatives are not that dumb that they would vote for a third party. If they were then they damn well deserve what they get.
Four years of Kerry could destroy our nation.
Too reasonable. Get lost. ; )
What do you think sixteen years of Kerry/Edwards will do to it?
There's already about 50 third parties.
I'll tell you again: 97 percent of conservatives -- THE BASE -- support Bush. Period.
Yes, again.
It's not a pretty picture, is it?
Well, you be the judge of who's real and who's not.
Folks, the speaking portions of the convention are, in essence, a show, meant to affect the swing voters. McCain, Schwarzenegger, and certainly Giuliani are very popular with swing voters (you can argue rightly or wrongly, but it is still a fact). McCain and Giuliani will almost certainly focus on security issues -- something that is definitely conservative.
I agree, but remember how Dole seemed to abandon the base and what happened.
They always lose when they abandon their base...ask Bush Sr.
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.