I'd love to say this is just so much hot air and media hype. But, actually, I think he's onto something. Just check out the effusive praise on this forum for Rudy Giuliani. Much of it is motivated by a real disgust for social conservatism--i.e., the much-hated Religious Right. If the most conservative forum on the Internet is awash with people who hate religious conservatives, then something is up. I don't know if the Soros-inspired coalition of secularists and religious leftists has won, but I'd say it is definitely winning over popular opinion.
Our problem is we don't have a perfect candidate to run.
Not. One.
That being said, people like Jim Wallis are trying their best to tear down religious conservatives and demoralize them. I see a lot of evangelical pastors lining up to listen to this crap.........and there are a fair amount of them that are quite gullible when it comes to the lefts' siren songs.
I'm still proud to call myself conservative. No one will shame me into voting 'centrist/moderate/wishy washy/liberal'.
Nah. I am a proud member of the so-called "religious right". What is key in this Wallis fellow's screed is "most of the people I talk to". Well, just imagine who shows up for this guy. This is akin to "How did Reagan win, nobody I know voted for him" coming out of the upper west side salons.
Yet, we here respond to it as if it was fact, not propaganda. Aside from the little slivers of blue surrounding the large metro areas which themselves surround most of the re-education camps that used to be our great universities, this is a Red Nation. Sooner than later we'll have had enough.
As to "evangelicals" on this site supporting Rudy: I suspect that many, like myself, do not support him at this point, but will definitely vote for him if he is the nominee against any democrat. This past weeks congressional treasons ought to tell us all we need to know about "teaching the rino's a lesson".
Your first thoughts were correct, it is media-hype, it has 'Rudy' written all over it.
BINGO!
The "praise" as you call it has nothing to do with disgust for social conservatism, nor does it reflect hate for the RR. The support Mr. Giuliani receives here on FR (from a minority I might add) reflects an understanding that those social values the RR here decries most, abortion and gay rights, have little or nothing to do with the presidency. Those issues will ultimately be resolved in the court system.
The issues he would have the greatest influence on as president include national security, budget and deficit control, tax policy and a strong attorney general who will fight real crime in this Nation. Those are all conservative issues, and in those, he has a proven track record.
What is upsetting to most here on FR is that he would be willing to sit down with the other side to work out compromises on those major issues of importance to Americans, such as social security, immigration reform, education and energy independence, all issues that the recent Republican dominated congress failed to follow through on.
So while abortion, stem cell research, creationism, prayer in school, and stopping states from adopting gay rights are the most important issues to the religious right, they have little to do with what America wants in its next president. And that is why, at least now, Mr. Jiuliani is the only Republican who can defeat Hillary.
Good observations. Thanks for the post and ping!
Keep in mind that FR is regularly and often swamped by subversives from the other side.
Popular opinion has all the durability of a week-old souffle.
The last few months have been eye opening. There is a large number of people on FR who would be happen if the GOP became a shadow of the Democrats on every issue but one, the war. They are pushing harder and harder to git rid of the religious and social conservatives.
I honestly fear what is coming.
Is it really hatred, or just a feeling that "these people" have been too influential too long? Politics does tend to translate differences of opinion into hostility and hatred, but it looks more to me that many other Americans are tired of the evangelicals' influence in conservative politics.
It's not so much that social conservatism is finished, rather it's that people are tired of those who've become most identified with social conservatism. Today, for many people in the Northeast and West Coast, "social conservatism" means "those strange people who live in another part of the country who don't like you and who you don't quite understand."
It wasn't like that in the Reagan era, when "social conservatism" meant a lot more than the evangelical bloc and the South. When it came to be "somebody else's property" it lost appeal in other parts of the country. It will take another big sorting-out of American politics before things change.
You can see a parallel with what happened in the 1920s. Urban Americans got tired of Prohibition, the Scopes Trial, Amy McPherson, Billy Sunday, and all the rest of the evangelical culture. In those days, though, evangelical Protestantism wasn't so closely identified with social conservatism, which found a home in other religions and traditions.
Definitely something to consider. I don't think that the religious right's era is over by any stretch, and most of us can agree with their message. Yet, I think the movement should consider reevaluating its messengers and the way in which their message is received perhaps.
I looked up "blithely ignorant" in the dictionary, and there was a picture of Jim Wallis...
The Left can celebrate the "defeat" of the "Religious Right" all they want. Only one religion is playing by Highlander rules in this day and age (In the emd, there can be only one!).
Wallis and his ilk can recite their twaddle as much as they want - when that other religion comes for them, there's going to be a whole lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth - at least till the scimitar falls...
Pathetic idiots.