Republican '08 options disappoint evangelicals (Land: would vote for Hillary over Rudy)

Washington Times ^ | April 16, 2007 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[Cincinatus' Wife]

***... Mr. Giuliani maintains a big lead over his Republican rivals in the polls yet has all the wrong policy positions on social issues such as abortion and homosexual rights considered key to cultivating Christian conservatives. However, some evangelicals and pro-life Catholics seem willing to overlook his faults -- including his two divorces -- in the belief that he is the only Republican actually running who can defeat the Democratic nominee in 2008.

Still, Mr. Giuliani and conservative Christians "probably have irreconcilable differences on life and family and that kind of thing," said Mr. Falwell, adding, "I couldn't support him for president."

Nor is Mr. Dobson in Mr. Giuliani's cheering section.

"I do not believe that the current excitement over Giuliani will continue," Mr. Dobson told U.S. News & World Report.

Richard Land, president of the Religious and Ethics Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, takes a hard line against virtually all the major Republican candidates. He says he'd vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, over Mr. Giuliani if the 2008 presidential race came down to such a choice. And if Mr. Giuliani wins, "he'll do so without social conservatives," Mr. Land said. .....

[dforest]

Show us the exact quote, exact words, said by Land about voting for Hillary.

There are no quotes because he didn’t say that.

What you posted was from THIS article, not shown in direct quotes from Mr.Land.

The other words of Lands were in direct quotes.

Get it?

[Baseballguy]

http://erlc.com/erlc/richard_land/

[xzins]

I agree with that.

Who is your favorite Rino for VP? I’m sure that’ll be the trade-off with rino’s to continue their support of the party?

[dforest]

Only thing I could see that he said was if it came down to a race between Rudy and Hillary he would not vote in that race, but would vote for state, local, and Congress.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I hear you. I think a good way to avoid this is to talk to all the candidates and keep the conversation going, not shut down dialogue.

[safisoft]

I personally know Dr. Richard Land. You will not find a more principled, calm, thoughtful, and intelligent conservative anywhere. He is a very wise man. Please bookmark your comments and come back here in a few years.

[M. Thatcher]

The Washington Times is an excellent paper, and Ralph Hallow is an first-rate journalist. This is an explicit, declarative report that Land actually said what The Washington Times says he said. Your argument is with Hallow, not me.

[dforest]

Your argument is with Hallow, not me.

That was clever. However, I did find my answer from a link earlier. It wasn't in quotes because that was not really what he said.

But since the poster here on FR didn't write the article .....

I didn't think Land said it. I don't believe everything I see in print anymore. People have agendas.

[M. Thatcher]

How is it "clever"? It's fact. Hallow reported it. Your only "evidence" that he didn't say it is that it is not reported elsewhere?

That isn't evidence.

[George W. Bush]

article: "I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," James Dobson, founder of Colorado-based Focus on the Family, has said. Mr. Dobson condemns the Vietnam War hero for, among other things, sponsoring the 2002 campaign-finance legislation that "keeps us from telling the truth right before elections. ... He's not in favor of traditional marriage, and I pray that we won't get stuck with him."

Can't blame him much but if Giuliani is the alternative, he'd better grit his teeth. Dobson has a bad habit of shooting off his mouth too much.

article: Still, Mr. Giuliani and conservative Christians "probably have irreconcilable differences on life and family and that kind of thing," said Mr. Falwell, adding, "I couldn't support him for president."

Again, how can you blame him?

article: Richard Land, president of the Religious and Ethics Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, takes a hard line against virtually all the major Republican candidates. He says he'd vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, over Mr. Giuliani if the 2008 presidential race came down to such a choice. And if Mr. Giuliani wins, "he'll do so without social conservatives," Mr. Land said. Mr. Land says the religious conservative leaders he knows don't trust Mr. McCain either.

[dforest]

If you go to his site you will see that Hallow did not use quotes because what Hallow is saying is his own interpretation of what Land said.

This is a case of quoting what Land said exactly would have made Hallows remarks more credible. He used direct quotes in the article, so why not use a direct quote on this?

Oh well, anyway. I was saying your play on words was clever. It was a compliment. Sometimes even if we are being nice lately, we think its a smart remark.

[linn37]

Given the choice I would have to pick Rudy over the spectacle of another Clinton being President.

[George W. Bush]

Can you imagine any of these preachers endorsing the leftwing mayor when television ads with the following start being aired in the primary states?

Giuliani at Gracie Mansion in 1997 dancing with Howard Koeppel,
one of the openly gay couple Giuliani lived with, after ditching
his wife and kids to be with his mistress.

[M. Thatcher]

what Hallow is saying is his own interpretation of what Land said

No, journalism 101. Hallow is explicitly reporting that Land said this.

[highlander_UW]

This guy is a bozo, but it does raise the question of why would republicans want to choose the least conservative candidate in the field when there are better choices knowing that doing so alienates a significant percentage of their previous voter base? It’s choosing an unacceptable candidate that is guaranteed to loose, all in the name of compromise. Isn’t it a clue when one sees how much the MSM likes Rudy?

[dforest]

Now you know people do not stick to Journalism-101 anymore.

Take a look at the NYT, They print whatever they want.

If they get caught, they bury the retraction somewhere where no one will notice.

All you have to do to see what Land really said is go to his site. There are several links provided on this thread.

[garv]

I've already contacted the Washington Times for a clarification, but regardless of Hallow's journalistic skills, all the statements attributed to Land in the article are apparently third-hand.

The Paula Zahn interview referenced is from February and other statements were culled from interviews Land gave in February and March. I have been unable to find any other news report or article attributing that particular statement to Land.

If I hear back from the Times I'll let you know.

[M. Thatcher]

Good. The responsibilty for the report lies with Hallow, who directly reported Land said this.

I think most here agree that if Land did say it, it's unfortunate. If Land didn't say it, The Washington TImes needs to issue a correction.

[Uncle Hal]

I have always been afraid that if Rudy wins the GOP nomination that the social conservatives would nominate a third party candidate they like on social issues, This would probably guarantee Hillary’s presidency. Perish the thought.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

......It’s choosing an unacceptable candidate that is guaranteed to loose, all in the name of compromise. Isn’t it a clue when one sees how much the MSM likes Rudy?

The media has done nothing but work to fan the flames in the GOP.