Posted on 10/10/2007 11:55:47 AM PDT by TitansAFC
FRCs Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Center Action, just completed a conference call with reporters. What stood out to me were his comments on Rudy:
Yes, there will be some evangelicals who vote for him. In my experience, its about half and half. In the eyes of many social conservatives, theres little distinction between [Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani]. Clearly theres some distinction, theyre not identical. But when you consider those who have come into the political process on ideological path or issues path, not a party path These are people who are not there to advance a political party. They are there to advance causes. If theyre indistinguishable on so many issues that are vital to these voters, its hard to see why you should vote for one instead of the other.
Other highlights from the call:
Q: If there is no clear frontrunner, what advice would you give evangelical voters?
Perkins: I dont think its ever good to sit out the process. As citizens we have ability and right, I believe as Christian citizens we have an obligation to be involved. Im optimistic that there is going to be one or two candidates emerge from the summit next week with a strong consensus of support among social conservatives.
Im pretty optimistic were going to see the field solidify.
On Fred Thompson: I have met a number of times with Sen. Thompson. I think he has a lot to offer. I think he covers a wide spectrum of issues. I think he has a record that shows he is conservative socially. I think he is a fiscal conservative, and is strong in foreign policy and defense. The challenge is that if you look at this field, theres a lot to like. Theres a little you want to have in each one of them. If you could mix and match, we would have a candidate tomorrow.
This summit will give these candidates a chance to speak directly to a good cross-section of our movement. We have representatives from all fifty states.
On the Utah meeting: I was at that meeting its been misconstrued a little bit. It was not a declaration of intent, it was a declaration of principle that there is a line we will not cross. If the party chooses to break its commitment to creating a culture of life, were not going to go in that direction with the party.
Theres only one candidate who has this issue, and thats Mayor Giuliani. It would be very problematic for the party to nominate a candidate who broke with 30 years of Republican Party history.
Theres no desire to create a third party, no action underway, simply the statement that if the party breaks with social conservatives, then social conservatives will break with thee party. Its an if-then scenario.
I dont know if Im going to personally endorse a candidate at all.
Q: If Giuliani exceeds expectations, doesnt that undermine threat?
One of the reasons we were insistent that he be invited to the Values Voters Summit was to give him the opportunity to say what his message is. Weve invited the Democratic candidates to come as well. [None have accepted so far.] Its helpful to have that dialogue.
I dont envision majority of social conservatives actively supporting a pro-abortion rights candidate The old ABC, Anybody But Clinton, is not enough to rally conservatives who have been working for thirty years to create a culture of life.
[Guiliani] will be treated cordially. He will be given twenty minutes to make his pitch My experience is, you dont beat a liberal with a moderate. You get enthusiasm on the left, but you dont get enthusiasm on the right. Yes, there will be some evangelicals who vote for him. In my experience, its about half and half.
Q: What advice would you give Romney?
I gave up consulting when my candidates kept losing, so Im not one to give advice. But Id say keep doing what hes been doing In my opinion, hes one of the strongest on our issues. It's true he has had a change of position on these issues. I do believe theyre genuine. I do not see him going back. Hes staked ground that he has to hold to.
[Mormonism] is an unknown religion, in the sense that people are not familiar with it. Some people have said he should be like John Kennedy. I think its a little different of a scenario. There are a lot of commonalities between Catholic and Protestant state. Mormonism, theres a lot of distinctions. Hes best when hes focused on the issues and his policy positions; then down the road he can have a dialogue on faith.
Were a third, roughly of the Republican party and weve had a good relationship with fiscal conservatives and national security conservatives over the past 30 years. We need a candidate who is acceptable on our policies, as well as fiscal policy and defense and foreign policy. Weve tried to be respectful to the other members of our coalition by not backing a candidate who isnt respectful of their priorities; now wed like them to be respectful by not backing a candidate who isnt respectful of our priorities.
Amen! People need to turn away from this temptation of compromising with evil.
Rudy911, lol.
These debates look like game shows. When does the 5% rule kick in? Get rid of the half wasting time and make the top half go into detailed responses. Really! I just quickly tuned in and Ron Paul looked & acted wired/bushy tailed on something. Off it went. I heard what I needed from radio anyway.
Primary or General, the same principles apply.
Don’t vote for someone who lacks morality.
Rudy lacks morality, he supports the murder of unborn children, therefore, he does not get my vote, EVER!
Let me repeat it again, if the Republicans decide to walk away from the conservatives and nominate a pro-abortion candidate, they lose my vote, and probably millions more that they cannot afford to loose.
The onus is on the Republicans to do the right thing, otherwise they will suffer the consequences of their choices.
No they don’t. The people who choose to nominate someone they know is wrong on the issues are totally to blame for the scenario you present.
Those who vote their conscience are blameless.
You really don’t understand Christianity and Christians do you?
re: You really dont understand Christianity and Christians do you?
I thought I did, but then I joined FR and found people like yourself who seem to be Super-Christians and, thank God, they are always willing to point out the shortcomings in my faith.
Remember the story of the Good Samaritan? By your standards the traveler would have been perfectly right with God had he simply ignored the injured man and moved on. After all, his principles forbid him from having contact with ‘those people’.
In my arrantly lame version of Christianity I am not only required to do something when I see a problem I am required to what’s right. In my book if my only choice is between one who openly supports abortion and will do anything he or she can to see there are as many abortions performed as possible and someone else who says he or she thinks abortion is wrong and will work as hard as they can to reduce the number performed under his or her watch the God I love, worship and serve expects me, in my humble opinion, to cast my lot with the latter.
I don’t share your opinion that because we can’t solve the entire problem to my satisfaction that we have no obligation to change the part we do have the power to affect.
Should Rudy make it to the general election I'll just have to cross that bridge if we get to that point. If Romney or Hunter are the nom, I'd have no problem supporting either of them, but would prefer Thompson.
I did. BOTH have the NARAL stamp of approval. That means there will be an equal # under either one. If you want to buy Rudy's B.S. about encouraging adoption and the rest of the crap he tries to sell without ever saying he's had a change of heart from abortion at any time, for any reason or no reason, paid for by taxpayers, that's your choice. I'm not foolish enough to buy any of the garbage he's peddling since he has not only a very clear record of his stated beliefs, but also a hard record of what he's actually DONE when he had any power.
It amazes me and makes me very suspicious about posters claiming to be pro-life, pro-gun, pro-tax cutting, pro-marriage, etc., who permit themselves to be so totally fooled by his non-denial denials, and ridiculous non-promise promises.
(Sigh is right)
You still are ignoring the facts.
Rudy himself has said that his position on the issues is almost identical to Clinton’s.
The only difference between the two is mostly because Rudy figured out in the last three or four months that is Liberal stance on the issues just was not playing well in Peoria. I don’t trust a man who changes his position on issues without a real heart-felt conversion on those issues. It amounts to pandering. If he was wrong before, he needs to come out and say he is wrong and tell us why. Otherwise he is lying and judging by some of the other whoppers he has been willing to tell lately I would put all of my money on hime just lying on where he is on the issues.
“Anybody but Clinton” is not a winning message. If you play to avoid losing, rather than playing to win, you’ll lose every time.
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.