I said "Christian sponsored", not "Christ sponsored". As far as papal addresses are concerned, I wouldn't know. I ain't a Catholic.
And there is a difference between opposing an amendment and endorsing a patronizing and losing political effort.
A hardheaded and ill-conceived path. The result, considering his already shaky position with the Christians, was predictable (and was in fact predicted right here on FR). A poorly taken stance (regardless of the reason)for one hoping to be elected and needing the Christian Right's aid in that regard.
As for McCain-Feingold, Fred completely disavowed his former support for that abomination on free speech.
The damage was already done. His change of position might be forgiven by the masses, but certainly not so amid the organizations, and that shut him out of the Christian networks- Networks that dwarf anything the Republicans currently have, including Conservative Talk Radio.
But I seem to recall that an evangelical Christian George W. Bush) signed that bill into law.
Yes. Thanks for that reminder. Certainly a big reason not to support the moderate Baker wing. They do seem bent upon removing the Bill of Rights. Especially when they get to work together like that.
I fail to see how Fred's appearance at a sparsely attended [...] would have seriously impacted the race,
It's not hard to see, you're looking at it right now.
It's not hard to see, you're looking at it right now.
Let me be more precise. I don't see how Fred's attendance would have changed the attitudes of the alleged evangelical Christian leaders opposed to Fred. The alleged slight was pretense only.
My take: Anyone who crafted or bought into this Dobson/Values Voters attack on Fred is a phoney baloney Christian, a phoney baloney conservative or both.
With McCain's victory in Florida tonight, the death of the GOP and the conservative has drawn even closer. Yet some mindless, but faithful evangelicals are more concerned about whether Fred slighted their narrow brand of evangelical purity and their blind devotion to 2 hypothetical and losing constitutional amendment arguments.