'This Is Not a Bluff'- A Christian political leader on the threat of a third party.

Newsweek.com ^ | October 23, 2007

[rightwingintelligentsia]

Christian conservatives want more respect. They were instrumental in propelling George W. Bush to power—twice—and now they're feeling neglected. At a "Values Voters" summit in Washington last week, leading evangelicals gathered to speak out and take a straw poll. The survey showed how unhappy they are with the twice-divorced, pro-choice Republican front runner for the presidential nomination, Rudy Giuliani. He got less than two percent of the overall vote. (Some Christian activists have threatened to back a third-party candidate if Giuliani wins the GOP nomination.)

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney won the straw poll of 5,775 conservatives, which included voters who have been able to cast online ballots since August. But many evangelicals are uncomfortable with Romney's Mormon faith. That may have factored in the voting of people who actually attended the summit: Romney lost that tally by a wide margin to former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who is also an ordained Southern Baptist minister. To better understand the current thinking of Christian conservatives, NEWSWEEK's Jeffrey Bartholet and Eve Conant spoke to Richard Land, a leading evangelical who serves as president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Excerpts:

[hinckley buzzard]

I wouldn't really take Newsweek as an authority on what the Christian right is thinking about now. Gary Bauer dumped on this as a suicide move, and I don't believe Land would be stupid enough to instigate it. I don't care what a couple of hacks from Newsweek say.

[Grunthor]

“while campaigning for pro-life Republicans and his own campaign?”

Was Mario Cuomo a pro-life Republican?

“Its a stretch, he has never seemed like the kind of man who cared about social issues at all. Not everything is a conspiracy.”

I’m not saying that it is a conspiracy, I AM saying that Rudy is PRO-Abortion, and I cannot vote for that, and save your Hillary scare tactic...(it’s usually all that Rudy rooters have left.)

I do not see a third party happening. I will not even sit home. I promise you that. I WILL vote. For the down-ballot races.

[frogjerk]

More power and money for Christian elitists.

How so?

[roses of sharon]

Wow, Cuomo, that was ages ago, no I was speaking of the last decade or so.

And yes, I will and do “toot” all Republicans who love their country, understands our enemies, and are willing to fight to protect us.

As far as Hillarycare, I would prefer the gov stay out of my medical care.

But thats just me.

See ya!

[frogjerk]

Its a stretch, he has never seemed like the kind of man who cared about social issues at all.

Incorrect and totally off base. Rudy cleaned up Times Square of porn, cleaned up crime throughout the city, enforced many different quality of life initiatives and was THE leader when it came to bringing NYC back to its former glory. These were all social issues. For this he should be applauded. He is a stand-up guy for Police, Fireman and all of the other everyday heroes that are responsible for making NYC great.

But there is a disconnect when it comes to not protecting the unborn and supporting homosexuality that I just don't get from Rudy. He has not realized that by pandering to the left on such core issues he hurts himself and it is showing. Rudy's personal life and views will become more and more of an obstacle.

For Attorney General I would support Rudy. For Homeland Security I would support Rudy. For President I cannot support Rudy because he is just so wrong on the fundamental issue of life and support of a such an outrageous behavior that is destroying the very fabric of our great country, the Family.

[frogjerk]

See now that can be taken a different way ie; “I honestly don’t think he cares that much if babies are murdered in the womb or not.”

Amen. Apathy is responsible for many deaths.

[Grunthor]

“As far as Hillarycare, I would prefer the gov stay out of my medical care.”

The issue isn’t high on my list of importance.

[Grunthor]

“But there is a disconnect when it comes to not protecting the unborn and supporting homosexuality that I just don’t get from Rudy.”

Ditto.

[joesbucks]

It gives them a devil, a focal point, a rallying point. It's tougher to attack Rudy, because so many of their followers will have voted for him and have an investment.

It will always be easier to attack a democrat and profit from it (and sell, books, tapes, speaking events) than a republican, even a republican that they fundamentally disagree with

[roses of sharon]

Maybe he was influenced by his wife, that weird Donna Hanover, she was a reporter and actress. (the Vagina Dialogs) And remember how Goldwater “became” pro-choice after he married that young women in his old age?

Anyway I know some men and (women) who have come around with age, maybe he will too someday.

Sometimes I think its a macho thing for guys, they just don’t think that caring about abortion rights is cool or something, not that they would ever agree to one themselves, but since men are analytical some can’t figure out how to punish it if its illegal, do you put the women in jail? The Drs?

But basically I agree with your premise, and you reminded me of the time RG got so mad about that art exhibit with the dung on the Virgin Mary, and threatened the museum, even tho he knew he would catch flack.

I like that in a guy, and I am in a mood for a ruthless SOB this time around, so thank goodness we have time to see what all our candidates are made of, who has some passion and fight. For me its no debate, I'm a broken glasser, and will work hard for whomever is nominated.

[Delacon]

“Christian conservatives want more respect. They were instrumental in propelling George W. Bush to power—twice—and now they’re feeling neglected.”

What? Somebody show me a faction within the republican party that wields more power. All the top tier candidates nomination possibilities turn on their acceptability over one issue. Abortion. In a time when the WOT and government reform should be the key issues, this is all cons can argue about. I am not saying its not important but its time a nominee was nominated based on a sum total of a collection of strengths. I’d add that religious conservatives had their chance with Bush(with his big government compassionate conservatism) for two whole terms and they got it with help from all the other cons. Religious cons didn’t do us any favors, its the other way around. They had their chance to have their specific agendas made into law and they blew it. Its time to let other factions of the conservative movement direct the party.

[roses of sharon]

Yes, I know Gov healthcare is a temptation for Americans since costs are high. But you must resist!

And Hillary obviously knows it too, since she beats all our guys in the head to heads.

I will not participate in giving her control of me or mine, nor will I allow her to become our CIC, with boots on the ground.

[Grunthor]

“Yes, I know Gov healthcare is a temptation for Americans since costs are high. But you must resist!”

I said it wasn’t high on my priority list.

[P-Marlowe]

This statement gets my vote as the dumbest thing I have ever read on this forum.

Let me explain.

FWIW the election of Gerald Ford in 1976 would have been a terrible thing for the United States and the world. If Gerald Ford had been elected, Ronald Reagan would have been too old to seek a first term for presidency and undoubtedly a liberal democrat would have held the presidency during the period of 1981 to 1989. Ford was an eastern liberal just like Giuliani and was no friend to conservatives. If Ford had been elected in 1976, we might very well still be fighting the cold war or we would have lost it.

In that sense the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976 was just what was needed to energize the conservatives and to allow the ascendance of Ronald Reagan.

If Giuliani is elected, it will be the death knell for conservatism for the next 12 to 20 years. If Hillary is elected, we will have the opportunity to elect new Ronald Reagan in 4 years (perhaps Duncan Hunter).

America got through the Jimmy Carter presidency (as bad as it was) and we are a better nation because of it. Carter unwittingly gave us Reagan. we can thank God that it worked out that way (I believe God planned it that way).

We will get through another Clinton presidency, but I fear we may never recover from a Giuliani presidency. Giuliani's nomination will spell the death knell to conservatisim within the Republican party. Mark my words on that.

I hope that clarifies my position. If you still think it is the stupidest thing you have ever read on this forum, then so be it.

[Delphinium]

Let me explain. FWIW the election of Gerald Ford in 1976 would have been a terrible thing for the United States and the world. If Gerald Ford had been elected, Ronald Reagan would have been too old to seek a first term for presidency and undoubtedly a liberal democrat would have held the presidency during the period of 1981 to 1989. Ford was an eastern liberal just like Giuliani and was no friend to conservatives. If Ford had been elected in 1976, we might very well still be fighting the cold war or we would have lost it. In that sense the election of Jimmy Carter in 1976 was just what was needed to energize the conservatives and to allow the ascendance of Ronald Reagan. If Giuliani is elected, it will be the death knell for conservatism for the next 12 to 20 years. If Hillary is elected, we will have the opportunity to elect new Ronald Reagan in 4 years (perhaps Duncan Hunter). America got through the Jimmy Carter presidency (as bad as it was) and we are a better nation because of it. Carter unwittingly gave us Reagan. we can thank God that it worked out that way (I believe God planned it that way). We will get through another Clinton presidency, but I fear we may never recover from a Giuliani presidency. Giuliani's nomination will spell the death knell to conservatisim within the Republican party. Mark my words on that. I hope that clarifies my position. If you still think it is the stupidest thing you have ever read on this forum, then so be it

So well said I copied it to my husband who isn't a freeper. He is so very fearful of Hillary, but I am fearful of losing our conservative party, the only viable conservative party we have at this time.

[Grunthor]

Genius.

[frogjerk]

Who are the Christian Elitists you are referring to?

[frogjerk]

Abortion. In a time when the WOT and government reform should be the key issues, this is all cons can argue about.

IMHO...

Does a nation that allows the killing of its unborn, the most defenseless among us BAR NONE, deserve to be called great?

What I see are pro-life people trying to turn this nation away from hypocrisy.

The tide is turning towards life. Many do not want to have a President or other politicians taking steps backward in the fight for many things that make the United States of America Great. If there is no life, nothing else matters. Life begins at conception.

You could argue the WOT defends life, and I would agree, but there would be a greater number of heroes, patriots and great men and women ready for the fight, had we, as a nation, not murdered millions of them in the womb.

[P-Marlowe]

Religious cons didn’t do us any favors, its the other way around. They had their chance to have their specific agendas made into law and they blew it. Its time to let other factions of the conservative movement direct the party.

And that would be in the direction of Rudy Giuliani?

FWIW:
Delacon
Since Jun 19, 2007

[mimaw]

Why is the ultra conservative Mr. Land giving Newsweek the time of day. He may have a alot of people follow him over the cliff but I don’t take marching orders from him or the Pope when it comes to my vote.