Posted on 11/07/2007 5:51:19 AM PST by rightwingintelligentsia
Pat Robertson, one of the nation's most influential Christian leaders, plans to endorse former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani today, the Politico has learned.
Giuliani has struggled to win support of social conservatives because of his moderate views on abortion and gay rights. But now he has one of the most resonant imprimaturs with Christian voters.
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), meanwhile, plans to announce his surprise endorsement of former Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) for president on Wednesday, a campaign official told Politico.
The endorsement is to be announced in Dubuque, Iowa.
The alliance gives McCain — once a front-runner, now struggling — a crucial bridge to social conservatives, an important constituency that has remained suspicious of him despite his opposition to abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Social Conservatives: "Absolutely agreed! What's your plan for doing that?"
Giuliani Supporters: "Simple! We just nominate a pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-illegal immigration candidate to head up our ticket in 2008! Sheer GENIUS!"
Social Conservatives: "... ummmmmmm... but... that doesn't really make any logical sense, actually..."
Giuliani Supporters: "STUPID, STUPID SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES! ARRRRRRRGHHHHH GARGLE BLARGLE RAAAAWWWWRRRRRRR -- !!!"
There. That's boiled things down to their core essentials rather nicely, I think.
As far as I know, we haven't declared war against Rudi-the-baby-killer.
And if you think there is no way around the second amendment, you really haven't been paying much attention to judicial activism, have you? When the SCOTUS votes to restrict free speech, nothing in the Constitution is safe until the makeup of the courts are changed. You may trust Rudy to do that.
I don't.
Yes. Insane, but immense. I can hear it now, "yeah, Dobson's opposed to him, but Robertson likes him. And, you know, he did do a great job after 9/11."
FWIW, the president selects SC nominees.
Well, if your family members were the murder victims--and the perpetrators were free to have acted at will against them--I don't think you'd praise the local "powers that be" for their marvelous crime-fighting record. You seem to have this elitist viewpoint that now that you're already born, it's no "crime" to kill the pre-born off. Besides, I thought it was more of the attorney general's job, and not the POTUS, to be our crime-fighter. (I'm not looking for a super-hero in the White House, are you?)
As for cutting taxes, well, you know, if you have more actually alive taxpayers (since 1973) who would be paying into social security, maybe it wouldn't be on the brink of folding? When you broaden the base legal taxpayers, we all bear the burden more equitably. When you kill off dozens of millions future taxpayers, you wind up needing more laborers to fill the labor pool (hence, non-taxpayer illegal immigrants).
Giuliani’s accomplishments in shrinking the size of New York City’s government is well documented...
So, we're left with cutting welfare and bureaucracy as the rousing rallying cry for the conservative movement to amass behind a candidate?
We simply disagree that a president’s primary role is to end abortion. That, unfortunately, is in the hands of the federal judiciary and not the people - at least, not yet.
Wow. What a pathetic straw man argument! Tell me, if you will, what judiciary ever or what pre-Roe POTUS ever "ended" murder? Lincoln? (Uh, no). Woodrow Wilson? (Uh, no). [Need I go on with such a pathetic conclusion?]
Go, ahead, keep framing that you think pro-lifers of conviction want to "end" all murders this side of heaven, as if that was possible. (I mean, we're not the idealic "no-war-ever-again, peace-on-earth" leftists...at least, not til Jesus comes).
As for the POTUS' role with abortion, I mean, even at a minimum a POTUS can...
(a) use his bully pulpit to slow down the fetus brain drain...just like a POTUS could attempt to slow down the labor brain drain of a country;
(b) slow down the taxpayer flow of funds into the abortion industry both in this country and abroad.
I mean, that hardly sounds like the Cavalry leader against abortion (your "primary role" bit). Yet Rudy can't even do (b) above!
LOL.... coincidentally at the same time he decided to run for president.
The "story" is that Mitt (and his wife, coincidentally) both changed their minds all of a sudden when looking at the stem cell issue. Problem is, a stem cell researcher says Mitt is lying about the conversation they had when Mitt supposedly realized he was pro-life. And 6 months after supposedly realizing he was pro-life because of embryonic stem cells, Mitt was still publicly supporting government funding of embryonic stem cell research. Heck, he STILL supports some embryonic stem cell research.
I have more respect now for Jim Bakker than I do for a "evangelist" that would openly favor a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual agenda liberal in a Republican primary.
It's time Pat took his millions and retired.
That happened years ago. Robertson apparently is trying to regain his influence by becoming more liberal even if that means betraying Biblical morality.
Not only that, but 6 months after his supposed conversion in Nov of '04, he held a May 27, '05 press conference in which he affirmed his "pro-choice" commitment.
Why? Because he endorsed Giuliani? What would you have said about him if he’d endorsed D.Hunter, F. Thompson, etc.(or another conservative)? Is this the way he is viewed all the time now, or just because he endorsed Rudy?
Its sad but prophetic that many will “fall away” in the last days.
Pat, you blew it.
Rudy has executive experience and I think that Robertson is betting that once Rudy is in office, he's not going to pull any liberal pranks. But he could be wrong...but at least Hillary won't be in the Oval Office, and that's what Robertson is banking on with Rudy - most likely to beat Hillary.
“Robertson has gone soft in the brain”
Like when Billy Graham got up to defend “Squirt-boy” . . . medicine-men off their meds and rockers.
Religion pisens everythin’ by cracky!
Just the opposite is likely true -- Robertson just destroyed what is left of his ministry and political influence. That definitely is true of Giuliani doesn't get the nomination or loses in a landslide to Hillary because Christians don't vote Republican on election day.
Talk about elitist.
That’s 1300 flesh and blood people alive every year due to the mayor’s anti crime initiatives. Oh, but they are just New Yorkers ... so they don’t count, eh?
But, thank you for your convoluted arguments, just the same.
It wouldn't surprise if he claimed homosexuality isn't condemned by the Bible.
After all, he has already rationalized China's one-child policy, endorsed the idea of man-made global warming, opposed the death penalty and, now, supported supported a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual candidate in a Republican primary.
It will likely get him an appearance on the Sean Hannity show, though.
Amen...the Rudybots and RINOs have been warned of the consequences of a Giuliani nomination.
It's a good candidate for "Caption this pic".
Cordially,
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.