Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Wednesday November 7, 2007
Category: Faith, PoliticsRobertson hearts Rudy
Pat Robertson just endorsed Rudy Giuliani:
The other major effect of Robertson's support for Giuliani is that it will quiet talk in social conservative circles that nominating Giuliani would lead "values voters" to abandon the Republican Party. The stamp of approval from Robertson should assuage the doubts of many (although certainly not all) of the rank-and-file social conservatives.
Yes and no. What Robertson's endorsement really does is highlight yet another massive fault in the religious right movement. Throughout the 1990s, Robertson's Christian Coalition became the single most powerful and effective organization of religious conservatives by embracing extreme pragmatism. They understood the progress of politics occurred incrementally. Therefore they had no problems working with pro-choice Republicans or liberal Republicans or moderate Republicans or anyone else.
It was precisely Robertson's pragmatism that lead him to hire a young political operative named Ralph Reed. And it was precisely this pragmatism that lead to battle after battle with other Christian leaders like... James Dobson. The latter regularly blasted the former for selling out. But it was the Christian Coalition's success that kept Dr. Dobson and others in line.
Robertson's Giuliani endorsement will result in yet another earthquake in the social conservative movement. This could really be the "big one".
Filed Under: casting stones, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Rudy Giuliani
posted by David Kuo @10:38am Permalink 
Email This 
Add to:
Subscribe
Comments
David,
Pat Robertson said that we deserved 9/11 because of the ACLU, gays, femmenists, and pagans. It's funny that his disaproval of gays is now being trumped by security concerns. According to Robertson's immediate 9/11 comment we wouldn't have had securtiy concerns if it wasn't for the aforementioned segments of society.
Robertson's protege, Ralph Reed, got in bed with Jack Abrhamoff (who became a devout Jew only after going to jail) and couldn't even win election in Georgia.
DAVID, WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU THINK THESE TYPES ARE DOING TO SPREAD CHRISITANIY? I think there ploy is to convince common folk that the government can legislate morality and make millions. DAVID, DO YOU REALLY THINK THE GOVERNMENT OF IMPERFECT HUMAN BEINGS CAN LEGISLATE MORALITY?
Why isn't there support for Mike Huckabee like you asked in a previous post?
I grew up in Evangelical Christianity (& have since left) and sympathise with some sentiment still. There are some very open-minded caring Evangelicals.
Now that I'm out of the fold, I can tell you that every college educated non-Evangelical I have ever met thinks that Robertson, Reed, etc. are charlatins. Maybe, David, because you're in the fold, you can't see that.
Posted by: Brian Horan | November 7, 2007 7:42 PM
This is something that strikes me ideologically (if not of course in its murderous consequences) as something akin to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
On the other hand (and I know it's un-Christian of me ...), anything that ticks off James Dobson can't be TOO bad a thing ...
Posted by: Larry Parker | November 7, 2007 7:44 PM
Why can't we all stop trying to.. and just use the Jesus example.. Love all worship one. and leave politics.. for those that are made for it. Faith has no place in it, other than in the personal lives of those involved. a Vote, has no place telling a person elected or not what they need to talk to God about on any given day. and I disagree that Jesus was a socialist. people seem ti miss the point that he was caught in traps of both "sides" and trumped them both by not saying anything that would align him to either side but just illustrating the perfect will & law of God. and No government on earth save for the one Jesus is coming back to setup will ever come close to emulating that. whether we like it, or not. We're still fallen, and in desperate need of s Savior no matter what side of the ocean or what economic stature we come from.
Posted by: Brad | November 8, 2007 12:21 AM
Amy, I'm pretty sure the "me" above is not David.
Posted by: Doug | November 8, 2007 4:57 AM
Amy,
The poster who sometimes signs off as "Me" is actually Donny, NOT David. Regular readers can quickly recognize a Donny post by its subject matter, word usage, sentence structure, etc, so apparently he does not feel it necessary to always identify himself.
Sara
Posted by: Sara | November 8, 2007 12:44 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?