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...Filed Under: casting stones, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Rudy Giuliani
posted by David Kuo @10:38am Permalink 
Email This 
Add to:
Subscribe
Comments
It's always good to have an octogenarian who can bench press 2000 pounds and believes in assassination on your side. I was pleased to see that Brownback endorsed McCain.
Posted by: Doug | November 7, 2007 11:04 AM
David, my computer obviously has a virus. Your last post reads: "Pat Robertson just endorsed Rudy Guliani." Does that explain the smoke emanating from Colorado Springs this morning?
Posted by: canucklehead | November 7, 2007 11:08 AM
For Robertson, the attraction of the cult of GOP power exceeds the attraction of his other cult, the selective literalism of Deuteronomy.
That's all we learn by this.
David's right, it'll be interesting to see how the rest of the evangelipolitical world reacts. They're not all necessarily just going to take orders from Robertson.
Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg | November 7, 2007 11:31 AM
Hmm... I should have noted before, and Marc Arminder points out, that Robertson's Revelation literalism plays a role here, on the same side of the scale as "the cult of GOP power" in my above post.
marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/11/giuliani_is_endorsed_by_pat_ro.php
Posted by: Elvis Elvisberg | November 7, 2007 12:38 PM
David, you assume Pat Robertson is a Christian. I don't.
Would a Christian (of any stripe) exploit the tragedy that is New Orleans by holding a televised donation campaign and then keep more than 50% of what was raised to help the homeless in New Orleans as "expenses related to the campaign -- the money then being transferred to his "christian network."
Would a Christian (of any stripe) have a website where in he charges 25% more than list price for political books that have nothing to do with religion? (and use the cloak of religion to avoid paying taxes on the sales)?
He is and always has been a tool of the GOP.
And I frankly don't have a clue what the "religious right" is anymore regardless of your contention that they are not "cracking up." (Seems to me it's the rest of America that is "cracking up" watching them in disarray.)
I hear some in the religious right say that wealth is evidence of your faith in God and a sign of God's favor in you.
I hear obvious splits in the group regarding global warming, pollution, etc.
I see individuals tie Christianity with racism (yep, the goold ole Southern Strategy -- including RUDY.) Check out what Rudy has to say about how he cleaned up New York of "lawless blacks" ---- doesn't anyone else remember the strange deaths of blacks by police who got a free pass from good ole Rudy? Ask any black who lived thru Rudy's NY reign and they can give you chapter and verse of how he made discrimination against blacks the cornerstone of his administration.
get the message?
the religious right is not abandoning its values at all. It's focusing on it's core values.
The religious right was born out of 2 historical events in American history: 1. the loss of the Civil War and emancipation of blacks; and 2. Brown v. Board of Education.
you see an alliance you cannot understand. I and my black friends surely don't.
Posted by: amy | November 7, 2007 2:39 PM
The way I've heard the story, the Religious Right formed to counter the denial of federal funding to Bob Jones "University" by the Supreme Court, because of its unwillingness to conform to federal anti-segregation laws. At that meeting they apparently hit upon Francis Schaeffer's anti-abortion beliefs as a great non-racial symbolic issue that their rural/post-rural white followings were very willing to rally around to keep a political status quo.
Robertson is easy to understand if you drop the lens of his being a religious leader. He's the son of a secular Virginian Senator. And empirically, the 'Religious Right' is pretty much a political movement of Southern and Midwestern white middle class people for the worldly empowerment and advancement of their own.
Well, yesterday the Blue Iron Curtain of Democratic majority advanced a few miles further south, into Virginia and Kentucky. (No Republican sourced commentary on that, David? :-) ) Maybe that accounts for Robertson's, uh, pragmatism. I suspect it's called "pragmatism" when you like the person who does it, and "flip-flopping" when you don't.
Posted by: Jillian | November 7, 2007 4:33 PM
It just goes to show the further moral decline of the once United States of America.
Demons are rejoicing even more than the LGBT/Secular humanism community. Well, maybe not.
Robertson is a Christian if anyone from the progressive and liberal ranks claim the label as well.
It's time for a third party.
Posted by: Me | November 7, 2007 7:08 PM
hmmm david.
I suggest that the religious right is infected with deep seated racism, and question Pat Robertson's moral legitimacy as a christian leader, based on his apparent pragmatism involving fleecing his followers (I notice Sen. Grassley is not including the all powerful Rev. Robertson in his investigation into televanglists ... is it possible that the investigation is designed to spare Rev. Robertson some TV competition???? Not Hinn .. he provides competition only for WWE.)
And you assume me to be a progressive and therefore not a true Christian? The extensive reading I have done of Christ and the early Christians and the sect in which he practiced his faith makes it pretty clear that Christ was both progressive and that he and his followers practiced a economic platform that would most likely be called socialism.
David, seems i hit a nerve ... to bring out such arrogance and hatred -- all I did was retell some factual information. sigh. sigh.
And go ahead and review my comments before you post them. (What's the good of freedom if no one is allowed to practice it?)
Posted by: amy | November 7, 2007 7:36 PM
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?