Steven Waldman

Did Religious Conservatives Veto Joe Lieberman, Leading to Palin's Selection?

Monday October 20, 2008

A few interesting religious angles in Jane Mayer's New Yorker piece about how Sarah Palin got picked.

First, the young blogger who brought her to the attention of the conservative blogosphere was a "Messianic Jew" (a type of evangelical) who believes that "the hand of God" played a role in choosing Palin: "The longer I worked on it the less I felt I was driving it. Something else was at work."

Second, editors at the conservative magazine, The Weekly Standard, became impressed with her when a magazine fundraising cruise stopped in Alaska. One memorable moment: Palin's lengthy grace before eating.

Most important, Mayer confirms a key point that had been previously suspected: McCain wanted to select Joe Lieberman, the Democrat-turned-Independent, but was convinced that doing so would prompt a floor fight at the Republican convention from social conservatives who would object to Lieberman's pro-choice views on abortion.

A week or so before McCain named her, however, sources close to the campaign say, McCain was intent on naming his fellow-senator Joe Lieberman, an independent, who left the Democratic Party in 2006. David Keene, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, who is close to a number of McCain's top aides, told me that "McCain and Lindsey Graham"--the South Carolina senator, who has been McCain's closest campaign companion--"really wanted Joe." But Keene believed that "McCain was scared off" in the final days, after warnings from his advisers that choosing Lieberman would ignite a contentious floor fight at the Convention, as social conservatives revolted against Lieberman for being, among other things, pro-choice.

If McCain loses, and if it appears that Palin was a net-minus, religious conservatives will have to grapple with their role in electing Obama.


Advertisement
Comments
Charles Cosimano
October 20, 2008 1:38 PM

And the rest of us will be deprived of four years of comic relief. But the real losers will be the people of Alaska. They get Mrs. Moosebreath back.

Alicia
October 20, 2008 2:16 PM

A younger, more vital John McCain might have picked Lieberman and risked the floor fight, leading to (possibly) the positive transformation of the Republican Party and possibly to victory in November. Or it might simply have "blown up" the Convention.

We'll never know, and I think Obama will be a better President, so I'm not sorry things turned out this way.

Linda
October 20, 2008 11:51 PM

The article below is interesting. Just a day or two after Palin's nomination, James Dobson was glowing about the selection

Ultra Secretive Right Wing Group Met Vet Palin

Last week, while the media focused almost obsessively on the DNC's spectacle in Denver, the country's most influential conservatives met quietly at a hotel in downtown Minneapolis to get to know Sarah Palin. The assembled were members of the Council for National Policy, an ultra-secretive cabal that networks wealthy right-wing donors together with top conservative operatives to plan long-term movement strategy.

CNP members have included Tony Perkins, James Dobson, Grover Norquist, Tim LaHaye and Paul Weyrich. At a secret 2000 meeting of the CNP, George W. Bush promised to nominate only pro-life judges; in 2004, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist told the group, "The destiny of the nation is on the shoulders of the conservative movement." This year, thanks to Sarah Palin's selection, the movement may have finally aligned itself behind the campaign of John McCain.

More detail:

http://tinyurl.com/58hhzt

Rob
October 22, 2008 10:44 AM

So, Steven, the robocalls were "somewhat misleading" in that they left out the fact the born-alive law could have conflicted with existing law that already protected those infants, but they were "close-to-accurate" as the wording of the born-alive law, so they're OK?

If you want McCain to win the presidency, why not take your aspirations a step further and plan for a credible White House for a change? This kind of stuff probably won't help in the election and definitely hurts any mandate the winner acquires. It's poison, and there are many conservatives who swill it down. Fortunately, there are many who don't.

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Steven Waldman

Calendar

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.