PDA

View Full Version : Republicans Taking First Steps To 08' Defeat



Nickdfresh
03-25-2006, 08:37 AM
Right Is Might for GOP's Aspirants
By Janet Hook, Times Staff Writer
March 25, 2006

WASHINGTON — Most Americans know one thing about Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, if they know anything at all: He lost more than 100 pounds in one year, a triumph touted in a weight-loss book that he has hawked around the country.

But evangelical conservative activists know one or two other things that make the governor a standout among Republicans who may run for president in 2008: Huckabee is a Baptist minister and a fierce defender of traditional family values.

"Let's face it," he recently told a crowd of Christian conservatives in Iowa, the state that holds the nation's earliest presidential caucuses. "In our lifetimes, we've seen our country go from 'Leave It to Beaver' to 'Beavis and Butt-head,' from Barney Fife to Barney Frank, from 'Father Knows Best' to television shows where father knows nothing."

Huckabee's early outreach to evangelicals — in Iowa and elsewhere — is a tribute to the clout of the GOP's Christian conservative wing. That faction was crucial to President Bush's reelection in 2004, and is maneuvering to have a big say in who wins the party's nomination in 2008.

The Iowa Christian Alliance has invited all of the potential Republican candidates to address voters around the state. Antiabortion activists have scrutinized potential contenders' records. A coalition of national conservative groups has summoned potential candidates to a conference here in September that it expects to be attended by 2,000 or more "values voters."

"We are looking forward to a vibrant competition among politicians for these voters," said Gary Bauer, a conservative leader who ran for president in 2000. "No one owns them."

Because no candidate has a lock on conservative evangelicals, virtually all of the major Republican politicians — even those who have been at odds with the Christian right on hot-button issues — see an opportunity to win their favor.

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has disavowed past statements supporting abortion rights. Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) dropped his support for covering homosexuals in hate crimes legislation. Even Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, whose liberal record on social issues is anathema to many conservatives, recently spoke to a meeting of evangelical leaders in the South.

But social and religious conservatives' influence may be limited by the fact that they have not rallied around one candidate. The potential candidates with the best showings in early polls — Giuliani and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — are viewed with suspicion by many conservatives. Yet those whom many regard as soul mates of religious conservatives, such as Huckabee and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), are among the least-known, which suggests they would have the highest hurdles to cross to win the nomination.

So some activists are urging social conservatives to close ranks behind a like-minded candidate to maximize their impact.

"If we get together and get behind a single candidate, we can be formidable," said Paul M. Weyrich, a conservative leader. "But if we are split up into eight different camps … it's going to destroy any chance of being effective."

It is not clear when or whether that agreement will happen. But it is clear that this faction is still a force, as potential candidates move to curry its favor — or at least stay off its enemies list.

"No one seems to be running from the right," said Brian Hart, Brownback's communications director. "Every named candidate is making a play for the right, and some seem to be doing a decent job of it. A year ago you would've said, 'No way McCain would be courting conservatives.' You never would have said a Massachusetts governor would be courting conservatives."

Christian conservatives — mostly white evangelical Protestants and increasingly Catholics — have been a crucial part of the GOP base during the Bush years. They tend to be more concerned about social issues such as abortion, religion in public life and same-sex marriage than are GOP economic conservatives, whose top priorities are cutting taxes and regulation.

With no indisputable front-runner in the emerging GOP field, religious conservatives have an opportunity to wield more influence in the selection than they have had in recent years. In 2000, the establishment consensus behind Bush formed so early that other candidates with closer ties to the religious right, such as Bauer and Alan Keyes, were mere also-rans.

Still, evangelicals easily warmed to Bush, a born-again Christian. They provided crucial votes in the contested 2000 election and even more in his 2004 reelection.

According to exit polls, Bush received 78% of the white evangelical vote in 2004, up 10 percentage points from 2000, says the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Bush also received 52% of the Catholic vote, up from 47% in 2000.

Jennifer Duffy, an analyst for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, estimates that a third or more of GOP primary voters are Christian conservatives. That means that they may not be strong enough to pick a nominee, but "they are strong enough to give candidates they dislike a lot of trouble," said John C. Green, a political scientist at the University of Akron.

That is why, more than two years before the 2008 election, Republicans are traveling the country to shore up support among evangelicals.

Huckabee is building on ties to religious leaders that he made as a Southern Baptist minister and former president of the Arkansas Baptist State Convention. He has endorsed South Dakota's new abortion ban, and last week spoke at a Florida gathering hosted by the Center for Reclaiming America for Christ.

Brownback appeals to many social conservatives because he has made fighting abortion, embryonic stem cell research and indecency central to his legislative career. He or his staff meets weekly on Capitol Hill with social conservative leaders in a group called the Values Action Team. A recent profile of Brownback and his ties to the religious right in Rolling Stone magazine was headlined "God's Senator."

Some see Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) as a solid conservative on economic and social issues who might be more electable than Huckabee or Brownback. Allen recently came in first in a straw poll at a convention of conservative activists.

But other conservatives mistrust Allen because they believe he broke a 2000 campaign promise to oppose the extension of federal hate crimes law to cover homosexuals when he voted for a similar measure in 2004. Under fire from conservatives, including the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition, Allen switched his position in December. That was enough to turn Sheldon into an Allen supporter, but it left others dubious.

"The jury is still out about what social conservatives think of George Allen," said Joe Glover, president of the Family Policy Network, a Christian conservative group.

Another potential candidate who has labored to appeal to the religious right is Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). He was among the first to call for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, and has scheduled a Senate vote on the measure for June. Last year, Frist made extraordinary efforts to pass legislation to keep Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged Florida woman, alive via feeding tube, a cause celebre of the religious right. Frist was also on the front lines of efforts to confirm Bush's conservative nominees to federal courts.

But Frist's star has fallen among conservatives, who recoiled last year when he called for expanded federal backing for embryonic stem cell research. That was anathema to conservatives who see such research as tantamount to destroying human life.

Romney is aggressively courting the religious right because, as a Mormon coming from the liberal state of Massachusetts, he is viewed with suspicion by many Christian conservatives. He has taken flak for saying during his 2002 campaign for governor that he supported a woman's right to choose abortion. Now he says his view has "evolved" and that he is a determined abortion opponent.

He is trying to promote himself to the party's right wing as someone who has been on the front lines of battling same-sex marriage. The issue was thrust to the top of the conservative agenda by a Massachusetts state court ruling in support of it.

Giuliani is widely viewed as the candidate who would have the hardest time winning acceptance among social conservatives because of his record of supporting abortion rights, gun control and gay rights.

"From a social conservative standpoint, he would be way down at the bottom of the heap," said Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Assn. of Michigan. "At least Romney is trying to flip-flop. Giuliani doesn't even bother to flip-flop."

Still, Giuliani did stop by a Florida convention of the Global Pastors Network, an evangelical group, to speak early this year. "I can't tell you from my heart how much I appreciate what you are doing: saving people, telling them about Jesus Christ and bringing them to God," Giuliani told the crowd, Time magazine reported.

In a television interview last year, evangelist Pat Robertson praised Giuliani's record as mayor of New York and said he would make a good president.

"Although he doesn't share all of my particular points of view on social issues, he's a very dedicated Catholic," Robertson said.

McCain also faces animosity on the right. He antagonized social conservatives in his 2000 presidential campaign by criticizing evangelical leaders' influence in the GOP. He voted against a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. And GOP conservative activists opposed his signature 2002 campaign finance law, which they believed put their party at a fundraising disadvantage.

But in a sign that he is trying to smooth troubled waters, McCain recently met with one of the evangelical leaders he had criticized — the Rev. Jerry Falwell. And he has picked up support from prominent Republicans with close ties to social conservatives: Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and former Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.).

It is not clear whether that will translate into broader support from the rank and file. Glenn, for example, turned down a chance to meet with McCain during a Michigan visit last year because of McCain's position on same-sex marriage.

"That," Glenn said, "is a nonnegotiable issue."

Link (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-right25mar25,1,5680164,full.story)

BigBadBrian
03-25-2006, 11:11 AM
The Democrats spend their time picking apart Republican candidates when they can't even field a candidate worthy themselves, particularly when Billary and other Dems are pandering to the Christian Right vote themselves. They know it's key in any election.

:gulp:

Cathedral
03-25-2006, 11:28 AM
A vote from the "Christian Right" is actually a vote "from" the Devil himself.
The "Christian" faith is so deep seeded in the traditions of man there is no way what they practice is of God.
And if something isn't of God then it can't very well be pleasing to God now can it?

The faithful have already been played like a $2 fiddle by Chimpy and i'd say they'll be hard pressed to fall in that line again.

As far as the "Christians" go, i'm sure they'll continue to buy into the lies as they always have. Chimpy claims to be born again, but his "works" prove otherwise.

And i hope you understand that there is a difference between "Christians" (Not of God) and the true believers (Of God).

The left, namely Hillary Clinton, are indeed trying that hand for themselves but it will be in vein.
Nobody who believes in and supports or defends Roe vs. Wade can EVER be a child of God. Abortion is an abomination to God because it "steals" God of what is rightfully his.
Life begins because he creates it, and life should only end when he takes it.
Man, in his "Pride" may choose to interfere in that plan. But he'll pay the price for that when he stands before the Lord and will be judged accordingly.

BigBadBrian
03-25-2006, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
A vote from the "Christian Right" is actually a vote "from" the Devil himself.
The "Christian" faith is so deep seeded in the traditions of man there is no way what they practice is of God.
And if something isn't of God then it can't very well be pleasing to God now can it?


And i hope you understand that there is a difference between "Christians" (Not of God) and the true believers (Of God).



Huh? :confused:

ct2kc1111
03-25-2006, 12:18 PM
Cathedral, Bravo for your abortion stand; regardless of other views, I applaud anyone who denounces abortion but unfortunately, it's only usually conservatives and not Leftists, Democrats or RINO's. But the "chimpy" stuff is childish. Disagree with policy if you want but credibility goes out the window when personal insults about public figures starts. I support the President but hardly agree with everything; in fact there's a host of issues which I disagree strongly with but strongly disagree with the Left that he is some Satan. That's jealous crap straight from MoveOut.org who has NO credibility on anything except they hate the President.

Nickdfresh
03-25-2006, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
I spend their time picking apart Democratic candidates (that may not even run) when I can't even name a Republican candidate worthy myself, particularly when Allen and other Frist are pandering to the Christian Right vote themselves. They know it's key to an unelectable candidate in any election.

:gulp:

Pot tea kettle "Billary."

Nickdfresh
03-25-2006, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by ct2kc1111
...But the "chimpy" stuff is childish. Disagree with policy if you want but credibility goes out the window when personal insults about public figures starts. I support the President but hardly agree with everything; in fact there's a host of issues which I disagree strongly with but strongly disagree with the Left that he is some Satan. That's jealous crap straight from MoveOut.org who has NO credibility on anything except they hate the President.


Originally posted by ct2kc1111
...rather than these stupid 3rd grade comments. Democrats and their supporters are soft ass pussies, face it. Disagree with Bush or Conservatives if you wish but at least he had the balls to do something. "Let's 'negotiate' with terrorists.." . Ridiculous. Grow a set and then talk to me.

Typical hypocritical bushShit from a full on hypocrite...

diamondD
03-25-2006, 12:50 PM
Mike Huckabee used to be my pastor years and years ago when I lived in Pine Bluff. As much as I'd like to say I've met 2 people long before they became President, he doesn't have a chance.

Plus I don't think the country will be too thrilled about 2 Arkansas governors almost back to back.

Cathedral
03-25-2006, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by ct2kc1111
Cathedral, Bravo for your abortion stand; regardless of other views, I applaud anyone who denounces abortion but unfortunately, it's only usually conservatives and not Leftists, Democrats or RINO's. But the "chimpy" stuff is childish. Disagree with policy if you want but credibility goes out the window when personal insults about public figures starts. I support the President but hardly agree with everything; in fact there's a host of issues which I disagree strongly with but strongly disagree with the Left that he is some Satan. That's jealous crap straight from MoveOut.org who has NO credibility on anything except they hate the President.

Well thanks for the supportive words, I apreciate that!

I do have to disagree that only conservatives are against abortion.
I have some friends that are registered Dems and they are supportive of an initiative to reverse Roe vs. Wade actually.

They also have expressed displeasure that abortion has become a defining issue that describes the root core of what a Democrat is.
They, as you stated, are against the Republican Policies on many fronts that pairs them with the Democrats.
But even the so called "Christians" who vote for Republicans because of their opposition to abortion are being used because in all the elections since 1974 not a single Republican President has pioneered a charge to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

I know I have no confidence that they will in the future, and that is one of the very few things I am proud of Bush on because he made strides in that area since he took office. He laid the groundwork for that reversal in the near future...though i think he'll be long gone before that happens and then it may end up never happening.

That said, I know a few registered Republicans that do support Roe vs. Wade.

So, in my opinion abortion isn't as much a political issue as it is a personal one.

Cathedral
03-25-2006, 02:08 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Huh? :confused:

In my studies I have come to conclude that people that call themselves "Christians" do not uphold the Word of God, BBB.

I further don't believe that Bible Thumpers are doing the works of God on this earth, they are more concerned with earning "Brownie" points and money for saving souls, which by the way they cannot do, and that is not their job. God does not require us to follow blindly and he has never sent anyone out into the world to "beat" or "drill" his message into them. they are sent to "share" his word and if someone denies that Word the servent of God is to dust of his feet as a testimony against them.
You either seek it for yourself, accept it, or you will not find his Glory.
The servent of God is not to waste time on those who deny him.

The term "Christian", to me, means, "False Prophet".

God is not in the business of saving souls. in fact, there has not been one soul saved since Jesus went to the cross, because that was when everyone was saved, all at once, and i don't recall any more Messiah's being crucified since then.
Jesus was not a Democrat, Republican, or Independant...he was NON-POLITICAL.
He believed that the government should be obeyed. he believed we were to follow the laws of the land and keep issues of God out of it.

Sadly, that is where the Traditions of man have replaced the inspired Word of God, and that is what every church I have ever entered has practiced. The doctrine of God cannot be found in any building, it can only be found in His Word and practiced in our own Temples, which are our bodies, the TRUE church of God and Jesus Christ.

So for a "Christian" to support a political party based on it's foundation is against God because they do not keep to the Word as it was inspired by God. They preach part of the word, but bastardize or flat out ignore other parts of that Word.
People who only half practice God's will are hypocrites and one only has to look at the inequities of those men to determine what and where their doctrine is...and in political circles it is the doctrine of MAN they support, not the Word of God.

The Jews crucified Jesus through the Romans, yet we are to believe that the Romans (meaning the Roman Catholic Church), are the authority on God's Word?

I don't think so.
Societies change, God never has and never will. but all denominations of faith are rooted in Catholicism.

So, given that "revelation", anyone who preaches against one thing yet ignores another cannot be of God, they lack "purity", and we all know by the Word that the impure will never know God without repentence which that opportunity was delivered by the blood of Jesus on that cross.

Dude, if a "Christian" can be persuaded to support the unholy in our political establishment, they are phonies and deserve the title of "Christian".

Warham
03-25-2006, 04:25 PM
The Republicans aren't going to lose in '08, so the premise of the article is totally off base.

FORD
03-25-2006, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Republicans aren't going to lose in '08, so the premise of the article is totally off base.

How (other than massive fraud) do you think the Republicans could possibly win another election after what the BCE has done to this country? :confused:

Warham
03-25-2006, 08:57 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How (other than massive fraud) do you think the Republicans could possibly win another election after what the BCE has done to this country? :confused:

The Republicans can win just by doing the same thing they are doing now.

The Democrats have to prove that they stand for something, anything, to win anything back.

What's their position on the Iraq War, anyway? I still haven't gotten a concrete answer from one DNC member yet.

Nickdfresh
03-25-2006, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by Warham
The Republicans can win just by doing the same thing they are doing now.

The Democrats have to prove that they stand for something, anything, to win anything back.

What's their position on the Iraq War, anyway? I still haven't gotten a concrete answer from one DNC member yet.

Maybe you can tell me what George BUSH'S position is? He seems rather cuntfused...

Warham
03-25-2006, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Maybe you can tell me what George BUSH'S position is? He seems rather cuntfused...

You heard his press conference the other day, didn't you?

We're in for the long haul, until '09 at the earliest.

FORD
03-26-2006, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by Warham
You heard his press conference the other day, didn't you?

We're in for the long haul, until '09 at the earliest.

He also said he never wanted war, which was a complete lie. How can you trust anything the Chimp says?

Nickdfresh
03-26-2006, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Warham
You heard his press conference the other day, didn't you?

We're in for the long haul, until '09 at the earliest.

Actually, I just read, and can see the disconnect between the pResident's rhetoric, and what's actually going on in Iraq...

Warham
03-26-2006, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Actually, I just read, and can see the disconnect between the pResident's rhetoric, and what's actually going on in Iraq...

There's no disconnect. He's always said it's been 'hard work' (even in the debates against Kerry in '04) and it's going to take a long time.

He's not said anything otherwise, and has never tried to candycoat it.