Sunday’s NYTimes included a David Kirkpatrick article about a secretive meeting of conservative Christian leaders including Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, and Grover Norquist. They were meeting, as usual, to discuss American politics but this year the mood is different due in part to the difficulty finding a GOP candidate that represents their issues correctly while also being able to actually win in ’08.
In “Christian Right Labors to Find ’08 Candidate,” Kirkpatrick writes:
“But in a stark shift from the group’s influence under President Bush, the group risks relegation to the margins. Many of the conservatives who attended the event, held at the beginning of the month at the Ritz-Carlton on Amelia Island, Fla., said they were dismayed at the absence of a champion to carry their banner in the next election.”
“‘I’ve never seen more disillusionment at this point in the election in 30 years,’ says a source close to the Council for National Policy, which prohibits members from discussing meetings with the media. ‘There’s a revolt out there, a feeling these top three are being pushed on us by Republican leadership in D.C.’”
In light of this dismay, here’s a roundup of what conservative blogs are saying.
True conservatives are in a bind in 2008, at least so far…
But as the super-secretive Council for National Policy broke camp this weekend the New York Times picked up on the chance to highlight all the “lack of consensus.”
And to their credit – made some very valid points…
Waimea notes his Republican bona fides, but after reading the article states, “This is why I cannot support the conservative wings of the Republican party. . should they take over the party, drives me away from being a Republican.”
With a quote on her sidebar from Jesse Helms, Little Old Lady writes:
I don’t consider myself a member of the Christian right of Jerry Falwell, I am a Christian and a right winger and I am having as difficult a time with a candidate as they seem to be. Though I am not having as difficult a time about Romney because of his religion as many seem to be. IMO as long as he believes in God, isn’t planning on forcing anyone to do anything to pander to his religion exclusively and isn’t a member os Islam, I have no problem with his religion.
An Ol’ Broad’s Ramblings corrects the article: “Well, maybe some are hostile, but that’s really not our way. Lack of trust would be more like it. Rudy’s previous marriages aren’t a big deal in my opinion, people make mistakes, it’s his stand on the murder of babies and gay ‘rights’ with which I have a problem.”
In the NYPost John Podhoretz pounds about the reasoning,
“Many on the right profess amazement at the lead he’s opened up among Republican primary voters, considering his pro-choice views and sloppy personal life. . .When Republican voters look at Rudy Giuliani, they know one key fact about him: They know he’s no liberal.
They may not exactly know why yet, but they know it.”
But over at Free Republic, Mr. Pissant clearly has another idea as he weighs the differences between Rudy Giuliani and Duncan Hunter:
“Does the GOP become the party of moderation, or do they insist on a return to Reaganism, with the unabashed, bold conservative ideas and a willingness to ridicule the party of treason. The leading candidate right now supported a communist, Mario Cuomo, for governor of his state because he had the right ideas. The leading candidate was endorsed by the NY liberal party 3 times, because he represented much of their platform. On the flip side there is a candidate that not only espouses Reaganism, but has lived and voted it. And for bold ideas, he vows to get the border fence built in 6 months, return the power of education to the states, confront China’s growing militancy, boost our armed forces – including space based weaponry, and do everything in his power to see that Roe v. Wade becomes a footnote in history.
That my friend, is a powerful, positive agenda. Reaganesque, Thatcheresque, but certainly not Giuliani-ish.”
On Thursday the new House leadership reached its goal of six major bills passed in its first one hundred hours of floor time.
In fact, they completed everything in only 42 hours. Here is a very informative graphic on each of the six proposals: Sept. 11 Commission, Stem Cell Research, Minimum Wage, Prescription Drugs, Student Loans, Energy Policy.
Strangely, notice what the right-wing Family Research Council said about the success of the newly-elected Congress:
“Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) and company introduced measures to fund anti-life research, silence voters through lobbying reform, increase taxes, and police thoughts through a new ‘hate crimes’ law.”
“Silence voters through lobbying reform” is an interesting choice of words for what many Congressional ethics watch groups herald as the most significant tightening of ethics rules. But then note who is on the schedule to speak at the Family Research Council’s Blog for Life event today.
Yes, former Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) friend of many military contractor lobbyists just like his jailed friend Duke Cunningham.
Cunningham and House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, worked closely with two local companies — ADCS Inc. of Poway and Audre Inc. of Rancho Bernardo — to make the Pentagon pay for converting printed documents to computer files. They and a few other lawmakers got Congress to allocate $190 million for “automated data conversion†projects from 1993 to 2001.
Did the Pentagon want this “helpâ€? No. As a 1994 General Accounting Office report noted, it already had the tools for such work.
But Cunningham, Hunter and their House allies didn’t care. Audre and ADCS were generous with contributions — and ADCS executive Brent Wilkes allegedly was bribing Cunningham…This led to such absurdities as a $9.7 million contract for ADCS to digitize historical documents from the Panama Canal Zone that the Pentagon considered insignificant. This isn’t governance. This is looting.”
But in a press release entitled, “Clock Runs out on the Family,” the Family Research Council went on to attack raising the minimum wage, lowering student loan and prescription drug costs as evidence that the new Congress “made no time for families.”
Hmm. . .yes, protecting the kinship of corporate lobbyists and lawmakers, fighting a free market for life-saving drugs, and making college harder for families – what family does the FRC actually represent?
Amidst the post-election brouhaha over conservatives and secular folk, it’s worth noting the following TIME op-ed about the first Muslim elected to Congress:
“Now secular liberals and culturally conservative Muslims are united in their intense opposition to Bush’s policies at home and abroad, especially in the Middle East. And it should be no surprise that an African American like Ellison has emerged as a key broker in this coalition. About one-fourth to one-third of all American Muslims are African Americans. These are not “black Muslim” followers of Louis Farrakhan, but orthodox Sunni Muslims, accepted as such by their brethren from traditionally Muslim societies.”
Perhaps America is better off when we work together against injustice. Because sometimes when we work together for the common good, those old terms just don’t make sense.
“Two Jews, a Hindu, and a born-again Christian, disillusioned after the 2004 election and troubled by the idea that their nation is bitterly divided over morality, set out to investigate the power of evangelical Christianity in American political life.”
“From Megachurches in Texas, to Music Festivals in New Hampshire to MTV protests in New York, they discover that the fanaticism characterized in the mainstream media tells only one side of a diverse and fascinating story of religion and politics.”
Yesterday afternoon as Rev. Ted Haggard resigned his position with the National Association of Evangelicals and temporarily stepped aside from his church in Colorado Springs, CNN’s Situation Room featured an extended spot on the disillusionment with the Republican party in the evangelical community. See the below story, featuring an interview with Religious Right poobah Jerry Falwell.