« January 27, 2008 - February 2, 2008
|
February 10, 2008 - February 16, 2008 »
February 3, 2008 - February 9, 2008
February 9, 2008
Miracle Mike
The pundits, said Mike Huckabee, "say the math doesn't work out. Folks, I didn't major in math, I majored in miracles-and I still believe in those."
Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference just two days after Mitt Romney dropped out of the presidential race, and after a host of right-wing activists urged the grassroots to fall in line with John McCain, Huckabee didn't exactly strike a confident pose.
But for the candidate who made his personal faith the center of his presidential bid, and who relied on church-based organizing to keep him limping along where broad-based support failed, the call for a "miracle" is simply the latest prong of his faith-based campaign.
Huckabee said he was inspired to take up the conservative cause as a young man by reading Phyllis Schlafly's pamphlet, "A Choice, Not an Echo"--an indictment of Republicans who were tempted to compromise and a manifesto in favor of Barry Goldwater, whose quixotic campaign in 1964 birthed the modern right wing. And he made the title of the book the theme of his speech: primary voters, he said, "deserve more than a coronation" of John McCain. That was the "choice" part, at least, and he reeled off his right-wing positions on the war (pro), taxes (against), abortion (bad), "sovereignty" (hours before Schlafly herself was scheduled to be warning of a "North American Union" plot), and judges. Huckabee proposed that judges who "invoke some international law" should be "summarily impeached."
He didn't explain what the "echo" part was, but that was clear enough: Although Huckabee had long been seen as carrying water for McCain during the acrimonious Republican race, here he was accusing the presumptive nominee of "echoing" the left--of being Nelson Rockefeller to his Goldwater.
"This race is not to the swift or the strong, but to those who endure to the end," said Star Parker in introducing Huckabee. Indeed, in the end Goldwater won the nomination, and while he lost the general election in a landslide, he left a movement in his wake. It's possible that Huckabee really believes he can pull together some kind of "miracle" out of bitter-enders like Parker and now James Dobson. But it's more likely that these activists are concerned less with winning than about maintaining the place of power the far right holds in the Republican Party.
Posted by Ezra at 6:00 PM | Permalink
February 8, 2008
The Pandering Must Go On!
As he was listing off his right-wing promises to the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference, John McCain said he would continue to “seek the counsel of my fellow conservatives.” For Human Events editor Jed Babbin, that isn’t enough: “This is vintage McCain. He promises to hear, not to listen. He promises to seek counsel, but not to respect it. … That is less than we require of our leaders. We require them to adhere to our basic principles, and that those principles be the basis for their decisions.”
Take heart, Mr. Babbin: McCain has all but secured the Republican nomination, and yet he is still reaching out to the fringe:
The Brody File has been talking to some influential social conservative leaders around the country and they tell me that they've been talking to John McCain for months. As a matter of fact, one leader told me John McCain called him after Super Tuesday this week. While details of the phone call remain secret, I can tell you that McCain was reaching out to this particular leader and emphasizing the common ground he has with social conservatives on the life issue, judges and defeating Islamic fascists.
Another social conservative leader told me McCain called him to discuss specifics on social conservative causes. I'm told McCain wanted to be more up to speed on the issues that are important to social conservatives. This leader told me that McCain hasn't been focused on their issues before so he's trying to become more aware of all the details.
Still, we can expect right-wing leaders to keep leveling demands at their presumptive candidate, following the principle that the squeaky wheel gets the grease. McCain needs them, they say: "He cannot rely on some Democrats and a lot of independents to become president of the United States," Tom DeLay said. "He's got to have a base, and hopefully he will understand that."
“To get the enthusiastic support of conservatives – support he must have, to win – Senator McCain must make his case with deeds, not just words," said Richard Viguerie. Ralph Reed, no friend of McCain’s, put it this way:
"This is fired-up Democratic Party, and it is not enough to simply define the differences between the parties," said Reed, who advised McCain to "choose a running mate with street cred on the right" and devote his nominating convention and fall campaign to "striking conservative themes."
What kind of “conservative themes”? How about judges: While McCain has already bent over backwards to the Right on Supreme Court nominations, with a cooing letter to the Federalist Society this week and his promise at CPAC to appoint judges like Roberts and Alito—Quin Hillyer of Confirm Them wants even more:
McCain pledged to appoint judges like Roberts and Alito. Great. I am a fan of both. But I am even more of a fan of Scalia, and even more than that a fan of Clarence Thomas. I would have been happier if McCain, speaking to this conservative audience, had forthrightly said he would appoint judges like Clarence Thomas.
Of course, McCain voted in favor of confirming Thomas. (He wasn’t in the Senate yet for Scalia’s confirmation. However, he was among a minority of senators to vote for Robert Bork the following year.) But, as he will find out, the Right’s appetite for pandering can be bottomless.
Posted by Ezra at 4:55 PM | Permalink
No 'Straight Talk' from McCain on Judges
When John McCain appeared before the Conservative Political Action Conference yesterday in an effort to patch up his rocky relations with the GOP's right flank, he knew the right button to push -- judicial nominations:
"I intend to nominate judges who have proven themselves worthy of our trust that they take as their sole responsibility the enforcement of laws made by the people's elected representatives, judges of the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito, judges who can be relied upon to respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend."
But the track record of Roberts and Alito puts the lie to McCain’s pronouncement. Look no further than the Ledbetter decision, where they rejected longstanding precedent to make it easier for companies to get away with pay discrimination – leaving thousands of workers who illegally receive lower pay with no legal recourse. How does that respect the rights of the American people?
If McCain was actually a “straight talker,” he would have told the CPAC crowd that he supports right-wing judges who routinely side with government and big business over the rights of individual Americans every single time. But McCain’s no maverick, and he’s using the same code words and mantras as Bush – “strict constructionist” and “legislate from the bench” – to signal his fealty to the far right on one of their signature issues.
For real straight talk on the Bush-McCain agenda for the Supreme Court, ask someone who has firsthand experience with the right's assault on individual rights, like Lilly Ledbetter:
Posted by Josh at 1:53 PM | Permalink
Dobson’s Craven Calculation
There was an article in Time last week wondering if James Dobson’s political clout was fading. Citing shrinking contributions, revenue, distribution, and audiences, the article suggested that Dobson was reluctant to “back a candidate so early in the game [because] backing a losing horse could devalue the worth of any future Dobson anointment.
Judging by his latest round of news-making, one has to wonder if Dobson has intentionally set out to make himself the object of ridicule and irrelevance. A few weeks ago, it was noted that Focus on the Family Action’s post-South Carolina primary political analysis was conspicuously flattering toward Mitt Romney, and while all involved denied that it could be construed as an endorsement, it was pretty obvious that Romney was their candidate of choice.
Then Dobson suddenly emerged from his headquarters in Colorado Springs after Super Tuesday to tell the world that his conscience would not allow him to support John McCain and that he was seeking a million voters to pledge to do the same, seemingly with the aim of mobilizing support behind Romney.
But Dobson’s efforts came too late, and Romney dropped out, leaving only McCain and Mike Huckabee. And so Dobson, being ever-bold and principled, has decided to endorse the only remaining candidate he hasn’t publicly repudiated:
I am endorsing Gov. Mike Huckabee for President of the United States today. My decision comes in the wake of my statement on Super Tuesday that I could not vote for Sen. John McCain, even if he goes on to win the Republican nomination. His record on the institution of the family and other conservative issues makes his candidacy a matter of conscience and concern for me.
That left two pro-family candidates whom I could support, but I was reluctant to choose between them. However, the decision by Gov. Mitt Romney to put his campaign "on hold" changes the political landscape. The remaining candidate for whom I could vote is Gov. Huckabee. His unwavering positions on the social issues, notably the institution of marriage, the importance of faith and the sanctity of human life, resonate deeply with me and with many others. That is why I will support Gov. Huckabee through the remaining primaries, and will vote for him in the general election if he should get the nomination. Obviously, the governor faces an uphill struggle, given the delegates already committed to Sen. McCain. Nevertheless, I believe he is our best remaining choice for President of the United States.
Nothing reeks of desperation more than announcing a halfhearted endorsement in the middle of the night when it is obvious that you are only supporting the candidate because you hate his opponent.
Dobson’s primary purpose in deciding to throw in with Huckabee only after the cause was lost is presumably to give himself cover for not voting for McCain in the general election. After all, if the one GOP candidate who truly holds “unwavering positions” on the importance of faith, marriage, and the sanctity of human life can’t win the Republican nomination, then what choice does Dobson have but to stand by his principles and refuse to support the party’s candidate?
Of course, considering that Huckabee’s “unwavering positions on the social issues” on which Dobson has built his entire career have been the centerpiece of his campaign, you’d think he would have endorsed him months ago … which is exactly what Huckabee has been saying all along. Had he done so, perhaps Huckabee wouldn’t be facing the kind of “uphill struggle” he faces now which makes it increasingly unlikely that he’ll actually be the nominee.
But doing that would have required taking a stand on principle when it actually mattered and supporting the one candidate who epitomizes the values Dobson claims to represent instead of hedging his bets and trying to shape the race through subtle signals, un-endorsements, and craven, late-night political calculations.
Posted by Kyle at 11:10 AM | Permalink
February 7, 2008
The Earmarks Candidate
In his last State of the Union speech, when President Bush promised to make his top budget priority the trimming of earmarked special projects, it may have seemed like a gimmick; after all, there was no veto threat when his own party had control of Congress and special projects ballooned. But at CPAC this afternoon, the earmarks obsession took center stage, and provided an aimless crowd of activists with a clear path to the only candidate they seem to have left.
It began with Rep. Jeb Hensarling, chairman of the right-wing Republican Study Committee in the House, and continued through a panel on the GOP being “lost”: Rep. Jeff Flake, Rep. Thad McCotter, Sen. Tom Coburn, and Sen. Jim DeMint all endeavored to explain that, although earmarks only make up about one percent of the budget, they are a threat “even greater” than that of terrorism, in the words of Coburn. And so they launched, parallel with the war on terror, a “war on pork—the gateway drug,” Coburn said, “to the spending addiction” that in turn will be “bankrupting” the country. The battle against earmarks, as former House Speaker Dick Armey put it, is a method of “leading the Republican Party back to its way.”
But in the short term, it was method of leading the CPAC crowd to the GOP candidate. DeMint, as he lectured on earmarks, complained that Republican voters “missed an opportunity of a lifetime” by not rallying around Romney, but he looked through his “tears [!] and disappointment” to a need to oppose Democrats in the general election. Armey groused about McCain’s one-time position on high-end tax cuts, but complimented him on the issue of earmarks, urging activists to “shape” their inevitable nominee—to extract promises. Surprise speaker George Allen—two years ago, speaking as CPAC’s hope for 2008—lauded McCain’s “character” and promised leadership in the war, in appointing judges, and in vetoing earmarks. And Coburn offered his grudging support, saying McCain would have the “courage” to face down Congress (except on immigration, he added quickly). McCain, he said, would appoint “strict constructionist judges” like Bork, Roberts, Alito, and Janice Rogers Brown, and yes, would take on those earmarks.
After all that, it was an anticlimax to hear McCain pledge that he “will not sign a bill with any earmarks in it.” But the rest of the candidate’s speech consisted of his effort to make clear to the assembled activists that he himself would emerge from CPAC larded with right-wing policy earmarks. Of course there was his about-face on comprehensive immigration reform and his revelation that he now supports making the “Bush tax cuts” permanent. But more broadly, he promised to fight for “our principles”: from protecting the “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” of “the unborn” to appointing judges like Roberts and Alito.
Ignoring Laura Igraham’s dig earlier in the afternoon, McCain told CPAC he had “come to public office as a foot soldier” in their movement, and assured them he remains one today.
Posted by Ezra at 6:46 PM | Permalink
Romney Drops Out at CPAC
Radio talker Laura Ingraham must not have gotten the memo that Mitt Romney was about to drop his presidential bid. “Of all the people introducing the three remaining candidates for president, I get to introduce the conservative,” she said, as she ripped John McCain’s claim to be a right-wing “foot soldier”: “I think the question is, ‘What have you been doing for conservatism lately?’ … An obsession with bipartisan compromise doesn’t make us free.”
But just as Igraham’s efforts failed to carry Romney through Super Tuesday, her remarks today weren’t enough to keep him in the race.
Romney, after giving a shout out to his new friends in talk radio, worked up the crowd with red meat: “Unless America changes course, we could become the France of the 21st century!” According to Romney, “The threat to our culture comes from within”—from the social safety net, number one (welfare “created a culture of poverty”), but also from “the attack on faith and religion.” For him, that means pornography, out-of-wedlock births, and “liberal judges.” If Democrats win in November, he said, “the opponents of American culture would push the throttle.”
There were already rumors passing through the attendees that this would be the end of the line for Romney, but his culture-war rhetoric had them enthralled, and he teased them: “You’re with me all the way to the convention. Fight on—just like Ronald Reagan in 1976!”
But instead, the folks at CPAC would have to make do with Gerald Ford. Concluding that staying in the race “would forestall the launch of a national campaign,” Romney said, “I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.” His supporters booed, and cried out “No!”
Opponents of McCain filter out, dejected—“Tell dad to throw out my absentee ballot,” one young women said on a cell phone, “I just can’t do it!” But those who didn’t get the idea on Tuesday have the rest of the weekend to get used to it.
Posted by Ezra at 5:10 PM | Permalink
The Elusive Reagan Spirit
Ronald Reagan’s disembodied voice opened the Conservative Political Action Conference, and the host, American Conservative Union President David Keene, boasted that Reagan spoke at CPAC seventeen times. Indeed, the very first panel was a discussion of the former president. “What better way to start a Conservative Political Action Conference than with a conversation about Ronald Reagan?” asked right-wing publisher Al Regnery.
But while the activists gathered at CPAC are unanimous in invoking Reagan’s legacy, confusion about what that means was evident from the start.
Starting off the first panel (the one about Reagan), Robert Novak posed the question, “Is George W. Bush really Ronald Reagan’s disciple?” If Reagan were president, he asked, would we still be in Iraq? This panel agreed: Nope.
However, this moment of agreement was interrupted by the early arrival of the next speaker: Vice President Dick Cheney, who received standing ovations for his hard-line statements on the war, domestic surveillance, and the administration’s “tough” interrogation policy. The Bush Administration’s legacy appeared secure with this crowd.
And then the Reagan panel resumed: Would Reagan, Novak asked, “conceivably” have proposed such projects as No Child Left Behind or the Medicare prescription drug plan?
Posted by Ezra at 5:05 PM | Permalink
Robertson Says No To McCain
From Fox News: "Evangelical leader Pat Robertson told FOX News Radio Thursday morning that he and other evangelicals would not support McCain, citing his temper. Robertson referenced a Wall Street Journal article describing him as a 'capped live volcano,' adding: 'You never know when he’s going to explode. … If you’ve got a guy who’s the commander in chief with his hand on the red button, I just don’t know, I wouldn’t like to be in WWIII, and I just have a feeling he wants to show how macho he is and we might just get ourselves in something we don’t want.'”
Posted by Kyle at 4:45 PM | Permalink
The CADC Won't Let It Go
The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission is still protesting ESPN: "The CADC is calling all those who oppose Christian bashing and a culture of corporate sponsored blasphemy to be part of a protest outside of ESPN's corporate headquarters in Bristol, Connecticut next Monday, February 11th at noon, across from the McDonald's on West Street. This rally is in response to the gross mishandling of the incident where Dana Jacobson, the co-anchor of ESPN's program, First Take, made the most inflammatory anti-Christian remarks."
Posted by Kyle at 3:01 PM | Permalink
The Straight Talk Express Veers Right
As everyone knows by this point, the Right does not like John McCain and the McCain camp finds itself in a quandary of how to appease hostile right-wing leaders without losing his most valuable asset: his media-concocted reputation as a “straight-talkin’ maverick” who refuses to pander for votes.
He needs to do it and will do it – but unfortunately for McCain, while some leaders of the right-wing base he needs seem willing to given him an opportunity to win them over, they don’t seem particularly eager to make it easy for him:
A prominent social conservative, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, said in an interview, “I’m willing to sit down and say we all make mistakes if he will come to the conclusion that some of the things he has worked on in the past, like McCain-Feingold, which in some ways the courts have deconstructed,” were mistakes. He added, “He must make social conservatives feel that he, No. 1, understands their issues; No. 2, believes in their issues; and No. 3, will advance them as president.”
Well, that ought to be easy - all he has to do repudiate his entire carefully-crafted reputation … and then beg their forgiveness:
One influential social conservative, Chuck Hurley, president of the Iowa Family Policy Center, said ''it's a stretch'' that McCain could assuage the concerns of social conservatives, but two things could help: 'If he says, ‘I was wrong, I'm sorry, please forgive me,' '' on the federal marriage amendment and embryonic stem-cell research. “That would be huge.''
So what is the McCain campaign’s strategy for dealing with this dilemma? Apparently, it is two-fold: having some surrogates out there suggesting that McCain has no intention of placating the Right while sending others out to do the pandering and apologizing for him.
Part One entails things like the McCain camp going out of their way to make it known that he has not been reaching out to those Religious Right leaders who might be warming up to him -- and having supporters like Phil Gramm blast his opponents as power-mad egomaniacs:
"I want to make the point that a lot of conservatives are coming home to McCain," says former senator Phil Gramm (Tex.), a McCain supporter. "But some aren't. Some just don't seem to understand that if they don't do this, it's going to hurt the party for a long time. They say they have principles, but some of it is their ego and power, too. They're well-known, and they're used to having power."
…
The incoming conservative fire against McCain has become a distraction, Gramm acknowledges. "Some people, in their own minds, think they have exerted a strong influence over the party, and now they are seeing that influence passing," he said. "There's some bitterness on their part. They're people who put their dogma in front of the interests of the country. . . . They don't like it that McCain is McCain."
Part Two entails quietly sending out proxies to woo them:
The effort to win over, or at least blunt the opposition, of talk-radio hosts and other movement figures who resent McCain’s maverick style and past departures from conservative orthodoxy involves both high-level surrogates and the candidate himself.
Its targets include the most influential talk-radio voice, Rush Limbaugh, who has been contacted in recent days by a McCain emissary, according to Republican sources.
The McCain campaign is also wooing Sean Hannity. At least two top McCain supporters, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), made the pitch to Hannity, who has a radio show in addition to co-hosting his nightly Fox News television program.
And hey, it looks like all the money McCain’s supporters forked over to help Sam Brownback pay off his campaign debt is paying dividends:
After quietly bowing out of the presidential race last fall, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) launched an aggressive effort to court socially conservative leaders who have expressed skepticism about the candidacy of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Brownback is heading McCain’s outreach to Catholic voters and is also one of McCain’s chief advisers on judicial nominations, helping to organize meetings between the candidate and national social conservative leaders. Brownback has met with Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, and Father Frank Pavone, a leader in the anti-abortion rights movement, to enlist their support.
On Thursday, Brownback will attend [the] Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual convention of conservative activists in Washington, to tout McCain. He will then travel home to persuade voters to support McCain in the Kansas caucus scheduled for Saturday.
In addition to this two-pronged strategy, McCain is also doing some good old fashioned personal pandering and courting one special Religious Right leader directly:
Conservative Christian leaders in Virginia have been fairly quiet about the state’s presidential primaries Tuesday, but the Republican candidates haven’t forgotten them.
The Rev. Jonathan Falwell, son of the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, said Wednesday that he had talked with John McCain within the past 24 hours. Falwell said he wasn’t ready to endorse a candidate, but wanted to hear more from the Arizona senator on the issues.
McCain’s phone call to him resulted from discussions he’s had with the candidate’s campaign staff over the past couple of months, Falwell said.
One remaining test for McCain is how to deal with Pat Robertson, the one “agent of intolerance” whom he hasn’t yet embraced …. and don’t think that has gone unnoticed:
Asked by CNN's Glenn Beck on Tuesday if he would vote for McCain, Robertson said: "I still have my misgivings. I'm not sure I can or not. I haven't made up my mind yet for sure."
McCain branded Robertson and the late Rev. Jerry Falwell as "agents of intolerance" during a campaign speech in Virginia Beach in 2000, days before Virginia's primary election.
"We are the party of Ronald Reagan, not Pat Robertson," McCain said at the time. He said he was not dismissing evangelicals, only "a few of their self-appointed leaders."
…
"I had spent years and lots of money getting him and his buddies and his chairman on various Senate committees. And then to have him come down to my city and make a statement like that, it was outrageous."
Granted, Robertson’s endorsement didn’t do much to help Rudy Giuliani, so perhaps his support isn’t vital. But as long as McCain and his associates are trying to have it both ways and are out there making nice with fringe figures like Frank Pavone and Jonathan Falwell, they may as well just apologize to Robertson. That way Robertson can finally move on with his life and McCain can get back to working the media on his Straight Talk Express.
Posted by Kyle at 2:34 PM | Permalink
Flee the Public Schools
That is what Phyllis Schlafly and others are urging: "Many of us have worked to reform public schools. Unfortunately, SB 777 and the related legislation represent a repudiation of 2,000 years of Christian moral teaching on human sexuality, marriage, and the family. The result is that California's schools are now promoting behaviors and lifestyles that are physically and spiritually dangerous for children. Consequently, in California, parents must try to find alternatives to the public schools."
Posted by Kyle at 2:28 PM | Permalink
Who'll Huckabee Attack ...
... now that Mitt Romney has dropped out?
Posted by Kyle at 11:56 AM | Permalink
The McCain Quandary
As the Conservative Political Action Conference convenes today in Washington, the Right Wing is in a rut, divided over the Republican presidential candidates. CPAC is always a time when the “conservative movement” pays homage to Ronald Reagan, who spoke at the event 12 times since 1974; last year, candidates fell over themselves to see who could invoke Reagan’s name the most, even as graying activists warned of a decline in adherence to Reaganology.
The focus this year will be on John McCain, who managed to defy a number of talk radio hosts and emerge the frontrunner in last night’s elections. McCain had to pull out from last year’s CPAC in the face of a hostile reception, but he’s spent the interim brown-nosing the far right, and it’s no surprise that this time he’s planning to drum up late support by emphasizing his right-wing credentials and channeling the Reagan spirit: Human Events editor Jed Babbin reports that “McCain has prepared a video featuring President Ronald Reagan to make the introduction.”
Babbin warns that this would “backfire”:
Very few of the 2008 CPAC crowd will see McCain as the successor to Reagan and Reagan’s principles. McCain has sacrificed conservatives’ fundamental beliefs throughout his Senate career. If McCain uses this introduction, the boos will be very loud.
McCain faces a real quandary. If he fails at CPAC -- and doesn’t win the CPAC straw poll (he finished dead last in 2007) -- the word will be out that the conservatives are off his team this year.
But at this point, given the likelihood that McCain will win the Republican nomination, it’s the CPAC crowd that faces the quandary: If they pan him again, but GOP voters select him anyway, then what kind of influence do these activists really have?
Which is why, even as James Dobson and Rick Santorum double down against McCain, some of the Right’s leaders are signaling they will be a lot more accommodating. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention predicts evangelicals will fall in line, and Gary Bauer praises McCain’s faith-oriented campaign. Richard Viguerie, who has been highly critical of everybody, even leaves the door open a crack for reconciliation.
Meanwhile, Mike Huckabee is also defending McCain, saying, “Some people need to switch to decaf and realize, folks, we may not get all of our battles just like we want, but there's a larger context in which this has to be fought.” (For Huckabee, it seems like that context is vice president.)
It remains to be seen whether the CPAC attendees will buy this line of argument. In the mean time, the Right seems about as disoriented as these young activists at Mitt Romney’s Super Tuesday party:
Only a few Sam Adams-sipping College Republicans went slightly off message. "I'm scared," one confessed. "I don't think I could vote for John McCain." "We bet on the wrong guy in the Huckabee-Brownback feud," another said after Huckabee was projected the winner in another Southern state. "Wait, you're not a reporter, are you?"
Posted by Ezra at 10:54 AM | Permalink
February 6, 2008
Dobson Seeks a Million Pledges Not to Vote for McCain?
James Dobson has a long history of threatening to abandon the Republican Party and take his supporters with him, only to turn around and undertake get-out-the-vote activities seemingly designed to help the GOP win elections.
Back in 2006, Dobson blasted the Republican leadership, saying that “values voters” had “very little to show” for all their efforts at getting them elected and that there would be “trouble down the road” if they didn’t start moving on the issues the Religious Right cares about. And to show just how serious he was about holding their feet to the fire, he set out to organize and participate in massive voter registration rallies in places like Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee while boosting his efforts on his radio program.
But this time around, fresh on the heels of telling the entire world that he will not, ever, under any circumstances forsake his principles and support John McCain, it looks like Dobson just might be serious, as he has announced that he is seeking “to enlist 1 million Values Voters” to pledge to stand on principle and not vote for McCain … or something:
Focus on the Family Founder and Chairman Dr. James Dobson invites values voters to pledge to uphold pro-family principles during this year’s election.
In response to the media’s efforts to minimize the impact of values voters, Dr. Dobson and Focus on the Family Action are initiating a nationwide Values Voter Pledge. The pledge is a statement by citizens who are committing to vote only for candidates who uphold the highest pro-life, pro-faith and pro-family principles.
Focus Action is hoping 1 million voters will take the pledge, which will serve as a demonstration of the strength and seriousness of Values Voters in this election.
The pledge itself reads:
As a concerned citizen, I am signing this Values Voter Pledge for 2008 indicating my commitment to stand for the values of life, faith and family during this election year. I am pledging to support candidates who uphold these bedrock values of:
• Life -- I will only vote for candidates who have committed to defend sanctity of life from conception to natural death.
• Family -- I will only vote for candidates who stand for one-man, one-woman marriage and oppose efforts to undermine the nuclear family.
• Faith -- I will only vote for candidates who support the public acknowledgement of God and affirm the religious liberties of all Americans.
I also oppose any and all efforts by the media, organizations or candidates to diminish the role that Values Voters are playing in this year’s election. I authorize Focus on the Family Action to represent my Values Voter Pledge before the media, political candidates or other suitable forums as a demonstration of the strength and seriousness of Values Voters in this election cycle.
Since Dobson attacked McCain specifically on these issues in his statement, this is presumably some sort of attempt to induce McCain to pander to them by getting a million potential voters to threaten to sit on the sidelines unless he does. But since Dobson has already made it abundantly clear that he hates McCain and has no intention of voting for him anyway, what incentive is there for McCain to even bother appeasing him?
Plus, given the vague language in the pledge, couldn’t McCain plausibly claim to “uphold these bedrock values” already? After all, he believes that “that the institution of marriage should be reserved for the union of a man and a woman,” proclaims that “the defense of innocent life” is at “the core of [his] value system,” and, as he declared at the Values Voter Summit, “Religious freedom does not require Americans to hide their faith from public view or that communities must refrain from publicly acknowledging the importance to them of faith.”
McCain seems to meet all of Dobson’s various criteria, so what exactly is the problem?
Posted by Kyle at 3:45 PM | Permalink
"Is Anyone Going to Care What Grade They Get From the Christian Coalition?"
So asks the Florida Christian Coalition's incoming president, Dennis Baxley.
Posted by Kyle at 2:11 PM | Permalink
The Real McCain
On the one hand, you have John McCain-supporter Sam Brownback telling pro-lifers that McCain is "our best hope to advance the cause of human dignity on a broad spectrum of life issues" and "the best pro-life candidate to win in 2008." On the other hand, you have Republicans for Choice endorsing McCain.
Posted by Kyle at 2:02 PM | Permalink
February 5, 2008
Easy Targets
The infamous Dred Scott Supreme Court decision—declaring enslaved blacks to be property and presaging the Civil War—is often invoked by opponents of abortion rights, who make the analogy that Roe v. Wade is to fetuses as Dred Scott is to African Americans. Rod Parsley does them one better, arguing that Roe v. Wade is to African Americans just as Dred Scott is to African Americans.
Last week, the Ohio televangelist used his TV show to claim that reproductive health-care providers were trying to “exterminate” African Americans. On Sunday he aired a sermon version of the same argument—and paired it with a get-out-the-vote message for his viewers in Super Tuesday states. Warning that a candidate victorious in today’s primaries will likely become president, and will appoint Supreme Court justices and sign or veto abortion legislation, Parsley’s show told viewers, “Our democracy is too important for Christians to be silent any more.”
Parsley appears to have largely abstained from campaigning around the presidential election so far, but it’s hard to imagine him being apolitical in the coming year. In 2004 and 2006, Parsley and Russell Johnson, another Columbus-area megachurch pastor, teamed up to run a church-based political machine driving the successful anti-gay marriage initiative and the unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign of Ken Blackwell. Calling themselves “Patriot Pastors,” they vowed to wage war against their political opponents—“secular jihadists,” the “forces of darkness,” and the “hordes of hell.”
The Cleveland Plain Dealer caught up with Parsley’s comrade Johnson, who headed the Ohio Restoration Project alongside Parsley’s Reformation Ohio. The groups promised to save souls while moving hundreds of thousands of voters to the polls, all while hosting candidate Blackwell at events around the state. Johnson promises more “Patriot Pastor”-style organizing—but without being so blatant about it:
Johnson said he expects that Ohio's Christian leadership will become more active once primary season is over, with varying emphasis on social issues, economics and national security from a conservative point of view. …
Johnson said political activity among preachers might look a little different than it did in the past, when he and the Rev. Parsley and their Patriot Pastors movement drew accusations of violating their churches' tax-exempt status by campaigning for Blackwell. (The pastors denied that they officially backed any particular candidate.)
In any case, leaders don't want to become "an easy target," Johnson says, so they are unlikely to give themselves a moniker. But they will be spreading information through e-mail networks, creating discussion groups and voter guides, and urging people to "get registered, get informed, go vote and take somebody with you."
Posted by Ezra at 5:46 PM | Permalink
Huckabee’s Latest Strategy: Whining
Aside from presenting himself as the one true “Christian leader” best prepared to be the nation’s first “Pastor in Chief,” Mike Huckabee’s primary campaign strategy seems to be whining about how unfairly he is being treated.
So far, while his supporters have been demanding recounts of straw polls and proclaiming that he is the victim of anti-evangelical bias, he has been busy complaining about other Christian leaders refusing to back him, saying that his faith is receiving undue scrutiny, and suggesting that there is some sort of anti-Huckabee conspiracy at work. Lately, he has begun whining that Mitt Romney is engaging in “voter suppression” and saying that Romney ought to drop out of the race because he is stealing his votes.
And now he has taken to blasting “establishment Republicans” who want him to drop out, saying that social conservatives are sick of being told to sit at the “back of the bus,” complaining that they’ve paid their dues and deserve to sit at the head of the table for once:
One day before Super Tuesday, when he hopes to regain some much-needed momentum in the South, Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee told Baptist Press that the GOP must not relegate social conservatives to the "back of the bus," as he says some "establishment Republicans" have done.
…
"What we're beginning to find out now," he told BP, "is that some of the establishment Republicans were more than happy to have social conservatives, as long as we would make sure we helped provide the vote margin to get Republicans elected and we were willing to hammer in yard signs and attend rallies and scream. But when we actually wanted to not just have a seat at the table but sit at the head of the table, make decisions on issues that are very, very important to us and always have been, suddenly we're not welcome anymore. We've been asked to go to the back of the bus.
"It's been very revealing. Either this is a party that social conservatives have a home in or we don't.... We've paid our dues."
Who knows, maybe whining is a winning electoral strategy. But since Huckabee plans on staying in the race even if he gets trounced on Super Tuesday, maybe he’ll have time to try out a campaign strategy that doesn’t involve playing the victim and that expands beyond his right-wing Christian base.
Posted by Kyle at 4:21 PM | Permalink
Who Would Jesus Vote For?
Apparently not Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or Mitt Romney, at least according to William H. Carney, author of "How Would Jesus Vote?"
Posted by Kyle at 2:54 PM | Permalink
Mormons Don't Like Huckabee Either
Politico reports that "Mormon Utah has taken a profound dislike to the Southern Baptist preacher best known for his nice-guy persona ... To Mormons, Huckabee’s eyebrow-raising question represented not only a gross distortion of their beliefs but also a carefully calculated move by a Christian politician who surely knew better."
Posted by Kyle at 2:30 PM | Permalink
Dobson Re-Unendorses McCain
Just in case anyone forgot or thought that he might change his mind, James Dobson resurfaces to reiterate his opposition to John McCain – via the Boston Globe’s “Political Intelligence” blog which highlights this audio clip of Laura Ingraham reading an exclusive, and melodramatic, statement from James Dobson:
I'm deeply disappointed the Republican Party seems poised to select a nominee who did not support a constitutional amendment to protect the institution of marriage, who voted for embryonic stem cell research to kill nascent human beings, who opposed tax cuts that ended the marriage penalty, and who has little regard for freedom of speech, who organized the Gang of 14 to preserve filibusters, and has a legendary temper and often uses foul and obscene language. I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are. He has at times sounded more like a member of the other party.McCain actually considered leaving the GOP in 2001 and approached John Kerry about being Kerry’s running mate in 2004. McCain also said publicly that Hillary Clinton would make a good president. Given these and many other concerns, a spoonful of sugar does not make the medicine go down. I cannot, and I will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.
But what a sad and melancholy decision this is for me and many other conservatives. Should John McCain capture the nomination as many assume, I believe this general election will offer the worst choices for president in my lifetime. I certainly can’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama based on the virulently anti-family policy positions. If these are the nominees in November, I simply will not cast a ballot for president for the first time in my life.
These decisions are my personal views and do not represent the organization with which I'm affiliated. They do reflect, however, my deeply held convictions about the institution of the family, about moral and spiritual beliefs, and about the welfare of our country.
Posted by Kyle at 1:07 PM | Permalink
February 4, 2008
Anti-Immigrant Spokesmen Can’t Seem to Shake Fringe
“[O]n the pro-control side, the pro-borders side, the kooks and the racists are at the fringes,” said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies on CNN’s Glenn Beck show last week. “They're nuts, you know, living in their mother's basements.”
Krikorian, fellow guest Jim Gilchrist, and host Mike Brooks were complaining that the California Department of Transportation is moving the adopt-a-highway sign of the San Diego Minutemen to a less prominent area. But if these anti-immigrant commentators wanted to make the point that the anti-immigrant fringe is not part of their side of the debate, perhaps they would have been more convincing had they not been defending one of the most militant and radical vigilante groups in the country.
On this blog we’ve seen the San Diego Minutemen:
- on film aggressively harassing day-laborers,
- conducting an over-the-top protest of a Catholic church that offered breakfast to day-laborers (see photo),
- and ransacking a campground where a number of migrant workers lived—also on film.
A profile of the San Diego Minutemen by the Southern Poverty Law Center notes that the group was disowned for extremism by both major national Minutemen factions—including the Minuteman Project, founded by Gilchrist. But on CNN, Gilchrist said the dispute over SDMM was a matter of “those opposed to immigration law enforcement.”
CNN’s panel—composed of three anti-immigrant activists—was timely evidence for the importance of a new project from the National Council of La Raza to stop the increasing appearance of hate groups and extremists as “experts” in the immigration debate. Indeed, Gilchrist is listed on the site as a “suspect spokesperson,” a self-proclaimed vigilante featured as an immigration expert, and Glenn Beck is named as one of the prominent media hosts of extremism.
Posted by Ezra at 6:03 PM | Permalink
McCain’s Delicate Dance
With John McCain seemingly poised to emerge from Super Tuesday as the de facto front runner in the Republican primary, the question will become just how much he intends to try and make nice with the Religious Right base that does not much like him.
As the McCain campaign admitted last year, his previous efforts to win them over were entirely half-hearted and purely political, but now that he might very well become the nominee, it looks as if some on the Right might be starting to warm up to him out of political necessity:
Republican presidential candidate John McCain today publicly thanked two prominent conservative Christian leaders who have rallied to his defense in recent days.
``I was very pleased to see comments made by people like Tony Perkins and Dr. Richard Land,'' McCain told reporters after a rally in Nashville, Tennessee. ``I appreciate the words that they have been using.''
Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, a conservative public policy group, and Land, a leader in the 16- million member Southern Baptist Convention, have criticized McCain in the past. Perkins told the New York Times that he has ``no residual issue with John McCain,'' while Land told the newspaper McCain ``is strongly pro-life.''
But even in accepting this praise, McCain went out of his way to make it clear that it was not he who did the reaching out :
“I will continue to reach out to all parts of the party but I did not call anyone,'' the Arizona senator said today. McCain's acknowledgement that he is not proactively reaching out to conservative leaders comes a day after he told reporters that he doesn't listen to conservative Rush Limbaugh's radio show.
Should he win the GOP nomination, McCain will undoubtedly change his tune on this issue – but quotes like this won’t be easily forgotten
McCain seems distinctly uninterested when asked questions concerning abortion and gay rights. While campaigning in South Carolina, he told reporters riding with him on his bus that he was comfortable pledging to appoint judges who would strictly interpret the Constitution in part because it would reassure conservatives who might otherwise distrust him.
"It's not social issues I care about," he explained.
Thus, it comes as no surprise that right-wing activists who care only about social issues are attacking him, such as BOND’s Jesse Lee Peterson, Faith and Action’s Rob Schenck, Janet Folger’s RoeGone front group, and various others:
"Most Texans I know think that McCain is the second-least desirable candidate" among all those who ran this year and with Rudy Giuliani out, he's now officially the worst, says Cathie Adams, head of Texas Eagle Forum. "McCain's policies are awful."
…
"He is no conservative. Yes, maybe on the war, although many of us are not happy about the war," said Mitt Romney supporter Paul Weyrich, president of the Free Congress Foundation and a founder of the conservative Heritage Foundation and the Moral Majority. "McCain hates strong conservatives. McCain hates the religious right. Thus far he has made no overtures to us."
When it comes down to it, McCain needs the Right if he hopes to win the presidency – and some of the Religious Right’s political leaders seems to realize that they might have the upper hand at the moment, with Tony Perkins saying that what happens between McCain and the Right going forward entirely "depends on how bad he wants to be president. Really it does."
Posted by Kyle at 3:58 PM | Permalink
Judges Still Matter
Right-wing activists, including Phyllis Schlafly, recently gathered at the Family Research Council to plot strategy on judges, and Manuel Miranda endorses John McCain and defends his record on the issue: "Senator McCain would not need on-the-job training on the issue of federal judicial nomination, and he is a meritocrat. He is not likely to nominate a lightweight to the judiciary."
Posted by Kyle at 2:46 PM | Permalink
RoeGone Returns
Huckabee-backer Janet Folger's front group, RoeGone.org, branches out to attack John McCain: "RoeGone.org, who earlier this week made news by exposing the liberal Romney record, including tax funded abortion on demand, today launches a new ad to expose the McCain record against life, marriage, and free speech."
Posted by Kyle at 1:51 PM | Permalink
Does Vision America Dwarf MoveOn?
According to the St. Louis Post Dispatch, Rick Scarborough of Vision America claims to have "sent out on Friday 10 million e-mails to the 20-plus states voting, praising Huckabee and noting questions about McCain's conservatism." 10 million emails? MoveOn only claims 3.2 million members.
Posted by Kyle at 1:33 PM | Permalink
Don't Vote for Satan!
And by “Satan” we mean “Mitt Romney” (actually, “we” don’t mean Romney at all ... anti-Mormon nut-job Bill Keller does): "The world's leading internet evangelist has launched a new web site -- votingforsatan.com. In an attempt to educate people on what Mormons really believe, Bill Keller -- who coined the infamous phrase, 'vote for Romney is a vote for Satan' -- now wants to hold high-profile Christians accountable for endorsing Romney's bid for the presidency. 'This web site is not set up to tell people who they ought to vote for,' says Keller. 'It's designed to educate people on what members of the Mormon cult really believe, and to hold Christian leaders who support Romney's bid for the White House accountable for their actions.'"
Posted by Kyle at 11:44 AM | Permalink