Arlington Group

The Arlington Group (AG) is the newest coalition of the leaders of Religious Right groups brought together by right-wing strategist Paul Weyrich and Don Wildmon, head of the American Family Association, to coordinate activities. The group is widely credited with being the driving force behind the effort to put marriage protection amendments on the ballot in 11 states in the 2004 election.

PFAW
Filed under:

Huckabee Continues to Burn Bridges, Declares The Arlington Group Dead

One of the most interesting things about Mike Huckabee's post-campaign career is how he relentlessly travels the country while constantly insisting that he doesn't have any plans to make another run for the White House in 2012. 

I am inclined to believe him - mainly because nobody who was planning on seeking the GOP nomination would be a relentlessly critical and dismissive of the Religious Right powerbrokers as Huckabee has been ever since his campaign ended.

Huckabee has made no secret of his disdain for all the groups and their leaders who refused to support him that last time around and he has taken every opportunity to not only criticize them but to, amazingly, try and downplay their importance, as he does in this new World Magazine piece in which he declares The Arlington Group to be fractured and therefore irrelevant:

WORLD: Where do you think some of the Christian conservative leaders went wrong in 2008?

HUCKABEE: They became more enamored with the process of politics than with principles and convictions. I saw pretty firsthand a lot of people saying, "We don't think you can win. We like everything you stand for and you are one of us, but we're not going to support you because you can't win." My assessment was when Christians decide to get involved as Christians and then abandon the issues by which they are essentially motivated, they might as well be the Republican Women of Poinsett County or something. They become ineffective as issue players.

WORLD: In your recent book Do the Right Thing, you chastise the Arlington Group in particular as a group of conservative Christians who didn't get behind you. Looking back, do you think things would have been different if they had?

HUCKABEE: The honest answer is I don't know. It might have done more harm than good. It could be that I would have been perceived as a "wholly owned" subsidiary of the Christian conservative movement.

WORLD: What do you do now regarding the Arlington Group and others? Can you gather them behind you at this point, having had this unexpected success?

HUCKABEE: The Arlington Group pretty much dissipated. I think they splintered and split and many of them took issue with each other because they felt that they had failed to do what originally they had compacted to do, which was to early on interview candidates, pick a candidate, and then coalesce behind that one candidate and try to unite the strength and force that they could. They failed to do that.

The Arlington Group is a secretive, high-influential coalition of like-minded interest groups that includes just about every major Religious Right organization in the country.  In many ways, winning over the members of the Arlington Group is a key step in securing the Republican Party's presidential nomination and just about every GOP hopeful during the last election sought its support - including Huckabee, who declared that "if they were to get behind me, it would be a huge surge for me."

But Huckabee couldn't win it over and is now declaring them fractured and irrelevant because it failed to "coalesce behind that one candidate" who best represented its goals and mission - him. 

If Huckabee decides to make another run for the White House in the future, he's going to have to rethink his current strategy of bad-mouthing those individuals and groups who refused to back his campaign last time (and whose lack of support doomed his hopes) because is not a particularly effective way of winning their support the next time around.

PFAW

Huckabee, Still Bitter About Hagee, Lashes Out At the Right

During his presidential campaign, one of Mike Huckabee’s signature traits was his willingness to publicly complain and whine about some supposed conspiracy among the nation’s Religious Right powerbrokers to refuse to support his candidacy.  And even though the campaign is over and Huckabee now has a lucrative new career on television and radio, it looks like he still hasn’t gotten over it, according to Time’s Michael Scherer who has gotten an early look at his new book:    

Many conservative Christian leaders, who never backed Huckabee despite their holding very similar stances on social issues, are spared neither the rod nor the lash. Huckabee writes of Gary Bauer, the conservative Christian leader and former presidential candidate, as having an "ever-changing reason to deny me his support." Of one private meeting with Bauer, Huckabee says, "it was like playing Whac-a-Mole at the arcade — whatever issue I addressed, another one surfaced as a 'problem' that made my candidacy unacceptable." He accuses Bauer of putting the issue of national security before bedrock social issues like the sanctity of life and traditional marriage.

Huckabee describes other elders of the social conservative movement, many of whom meet in private as part of an organization called the Arlington Group, as "more enamored with the process, the political strategies, and the party hierarchy than with the simple principles that had originally motivated the Founders." Later Huckabee writes, "I lamented that so many people of faith had moved from being prophetic voices — like Naaman, confronting King David in his sin and saying, 'Though art the man!'— to being voices of patronage, and saying to those in power, 'You da' man!' "

He calls out Pat Robertson, the Virginia-based televangelist, and Dr. Bob Jones III, chancellor of Bob Jones University in South Carolina, for endorsing Rudy Giuliani and Romney, respectively. He also has words for the Texas-based Rev. John Hagee, who endorsed the more moderate John McCain in the primaries, as someone who was drawn to the eventual Republican nominee because of the lure of power. Huckabee speaks to Hagee by phone before the McCain endorsement, while the former Arkansas governor is preparing for a spot on Saturday Night Live. "I asked if he had prayed about this and believed this was what the Lord wanted him to do," Huckabee writes of his conversation with Hagee. "I didn't get a straight answer." Months later, McCain rejected Hagee's endorsement because of controversial remarks the pastor had made about biblical interpretations.

So Huckabee is calling Hagee a sell-out for backing McCain instead of him, even knowing that McCain was eventually forced to disassociate himself from him because of Hagee’s outrageous views?  Doesn’t it seem odd that instead of thinking that maybe he dodged a bullet by not getting Hagee’s support, Huckabee is still mad about it?

Of course, Hagee’s support for Huckabee probably wouldn’t have been especially noteworthy since his ultra-right-wing views were no different than those esposed by his other supporters like on Don Wildmon, Janet Porter, Rick Scarborough, and Tim and Beverly LaHaye.

But considering that Huckabee is mulling over a future presidential run, it seems a little counterproductive to start badmouthing the very people from whom he’ll need support the next time around, especially since their lack of support this time was what helped to doom his campaign.

PFAW

Perkins’ Prediction Comes True and Creates a New Dilemma

Heading into the recent Values Voter Summit, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins was careful to make clear that it was unlikely that any one candidate would emerge from the event as the Right’s candidate of choice, thus rescuing them from their current dilemma and confusion.   But he also predicted that the event would at least help narrow down the field a bit:  

“These are the influencers, these are the talkers,” Perkins said of the attendees that will take over the Washington Hilton hotel. “This could be when things start to shake out and a candidate begins to emerge with a certain level of support. I don’t think anybody’s going to walk away with a lock, but maybe one or two candidates, maybe three, will begin to take off with strong support from the base.”

The one candidate who got the biggest boost from the Summit was Mike Huckabee, who came in second place in the straw poll and was the overwhelming favorite among those in attendance – something which, oddly enough, only seems to have confused things further:

The influential social conservatives who comprise the Arlington Group met over the weekend to discuss the possibility of endorsing a presidential candidate and could not reach a consensus, according to a source familiar with the process.

Though leaders of the individual organizations may make their own endorsements, those selections "cannot be considered a blanket endorsement by the 'Religious Right,'" according to the source.

While many leaders want to endorse fan favorite Mike Huckabee, others are more hesitant. The source informed me that "the dilemma is over whether to choose the preferred candidate of their constituents or go with the pragmatic choice and risk offending our base."

According to the source, James Dobson of Focus on the Family likes Mitt Romney, Gary Bauer of American Values prefers Fred Thompson, and Don Wildmon of the American Family Association likes Huckabee. Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council is still on the fence, but nearing a decision.

In fact, very little has changed:  Supporting McCain or Giuliani was never much of a possibility and the right-wing leadership has always been torn between Romney, Thompson, and, to a lesser extent, Huckabee.  The only new development is that some are becoming more willing to openly back Huckabee:

PFAW

A Costly Near-Miss for Thompson

After months of “testing the water,” Fred Thompson finally made it official last night that he is indeed seeking the Republican presidential nomination. Seeking to make a splash in the race, Thompson skipped the scheduled GOP debate in New Hampshire, choosing instead to appear on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” to make the announcement  -  a move that seems to have irked his fellow Republican hopefuls.

While Thompson’s entry into the race and the manner in which he made it were expected, what would have really shaken up the Republican primary was if he could have walked onto the scene with the backing of the extremely influential Arlington Group, which very nearly happened, according to various sources.  

On the September 5 edition of “Special Report with Brit Hume,” Fox News Chief Political Correspondent Carl Cameron reported:

[Thompson] has four months now to court conservatives that others have spent the whole year wooing. One example, the highly-influential Arlington Group, which is made up of various conservative and religious organizations and leaders, including Gary Bauer, a former presidential candidate and former head of the Family Research Council.

Sources say the Arlington Group had planned to throw its support behind Thompson tomorrow when he announces. That is now on hold because last week on the "National Review Online," Thompson aides said he would oppose a constitutional amendment that religious conservatives support banning gay marriage.

The National Review’s “The Campaign Spot” reports the same:

A reliable source has told me of huge, potentially bad news for the Thompson campaign — there is a very influential group of social and religious conservatives called the Arlington Group. Thompson addressed them earlier this year and, I was told, wowed them. It looked like he was going to collect a slew of impressive endorsements.

I've just been told that that group may be ready to say that they're not impressed with Thompson in recent months.

The Arlington Group is a coalition of dozens of powerful and influential right-wing organizations, which includes the likes of the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the American Family Association, American Values, the Free Congress Foundation, Vision America, and others.  

The Boston Globe reported earlier this year that Republican candidates were eagerly courting the Arlington Group precisely because of the tremendous influence its members possess:

Leaders of the group have interviewed Huckabee, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, US Representative Duncan Hunter of California, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who hasn't entered the race but may later this year. It's not clear which other candidates have been or will be interviewed. The group has not yet questioned Romney, Senator John McCain of Arizona, or former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, according to those campaigns.

Because the Arlington Group is made up of many nonprofit organizations and ministries -- which, by law, cannot officially advocate for political candidates -- the coalition is not expected to explicitly endorse anyone. Instead, according to members of the group and two Republicans close to it, the conservative leaders hope to coalesce around one candidate that prominent members such as James Dobson, who heads Colorado-based Focus on the Family, could endorse individually. Dobson, for example, is free to say as a private citizen that he supports a certain candidate, a personal endorsement sure to influence many of his followers.

The group or its leaders might not even reach a consensus -- a similar effort in the 2000 race ended without agreement, and many conservatives have expressed frustration at the lack of a clear choice in the 2008 contest. But if they do, the political potential for that candidate would be significant. The Arlington Group encompasses roughly 70 grass-roots organizations around the country said to reach tens of millions of people collectively.

"It is our desire that all of us, in a united effort, could marshal our resources to the same end," said one member of the group, who spoke on condition of anonymity, because members agreed not to disclose the discussions publicly.

In a Republican primary in which the current candidates are actively courting support from the right-wing political leaders and organizations, receiving the stamp of approval from the Arlington Group would have been a significant development in Thompson’s campaign and delivered a tremendous boost for his chances of winning the nomination.  

But it appears as if, at least for the time being, Thompson has lost that opportunity primarily because of his waffling on the question of whether he would “actively push a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage” were he to be elected president.  

PFAW

Stuck in the Mud, Right Wing Forgets Its Happy Days with Rove

For many frustrated right-wing activists, news of Karl Rove’s departure from the White House may have felt like good riddance to bad rubbish. Richard Viguerie called it “good news for conservatives.” Paul Weyrich, another old hand of the conservative movement, said, “You have to say that if (Rove) can claim credit for what happened in 2004, it is reasonable that he is somewhat responsible for where we are in 2007.”

But if these right-wing activists can pin the blame for the administration’s woes on the president’s erstwhile “architect,” they will have a hard time glossing over Rove’s role in giving them an important berth of political power in the Bush White House.

PFAW

Just How Many “Secretive Clubs” Does The Right Have?

It is no secret that the GOP’s right-wing base is unenthusiastic about the current crop of presidential frontrunners.  As the New York Times reported last month:

A group of influential Christian conservatives and their allies emerged from a private meeting at a Florida resort this month dissatisfied with the Republican presidential field and uncertain where to turn.

The event was a meeting of the Council for National Policy, a secretive club whose few hundred members include Dr. James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family, the Rev. Jerry Falwell of Liberty University and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform. Although little known outside the conservative movement, the council has become a pivotal stop for Republican presidential primary hopefuls, including George W. Bush on the eve of his 1999 primary campaign.

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.

Now, the Boston Globe is reporting that another secretive right-wing political organization is going beyond the Council for National Policy’s mere complaining and is actively interviewing candidates in order to determine which nominee meets its criteria:

Leaders of a secretive coalition that includes some of the most influential social conservatives in the nation are interviewing presidential candidates in hopes of flexing political muscle and reframing the Republican primaries in 2008.

Over the past few months, members of the executive committee of the so-called Arlington Group have questioned several declared and potential White House hopefuls with the intention of settling on a single candidate, according to Arlington Group members and Republican operatives familiar with the discussions.

Leaders of the group have interviewed Huckabee, Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, US Representative Duncan Hunter of California, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who hasn't entered the race but may later this year. It's not clear which other candidates have been or will be interviewed. The group has not yet questioned Romney, Senator John McCain of Arizona, or former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, according to those campaigns.

While the Arlington Group cannot endorse candidates itself, its high-profile and influential members certainly can:

PFAW

Anti-Gay Marriage Activists Organize on Virginia Campuses

Reports the AP. Also: Focus on the Family and Arlington Group the major funders behind Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban.

PFAW

Arlington Group blasts House leaders, but WSJ editorial warns such attacks will hurt GOP in November

Arlington Group not happy, but WSJ says they’ll be less happy if Democrats win. Paul Weyrich has backed off his call for Hastert’s resignation after receiving a call from Hastert himself.

PFAW

Blacks Purported to Embrace Far-Right Agenda

Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr. thinks that America is “at a crossroads in terms of thought and political ideology.”

This is the moment in which the conservative movement can win many converts from the black community. In order to accomplish this, conservatives must understand the real concerns of the average African American.

According to Jackson, who launched his “Black Contract with America on Moral Values” last year, the “real concerns of the average African American” are topped with banning same-sex marriage and rejecting “tax-and-spend policies directed at the poor.”

Since joining forces with the far Right – including membership in the influential Arlington Group – Jackson has been a frequent spokesman for right-wing causes. He spoke at the “Justice Sunday: Stopping the Filibuster Against People of Faith” religious rally in support of Bush’s extreme judicial nominees, and told the television audience at “Justice Sunday II” that “You and I can bring the rule and reign of the Cross to America.” He's scheduled to speak at the Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit" later this month.

Gays in particular seem to motivate Jackson’s political efforts. In an article in Charisma magazine, Jackson wrote that the “wisdom behind” the “gay agenda” is “clearly satanic,” and he called for an aggressive “counterattack.” He asserted to The New York Times that “Historically when societies have gone off kilter, there has been rampant same-sex marriage.”

Jackson writes that in 2004, he “decided to make a difference by calling on black Christians to vote for George Bush because his morality, governing approach, and conservative values most aligned with theirs.”

The large number of blacks who crossed the color line of the Democratic Party and voted for President Bush showed that dramatic changes were happening.

In fact, only 11 percent of African Americans voted for Bush in 2004, and one year afterwards the president's approval rating among blacks dropped to 2 percent, suggesting that blacks have yet to embrace the "economic and social values" of the far Right.

PFAW
Syndicate content