« Mitt Romney
June 2, 2008
Religious Right: 'True Christians' Only Those with 'Right' Politics
Impugning the religious faith of others based on their political views is one of the basic themes of the Religious Right, but it’s still refreshing to hear it as openly stated as this simple test: a “True Christian” is one who opposes abortion and same-sex marriage.
That’s the message of “True Christian VP,” a petition drive from Gary Cass’s “Christian Anti-Defamation Commission,” which is “calling for each candidate to select a true Christian as a running mate for the all important 2008 elections.” And in case there might be any confusion, the group has narrowed down the definition of “true Christian” to two criteria:
What qualifications are embodied in a truly Christian candidate for the Vice Presidency? Quite simply, the candidate will demonstrate actions and hold the beliefs personified by all of us who proclaim the name of Jesus Christ as Savior: the need to be re-born in Christ and the affirmation of historic Christianity, having a demonstrable and proven record of support for traditional Christian morality.
A life of dedicated Christian service to the public is demonstrated by the following:
Support for traditional marriage. As a Christian, the candidate for Vice President must affirm that marriage is an institution created by God and defined as a union between one man and one woman. …
Support for the Right to Life, proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, without exception.
The group also clarifies that, for example, the two Democratic candidates for president would not qualify as “real Christians”:
Who is the real Christian seeking the Presidency of the United States?
The three major presidential candidates, Democrats Barrack [sic] Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Republican John McCain have presented Christian voters with a vexing problem for Christians. Both Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton have declared they are Christians, yet based on their votes, both have consistently demonstrated a failure to support the values and policy positions important to Christians. While Mr. McCain proclaims support for traditional Christian values and morality, he has chosen to not discuss his own religious beliefs.
Since founding his group last year, Cass has concentrated on promoting two ideas: one, that Christianity is being persecuted (or “bashed”), and two, that other people’s faith is fair game. In particular, Cass attacked Mormon candidate Mitt Romney for his religion’s supposed “secret rituals” and “hostility to Christianity.” Presumably Cass isn’t happy that Romney is being floated as a potential running mate for McCain.
This counterintuitive notion—that Christianity is to be defended from persecution in public culture by attacking others’ faith—is apparently shared by the so-called Christian Defense Coalition, which attacked Obama over the weekend for resigning from his church after public disagreements. “[I]f his church membership was truly spiritual -- then this action shows a fundamental lack of integrity,” declared Patrick Mahoney, who has attacked Obama’s religious credentials for some time. “Obama's resignation of membership in Trinity United Church demonstrates that he will trade even on his faith for political advantage.”
Posted by Ezra at 5:02 PM | Permalink
April 10, 2008
Nobody Asked Him
Gary Bauer offers some advice to those pressuring John McCain not to tap Mitt Romney as his VP, despite the fact that nobody asked him: "Former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer -- now a McCain supporter -- says if those social conservatives had asked for his advice, he would have recommended they find better ways to use their money. 'I think it's very hard to pressure a presidential candidate into either taking or rejecting a vice-presidential possibility,' Bauer contends. 'And quite frankly I would be worried about a presidential candidate who allowed public pressure to affect his or her decision, which is really one of the first important decisions that they make.'"
Posted by Kyle at 2:25 PM | Permalink
April 4, 2008
Paul Weyrich’s Penance
Back in the Fall of 2007, Gov. Mitt Romney was riding high, having barely won the Values Voter Summit’s straw poll and positioning himself as the candidate favored by both Religious Right Beltway-insiders like Jay Sekulow and outsiders like Lou Sheldon and Bob Jones. In fact, Romney was being pitched as the only alternative to unacceptable Rudy Giuliani, the unelectable Mike Huckabee, the unexciting Fred Thompson, and the unforgiven John McCain.
Romney’s efforts to position himself as the Right’s candidate of choice received a significant boost when, in November, he secured the endorsement of right-wing icon Paul Weyrich:
Today, Paul Weyrich, Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Research and Education Foundation, announced his support for Governor Mitt Romney and his campaign to be our country's next President. Paul Weyrich is one of the premier leaders in the conservative movement, having founded the Heritage Foundation and the American Legislative Exchange Council.
"As he travels across the country, Governor Romney has outlined a blueprint to build a stronger America rooted in our common conservative principles. With a clear conservative vision to move America forward, he will strengthen our economy, our military and our families. More importantly, he already has an exceptional record of putting conservative values to work. Because of his experience, vision and values, I am proud to support Governor Romney," said Paul Weyrich.
But over the coming months, Romney’s campaign failed to catch fire and he eventually dropped out of the race and Weyrich threw his support to Huckabee, whose campaign likewise failed to generate significant support and folded.
Since then, Weyrich appears to have done some soul-searching and has come to regret his support of Romney at the expense of Huckabee:
In a quiet, brief, but passionate speech, Weyrich essentially confessed that he and the other leaders should have backed Huckabee, a candidate who shared their values more fully than any other candidate in a generation. He agreed with Farris that many conservative leaders had blown it. By chasing other candidates with greater visibility, they failed to see what many of their supporters in the trenches saw clearly: Huckabee was their guy.
The extent of Weyrich’s remorse appears to be even deeper than anyone could have imagined, as he has now joined a group of former-Huckabee backers and other right-wing activists in warning McCain that picking Romney as a running mate would be “utterly unacceptable”
Conservative leader Paul Weyrich – who endorsed Mitt Romney’s presidential bid – has signed on to an open letter from more than two dozen movement activists to John McCain warning him not to select the former Massachusetts governor as his VP pick if he expects their support.
"If Governor Romney is on your ticket, many social conservative voters will consider their values repudiated by the Republican Party and either stay away from the polls this November or only vote down the ticket,” they write in a message posted online by a political action committee called “Government is Not God.”
The letter – topped by the headline “NO Mitt” — will run as a print ad in cities visited by McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, beginning with his Arizona stop this weekend.
How, in the course of just a few months, Weyrich went from citing Romney’s “experience, vision and values” as making him best-suited to be President to declaring that he is absolutely unqualified to serve as McCain’s running mate is utterly mind-boggling:
When a chief executive can violate multiple articles of the oldest functioning constitution in the world and disobey statutes he solemnly swore to defend and execute faithfully, then blame judges who never even asked him to intervene, he mocks the principle of limited government and the separation of powers. He robs Americans of their unalienable right to self-government, for which so many soldiers, sailors and airmen have died.
These are just two issues (there are more) that absolutely disqualify Mitt Romney as a viable Vice Presidential option. He would fatally harm your appeal to voters with deep constitutionalist and social conservative commitments.
If Governor Romney is on your ticket, many social conservative voters will consider their values repudiated by the Republican Party and either stay away from the polls this November or only vote down the ticket. For the sake of your election, the health of your party, and the future of America you must not allow the obvious electoral consequences of that to occur.
As citizens, activists, and leaders with our feet on the solid ground of real world Republican and Independent voters, it is our duty to alert you that the grassroots is nearing a point of breaking with Republican Party leadership on many issues, not the least of which is the relentless whitewashing of Mitt Romney as a so-called "conservative."
Posted by Kyle at 2:57 PM | Permalink
March 13, 2008
Be Careful How You Pray
From their start as the “Moral Majority” through their as the “Christian Coalition” and all the way up to the “Values Voters” who supposedly returned President Bush to office in 2004, Religious Right leaders has long claimed the exclusive right to speak for people of faith in the political arena. In order to bolster that claim, the Right has developed an entire repertoire of attacks against those who might dare to disagree: complaining about perceived anti-religious bigotry, warning that Christians are under constant attack, demonizing and disrespecting other faiths, and accusing Democrats of attempting to dupe faithful Americans into abandoning the only political party that represents a “truly biblical worldview.”
Normally, such attacks were directly solely against Democrats, but they started to get used against Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith when he showed up on the presidential scene. The Right, not knowing know how to react to a Republican candidate who did not subscribe to a faith with which they were comfortable and familiar, began to flail about, giving rise to all sorts of speculation about whether rank and file right-wing voters could ever support such a candidate, allegations that other candidates were exploiting the issue for political gain, worries that Romney’s unique beliefs would somehow hijack the Right’s traditional messaging … even allegations that a vote for Romney was “a vote for Satan.”
Eventually, Romney was compelled to deliver a speech reminding voters that a religious test for candidates and office holders was prohibited by the US Constitution and proclaiming that “no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. “
The speech didn’t accomplish much and Romney was eventually forced to drop out of the race – and now the Right has been able to get back to what it does best: attacking Democrats.
Amid the strong showing that Barack Obama continues to make in the Democratic primaries, we have begun to notice that Obama’s proudly declared strong personal faith appears to be rankling some on the Right who see his talk of faith as a threat to their perceived hegemony and have begun striking back by attacking not just his positions or policies, but the nature of his faith itself.
Routinely, right-wing commentators have been attacking Obama’s church and declaring that his “Christianity [is] woefully deficient.” Just last week, Rob Schenck did an entire segment on Obama’s faith, suggesting that he might really be a Muslim despite the fact that he identifies himself as a Christian and even questioning Obama’s claim that he “[prays] to Jesus every night, wondering why he would “pray to Jesus” rather than “pray to God in Jesus’ name.”
Apparently, the mechanics of Obama’s personal prayer and his understanding of the Trinity are of great concern to people like Schenck and Mychael Massie who seem to think it is now acceptable to encourage voters to oppose a candidate or office holder based solely on how he or she exercises their personal faith:
Suffice it to say that his comments are objectionable on many levels, not least of which is because the fundamental construct for prayer is given in Matthew 6:6-9, and nowhere in same does Jesus say to pray to "Him." In fact, nowhere in all of Scripture are we told to pray to anyone save God Almighty Himself.
In Philippians 2:9-11, Paul writes that while God has given Jesus a name above all names, and that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, and that every tongue should confess Him as Lord, this is done to the glory of God the Father. Paul, in verse six of the same chapter, writes that, "…in everything, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be known unto God." He doesn't say make them known unto Jesus.
Is it possible Obama doesn't understand the meaning and order of the prayer the Lord instructed us to pray in Matthew 6:6-9? Does Obama presume Paul didn't mean what he said? Or does he place his biblical literacy above him whom God inspired? Perhaps Obama just doesn't understand the true nature and order of the Triune God – allowing that is the case, then it is incumbent upon him to revisit the definition of devout.
Jesus Himself references God the Father as "His God" and "my God." At no time and in no place does Jesus say pray to Him, but rather in John 16:14-28, He instructs the exact opposite.
So word to the wise: if you consider yourself a Christian, you’d better bone up on the details of how to pray properly because otherwise the Right is going to accuse you of being a posturing, ignorant phony whose faith is fundamentally illegitimate.
Posted by Kyle at 10:13 AM | Permalink
February 14, 2008
Time Running Out for Huck
Mitt Romney is set to endorse John McCain and release his delegates, putting McCain just short of the 1,191 he needs to secure the GOP nomination, the magic figure Mike Huckabee keeps citing as to why he won't drop out.
Posted by Kyle at 2:21 PM | Permalink
February 8, 2008
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
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 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 5, 2008
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
February 4, 2008
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
Older Mitt Romney posts: