« Georgia
January 9, 2008
Reports of Huckabee’s Moderation Are Greatly Exaggerated
Running as a “Christian Leader” was enough to proper Mike Huckabee to victory in Iowa, but it didn’t play too well in New Hampshire, where he finished a distant third.
So what is his plan going forward?
Republican Mike Huckabee is trying to soften the image of the religious right as he reaches out to liberal Christians and blue-collar workers for support in his presidential campaign.
It's a delicate balancing act for the ordained Baptist minister who staunchly opposes abortion and gay marriage.
But the folksy southerner told Reuters he believed some evangelicals had widened their political concerns beyond the hot-button cultural issues that helped put George W. Bush in the White House and had mellowed enough to embrace causes like poverty and the environment.
Huckabee, who won the first presidential nominating contest in Iowa with the support of evangelicals and placed third in New Hampshire on Tuesday, wants to help bridge that divide.
"Unquestionably there is a maturing that is going on within the evangelical movement. It doesn't mean that evangelicals are any less concerned about traditional families and the sanctity of life," the former Arkansas governor said.
"It just means that they also realize that we have real responsibility in areas like disease and hunger and poverty and that these are issues that people of faith have to address," he said in an interview aboard his campaign bus.
Presumably, any effort to soften his image or reach out beyond his right-wing religious base will have to wait until he gets back from this:
Together for Life Memorial Service and Walk, Georgia's annual pro-life gathering, will be held Tuesday, January 22, 2008 on the steps of the Georgia Capitol in Atlanta, Georgia.
The Memorial Service, sponsored by Georgia Right to Life (GRTL) begins at 11:30 am and is followed by a one-mile long silent walk through downtown Atlanta.
This year's keynote speaker is Gary Bauer, an esteemed author, political activist, and President of American Values. He stated, "We must build an America where all of our children, rich and poor, black and white, are welcomed into the world and protected by the law. Human life has dignity at every age; the taking of innocent human life is always wrong."
…
Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee will also speak as a strong pro-life advocate and supporter of the Human Life Amendment. "I'm pro-life because I believe life begins at conception, and I believe that we should do everything possible to protect that life because it is the centerpiece of what makes us unique as an American people. We value the life of one as if it's the life of all... it's what separates us from the Islamic jihadists who are out to kill us. They celebrate death. They have a culture of death. Ours is a culture of life." The Georgia Right to Life PAC has endorsed Mike Huckabee for President.
Posted by Kyle at 3:44 PM | Permalink
January 3, 2008
State-Level Abortion Bans Head for 2008 Ballots
Activists are likely to place a far-reaching abortion ban on the Missouri ballot this year, one pegged to the emerging anti-abortion strategy of claiming to be protecting women. The Baltimore Sun reports:
If passed, it would stand as possibly the most restrictive abortion law in the country, requiring abortion providers to investigate each patient's background and lifestyle in order to certify that the woman was not coerced into the procedure.
Under the initiative, doctors would not be allowed to perform a nonemergency abortion unless they believed "the imminent death or serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman" would occur.
Critics say the proposal would expose doctors to lawsuits from women who later regretted their decisions to terminate pregnancies. …
Anti-abortion groups say the proposal would make Missouri a model for the country.
Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt laid groundwork last fall by forming a “task force” on “the impact of abortion on women,” a group composed of anti-abortion activists, and a major backer of the initiative is the Illinois-based Elliot Institute, whose founder was described as the “Moses” of the movement to define anti-choice as a defense of women’s interests, whether the women know it or not.
This tactic found validation in last year’s Supreme Court decision upholding the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban”—the court’s majority opinion seemed to echo the paternalist view, a point certainly not missed by any activists attempting to pass a far-reaching abortion ban.
But an initiative likely to reach the Colorado ballot takes a different approach: giving fertilized eggs equal protection and full rights under law. Playing the ingénue, the 20-year-old law student spearheading the amendment “insists her only aim is to define when human life begins, and any discussion about abortion is up to lawmakers.” Of course the “Human Life Amendment,” as it has been known since before she was born, was designed specifically to overturn Roe v. Wade and ban abortion completely.
The hard-line approach of Colorado’s amendment—and a similar initiative being considered for the ballot in Georgia—goes to the heart of a rift between absolutists and incrementalists in the anti-abortion movement. From the Washington Times:
"National Right to Life thinks this will do more harm than good," [Brian Rooney of the Thomas More Law Center, which backs the amendments] said. "They argue that the makeup of the court isn't right for a decision. We argue that this is the best opportunity we're likely to have in the next decade. If we don't confront Roe now, the way the politics of the presidential election are going, we could be waiting for years."
Indeed, National Right to Life ended up divorcing its Colorado affiliate last year after a spat over incrementalism. (The head of Colorado Right to Life accused NRLC of selling out to the Republican Party.)
Posted by Ezra at 6:52 PM | Permalink
December 18, 2007
Robertson Hits the Road for Giuliani
Not every religious-right leader has fallen in love with Mike Huckabee. Although Christian Coalition founder and “700 Club” host Pat Robertson has a lot in common with Huckabee, whose surge in Iowa in some way mirrors Robertson’s run in 1988, Robertson is a firm backer of Rudy Giuliani, as he made clear last week.
Perhaps responding to Huckabee’s recent rise in South Carolina and even in Florida—Giuliani’s stronghold—Robertson has taken a break from meteorology to hit the campaign trail (by radio, anyway). On a Panama City, Florida station, Robertson emphasized that terrorism is his first priority, followed by the economy—no mention of those social issues that make James Dobson so angry:
BURNIE THOMPSON: “[G]lad to have you and I’ll tell you, Mayor Giuliani really does want Bay County’s vote. He’s been on talking with northwest Florida and I know that Florida’s very important to the Mayor. But I’ve got to tell you Dr. Robertson, I’m sitting with a very conservative Republican friend of mine who’s an evangelical Christian and his question he said ‘Please ask Dr. Robertson why, why would you endorse … Mayor Giuliani’”
ROBERTSON: “Well it’s real simple. I think the overriding issue in our society is going to be defense against terrorism. We’re in a war against militant Islam and I think we have to defend the American people. I think that’s the overriding issue and the second issue has to do with whether we’re going to destroy the economy or whether we’re going to build it up and have a future for our children.”
And on a Savannah, Georgia—Hilton Head, South Carolina station, Robertson promised right-wing Supreme Court appointments:
EDWARDS: “[H]e also is an administrator and most of the other people running for president have never run anything.”
ROBERTSON: “Well I felt that too. You know the United States government is the biggest corporation---executive decisions that a president has to make. … And especially the thing that strikes me also is his selection of judges. He has promised the American people, promised me, promised others that he’s going to put in judges after the stripe of Scalia, Thomas …”
Where does that leave Giuliani nemesis Randall Terry, who protested Robertson’s endorsement at the D.C. office of the televangelist’s Christian Broadcasting Network? Terry headed in the opposite direction, holding “vigils, literature drops, pickets and more” in New Hampshire “to expose the agenda of Rudy Giuliani.” Terry’s “literature” includes a fake pamphlet for the campaign of a white supremacist named Smith—“A Candidate with the courage to deal with the disaster of free Negroes, and the ‘white man’s right to own!’” The punchline: It’s a thickly-veiled metaphor for Giuliani, of course.
Should a Christian vote for someone who supports slavery? No!
Should a Christian vote for a racist who supports segregation? No!
Then how can a Christian vote for a candidate that supports the murder of children by abortion?! …
Don’t be seduced! If you vote for Rudy or Hillary or any pro-choice candidate, you share in the sin of child-killing, and betray the very Law of God. … Do the right thing: vote according to principle, not party; life, not death.
Posted by Ezra at 5:13 PM | Permalink
December 3, 2007
Georgia Right to Life Endorses Huckabee
Breaking with the national organization, which backed Fred Thompson, Georgia Right to Life goes with Huckabee: "Gov. Huckabee has a proven track record of solid pro-life legislation during his terms as governor of Arkansas. He is noted for having passed a state 'Human Life Amendment' which says that 'the policy of Arkansas is to protect the life of every unborn child from conception to birth.' Arkansas Amendment 68 will take effect the moment that Roe vs. Wade is reversed. He is especially supportive of our efforts here in Georgia, to promote the passage of H.R. 536, the Paramount Right to Life Amendment."
Posted by Kyle at 12:49 PM | Permalink
November 27, 2007
Anti-Abortion Movement Split Spills onto Presidential Race
The Los Angeles Times recently reported on the reappearance of a somewhat rusty tactic in the anti-abortion movement’s tool belt: attempts to pass a “Human Life Amendment” to several state constitutions, which would purportedly grant full “personhood” rights beginning at conception. Such an end-run would circumvent a protracted political debate—which they could lose, as they did when South Dakota voters rejected an abortion ban last year—and likely end up in federal court, where activists hope new right-wing Supreme Court justices will take the opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade. But the major national religious-right groups have preferred a more incremental strategy of advancing less-sweeping restrictions and promoting Republican politicians who promise to appoint anti-abortion judges, leaving absolutist activists out in the cold, as the Times notes:
For the most part, the campaigns are run by local activists, with little support or funding from big national antiabortion groups. Similar efforts have failed in the past: Proponents in Michigan could not collect enough signatures to put a personhood measure on the ballot in 2006. The Georgia proposal stalled in the Legislature this year.
Indeed, Clarke Forsythe and Denise Burke of Americans United for Life—a legal group active since the 1970s—published an article in National Review today calling the HLA “a losing move for the pro-life movement.” While AUL is hardly an influential group in this decade, its anti-HLA commentary recalls the anti-abortion movement’s in-fighting in the 1980s and 1990s over militant clinic protests (and the occasional murder of doctors). Although AUL was happy to represent militant activist Joseph Scheidler and his Pro-Life Action League in court, at the same time it pooh-poohed the frenzied “Summer of Mercy” protest in Wichita in 1991. “[I]t is better to show the public that [the abortion provider’s] practices are unlawful than to engage in tactics that attract attention to the unlawfulness of pro-lifers,” cautioned AUL’s president.
Earlier this year, this schism over tactics broke out when militant activists posted ads denouncing religious-right leader James Dobson for his support of the “Partial Birth Abortion Ban.” Two separate factions of Operation Rescue, once one of the major militant groups, attacked each other over the ad, as did National Right to Life and its Colorado affiliate. The dispute put the vision in stark relief: The NRLC said it was “sophisticated enough to know we're not going to win a total victory all at once,” while Colorado Right to Life President Brian Rohrbough accused the incrementalists of selling out to politics:
"What happened in the abortion world is that groups like National Right to Life, they're really a wing of the Republican Party, and they're not geared to push for personhood for an unborn child -- they're geared to getting Republicans elected," he said.
The spat over the Human Life Amendment repeats this disagreement. Here’s Rohrbough, now pushing an HLA in Colorado:
"The concept that we're going to elect judges who will change everything has failed," said Brian Rohrbough, a former president of Colorado Right to Life. "The logical thing is to start with personhood. . . . It's the only legitimate tactic that does not involve a compromise."
At the same time, the schism is coming out in the Republican presidential primary. When Pat Robertson endorsed Rudy Giuliani, citing the candidate’s promise to appoint right-wing Supreme Court justices, Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry came out of the woodwork to stage a protest of Robertson’s CBN. “Is Pat Robertson so terrified of Hillary that he will betray the Right to Life, Marriage, Self-defense, and The Church Herself as long as a fellow Republican snatches power?” asked Terry. “Rudy may wade through the blood of the innocent to reach the throne; he may be a stench in the nostrils of Angels – and the nostrils of devils for that matter – but at least Rudy is a stench that comes from the GOP stable – and he's not Hillary. Is this the conviction we expect from Christian Leaders?” Terry then planned a “civil disobedience” rally in Philadelphia with an absolutist candidate, long-shot Alan Keyes.
And when the National Right to Life endorsed Fred Thompson—days after Thompson rejected a federal Human Life Amendment, which activists have fought tooth and nail to keep in the GOP platform—the group was accused of selling out. “I think in all probability the Thompson people were engaged with the National Right to Life people in financial dealing,” said Paul Weyrich. NRLC said it was a matter of electability. For his part, Mitt Romney is trying to shore up his position on the Human Life Amendment.
All of the Republican candidates are promising to appoint “strict constructionist” or anti-abortion judges, and it remains priority number one for the far Right. “In ’08, it’s all about the judges!” wrote Rick Scarborough, urging his (even more) purist allies to “Grow UP!!!” Certainly the Supreme Court has swerved to the Right in the last two years, and the Court is on the brink of a disaster for civil rights and civil liberties. Still, one can almost understand the skepticism of the more militant activists. “I think we see the end of the tunnel and the demise of Roe v. Wade,” proclaimed Clarke Forsythe, then the legal director of AUL, to TIME shortly after George Bush I was elected president in 1988.
But at the end of the day, whatever disagreements the absolutists and the incrementalists have over political tactics, they still share common ground, both in their goal to ban abortion and their ultimate electoral activism. From the L.A. Times:
Proponents of the [Human Life Amendment] initiatives say their campaign has a political value as well. [Dan] Becker, the Georgia Right to Life president, said it could energize dispirited conservatives during the 2008 presidential election.
"It'll draw a lot of conservatives to the polls," he said, "in an otherwise lackluster presidential year."
Posted by Ezra at 5:09 PM | Permalink
September 26, 2007
Rudy Recruits More Federalist Society Members
Giuliani announced his Georgia Lawyers for Rudy Leadership Team, many of whom are Federalist Society members.
Posted by Kyle at 4:00 PM | Permalink
May 31, 2007
Christian Coalition Spat Continues in Alabama
Last week’s attack on James Dobson by some anti-abortion groups prompted rebukes defending Dobson from other anti-abortion groups with almost the same names, displaying an internecine conflict between factions on the far Right: Operation Rescue versus Operation Rescue and National Right to Life versus affiliate Colorado Right to Life.
Similar problems have been brewing over the last year between the waning Christian Coalition and its state affiliates. Chapters in Ohio, Iowa, Alabama, and Georgia have split off, citing disgust over the group’s finances as well as apparent ideological differences, such as the national group’s support of an Alabama tax reform measure, which the Republican governor called a Christian duty to the poor but which was fervently opposed by the group’s Alabama chapter.
It seems like CC of America is having trouble finding its identity: While disgruntled affiliates complained of the national group’s involvement on non-abortion and non-gay-related issues such as poverty and the environment, incoming president Rev. Joel Hunter withdrew before taking office because, he said, the board didn’t want to be involved in poverty or the environment (as it was “unwilling to part with its partisan, Republican roots”). Nevertheless, the Christian Coalition is still having an impact, according to a recent AP report – even in Georgia, where the breakaway chapter, renamed Christian Alliance, worked alongside the replacement CC of Georgia to oppose Sunday liquor sales.
Things aren’t as peachy in other states as they are in Georgia. The current policy dispute between the breakaway chapter in Alabama – now Christian Action Alabama – and its replacement affiliate centers on a proposed constitutional amendment on electronic bingo machines: the new CC of Alabama supports the amendment, claiming that it would eliminate more machines at gas stations than it would allow at dog tracks, while former Christian Action Alabama head and prominent activist and politician John Giles and other former CC figures oppose the measure.
Behind that policy dispute, however, is something nastier: The head of the new CC of Alabama is suing Giles, claiming he and the breakaway chapter absconded with CC assets. Giles responds by calling the suit “frivolous and baseless" and claims the new CC of Alabama is in the "palm of gamblers.”
If all this talk about the Christian Coalition, gambling, and Alabama sounds familiar, it’s because of reports in recent years that imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Christian Coalition of America leader Ralph Reed funneled $850,000 from casino-owning Indian tribes in Mississippi to the Christian Coalition of Alabama to oppose a gambling measure there in 1999; the money alleged passed through Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform.
Posted by Ezra at 3:57 PM | Permalink
May 17, 2007
Anti-Evolution Billboards in Oregon, Georgia Demonstrate Man, Monkey Look Different
Group promotes teaching creationism in public school.
Posted by Ezra at 11:59 PM | Permalink
April 12, 2007
RightMarch Founder/Congressional Candidate Warns Dems Could 'Steal' GOP-Leaning Seat
Bill Greene again cites blogs.
Posted by Ezra at 11:59 PM | Permalink
April 6, 2007
RightMarch.com Founder Desperate for Cash
Last week, we noted that Bill Greene, founder of the RightMarch.com mailing list, was able to use his list – and his contacts with the right-wing activists who use it – in his campaign for Congress. RightMarch.com distributed an endorsement from Minuteman Civil Defense Corps founder Chris Simcox, who emphasized that Greene would need “financial firepower” in order to “blanket the local radio and television markets with a barrage of ads.” Indeed, even though Greene announced his candidacy in February, an April 2 report on the June 19 special election did not even mention Greene as a candidate, suggesting that, while known among right-wing activists on the Internet or as a supporter of a novelty tax plan, he has a tough case to make to voters in his Georgia district.
Within days of our blog post, Greene once again appealed to his subscribers, warning that he is “under attack” by this blog. Greene proudly, if mistakenly, claimed that we called him a “right-wing leader” – a label we used instead for the clients of his e-mail service, such as Simcox. Nevertheless, Greene cut to the chase: being mentioned on a blog means that his campaign has hit the big time – and that means he needs “a LOT of money.”
Bill Greene needs our help NOW. Today, March 31st, is the first deadline for filing campaign fundraising reports with the FEC. If we want to really shake up the liberal forces of pro-illegal immigration, we need to make sure they know that Americans will support a strong conservative who's willing to take a stand against the radical liberals trying to destroy American sovereignty.
It's going to take a LOT of money to fight back against well-funded liberal groups like PFAW. Please, give as much as you can -- whether it's the legal limit of $2300, $1000, $500, $250, $100, or even $50 -- whatever you can give, it's needed right away.
Posted by Ezra at 4:14 PM | Permalink
Older Georgia posts: