banner photo:

"Each individual should allow reason to guide his conduct, or like an animal, he will need to be led by a leash."
Diogenes of Sinope


Banner photo
Thousand Flowers tapestry (15th Century) - Beaune, France (detail)

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Evangelicals for Giuliani

I love to say "I told you so". Back in March I wrote a post praising Rudy Giuliani's brand of conservatism and suggesting that it was a model for the direction of both the Republican Party and the Conservative Party of Canada. I was promptly lambasted by uber-crank Canadian Cynic who called my post a dispatch from "Wankerland North" and said:

Yeah, Eric, why don't you promote Rudy Guiliani [sic] as a presidential candidate? I'd love to see how that turns out.
Suzanne over at Big Blue Wave wrote "if Republicans nominate Giuliani, they will lose". She had this to say:

Diogenes Borealis suggests that the Republicans would do well to allow Giuliani to be nominated as the Presidential candidate.If the Republicans don't nominate a pro-lifer, they will lose. The so-con base is not going to move mountains the way they did for George Bush for some guy who is not nearly as pro-life as he is.
So, it was with a bit of a smirk that I learned that Giuliani has now been endorsed by Christian evangelist Pat Robertson:

"To me the overriding issue before the American people is the defense of our population from the blood lust of Islamic terrorists," Robertson said in his opening statements. Robertson added that the United Stated needs a "leader with a bold vision who is not afraid to tackle the challenges ahead" and that leader was former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, R-N.Y.
Critics of Giuliani who think that his past pro-abortion & pro-homosexual positions make him unacceptable to the Christian Right in the US are deluded, in my opinion. As Robertson has stated, Christian Republicans want a candidate that at least has a shot at defeating the Democrats in 2008, and if that means supporting a divorced pro-choicer from New York, so be it. The alternative is a Hillary Clinton presidency. Who is more anathema to Christian Republicans - Clinton or Giuliani? Exactly.

1 comment:

Cranky or Just A Crank said...

I think that it may be a calculated choice of lesser evils by Robertson, but so what. By getting into the tent early the evangelicals may get voice that would let take some comfort that what they see as gains over the years from Reagan, to Newt, to GWB won't be eroded. They might not progress their agenda under Rudy, but they probably won't lose either.

It's not like they are going to vote for Hillary Clinton.

The conservative Christian segment of the electorate is not going to stop supporting conservatives because the candidate is a little weak on the Christian part.