WASHINGTON – Prominent televangelist Pat Robertson has received mixed reaction from conservatives for his endorsement of presidential contender Rudy Giuliani.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Kevin Wolf)Pat Robertson endorses Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani during a news conference on Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2007, in Washington. Robertson, a prominent Christian leader and social conservative, endorsed Giuliani on Wednesday. 'Rudy Giuliani took a city that was in decline and considered ungovernable and reduced its violent crime, revitalized its core, dramatically lowered its taxes, cut through a welter of bureaucratic regulations, and did so in the spirit of bipartisanship which is so urgently needed in Washington today,' Robertson said.
Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, lambasted Robertson Wednesday for his support of the former New York mayor who is blacklisted by many conservatives for his pro abortion and gay rights stance.
“Pat Robertson is leading pro-family voters astray by abandoning moral standards for government,” he said .
Thomasson accused Robertson of “casting a blind eye” to Giuliani’s “big-time advocacy” of the homosexual, transsexual, bisexual agenda.
“This shocking news is a 180-degree turn by the founder of the Christian Coalition,” said the pro-life leader.
Meanwhile, conservative commentator Ann Coulter was more moderate in her response, noting that Robertson’s endorsement was not too shocking because he “appears to be more conservative than he is”.
Coulter, during an interview with Fox News, said Robertson is moderate to liberal on many issues and his endorsement does not truly represent a political conservative endorsement such as one from the late Rev. Jerry Falwell or Dr. James Dobson.
During his endorsement announcement, Robertson had praised Giuliani for being tough on crime, for his ability to handle the war on terror, and for his “spirit of bipartisanship.”
``It is my pleasure to announce my support for America's Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, a proven leader who is not afraid of what lies ahead and who will cast a hopeful vision for all Americans,'' Robertson said in a statement issued by the Giuliani campaign, according to The Associated Press.
Robertson, the founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, did not mention his differences with Giuliani on social conservative issues in his statement.
Other Republican candidates have also recently garnered important conservative endorsements. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney gained two Christian conservative leaders’ endorsement in South Carolina recently while Ariz. Sen. John McCain received the endorsement of Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), who dropped out of the presidential race last month.
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, who gained ground after Brownback’s departure, has picked up endorsements of two influential leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination.
On Sunday former SBC president Jack Graham introduced the former Arkansas governor to about 7,000 worshippers at Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, Texas. Meanwhile, Daniel Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, N.C., told the Raleigh News & Observer that he is supporting Huckabee not because he is a minister, but because of his stands on abortion, the family and keeping the United States strong.
Huckabee, named by Time Magazine as one of the five best governors in America in 2005, won the majority (51.26 percent) of onsite votes in a straw poll at the conservative Values Voter Summit last month in Washington. Following Huckabee was Romney with 10.40 percent of the onsite votes and former senator Fred Thompson with 8.09 percent.
RSS
amathson,
you said a mouthful. if we had a platform like him I guess we could indorse a good evangelical like Mike H. That is who he should have indorsed, but I knew he wouldn't after he had Rudy speek at the graduation at Regent U. Buddy buddy with the world......I wonder how much money he is giving to Rudy?
CBN states on its website homepage: "As a private citizen [Pat Robertson] has the right to participate in the political process, and is entitled to express his personal views."
As a "private" citizen, he could hardly have expressed his views in a more public way. Such a pity his personal choice was to place ideology above morality.
He's throwing the baby out with the bath water . Im stuned, What a shame.
Personally, as a Roman Catholic, I'm going to support either Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee because they have a better understanding of the Church:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul244.html
http://opinionatedcatholic.blogspot.com/2007/11/will-you-say-rosary-for-mike-huckabee.html
Mike Huckabee: I have spoken in Catholic churches and several key members of my staff are Roman Catholic.
He's a Catholic, why doesn't leaders of the Catholic community endorse him like many evangelical leaders? because the Catholic Church has different standards:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/25/us/politics/25rudy.html
to joshgilman - unfortunately, many people does follow him. just look at the hundreds of thousands of $$$ he rakes in every 'telethon hour or tithe' portion of his show. And with the last election many believed him in re-electing his favorite president bush or else. they defend him when he speaks contrary to the teachings of the bible, they believe that god speaks to him even he said there will be mass murder here in the US on sept. 2007. UNFORTUNATELY
Is Pat Robertson promoting morality or HYPOCRISY? The same person who condemned & blamed gays, abortionist, & liberals on 911. For Pat, never mind the gays or liberals, just kill the 'islamofacists'. But he does not even know who the enemy is - insurgents or alqueda. Talk about a person who practices absolute, rigid religion.
I really hope he isn't expecting many people to follow him.
I was shocked and dismayed by Mr. Robertson's endorsement. What are these prominent conservative men thinking? Right in front of their noses is a candidate that will satisfy the Christian conservative agenda, Mike Huckabee. I believe if we all stand with him, he could win the presidency, even if his opponent be Hillary. Are these men listening?!?!
I have been a supporter of the CBN ministry for over 20 years and will now take time to consider, in prayer, withdrawing that support .
The very idea of "electability" is an interesting one, in that, WE THE PEOPLE determine someone's "electability."
It’s not the polls, or MSM or…whatever. It’s US!
The object of an election is to put into practice, at the governmental level, the ideals, that are consistent with the U.S. Constitution, I as a voter/taxpayer/American citizen deem beneficial to me personally and me corporately (being a legal citizen who cares deeply about my country).
It’s really quite simple: if enough of US decide that we want our government operating under such-and-such ideals, and we vote based on that desire (not the “lesser of two evils”), it can and does happen.
History, recent and not-so-recent, is replete with examples of “underdogs” triumphing: “Navy Beats Notre Dame, Ending 44-Year Losing Streak” (Nov. 3, 2007); “Appalachian State 34, No. 5 Michigan 32” in “one of the greatest upsets in college football history….” (Sept. 1, 2007); in early-2003, Joe Lieberman was leading the field for the Democratic Presidential nomination yet failed to win any primary; in early-1991 Bill Clinton was at 2% and went on to win the Presidency; in early-1975 Jimmy Carter was polling at 1% and went on to win the Presidency.
Would to God that we as citizens would approach the election process with the fervor, intensity and no-holds-barred approach that we can see in life’s other activities. I can assure you that, although some members of the Navy and Appalachian State teams had their doubts, they were encouraged to believe in themselves and to make the best possible effort they could, being unwilling to settle for anything less than that best effort.
No, no, NO, folks! Our job as U.S. citizens and patriots is not to "pick a winner," which seems to me to be a view which trivializes our opportunity and responsibility as citizens. We’re to carefully consider all our options and then vote based on what best follows the Constitution and, therefore, is best for US! Voting based on the supposed “electability” of this candidate or that candidate means “We the People” have bought into the lies and deception thrust upon us by those who seek to destroy our great country:
“That candidate doesn’t have a chance at winning. After all, look at these polls and our numbers over here. And they’ve raised so little money! See? Besides…s/he’s just much on the fringe. Have you listened to their radical views about this and about that? You’d be laughed out of your (insert major party name here) meetings for supporting that candidate. Honestly, you’re supporting a candidate that cannot win and you’ll be taking away votes from so-and-so which only increases the chances of the (insert major party name here) candidate so-and-so winning…and you know how bad THAT would be, don’t you? You wouldn’t want THAT on your conscience, now would you?”
To support and vote based on “electability” is to deny the importance and relevance of MY vote and YOUR vote and, in all likelihood, put into office someone who themselves was no more or less “electable” at all than the candidate we really wanted to vote for…all for the sake of keeping someone else out of office and not truly believing in our cause and the need to vote for what is RIGHT and not what is EXPEDIENT. Such a vote is wasted and it creates in the mind of the voter an illusion that they’ve really done their civic duty. The worst part is that it does NOTHING to reverse the attacks on the U.S. Constitution, thereby delaying the return of Constitutional government and the “Rule of Law” to America. I, for one, do not want THAT on my conscience…that I did nothing to rescue and preserve our Constitution; in fact, my vote worked AGAINST such an effort.
God forbid I should turn my back on my beloved country!
One by one, as each of us decides that our vote IS important and that we are modern stewards of this great country, for which so many have given so much, THEN we begin to realize what we must do.
For me, that means expending whatever resources I can to make right what so many have worked so hard to destroy: my country...the United States of America. This great land deserves nothing less than the best I have to give. Can I truly call myself a "patriot" having done less than I could for this great country? What kind of American am I to see an opportunity to install into the White House a man with demonstrable and impeccable credentials and then do little to nothing to forward that effort?
No! I will have no part whatsoever in sitting idly by as others who, in the name of God or Money or “Compassionate Conservatism” or “Honor” or whatever do their utmost to denigrate and dissolve this great country…MY country! RON PAUL for President! Viva la Revolución!
P.S. If someone doesn’t like the way the U.S. was designed to operate and opposes a return to that way of thinking and governance, I politely suggest they find another country that DOES provide all the services and care they desire from their government. (“Paging a Mr. Robert Altman and Mr. Alec Baldwin…Final boarding call for any and all flights departing America….”) But that is NOT the way the U.S. was designed and I, and millions of others, intend on returning the U.S. to it’s roots…it’s Constitutional roots.
Robertson, along with Dr. Bob Jones III, Dr. Bob Taylor, Dr. Jack Willke and former Presidential nominee Sam Brownback, has, apparently decided that the allure of being the President's "right-hand man" is to be desired more than being God's "right-hand man."
For these sad, mostly-irrelevant "men of God," their God seemingly doesn't want them to endorse someone who isn't "electable." After all, their God isn't the least bit interested in what happens here in America and is utterly powerless to help.
One would think, by these bastardly endorsements, that the decades-long slaughter of millions of babies is more of an affront to us humans than to Him...the Author of Life. And since these “leaders” must see this is the case, "we" must put into office the one who would allow fewer murders (God’s plan be damned!). We dare not endorse and work for a candidate that has a longstanding and demonstrable record of supporting life because he's completely "unelectable" and "can't beat Hillary."
(I can envision King Saul having a similar conversation with himself when thinking about David fighting Goliath: “There is no way David can win! He has no battlefield experience, much less experience fighting giants; he has no name recognition…his polling numbers are almost non-existent; he doesn’t even look very ‘soldierish!’ I can’t ‘endorse’ him as he has no chance at winning. Who can we send in to slay this giant that defies Israel and Israel’s God?”)
I'm ashamed, firstly, of myself as a Christian. No doubt I have my own issues, against which others would have no struggle. But this ongoing denial by these "men of God" of God's desire and ability to put a Godly, righteous man into the White House, and their absolute glee at announcing their “all-important” yet ungodly endorsements leaves me at a loss of epic proportions. This, secondly, makes me ashamed to be their “brother in Christ."
And I am sad. It is we Christians that are to be “salt and light,” yet, given the opportunity to put into the White House such a man, we opt for what the “best” the world has to offer. And that’s what, in my opinion, all the candidates are…with the exception of Ron Paul.
God help America if anyone other than Ron Paul is elected President. For I truly believe that another man with his integrity, understanding of Constitutional governance and Godly credentials may never again aspire to be President of these United States.
And may God show no mercy to any of us that have a role in helping anyone else become President.
“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
Samuel Adams – American Patriot and Politician
1722-1803
Vote Pro-Life, Vote for RON PAUL!!! He will take action!
The following is from http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/life-and-liberty/
Life and Liberty
The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.
In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.
In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, HR 1094.
I am also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn.
I have also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.”
Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken direct action to restore protection for the unborn.
As an OB/GYN doctor, I’ve delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience has made me an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have read my book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Much can be understood about the civility of a society in observing its regard for the dignity of human life.
What is the justification for Christian activism in politics if it is not to promote Christian morality?
Pat Robertson remember: Dead flies can make a whole bottle of perfume stink, and a little stupidity can cancel out the greatest wisdom. Ecc 10:1 (GNB)