James Dobson abandons Giuliani and supports a third party candidate? He’s loud about his dissatisfaction that Giuliani is leading the Republican field. He hates the fact that Giuliani has policies that are closer to Clinton than to social conservatives. He will only accept an anti-choice candidate. He doesn’t trust that Giuliani will appoint Justices that are conservative, based on Giuliani’s record that’s probably a good bet. So James Dobson threatens promises to break free from the Republican party if Giuliani is elected the nominee.
What will this mean for the GOP? Considering that exit polls on election day in 2004 showed that 22% of voters labeled themselves Evangelical Christian, it would probably secure a Democratic win. That is, if Dobson could muster enough of them to defy their ingrained Republican voting tradition.
I was watching Face the Nation on Sunday and the guest was Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council. He appeared to back peddle a bit on Dobson’s statement by stating, “What we said last week was more of a proclamation of principle rather than a declaration of intent.” He then stated that “If the party chooses to break its commitment to creating a culture of life, we’re not going to go in that direction with the party.” during a conference call on Thursday with reporters. To me this sounds pretty much like an intention.
On Face the Nation, Perkins went on to say that the Conservative movement is comparable to a three legged stool the Fiscal Conservatives, the Foreign Policy Conservatives, and the Social Conservatives. He implored the other 2/3 of the party to throw their support to the Social Conservatives and their anti-choice agenda. Without all three legs they will “impale” themselves. Thursday, Perkins stated that he believed roughly half of the Religious Right would vote for Giuliani anyway but that’s still a lot of votes to lose.
So what will this mean for the Democrats? Probably a bigger win over the Republican nominee. Unless, that is, Mitt Romney starts climbing faster. He appears to be the Evangelicals’ favorite at this time with Perkins stating Thursday, “he’s one of the strongest on our issues. It’s true he has had a change of position on these issues. I do believe they’re genuine. I do not see him going back.”
It has disturbed me for sometime that the so called “prolifers” are not on the up and up about the fx war has on human life. War causes death. War is for dummies.
i am one of these idiots, email me @
fresnodaddy@sbcglobal.net
There are plenty of pro-lifers against the war in Iraq, but there is no big unified way for them to announce this. Look at the grassroots support of Ron Paul though; his pro-life message included stopping the war (a war he never supported in the first place).
Plus pro-lifers are busy fighting the war against mothers and their children in America. “Over One Million Dead” is something pro-lifers in America say every single year (actually over 1.2M).
Hello, have you lost the power of reason?
Do you know what a million bodies piled up looks like? I would like to see the Methodology that the Lancet used to compile there numbers. Sounds like junk research.
That’s a lot of Suicide Bombings and Collateral Damage.
Remember what Stalin said One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is just a statistic”"