Evangelical Turnout - The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
Evangelical Turnout

Re: W. James Antle III’s Left Behind:

These TAS pro-Rudy articles sound as if they are inspired by the Kossacks and seem engaged in bullying. It’s more Metro-Con talk that will truly lead to marginalization with the Democrats becoming a new permanent majority, the PRI of the north, that ruled weakly opposed for 70-80 years to the south of us. Sorry, you can’t respect a different opinion.
David Bartlett

W. James Antle III has chastised the Christian conservative voter with his article “Left Behind” for not stepping in earlier to promote a Republican candidate compatible with our beliefs.

In my view, it is not our job to drive the Republican Party in any direction. We are more like customers. In other words, Christian voters are not as tied to the party as the Republicans think. The point that Mr. Antle misses is that we have a higher authority. Faith is the driving motivation for the Christian conservative.

When Ronald Reagan ran for President, we had someone who appeared to share our beliefs. We supported him mainly due to his strong inner core values. Since then, the Republican Party has assumed that we would be a solid part of their base no matter what. They could treat us as the Democrats treat their base.

I’m with Dr. Dobson one hundred percent. I will not vote for someone like Rudy Giuliani. If that causes Hillary to be elected, so be it. I have faith that things will work out as long as I do not compromise by voting for the lesser of two evils. A lesser evil is still evil.
Rob Curtis
Alton, Illinois

Yes, electing Hillary Clinton would be a disaster–as would electing Giuliani. As a “social conservative” myself, I am confronted with a dilemma: Do I vote for someone with essentially identical views on social issues as Clinton (Giuliani), or do I not and adhere to my principles. Hmm. Tough one. What do I do? Time’s up! My principles win. We social conservatives must vote on principle. Besides, why do we have to compromise our principles and they do not?
Terry L. Robb
Columbia, Missouri

I just love Rudy. I always have admired the man. Fred Thompson looks like he’s not feeling well. Rudy is strong here in Ohio. People that I assume would vote for someone else, express their support for Rudy and it’s intense. People, in my social circles that are mad at the Republican Party will express a slight interest in Obama, but when you ask them about voting for Hillary, they freak out! Most Democrat men dislike Hillary. That’s my two cents.
Vicki Gattuso
Akron, Ohio

I am a Protestant, evangelical, Christian conservative who has in the past protested abortion, supported pro-life pregnancy counseling centers, and remain personally opposed to dumbing marriage downwards. Having said that, I plan to vote for Rudy Giuliani, simply because he is the best leader who is a candidate in this election. He proved himself under fire on 9/11 and during the weeks and months following.

Since Ronald Reagan assumed office, we’ve had “conservatives” in power except for the Clinton years. We are still aborting as many unborn babies as we were 25 years ago. We have continued the slippery slide down the redefining marriage slope. Why? Because “the hearts and minds” of the population have not been changed.

I respect Dr. Dobson. But I’d rather have Rudy in office, and be praying every day for his mind to change on some of these issues, than to torpedo the Republican Party and elect Hillary (with less than 50% of the popular vote).
Clint Wilkinson, D.M.D.

I think that our (religious right) wins in 2000 and 2004 showed us that our votes matter, but what it also did was make us sit up and take note of how things really work in elections. As a result I think that religious voters are a more politically savvy bunch than we were a few years ago. More savvy in a way to make us realize that if we stay home we could very well affect the election in a negative way and see Hillary become president of the United States! That scenario is just too scary to contemplate. While I do love Dr. Dobson, I think this time he will not have the majority of religious voters behind him. I, for one, will vote for the Republican candidate, whoever that is, because he can’t be worse for our country than a Democrat!
Deane Pradzinski
Highland, California

Mr. Antle well spells out the dividing line between fiscal conservatives and social ones. The former have no honor or core principles other than personal greed, which is partly why there’s such a divide between Dobson and his ilk and fiscal conservatives.

I’m Catholic and conservative strongly agree with Dobson that those such as I will not support a queer-loving, pro-abortion hedonist, not even at the near certainty of throwing the election to Hillary, whom I despise. The same may said of the Mormon, Romney, for whom I’ll not vote under any circumstance whatsoever.

Should either of them capture the GOP nomination, I, unaffiliated, will vote 3rd party or not vote in the general election.

And don’t whimper to me about the foolishness of one willing to sacrifice an election for the sake of principle. If I were worried about that sort of thing, I wouldn’t have volunteered for a second twelve-month-long tour of fighting in Vietnam, instead of dodging the draft, as did both Giuliani and Romney. Or hiding out in a Nat’l Guard unit of a type nearly certain not to be sent to the war zone, as did Geo. W.
Dave Livingston
Life member, MOPH (Military Order of the Purple Heart)
Colorado Springs, Colorado (’bout 10 miles from Dobson’s Focus on the Family facility)

Obviously, there are those on the ‘right’ that incorrectly assume that ‘religious right’ voters all follow James Dobson as if we were a bunch of sheep. Republican leadership is sadly mistaken if they believe that ‘religious right voters can be pigeon holed into any one group. Democrats have made the mistake for years with black voters thinking that all blacks follow Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton’s lead. I consider myself a ‘religious right’ voter and at this moment in time I would support Rudy as the GOP candidate. I know many conservative religious right voters that feel the same way. Rudy only needs to come around on the immigration question and take a concrete stand against amnesty in any form or fashion and he will win the GOP nomination hands down. As a conservative Christian I disagree with Rudy’s views on homosexuals and abortion, but over all a liberal point of view in these two areas is not nearly as dangerous as a more lenient view on immigration, tax increases, spending, and increasing the government’s involvement in the economy. As for James Dobson, I know no one that seeks his counsel in how to cast their vote.

It is far more dangerous to America and particularly Christians to have a democrat president and a democrat congress than it is to have a three time married man that is pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, but is solid in his execution of conservative principles in other areas.
Lee Schafer
New Caney Texas

Don’t we always stay behind. Isn’t that what the Moral Majority did after they were dissatisfied with the Reagan administration they helped elect? Isn’t that what the Christian Coalition did after they were dissatisfied with the Republican Congress they helped put into place? Isn’t that what we all have done with Bush and Republicans in general?

The Dems know that we demand our way or the highway. They run smear campaigns with the sole intention of turning us away from the poles. And they definitely use government to persecute any right-winger who uses churches the way they do.

I am a Mormon who has just realized that I am not really welcome amongst other religious conservatives. Too many just won’t even consider the Mormon candidate. It is one thing to look at him, like I have, and be afraid that he really isn’t conservative. But refusing to look at him?

But, as I hear him give stump speeches that take the form of fireside chats, hold the religion, and run ads that use famous Mormon phrases like “This is the place!”, I have realized that the main problem is that none of the candidates are talking in the right language. Romney may not realize what he is doing. There are definitely not enough Mormons to target a national campaign towards us. It is part of him. Likewise Bush used language that was part of him, not calculated code words to send messages like the left does.

There is nobody out there who really is one of the main group. Neither are there friends and cohorts from the group at their side, pitching their cause. (The case with Reagan.)

I for one, though, will not stay home. I do not want to be to blame for another 8 scandal filled socialist leaning years of Clinton. That means even voting for someone you know isn’t socially conservative, (RUDY), or someone who has 8 years ago tried to get elected by attacking social conservatives, (JOHN), or whoever else I don’t fully trust.

When faced with the choice of the lesser of two evils, if we won’t stand strong against the worst evil, then we will be to blame.
James Bailey

Regarding religious conservatives being left behind, it is apparent that many within the Republican establishment still don’t get it. I am an evangelical (Reformed) Christian that is not particularly fond of Dr. Dobson’s political activities, nor any of the “great” religious right political organizations. Christianity is not a special interest group of the Republican, Democrat, nor any political party for that matter. True evangelical Christians participates in the political process (voting, running for office, etc.) under a simple and profound ideal: Do whatever it takes, within the guidance of Scripture, and the just laws provided by the state, to further God’s Kingdom through Jesus Christ. Christianity is not about saving our culture through the political process; it is about living out the cultural mandate given us by God through His Son and the Apostles as found in the Bible. When evangelicals become entrenched as just another “wing of” or special interest group within any political party, it has already marginalized itself.

I, for one, will not vote for a Republican presidential candidate that does not fully embrace the concept that all people are created in the Imago Dei, and, for whatever reason, seems to think that anyone has the “right” to kill a fellow human in the womb, because of some ideal called “choice.” Personal preferences do not trump what is universally right — the preservation and nurturing of life at all stages of development.

But one would argue that evangelicals voting for a pro-life, third-party candidate would divide the conservative vote and lead to a third Clinton term in the White House, and all of the pitfalls and doom that would ensue? That possibility (or eventuality) is much more preferential to the evangelical Christian than to cast a vote for a Republican that would bring about the same ends.

I pray that God through the use of His secondary means (our actions including involvement in the political process), will raise up a Godly man or woman to lead this nation; one that will, through the power delegated to the office, appoint judges interested in preserving life, providing for justice, and is respectful to our God. But if the “choice” comes down to two candidates that are separated only by their differing economic or national security philosophies and that ignore what is clearly true and beautiful and right, then sitting the election out is my only option. With that in mind, I welcome being marginalized, and will redouble my prayers and actions that God has called me to do, in His Wisdom and for His Glory, to be salt and light in an increasingly post-Christian culture.
Morgan P. Yarbrough

Your article states there are only two religious conservative GOP people on the ticket. You are not correct. You have completely forgotten Mitt Romney.

I would tend to say that there is no person more religiously conservative than Mitt Romney. You obviously do not know anything about his religion and how devoted he is to it.

I would recommend looking at this website.
Lance Ellinghaus

James Antle III… who really cares what you think about Dobson or the “values voters”? They are the people who have kept the Republicans in the majority until recently when they got fed up with the lack of values in politicians. Bush has made a disaster of this country with his immigration policies and the war in Iraq is turning into a big boondoggle due to his lack of leadership and foresight. Now Bush’s one world tendencies are coming to the forefront with his intervention in the Texas capital punishment case. As one who used to frequent this site and who had gotten pretty fed up with your myopic viewpoints that condescend to reason and reality, I feel it’s time we did get back to values. I’m not going to defend Dobson, but at least he stands for something his feet on the ground, and if it comes down to “sacrificing” the GOP to bring this nation back on an even keel, then so be it. You can compromise all you want, but until the last vote is counted , don’t knock the “values voters” or you will find yourself without an audience as more people make the decision I did and leave you in the dust. Further, you left out Rudy’s opposition to gun rights. He may say he’ll appoint strict constructionists but anyone who thinks the way he does can hardly be trusted. Also, his “leadership” on 9/11 is being disputed by some of the people who were directly involved.
Pete Chagnon

I am a born-again, baptized in the Holy Spirit, tongue-speaking Christian living in south Louisiana. What does that have to do with whom I’m going to vote for in 2008? Nothing. Politics ain’t beanbag, and it ain’t an invitation to be filled with the Holy Ghost. The best candidate, with Fred Thompson a distant (but closing) second is Rudy. Period.

I have seen too many self-proclaimed shepherds of the voting Christian flock go off the deep end with their sudden (self) importance. If it isn’t Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell saying something silly, it’s Dr. Dobson going into full theatre to denounce perhaps the only viable candidate to keep a repeat of the French Revolution from erupting in America for the next four or eight years.

Dr. Dobson, get off of your high horse. You do not speak for me, and you don’t speak for millions of other evangelical Christians who pay more than occasional attention to the political scene. And, third parties are for losers like Perot and that Corvair-slaying debutante of the Left. So, let a little of the hot air escape the bag and relax. After all, the Holy Spirit is in control. Right James?

So far, it’s Rudy. That may change, it may not. If it does, it won’t be because James Dobson told me not to vote for Rudy.
Robert McClain
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

More than 200 hundred years ago, Thomas Jefferson running for president against John Adams and denying Adams a second term, was castigated from the pulpits by preachers assailing Jefferson as a nonbeliever even anti-Christian. As Jefferson served his presidency for two terms, the charges of his bias against religion dissipated, disappeared as a political issue.

Today Rudy finds himself in somewhat the same predicament, accused of not living as a Christian should live and harboring un-Christian like social ideas. Dr. Dobson appears to have the loudest horn in this avenging band.

To be fair and mindful of history, let’s state now that Dr. Dobson is fair-minded and seeks to guide his Christian flock as he is commanded to by his religion. We also assume Dr. Dobson would forgive Rudy any sins as is the right of any person seeking forgiveness and redemption.
Let’s also remember that Rudy is a practitioner of governance and must govern to a large extent as those who elect him wish him to. To this point Rudy has never said he is for abortion. Rather he has said he is against it, desiring as few as possible to occur within his governance. He recognizes, however his duty as a governor to settle the issue in his real world he governs in steps as opposed to imposing a religious view point having no gradation.

Rudy will appoint Conservative judges whom will comport in steps with the result desired by Christians. The Democrat Party, on the other hand, will resist efforts to end abortion, the result desired by Christians, and will probably continue their religious bias against Christians. Supporting third party efforts within the Republican Party will lead to an unsatisfactory effort to end abortion. “Render unto Rudy what is Rudy’s and unto God what is God’s” seems relevant here.
Howard Lohmuller

As someone sympathetic to the concerns of Dr. Dobson, et al., here’s the thing: booger up the war vs. Islamofascism and the rest of the stuff they’re worried about won’t matter much.

Rudy won’t booger up the war.
Brad Bettin
Melbourne, Florida

Re: The Prowler’s Rush Week:

You people have no integrity at all. I just heard your spokesperson on the Rush Limbaugh show. Absolutely disgraceful. You are the kind of people who are creating the divisiveness in our country. You are unpatriotic.

Sometimes it makes one wonder how people such as you can be raised in our great country. Your Nazi mentality scares me.
Allen Beasley

I would like to thank you for your stance against people and groups like Waxman who are trying to destroy America and our freedoms. I listened to your interview on a talk show and really appreciated your “American Stance.” Please keep giving us the heads up on potential “Destroyers of America. If I had one wish it would be that they & all like them leave the “Home of the Free.” Thanks again. An old Vet.
Jerry Mappi

Please continue to push forward evidence. Take him to court so that the facts can be known publicly and for once we the people can see abuses of power punished.
David Gilbert

Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.’s Imus in the Offing:

RET had to swallow hard to champion the impending reappearance of a radio-industry carbuncle. So be it. The argument is worth making, no, it is in fact essential. Imus and the assorted creeps, slugs, and other dwelling “talent” currently crawling through the airwaves are repellant. But they DO have place in a society enabled by our Constitution. Liberty is messy, and Imus is the price we pay (if we WANT to tune in) for the protections the First Amendment affords to people we do respect, do rely on, and do champion. People like, well…Bob Tyrrell. Pity that Imus is the beneficiary of your firepower rather than someone — gently put — a bit more classy. But you fight for a principle, not a slug.
J.C. Eaton
Chetek, Wisconsin

Until Bill Bennett came on the radio, Imus, with all his warts, was the only early morning radio/TV that carried some sort of “vaguely intellectual” and entertaining fare. (Sometimes C-Span is just too boring and all the others are just too lightweight, pretentious and silly.)

Let him back on the radio and maybe even television. If people don’t like him, they can turn him off. I remember the Correspondents Dinner where Imus was the invited “humorist” and he excoriated Bill Clinton. (It was pretty funny, and we didn’t even know about Monica yet.) I thought he was done then, but no, all the hypocritical reporters and journalists made their way back to his show in a week or two. During the Monica Era, Imus saw the humor in the scandal and it was fun watching him and his cohorts. Everyone needed a break from the intensity of those six months and he provided it.

We knew when Imus left last spring, he was coming back. I don’t think I’ll listen to him because I have Bill Bennett’s Morning in America, a more elevating and truly intellectual show.
Judy Beumler
Louisville, Kentucky

An excellent article on Imus, and I thank you. He is a senior poseur. I actually found him amusing for about a month when I first saw him. Then it dawned on me: I was not a frat boy, never was and if I did ever change my mind, it surely would not be to join the Tri-Crappa group that this silly man and his followers represent.
Bill Margeson
Dundee, Illinois

I have just finished reading “Imus in the Offing,” by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. I have never thought of myself as one of a “substantial audience of macho fellows…who consider themselves somewhat intellectual, somewhat athletic, in sum: very au courant with what ‘real’ men know.” I was flattered until the part about ‘real’ men. I understand that R. Emmett must not consider himself to be one of those “real” men but this sort of stereotyping smells a little like Imus to me. I have been an Imus fan for a few years now, and I hope he does return to a station that I can listen to or view or both. I would continuing writing this but I must jog and read now.
Ron Savage
Williamsburg, Virginia

Perfectly marvelous. If black journalists and aging feminists choose to laugh with you at Imus rather than continue their endless gnashing of teeth and rending of garments, then your next pair of opera pumps are on me.
Mrs. Jackson

This is great news that Don Imus will be returning to the air ways. He should have never been taken off the air in the first place.

If you watch his show and understand the man better you might change your view of him.

We are very well-educated people, we enjoy the man’s show and know that he is a gentle giant, good man and his shows need to be taken for what it is, and if you do not enjoy it turn it off.

But we do enjoy him and feel we should have the choice to do so, with out Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson interfering with thing they need to stay at home.
Carol and Family

Re: Jeffrey Lord’s Soros: From Dots to Patterns:

Goodness, Jeffrey Lord’s column is just about the scariest thing I’ve read in years. This is what happens to a democratic republic when the mainstream news media doesn’t question the left side of the political spectrum the way it does the right side. And when the country finally gets a wee bit of balance with the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, The American Spectator and Fox News, that news media joins up with the puppeteers of the left to take down the competition.

This reminds me of the left-leaning Americans and other Westerners who can’t face the fact that Islamofascists are trying to tear down the foundations of their culture from the inside and outside, so they blame the United States for all of the problems in the world and join the fascists/terrorists in their hatred. In the process, they sound very similar in their denunciations of their own culture, once again thinking the crocodile will eat them last.

We live in very dangerous times. I truly fear for the future of our country. I’m especially afraid because you add to that a threat from the right, such as Bush giving away our sovereignty to the World Court by halting the execution of an illegal-immigrant Mexican who was part of a group that brutally raped and murdered two Texas teen-agers. I wonder if the arresting officers were even allowed to ask the Mexican if he was illegal in 1993 when the rapes occurred, so how could they tell him he could talk to the Mexican Consulate? How many additional rights do illegals get to have over Native Americans?

The world has become so Orwellian I can’t hardly stand it. Black is white, good is bad, right is wrong. Only God can help us. And you’re exactly right, Mr. Lord, keep asking the religious conservatives how much of their nose they are willing to lose to spite their face in the next election — or how much of their country?

Thanks for waking me up and scaring me to death with the truth. My e-mail posse has received this one.
Deborah Durkee
Marietta, Georgia

Jeffrey Lord hits the nail on the head with the pattern of interference and influence peddling by George Soros funded groups on the democratic system of government in our representative republic.

Americans are too busy working, buying, spending and acquiring “things” to pay any attention to how their civil liberties have been gradually eliminated, their vote turned into nothing more than a meaningless number used by grifters and hacks to gain power, and their airwaves and press manipulated by subtle attacks on decency and our way of life. Soros poses a danger, but tied with the Clintons and their need for his money, their long tradition of selling access and favors is a marriage made in hell. Their particular warped view of society and what it should be has morphed into the greed and need combo now trying to gain the White House. Under Bill Clinton the DOJ operated like a punishing arm against their perceived “enemies.” They used the IRS as marauders against anyone who they felt could upset their tiny little world of questionable doings!

Our enemies have always been patient, because we are too slow to wake up. But, I hope we wake up before election day. There is too much at stake.
Valdis Gailitis
Newbury Park, California

I sent emails to the FCC Chairman and all the members telling them this is NOT Russia and we do have freedom of speech and keep hands off Talk Radio.
Elaine Kyle

I remember a banker by the name of Richard Mellon Scaife, who supported conservative causes and the Democrats went crazy over it. Why are they silent now?
Don Tilley
Provo, Utah

Thanks for this article.
Mike Williams

Re: Quin Hillyer’s Open Letter to Fred Thompson:

Absolutely, positively, and then some. I busted my butt going door to door and on the phone for the Gipper. I felt rewarded because he came through with the message loud and strong. Results came, the public spoke strongly in response. This time around I’m considerably older and grayer but nevertheless I would go the route for Thompson if he could show me he has the wherewithal to define the methodology for getting the nation back to believing in our inherent greatness. Reagan had only a few goals that he stressed and accomplished them.

We don’t need a shotgun approach. There are a lot of things to fix, will always be that way. We need the top priorities defined and emphasized. Our security should be job #1. Continue the war effort against fanatic Islamists by keeping General Petraeus in charge. After all he wrote the book on how to do it. Tighten up our borders, build the fence that was authorized and funded by Congress. Enforce the current laws, we don’t need a slew of new ones. Crack down on employers who are informed that their employees are illegals and yet continue to keep them on the payroll. They broke the law by illegally entering and staying. They committed a felony by using a phony social security card and other fake ID. The employers are complicit in the commission of those felonies. If the crackdown on employers is implemented the exodus will be to return back to where the illegals came from. But slam the door shut after they leave. I came from an immigrant family and they all came in legally and became citizens by joining the U.S. military and the others waited 7 years. This is an immigrant nation built by legal immigrants.
Chuck Wood
Sanford, Florida

Re: William Tucker’s Set ‘Em Up, Joe and David Govett’s letter (under “Bronx Cheers”) in Reader Mail’s Russian Shows of Strength:

Those who rejoice at the playoff failure of the New York Yankees, and those who mourn it, should realize they have one thing in common, which is a belief that the 2007 baseball season ended with the final out at Yankee Stadium. It is only with grudging acceptance that they can be convinced that there are still games scheduled, and in such odd places as Cleveland, Phoenix and Denver. The existence of such a thing as the Mountain Time Zone is probably also a revelation.

It would be helpful if David Govett could clarify, when he writes “Mickey and Roger, where are you?” whether he is talking Mantle and Maris, or Rivers and Repoz.
Glen Hoffing
Shamong, New Jersey

Re: James Srodes’s A Legacy of Horror and Honor:

That is an interesting and inspiring story about Colonel Day’s life. I served as a pilot in the Air Force from Dec 1960 to June 1982 including a tour in Vietnam and I find it surprising that I don’t remember ever having heard of Colonel Day. Anyway, it’s one of many inspiring stories to come out of our Vietnam experience. One other thing, Mr. Srodes says that Clinton cut off health care and prescription drugs for veterans from 1995 to 2000. I don’t think I was without health care during that period. There were changes to the Champus and Tricare systems, but I don’t think health care, including prescription drugs, was ever denied to veterans. You might want to check on that.
John Thorne
Lt Col, USAF (Retired)
Port Orchard, Washington

Re: Kay Clinard’s letter (under “Left Cold”) in Reader Mail’s Russian Shows of Strength:

Kay Clinard’s letter is the quintessential example of the pot calling the kettle black. She claims a women who disagrees with her lacks compassion — and then proceeds to “sincerely hope [she] never has children.” Isn’t that special.

For someone who supposedly was a social worker, Ms. Clinard certainly didn’t learn anything. Apparently she has never dealt with women who are infertile and the anguish they go through because of that. What an awful thing to wish on someone.

Ms. Clinard could use of dose of compassion herself.
Garry Greenwood

Re: David Menard’s letter (under “Close Inspection”) in Reader Mail’s Russian Shows of Strength:

My United States Government Printing Office Style Manual (March 1984) lists both “Congressional Medal of Honor” and “Medal of Honor” as acceptable. See “Congressional,” 42 and “decorations,” p.43, if you have a copy handy. (And if you don’t, you should — get yours here.)
Doug Welty
Arlington, Virginia

Sign up to receive our latest updates! Register

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: The American Spectator, 122 S Royal Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314, http://spectator.org. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact

Be a Free Market Loving Patriot. Subscribe Today!