Loading ...When a televangelist who blamed the 9/11 attack on the United States on abortionists and
feminists endorses the presidential campaign of a man who is openly pro-abortion and gay rights, it’s a big deal.
In fact, it’s occasioned the Times of London’s Gerard Baker to describe it as the “the fracturing of the American evangelist movement”.
Robertson, probably the best known of the televangelists, is also the most controversial. His confirmation that the United States should not intervene in China’s abortion policies, live on CNN, left his co-religionists underwhelmed to say the least.
Robertson cited the overpopulation in China and the fact that it was an internal affair for this grand departure from Evangelical thinking.
He also confirmed that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke due to his decision to hand the Gaza Strip over to the Palestinians.
His disgusting attacks on Muslims and Islam, calling them inter alia “slave traders” and “worse than Nazis” prompted calls from CAIR to Giuliani to review his acceptance of Robertson’s endorsement.
He has also called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, blamed Hurricane Katrina on the “wanton ways” of Americans and claims that liberal judges are a greater danger to America “than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings”.
Kathleen Parker, writing for the San Francisco Gate, expresses the view that perhaps it is not so much a belief in Giuliani’s ability to uphold social conservatism, being the most liberal of the current candidates, but rather the fact that he represents the best bet of keeping those awful Clintons out of the White House that has given rise to this endorsement.
This seems to ring true if consideration is given to the fact that in 1993 Robertson’s Christian Coalition endorsed Giuliani’s opponent in the race for the mayor of New York.
Either way, Robertson’s backing is a mixed blessing at best: while it “may” assist in handing Rudy the Republican nomination, it might also be the kiss of death when the final votes are counted in the presidential election:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20071108/ cm_huffpost/071716
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/07/ pat-robertsons-giuliani-_n_71648.html
Matthew Balan, news analyst at the Media Research Centre, captured the essence of the analysts interviewed by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer in this piece.
It appears that Giuliani, and indeed all of the Republican candidates up for nomination, actively
pursued Robertson’s endorsement.
Is this confirmation that GOP politicians still regard these evangelists as critical to their cracking the nod, or is there merit in Gerard Baker’s “fracturing of the evangelist movement”
theory?
If you read the views of senior legal analyst Jeff Toobin, it seems to indicate that Republicans
are trying to justify Robertson’s endorsement of Giuliani: “And you know, it just shows how
much Giuliani has changed from the guy who used to live with a gay couple in New York.”
Is Toobin from the 21st century?
This wenner is a supposedly senior analyst who justifies Robertson’s (Archie Bunker on crack) faith in Giuliani by intimating that while Giuliani is not a homophobe, he’s now all grown up and doesn’t associate himself with gays any more.
And this is the calibre of analyst that CNN uses? Either it hates the Republicans or maybe it should just bring in more entertaining legal analysts like Judge Motata after he’s downed six bottles of tea.
Now for something completely different!
