Conservative talk-radio hosts are beginning to line-up behind Mitt Romney. They do not necessarily sound like they are excited about Mitt Romney. They sound like they are against John McCain. You can listen to Sean Hannity’s and Laura Ingraham’s endorsements below.
Sean Hannity Endorsement
Laura Ingraham and Rick Santorum Endorsements
By the way, I’m not making any endorsements. I’m just passing along the info. For an evangelical perspective on Romney, check out Wayne Grudem’s essay from last year in support of his candidacy: “Why Evangelicals Should Support Mitt Romney.”
Interesting indeed. For sure, this sounds like it is simply against McCain. Hosts aside, the one that surprised me was Sen. Santorum. His first hand knowledge of McCain in the senate was telling.
Of course, it may be moot in a matter of days.
FYI-You also should note that Ann Coulter said she would campaign for Hillary if McCain was the nominee. Of course, sometimes Coulter has diarrhea of the mouth.
Here’s that link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuTqgqhxVMc
Oh, just what we need, conservatives backing a man with no convictions. He changes his positions according to what will make him win. He was pro-choice and pro-gay marriage to win the election in Massachusetts, but to run for president he is all of a sudden pro-life and against gay marriage. Sound hypocritical? Of course it does…
I agree Matt. I am a little worried as to the true state of his convictions.
Further, I don’t think he can beat Obama or Clinton. I might be completely off on this (but McC was dead and Rudy was on top just 6 months ago!), but I think McCain is the only one that can pull enough independent votes to get the win. Then again, if McC is the nominee, will social conservatives come out and vote in large enough numbers? Is it enough to say “Come vote against Clinton” or “Come vote against Obama?” Will that rally enough votes for McC to win? We’ll see. I’ll be watching.
why does it always have to be about voting AGAINST someone? That’s a pathetic way to vote, and really, if that’s how someone is going to vote, they should just stay home.
I’m growing tired of conservatives worrying about towing the “conservative” line, while ignoring that Mitt would get crushed by Obama or Hillary. And while ignoring Mitt’s sudden change of heart on the “conservative” issues. We go from Dobson saying he will vote independent if Giuliani gets the nomination to conservatives rallying to back the flip flopper Mormon.
And Paul, voting against someone is not a pathetic way to vote. If I see Hillary as someone who will take this country where I don’t want it to go, you better bet I’ll be “voting against” her.
Okay, but enough of the empty rhetoric. WHY is Hilary going to take the country in the wrong direction? And Abortion is already legal, so someone KEEPING it legal isn’t taking it anywhere. So, where is Hilary going to take us that’s so bad?
Matt, Please check Romney’s record. He has and still does support Gay Rights. However, he has NEVER supported Gay Marriage. The Mass supreme court overturned his efforts to now allow Gay Marriage. He held a rally on the State House steps against Gay Marriage.
He has said that he will support an ammendant only allow marriage between one man and one woman. Please don’t just listen to the rhetoric, go and check his record.
Yeah, I think this is starting to reveal more than just disagreement with McCain by these radio folks. I think there is some kind of deep seated hatred going on. I for one am getting pretty sick of the whinning, hysterical temper tantrum the far right is throwing over McCain. If they can’t get their way, they’re taking their ball and going home. I thought I was conservative but now I’m not so sure. When I look around the room at the folks heaping this much vitriol on him, I’m getting pretty uncomfortable. Look….I certainly don’t agree with some of the things McCain has advocated but get a grip. He, Romney and Huckabee are all good men and would be much better for the country than either Clinton or Obama. So when you don’t vote in the general election and Hillary is President, you have no right to say a word about what she does. You helped put her there.
Go to youtube and watch the CNN Republican Debate (9 parts) â€“ or perhaps you saw it when it aired â€“ I think Romney comes across as the clear choice.
I believe he does feel strongly about the positions he holds. I know he has changed on some important topics, but I don’t see evidence to suggest that these changes were merely politically motivated. He actually admits he regrets his former positions, which is more than McCain does.
He has experience in the business world, which is very important. He comes across as competent, honest, knowledgeable, confident, realistic.
McCain, by contrast, has continually crossed conservatives in his policy decisions. HE’S the one that is now trying to portray himself as a unifying conservative, when he has spent the last 10 years pushing a very non-conservative agenda. He also makes anti-capitalistic jabs at Romney because of his business experience, as if business is an evil thing. I could go on and on.
McCain is some good and some bad and a lot of who knows what? Romney may not be 100% conservative, but he’s as close to the real thing as we’ve got to choose.
I like Huckabee, but his economic policies are suspect, and he’s joined McCain to dogpile on Romney, which is regrettable.
Paul: “Abortion is already legal, so someone KEEPING it legal isnâ€™t taking it anywhere”
Changing the law on abortion would be a gradual process, involving things like who is appointed to the Supreme Court. Who becomes president matters, even if abortion is unlikely to be totally outlawed with the next 4 or 8 years.
I don’t think Hillary Clinton will do nothing about abortion if she becomes president. Her website says she has “fought” to defend Roe vs Wade. I expect Hillary Clinton, if president, would appoint pro-choice judges. Also, she would support government funding being used for things like the morning after pill which destroy human life after conception.
On the issue of abortion, a vote for Hillary Clinton is not neutral.
And her ideas for health care would hurt the economy.
I don’t believe the economy is the issue in this country. In fact I think we have bought the lie and the economy is becoming or has become an idol to many.
We overspend in our own households, at the government level, and even in some churches to please our flesh at the expense of those who are needy around the world and even in parts of our communities.
We pass tax measures that burden the poor to build stadiums for multi-million dollar owners and players to perform for us in our cities. It looks alot like the fall of Rome to me all over again to me.
Justice in our country is broken. The wealthy escape punishment while the poor serve out their sentences.
And to top it all off we “evangelicals” support the oppression of the alien and stranger in our land by supporting the “conservative right” who promise to get rid of the alien after we have used them to mow our lawns, roof our houses, build our bridges, clean our motel rooms.
These are the things we should think about this election. It may be good that our economy tanks and by doing so we turn back to God from our money made idols. This election is not only about abortion as bad as this as been, its about alot more.
Can Ezekiel 16:48-50 apply to our country today or do we still have time?
48″As I live,” declares the Lord GOD, “Sodom, your sister and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done.
49″Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy.
50″Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me Therefore I removed them when I saw it.
I know this is long and is kinda of a rant, but this is what I see.
Thanks Denny for the space and privilege to post on your blog.
Kris, I sympathize with your heart for the poor and the oppressed, but I think you have bought into the liberal lie that the best way to help the poor is for national governments to simply give them money.
I will simply remind you of the line about giving a man a fish versus teaching a man to fish. We need to help more people become contributors to the free market, so they can experience the joy of providing for themselves and their own families, using the God-given gifts and talents that are uniquely theirs.
That’s exactly what our free market system is supposed to promote. That’s why people from all over the world flock to the US â€“ for the economic opportunity here. Unemployment is at 5% â€“ lots of countries would kill to have that many of their people working.
When you begin to tax everyone more heavily, just so you can then re-distribute that money to those you deem ‘poor and oppressed’, TWO unfortunate situations often result: 1) those who are heavily taxed lose their initiative to work and to prosper (and remember, work in a free market simply equates to the offering of a good or service to others), and 2) those who are simply given $$ become complacent. Witness the results of welfare today.
So given human nature, the best way to help the poor is to teach them how to GIVE by working (offering a good or service to others) so that they can support themselves, without fear of heavy taxation.
IMHO, government is there to provide help only to the most needy, who obviously cannot help themselves: the mentally and physically disabled, the very elderly, etc. People who can work (and who can earn citizenship legally) are obligated to do so.
I’m sorry I left the impression in my comments that I advocated spending tax dollars to help the poor & needy.
I don’t advocate that, I think we should cut spending(as John McCain advocates)I understand that many in our country are enable by our social programs to put their trust in Gov. instead of the Lord.
I am by no means liberal as defined in our country. But at the same time I think we miss what our God tells us to do concerning the alien and stranger in our land. He says not to oppress them in the land, but remember that is was Him who led our fathers out of oppression and gave us this land.
I think most of the “conservative” & “liberal” talk show host are stricly secular in their thinking and rarely think of the problems in our country come from spiritual needs because of our sin.
Anyway I hope that clears up where I stand, thanks Chris.
Grace & Peace
Kris, thanks for your clarification. I agree that most of the talk show hosts probably speak from a secular standpoint. And while I believe in the merits of the free market, I know the Lord can work (and often has) through less efficient or even patently lousy economic systems. I don’t even know that I would try to defend a free market, low-tax system using Scripture â€“ it just seems to me to work well for everyone involved.
I do think we need to be considerate of illegal aliens in the States. I am from Texas, where there are a lot of Mexicans who have come north to work and earn more money than they could in their own country.
I sympathize with their ambitions, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask them to register as citizens if they’re going to come and work in the U.S. It’s not a very difficult procedure â€“ drawn out and tedious, perhaps, but nothing valuable comes easily.
By enforcing immigration laws, we also ensure that terrorists can’t get through our borders as easily.
Inasmuch as McCain plans to cut spending, I’m with him, but some of the other things he has stood behind give me the heebie-jeebies.
God bless, Kris. May God give us all wisdom in the voting booth!
I’ve read several posts where your comments contain the phrase “alien and stranger.” I think you might have left out a key word as it pertains to this issue. Our country is not against the alien and stranger. A quick look at our history and Lady Liberty and other famous ports of entry will tell you that. It’s the ILLEGAL alien and stranger that we are trying to send home and prevent from entering. It’s a national and economic security issue, and a matter of upholding the rule of law.
And one other thing…flipflopper he may seem, Romney is STILL pro-choice. He states on his web site (and vehemently explains and expounds further to Ted Kennedy in a youtube clip from a prior campaign debate) that he believes abortion to be the right choice in cases of rape, incest, or threat to mother’s health. He also states on his web site that this issue shouldn’t be mandated by federal judges (ie the Supreme Court). Hello!
I agree that the rule of law is important (1 Peter 2:13-14).
However, churches are not there to enforce the law. I think churches should welcoming all people (Leviticus 19:33-34), including people who have entered the country illegally. I think some evangelical churches have grown as a result of immigration.
How can Christians find a balance between welcoming immigrants, and obeying the law?
They obey the law unless it goes against Christ’s commands. We should know how God has a heart for the foreigner throughout the entirety of scripture, as well as for the poor and oppressed. Many immigrants fit this mold, so we are not called to despise them, degrade them, speak evil of them, voice our opinions of them getting the heck outta here, send nasty junk chain letters about them, become so ethnocentric to say they have to learn english (when we’re like one of the only countries in the world that is not multi-lingual).
Illegal or not, it shouldn’t matter to kingdom of God citizens. These are people whom we are called to minister to and show Christ’s love. Look on the bright side, it gives some of the people who are so full of American pride a chance in a sense go into all the nations. Immigrants are actually some of the most responsive people to the Gospel (so the studies say), so this should be a great opportunity to minister to them and show them Christ in word and deed.
By the way, short-term missions have destroyed missions. Long-term change requires long-term presence.
Quixote (great username, Senor),
Two pastes from the Romney website:
“As President, Governor Romney will promote a culture of life. Governor Romney believes that Roe v. Wade should be overturned so that the issue of abortion can be returned to the American people and their elected representatives at the state and federal level.”
“I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.” (Governor Mitt Romney, Boston Globe, Op-Ed, 7/26/05)
Basically, he now claims to be a states’ rights guy on this. I can live with that.
… Especially considering that McCain’s position is even worse: according to this site (http://www.ontheissues.org/John_McCain.htm) McCain is fairly soft on abortion and supports stem-cell and fetal tissue research, in addition to supporting abortion in the case of rape or incest. In 1999 McCain said no to repealing RvW, but then said he would repeal it in 2000. He’s no less a flip-flopper.
At least Romney is a penitent flip-flopper, not an equivocating one like Bill Clin– I mean, John McCain.
By the way, thanks, Denny, for allowing me to horde your meta for a moment. I was at DTS from ’97 to ’02, and remember seeing you there, though we obviously never became chummy. Best wishes to you. I like your blog …
Wow, I didn’t know that. Where are you now? Thanks for reading and commenting.
I’m not going to get in a debate over immigration, but I will say this: If the illegal immigrants were fleeing to our country because of religious persecution and were coming here to find freedom to worship our God, then it would be a different situation altogether.
As it is, they are primarily coming here to find financial freedom (and sending a significant portion of the money back to their own countrymen) and to do so illegally puts a burden on the rest of our citizens.
In addition, it’s not like the only law they break is in crossing the border. To come here illegally, they are forced to establish a life of illegality (not having or stealing social security numbers, not having mandatory car insurance, not paying taxes which would send the rest of us to jail, etc.) which is incovenient at best to law-abiding citizens and dangerous at worst.
I’m in Edinburgh, Scotland, doing a PhD in church history, on the origins of puritan spirituality. I’m hoping to finish my thesis by April, God willing. My family is in College Station while I’m finishing here. My dad’s an LSU grad, and my nephew is a senior there now, though I remain a faithful Aggie.
Take care …