Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Perfect Strangers; or Even Stranger Bedfellows...

Yeah, I like the second title better as well.... It almost hints at homoeroticism...
It seems that, in an effort to appeal "main stream" and "in touch," the so-called "moral majority" is crawling up the ass of Republicans to never-before-seen darkness. Wasn't it just a few months ago that the right-wing nuts were "threatening" to back a third-party candidate if no "true conservative" stepped out from the shadows? It seems that realization has seeped into their brains... Pat Robertson, founder of the "Christian Coalition" has decided to place his bet on Guiliani.

So let's see what we have here: a pro-gay-rights, pro-choice, gun-control-backing candidate being "backed" by an anti-gay-rights, anti-abortion, pro-assasination-of-Chavez pastor... Let me ask you, why is it so much more important to "defeat Hillary" than it is to stand by values you claim to hold so very dear? What does Hillary Clinton support, or stand for, that is so much more "anti-Christian" than Guiliani?

Do they lack that much faith in their voting-block status, that they're willing to compromise on the "abominations" just to keep Hillary from winning? Or is it just that they realized the rest of the country was laughing at them when they threatened to back a third-party candidate?

Can someone explain to me what the wing-nuts are really thinking here?

From the article:

"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 during a news conference with Giuliani in Washington.

[...]

Giuliani is best known for leading New York in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Shortly after 9/11, Robertson released a statement in which he said the attacks occurred because Americans had insulted God and lost the protection of heaven by allowing abortion and "rampant Internet pornography."

Robertson made no mention of his differences with Giuliani on social issues in Wednesday's statement.

"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.[...]
Of course, all this really does is expose the "moral majority" for what it really is: a political movement, not a religious one. Otherwise, Robertson wouldn't be so quick to back a backer of the abominations of his lord and savior...

3 comments:

DaBich said...

Could be he's choosing the lesser of two evils? lol

I WON'T vote for Hillary. She's ... call it intuition...
EVIL!

Gives women a bad name.

FCSuper said...

I was going to comment on rampant hippocracy in religion and government, but the previous post got me wondering the state of mind of the general population. For starters, Pat would never support a democrat of any type whatsoever, so it's not the less of two evils, but rather just knowing you are evil and sticking with it. ;)

Jason Hughes said...

Dabich: Evil? Really?

I really need to do an in-depth post about Hillary... I have questions and some nagging doubts about whether she's the one who will get my vote, but... :D Well, I guess until we can get into it more deeply, I suppose I'll let you get away with the "evil" label... :D

FC: I love that last statement!!