Religious Rupture, Not Rapture, Regarding Rudy

The Council for National Policy got together in Salt Lake City last wknd. An earlier take on the Council, from this very web log (quote from Mother Jones):

The Council for National Policy—a group that holds meetings for right-wing leaders, once dubbed “the most powerful conservative group you’ve never heard of”—was founded in 1981 as a project of top John Birch Society figures. Its members included Rushdoony, Gary North, Tim LaHaye, former Reagan aide Gary Bauer, and activist Paul Weyrich, who famously aimed to “overturn the present power structure of this country.”

Make no fucking mistake about it: These people are serious, they are powerful, and an organization like Blackwater fits right into their plans. Note the connection between Erik Prince's father, Edgar, & Gary Bauer (from Blackwater Runs Red):

The elder Prince was widely known for his close association with anti-choice crusader Gary Bauer. Bauer was a domestic policy advisor in the Reagan White House before succeeding Jerry Regier (a former Reagan official, as well) for the leadership role of the Family Research Council (FRC) in 1988. With Edgar's help, Bauer put the FRC on the map.

According to the NYT, some of the evangelical power brokers in SLC had an extra super-secret meeting, on the subject of Rudy "The Catholic" Giuliani & his lead in the polls.

The participants said that the group chose the qualified term “consider” because it had not yet identified an alternative candidate, but that it was largely united in its plans to bolt the party if Mr. Giuliani, the former New York mayor, became the nominee. [...] Gary L. Bauer, a Christian conservative political advocate who was a Republican primary candidate eight years ago, said that, speaking by phone to the meeting, he urged the group to proceed with caution. “I can’t think of a bigger disaster for social conservatives, defense conservatives and economic conservatives than Hillary Clinton in the White House,” Mr. Bauer said. He added, “But I do believe there are certain core issues for the Republican Party — low taxes, strong defense and pro-life — and if we nominate someone who is hostile on one of those three things it will blow up the G.O.P.” [...] Participants in the group that endorsed the resolution said they had reached their position after hearing an assessment of the state of the Republican primary from Mr. Perkins, who acts as a point man in Washington for the movement. Mr. Perkins told them that Mr. Giuliani could plausibly win the primary if he carried Florida, which has many conservative Christian voters, and that now was the best chance to stop any momentum behind his campaign.

Old fool James C. Dobson (see a scathing analysis of his son Ryan's website) cranked out a column for the Times on the extra super secret meeting:

Reports have surfaced in the press about a meeting that occurred last Saturday in Salt Lake City involving more than 50 pro-family leaders. [...] Although I was neither the convener nor the moderator of the meeting, I’d like to offer several brief clarifications about its outcome and implications. [...] After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous. The other issue discussed at length concerned the advisability of creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans do indeed abandon the sanctity of human life and other traditional family values. Though there was some support for the proposal, no consensus emerged. Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent or the other leaders gathered in Salt Lake City, I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. [Go fuck yourself, you hate-filled Yankee Taliban. — Ed.] Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed. [...] The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday, for example, that supporters of traditional family values are rapidly “splintering.” That is not true. The near unanimity in Salt Lake City is evidence of much greater harmony than supposed. Admittedly, differences of opinion exist among us about our choices for president. That divergence is entirely reasonable, now just over a year before the national election. It is hardly indicative of a “splintering” of old alliances. If the major political parties decide to abandon conservative principles, the cohesion of pro-family advocates will be all too apparent in 2008.

On the other hand, Lew Rockwell questions Dobson's sincerity:

I have long thought that the Christian Right would have no trouble supporting the Rudester because he is as pro-war and pro-police state as they are. And James Dobson won't be an exception, after he is promised patronage. That is the point of his protest. And now John Hagee says on TV that he can endorse Giuliani--despite pledging never to support a pro-choice candidate--because Rudy is more pro-Israel than Hillary.

On the Catholic front, from Taki's Underwear Drawer:

And that, I’m afraid, is frightening confirmation of the extent to which politically active conservative Catholics in America have become enslaved to the Republican Party. If Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination, we will hear dozens of reasons why Catholics should vote for him. Some will declare a vote for Giuliani a positive good, deciding that his support for the war in Iraq (and, more broadly, the “War on Terror") is more important than his position on abortion. Others will make the (dubious) argument that he’s still more likely to appoint pro-life judges than any potential Democratic candidate. Still others will tell us that, of course, Giuliani is hardly better than a Democrat, but the alliance of pro-lifers with the Republican Party ”necessarily places voters in the situation of in effect having to buy a whole political package”--even when that package now includes abortion “rights.” And finally, and most pathetically, we’ll be told that pro-abortion “conservatives” are our most faithful allies in the fight against “Cultural Marxism"--as if Rudy and his ilk aren’t Cultural Marxists themselves.

"Cultural Marxists." Some of these bead-rattlers are just plain nuts. Does too much fish on Fridays lead to mercury poisoning & brain damage? From the AP:

Viguerie would not give specifics of the proposal or reveal additional names of participants, but said President Bush "would not have been elected in '04 without the people in that room." "There is such jaundiced feelings about any promises or commitments from any Republican leaders," he said in a phone interview. "You could almost cut the anger and the frustration with a knife in that room it's so strong. Because they don't know what else to do, they're talking third party." [...] The participants were in Salt Lake City for a separate meeting of the secretive Council for National Policy, a group of conservative business, religious and political leaders that was co-founded years ago by Tim LaHaye, author of the "Left Behind" series of books. Vice President Dick Cheney flew into the city Friday to address the group, according to The Salt Lake Tribune. Christian conservatives, who hold considerable sway in the Republican Party, have been deeply unhappy about the field of GOP presidential candidates. Dobson has said he wouldn't support Giuliani, calling the former New York mayor an "unapologetic supporter of abortion on demand." Dobson has also rejected former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson as wrong on social issues, and wouldn't back John McCain because of the Arizona senator's opposition to a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. [...] "Conservatives have been treated like a mistress as long as any of us can remember," Viguerie said. "They'll have lots of private meetings with us, tell us how much they appreciate it and how much they value us, but if you see me on the street please don't speak with me." A third-party run would be a long shot, requiring millions of dollars and challenges to ballot access. Such a bid could prove disastrous for the GOP by splitting the vote. Richard Land, head of the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention, was not at the meeting. But he said no one floating the idea of a third party thinks there's much chance the candidate would win. He considers the proposal a reaction to "moguls of the Republican establishment" who think conservative Christians will support the GOP no matter what. "A lot of them won't hold their nose and do it," Land said.

Looks as if the Republicans can't depend on the cultural conservatives, conservative Catholics, religious reactionaries & so forth for too much longer. Maybe a Ron Paul-Alan Keyes third-party ticket is the answer. Just Another Blog™ would love to see that. And if Sen. Clinton gets the Democratic nod, maybe a fourth, leftist, ticket. If nothing else it could lead to the end of the Electoral College. And (fingers crossed here) political violence in the streets. Only 13 mos. to go, get your guns & ammo now. You won't want to be the last one looting the gun store.