The GOP leader(less)ship is back at its favorite game: Herding conservative voters into the arms of “non-con” (neeocon) candidates for US President in 2008. As so often before, conservatives are being told what to think and what to fear - and this time, of course, it’s Hillary.
In an interview printed as an editorial of the Wall Street Journal, Richard Land, the Southern Baptist Convention’s representative in Washington DC was quoted by Naomi Schaefer Riley as saying that “with Hillary Clinton looming on the horizon, electability is a very important issue," continuing on by noting that "even among the unelectable" (like Brownback and Hunter) evangelicals can't make up their mind.
The editorial is basically a rundown of Land’s views on who in the republican party would make a good choice for US president according to evangelicals, who wouldn’t, and why. Schaefer Riley then editorializes in the last paragraph of her report about the interview:
“As he throws his weight around in the Republican primaries, trying to ensure a socially conservative candidate comes out on top, Mr. Land also knows the bottom line. Mrs. Clinton has announced that if she becomes president, the troops will be pulled out of Iraq within 90 days. To avoid that outcome, evangelical voters in this country might be willing to tolerate just about anything.”
So, there you have it. A new set up for installing another “lesser evil” at the helm of the nation Funny thing, that is, as evangelicals should by definition not vote for anything even remotely evil if they actually deserved their name, but, hey, you gotta do what you gotta do to stay in power or to throw your weight around, I suppose.
So, who is Land’s choice?
“Mitt Romney” (the double-talking, flip-flopping “avid hunter” who unlike Dick Cheney would luckily probably shoot his own foot before he managed to hit any external target) is “still a good possibility” he said.
Hmm.
Interesting that, from the GOP leadership’s view, the only conservative candidates who are worth electing (at least to conservatives who still believe the Republican party is “their” party) are decreed to be “unelectable.” It is always the windy ones, those who can be molded, those who change their rhetoric around whenever needed, who are declared to be “electable.”
Naturally, Republican cattle will feed werever their herders graze them, unless ...
Unless a real conservative like Ron Paul actually gets his message in front of enough people. Strangely, almost all who ever actually listen to Ron end up seriously considering the validity of his views, even though they may go against what people were trained to believe are the “hot button issues” in this election.
Just take the good folks with the “Health Care” T-Shirts who came to listen to Ron Paul at a New Hampshire stop. Watch how they listen while he talks in this YouTube clip. Not one of them actually asks a question about health care after listening to him.
It just isn’t that big a deal when you’re talking about whether this country will even exist any longer after neocon (or liberal) Bush-successors get done with their “NAU” (North American Union) program. Liberals’ only objections to this scheme are about labor or environmental issues. They don’t understand that, after the Constitution goes kaput, so will their rights to express liberal view - or any views for that matter.
The GOP leadership knows that if Ron Paul gets elected, they will utterly lose control of the white house, and they need control of the White House to push their NAU agenda.
That’s why Hillary beating Obama in the primaries is so important to them. They GOP would rather have Hillary win than a real conservative like the infamous "Congressman No."
