Posted on 01/06/2012 5:17:18 PM PST by Colofornian
A group of "evangelical heavyweights" will be meeting in Texas on Saturday in an attempt to form a coalition of evangelical Christian support for one Republican...
Reporter Paul Stanley of the Christian Post is reporting that Paul and Nancy Pressler of Brenham, Texas, have invited a group of evangelical leaders including Don Wildmon, the former chairman of the American Family Association, former presidential candidate Gary Bauer and Focus on the Family Founder James Dobson, among others, to their ranch "for the purpose of attempting to unite and come to a consensus on which Republican presidential candidate to support or which not to support."
...it is pretty clear which candidate will fall into the "not to support" category.
"If Republicans are going to put up a pro-family conservative against Mitt Romney, some decisions need to be made," said Bob Vander Plaats, head of The Family Leader in Iowa.
SNIP
Whether or not stopping Romney will be the focus of the meeting in Texas this weekend, it is clear that many evangelicals continue to be reluctant to support him. Steve Scheffler, president of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coaltion, told Daniel Burke of the Religion News Service that "Romney failed to convince evangelicals that he cares about their issues, particularly outlawing abortion and same-sex marriage."
SNIP
"Evangelicals have come to regard the presidency as a spiritually potent office," said Mark Silk, an expert on religion and politics at Trinity College in Hartford, Conn. "And the idea of electing someone who will use it on behalf of a religion they consider beyond the pale really bothers them."
Burke cites surveys indicating that as many as 15 percent of white evangelicals will refuse to vote for a Mormon. "...it could mean that millions of evangelicals stay home during the general election."
(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...
And when Romney had the chance to nomiate judges he only chose strict constructionsits, right?
Right?
Didn’t think so. Your boy has a record and it ain’t pretty.
“No argument from me on this point. I just don’t believe that if Republicans control Congress, they’ll allow him to place a Sotomayor or Kagan on the bench.”
Yep. Just like a G.O.P. congress kept “Dubya’s” spending in check.
Oh, wait a minute....
Didn’t see your tagline until after I posted, consider it knocked off.
Romney appointed liberals because he is a liberal, and he will get the judges that he wants.
I'm sorry. Terrible timing. Elvis left the building. I just returned. One of the sites I had open when I made the screen shot for you was about a impartial judicial panel that Romeny's camp claims he had to use, but the site pointed out that Romney wasn't bound anything and that the panel wasn't always there. And that Romney went way beyond the panel's recommendations. Basically, is it your suggestion that, facing a Democrat legislature, Romney was right in immediately appointing Democrat judges? Personally, if the guy won't fight for conservative values as a Massachusetts governor, then why should I believe he's going to fight for them as President?
I don't know how Romney supporters want to spin it (I'm not saying you are one).
Here's one choice tidbit. Romney failed to fill ten judicial vacancies before his term ended, leaving them to be filled by his Democrat successor, Deval Patrick.
I can't vouch for the truth of everything on this site. It's one of the first I found that appears to footnote its reference and to be detailed. You want liberal judges? Romney.
Sorry. Re-read and see that you're not one. I don't trust the GOP to force Romney to appoint conservatives to the bench. Romney's not a conservative and he has the political backbone of a flatworm.
Fair enough. Look, I sure as hell hope Romney isn't the nominee but right now I'd say there's about a 50/50 chance that he will be. Yes, I know 75% of Republicans don't like him but I expect that as the race tightens up, there's going to be an "anybody but Obama" sense of urgency that drives more support into his camp.
Here's another thing to consider: Scalia is 75. Kennedy is 75. Breyer is 73 and Ginsburg is 78. There's a good chance that the next President will be replacing at least one of these Justices --if not more. We can argue about what kind of judges a Romney Presidency might give us. I still believe that congressional Republicans will force him to the right. However, we know exactly what kind of judges Obama will give us; young, liberal activists.
We barely hold SCOTUS. With Romney, at least we'd have a fighting chance to keep it. God forbid Obama gets to replace Scalia or even Kennedy. We'd lose the high court and that's it. If not mortally wounded, conservatism would be set back for years.
“I still believe that congressional Republicans will force him to the right.”
You do not base that belif on anything tangible since recent history does not support any such thing (see Bush and Medicare prescription drugs, Bush NCLB, Bush nation-building) they will cave so fast to any pro-abort pro-gay pos that Romney wants it will make your head spin.
“We barely hold SCOTUS. With Romney, at least we’d have a fighting chance to keep it. God forbid Obama gets to replace Scalia or even Kennedy. We’d lose the high court and that’s it. If not mortally wounded, conservatism would be set back for years.”
And I am telling you that with a Romney nomination, and a choice between those two liberals, the court is already lost.
Harriet Miers is a good example. Bush wanted her on the high court. Congressional Republicans said, "hell no!"
Not even if they had an IMPECTABLE Conservative rating?
Just what could POSSIBLY influence a SANKE DANCER politically?
“Not even if they had an IMPECTABLE Conservative rating?”
No, because any of the three are clearly insane.
“Just what could POSSIBLY influence a SANKE DANCER politically?”
Don’t know, don’t wanna know.
I have a question for you. You have to pick ONE of the following for the nomination;
A center-left Catholic or Protestant who is soft on social and environment issues or a rock-ribbed conservative, the complete opposite of Obama, but he’s a mormon.
I’m pretty sure I know which one you will pick but who knows, you might surprise me.
Why the LAST one; of course!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.