Audio: Michelle and Laura talk GOP politics, endorsements and the maturing of Pat Robertson
posted at 10:35 am on November 8, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s good stuff any time the boss and Laura Ingraham get together. This time they cover the, ahem, maturing of Pat Robertson and the johnny-come-latelys on immigration enforcement.
Just to toss out a few thoughts related to the discussion of whether Rudy is the only Republican who can beat Hillary, according to Rasmussen Mike Huckabee has pulled to within 3 points of the Glacier. Even Ron Paul polls better against Hillary than against other Republicans. Leaders among the social con right have endorsed three different candidates in the GOP primary, the effect of which is probably that they haven’t truly endorsed any candidate.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Laura nails it.
If I’m s’posed to “mature” out of my world-view, I ain’t gonna grow up.
least1 on November 8, 2007 at 10:41 AM
I’m just a grumpy “mature” man, I guess.
omnipotent on November 8, 2007 at 10:43 AM
I will grow, but I’ll grow this way:
Ephesians 4:15
2 Peter 3:18
least1 on November 8, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Wasn’t I recently told that Huckabee was a nanny-stater?
amerpundit on November 8, 2007 at 10:48 AM
He is a nanny-stater. To me, he’s kind of the reverse of Romney. I’d vote for Romney for POTUS but not for president of the Southern Baptists. Huckabee, I might vote in for president of the SBC but not for POTUS unless he’s up against Hillary.
Bryan on November 8, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Is there any doubt that Giuliani has recruited Robertson to try to establish some credibility among some conservative evangelicals? And is there any doubt that Robertson’s followers will reject his endorsement of Giuliani? So, the Robertson endorsement is essentially meaningless.
Laserlawyer on November 8, 2007 at 10:55 AM
PLEASE use a better picture of Laura. She looks like Nicolas Cage in a wig and party dress.
km on November 8, 2007 at 10:55 AM
So, how scary would a Rudy/Huckabee ticket be for Clinton?
It seems that that’s been a pattern as of late. See: Dobson.
amerpundit on November 8, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Or, alternatively, a Mitt/Huckabee ticket?
amerpundit on November 8, 2007 at 10:58 AM
Good for both Rudy and Pat. Pat says, we deserved 9/11, and Rudy — as President of 9/11 — rescued us from it (and future ones). It’s a marriage made in hell.
Drum on November 8, 2007 at 10:58 AM
You have put your finger on one of the most glaring problems with the Robertson endorsement of Giuliani, and it’s a problem that may haunt Rudy down the road. Robertson did eventually recant that remark, but it also did make him one of the first idiotarians on earth.
Bryan on November 8, 2007 at 11:00 AM
I missed being able to talk to two of my socio-political heroes by thismuch during this chat. Got through, was put on hold, then heard Laura thank MM for appearing.
My point would have been this: We conservatives in Colorado had a candidate for national office suffer the same ignominy as the overlooked GOP candidate who was cast aside for Ahnold and others of the like that LIngraham and MMalkin brought up: Congressman Bob Schaffer (not CBS’s “Schieffer”) who had the nerve to honor his term limits pledge, then ran for Senate, had the endorsement of our likable GOP guv Bill Owens, only to have Owens rescind his endorsement in favor of political not-even-neophyte and household name Pete Coors. What did we get for our troubles after Coors failed to ignite the electorate of this formerly solidly red (as in the name: ‘Captain Scarlet’) state? A Dem senator, the road paved for a Dem majority in the state legislature, a new Dem guv, and the pleasure of turning the streets of our capitol city over(and probably, literally, a few police cars) to the “Recreate ‘68″ crowd next summer at the DNC! What a thank you gift…
Captain Scarlet on November 8, 2007 at 11:03 AM
But didn’t Pat hear that straight from God?/s
abinitioadinfinitum on November 8, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I think Pat simply wants to back a winner. The guy’s (Robertson) a businessman before anything else.
Drum on November 8, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Huckabee is not a nanny-stater. I’m not sure how that meme has gotten so prevalent around here, but if you actually follow his positions, his statements, and his rebuttals of incorrect and unfactual criticism, you’ll find that that he is a solid Reagan conservative who actually advocates Jeffersonian politics on the federal level. No he’s not a Ron Paul who’s nice and gets foreign policy — he does err on the side of “compassionate” conservatism, but he’s way more on the ball than Bush. And his FairTax campaign will be extremely beneficial for the future financial health of this country.
Jared White on November 8, 2007 at 11:17 AM
When you advocate using the power of the federal government to ban workplace smoking, that’s a bit nanny-statish.
What else will Huckabee do ‘for our own good?’
Slublog on November 8, 2007 at 11:22 AM
I must have missed the memo that all conservatives have to vote on the abortion issue.
terryannonline on November 8, 2007 at 11:24 AM
That was an excellent segment of talk radio. Laura made awesome points as usual, and Michelle was running right along side of her. Well done all around!
ThackerAgency on November 8, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Laura offered that Huck was a reasonable choice. Not sure if he would be tougher on immigration than Rudy. The abortion issue may weigh more heavily for Laura than for most Republicans and she may be overestimating what can be changed on that one issue.
dedalus on November 8, 2007 at 11:43 AM
I agree with you: Huckabee is notoriously weak, and he, just like Rudy, are liberal on illegal immigration.
Michelle was correct about questioning if Robertson’s endorsement is an asset to Rudy. Many of us Bible-believing Christians have long raised “red warning flags” and have expressed serious doctrinal concerns about Pat Robertson and his views on God, especially his mystical, irrational, subjective, and non-traditional views on God’s Revelation, ex. “God just spoke to me today…”
Whenever a professing Christian leader appeals to subjective, mystical experiences to justify their views, all of us Bible-believing Christians should be very concerned and worried. The Bible alone is the Word of God.
ColtsFan on November 8, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Robertson seems to be, surprisingly, a political realist (in the technical sense). I doubt that Giuliani is his dream candidate, either, but I think he truly comprehends the ruthlessness of the Clintons, and what a third term of their presidency will do to the long-term prospects of the Republican Party (and Evangelicals in particular).
To contrast within the opposition, the primary objective of an Obama presidency would be to advance liberal policies, while the primary objective of (a third) Clinton presidency would be to legislatively, bureaucratically, and judicially tilt the national playing field such that it will be virtually impossible for Republicans to ever again achieve political power. Period.
In other words, even if Giuliani were in political lock-step with the most leftist of Democrat candidates, he would be better for the future of Robertson and conservatives of any stripe than the Clintons, who want not just to govern liberally but to fundamentally change the nature of American politics in a way not seen since FDR. When your very survival is at stake, it’s not the time for perfectionism.
Blacklake on November 8, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Can you site something else, besides the government workplace non-smoking ban?
I hear that Huck is un-electable, then they bring up the one thing. Is there more negatives?
right2bright on November 8, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Not surprised that Ron Paul polls well against Hillary - they’re competing for the same anti-war Democrats…
omriceren on November 8, 2007 at 1:02 PM
We in the conservative movement have to get over ourselves. Take just two social issues, gay marriage and abortion. These issues will eventually be settled in the courts. It shouldn’t be the case, but welcome to 2007 America, where the spineless run for office and the whiney vote for them. So, a presidential candidate spending large amounts of valuable stump-speech time and agenda time on these issues means little really. Reagan ran on abortion as did Bush the elder and the current Bush. Abortion is still the law of the land last time I checked. We have to change hearts on this issue, which we are doing by the way. Gay marriage became a national issue because of a state court. It will be settled in the federal courts. Now, having stated that, I myself prefer a candidate with strong creds on these issues. But there is this thing out there called Islamic Fascism…sorry folks but this commands all my attention. Right after is immigration….then tax-reform(fair-tax)SSI reform and so on.
So here we are…there is no Reagan in the GOP field…no clear-cut conservative with the proper creds. What are we to do? Go third party and give the fifth column the presidency with our men and women in the combat zone and an enemy trying to annihilate us? Vote for someone based on a few social concerns while ignoring the major issue of our time…with the result being to again hand the fifth column the victory? There are those elections where you have to make decisions on more than just one level. This is one of those elections.
For me, a less than perfect and desirable repub is far batter than anyone on the left……..
ritethinker on November 8, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Unfortunately, yes. He’s bad on taxes, spending and immigration. Huckabee is a silver-tongued George W. Bush.
Slublog on November 8, 2007 at 1:10 PM
I wonder whether, back when Pat Robertson was running for President, Giuliani would have endorsed him? I seriously doubt it. Strange bedfellows indeed.
Laserlawyer on November 8, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Huck’s a squish on border/illegal immigration issues, possibly worse than Bush, he’s a tax squish and big spenda, also has abysmal ratings from the Club for Growth.
Bad Candy on November 8, 2007 at 1:29 PM
It’s just taken for granted that the majority of the black vote goes to the Democratic Party every election. But the black community rolls their eyes every time Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton come out of hiding to “represent the black community”. I’ve feared for a while that the Christian vote has been taken for granted within the Republican Party. And it looks like we now have our own Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton. We’ve got James Dobson making us cringe as he speaks for “the Christians” within the Republican Party and now we have Pat Robertson. I consider myself a hardcore Christian and neither of these people speak for me.
Joshua P. Allem on November 8, 2007 at 1:44 PM
That memo was only for the real ones ;)
MirCat on November 8, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Joshua,
I enjoyed taking a quick look at your neat website.
I listened with interest to your audio clip, “Tips for Christians debating Atheists.”
I agree with you that Type 2 Christians are nasty, irrational, disrespectful, (and most importantly: unChrist-like.
You have articulated other helpful points as well.
One disagreement I have with your audio clip, in my humble opinion, centers on the metaphysics and epistemology of the Type 1 atheist.
This is off-topic, but I just wanted to say I enjoyed your audio clip overall, with some reservations about the correct philosophical defense of Christianity.
ColtsFan on November 8, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Laura really annoys me.
Now it’s Fred!s fault that the “useful tool” endorses Rudy.
Was Fred! supposed to badmouth Robertson?
I agree that Roberson’s endorsement is a hinderance for Mayor 9-11.
omnipotent on November 8, 2007 at 2:51 PM
ColtsFan,
Thanks for posting the link to that debate. More christians and atheists should experience debates like this to expose the light on their own presuppositions.
Oops! Did I say the presup word? I exposed a bit of myself.
shick on November 8, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Yes. He. Is. Period.
When it comes to immigration, Hunckabee makes Rudy look like Tom Tancredo.
2Brave2Bscared on November 8, 2007 at 3:44 PM
Bryan, has MM been banned from Fox News? Haven’t seen her on the O Factor for a couple months.
RMCS_USN on November 8, 2007 at 3:49 PM
She quit the O’Reilly Factor. However, she still appears on other Fox News shows from time to time.
2Brave2Bscared on November 8, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Yeah GOP Presidential nominee Mike Huckleberry - that will really scare the Dems. Bryan you better wake up and greow up and learn that the President cannot outlaw abortion.
Hilts on November 8, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Oh snap! Questioning my conservatism! Aw, that’s ok. I spent a lot of time watching MTV when a teenager so I think that automatically takes some points off my total conservative percentage.
terryannonline on November 8, 2007 at 5:01 PM
And why is that? You gotta give me something more concrete than workplace smoking (something that some people, like my brother, are extremely allergic to, BTW)… As for taxes, F.A.I.R. T.A.X. Check it out. BTW, the few taxes he did raise while Governor he has already clearly explained the rationale behind that. I suggest you keep an open mind and actually find out what the facts are.
Jared White on November 8, 2007 at 5:34 PM
Wouldn’t question your conservatism. After reading through your blog, it seems like your position is well thought out and the writing is great.
dedalus on November 8, 2007 at 5:37 PM
You said what I’ve been thinking, ever-increasingly, for twenty-plus years… We can’t afford to lose to those who would give our country away wholesale and subject us to full socialism, communism, or sha’ria. I’m no more content with the deviant-marriage or abortion situations than Michelle, Laura, or anyone else here…, but sane, solution-oriented, sovereignty-conscious, genuinely patriotic citizens need to be, SOLIDLY and Firmly, ‘in control’ before ANY real change can even be debated among such people. The Lib-Dems need to be relegated to spectator status if we’re ever to return to that which our Founding Fathers created and our Forefathers, so valiantly, maintained, up to the point where our freaks on the fringes began to abuse our tolerant generosity.
On a different note…
Could we NOT refer to our guys as ‘Repubs’ and call them “Reps” to give it a ‘jaunty’ sound, as opposed to resembling the names which the Dems call us…? Thank you.
Rugged Individual on November 8, 2007 at 7:52 PM
I’m well aware of the facts, thank you.
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2006/05/mike_huckabee_is_a_liberal_a_c.php
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/06/30/News/323746.html
http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=2829&CMSCategoryID=19
Huckabee is not a conservative. Not even close.
2Brave2Bscared on November 8, 2007 at 9:07 PM
I thought Laura souded like a self-righteous, self proclaimed Joan of Arc and Michelle was slipping into that over inflected arrogant way she can speak sometimes, also. These women need to stay off each other’s shows, they reduce each other to cackling washateria gals trying to one up each other on who can denigrate the best.
The Jesus wigs are as irrelevant as their “Messiah”. The Republican party is not the party of Jesus of Nazareth. If anything, the opposite is true. The Founders were significantly influenced by deists like Franklin and Jefferson, even though the J-wigs have tried as earnestly to erase that fact as the leftists have tried to erase other tenants of American history.
After all, the J-wigs had nearly 1400 years to impose the “Bible” on citizens through government. It is called the Dark Ages.
Sometimes Laura can be an incredibly self-righteous person, and one of the most shameless self promoters on the radio. Her radio show became a month long self indulgent non-stop commercial for her latest Ann Coulter knock off. Her show is sometimes nothing more than her and her side kicks giggling like high schoolers cutting class.
It makes me think that even with talk radio and blogs, the Right does not have the kind of communicative power needed to achieve its goals (which by the way are not religious).
I was hoping Michelle was not a “praise Jesus” type, and I was under the impression that Allah Pundit was non-religious. Everyone on this site should read Infidel by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Then come back and listen to this audio.
revolution on November 9, 2007 at 1:18 AM