McCain advisor: Christian right “a serious problem”?
posted at 4:11 pm on March 18, 2008 by Allahpundit
No context whatsoever provided so we’re left to wonder in what sense they’re problematic. Problematic because they’re leery of McCain and might not turn out in force in November? Problematic because they’re the “agents of intolerance” Maverick once accused them of being? Problematic because they’re known for asserting that the U.S. engineered the AIDS virus and may just have let the attack on Pearl Harbor happen to justify a colonialist war in the Pacific? Oh, sorry; he said Christian right.
My advice to McCain: Give a speech perfunctorily condemning every freaky thing any Christian preacher has ever said while embracing the preachers themselves on grounds that to do otherwise wouldn’t fully reflect “the American experience.” Be sure to hint that anyone who disagrees is sort of a racist.
Eagleburger was trying to have fun. He was mocking his fellow panelist Kurtzer, sitting to the left of the others (“where he belongs”), and making noises and funny, impatient faces, while Ann Lewis was speaking. But more importantly, he did not mince his words. In a response to a question about the religious right, an important component of the Republican coalition, he said that it was, indeed “a serious problem,” and reminded his listeners that he now lives in Charlottesville, surrounded by such people that he needs to fight.
Meanwhile, the left is in a froth over McCain accidentally substituting “Al Qaeda” for “the Mahdi Army” in something he said about Iran training jihadis in Iraq. Exit question: Do you really want to play the “words mean things!” game today of all days, nutroots? Really?
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
According to this, Mac was correct:
Buy Danish on March 18, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Eh, I’m not really worried about this. McCain is certainly not the ideal candidate but in comparison to the other 2 he’s definitely preferrable. Other than that, I’m sitting back and enjoying the fireworks from the Left at the moment…
JohnAGJ on March 18, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Accursed God-Botherers. They’re tearing this party apaaaaarrrtt!
Or, McVain happens to see anyone that doesn’t see the world exactly like he does as “problematic.” Do we have to elect this twit?
TheUnrepentantGeek on March 18, 2008 at 4:20 PM
I don’t tend to give the Maverick™ the benefit of the doubt, but I think that advisor was probably speaking of turnout, which could be problematic.
Slublog on March 18, 2008 at 4:22 PM
IMO, McCain has a decent chance of picking up dem. Jewish voters. However, they’re secular libs who fear the religious right. So his rep. pandered to them.
At a relig. Jewish gathering, he wouldn’t have said such a thing. These Jews are typically conservative voters and apprec. the relig. right’s moral assistance to Israel.
I thought McCain was actually in Israel today speaking to American jews (voters) living there. Bet there wasn’t one mention made of the “problem.”
JiangxiDad on March 18, 2008 at 4:25 PM
I reckon that I’m one of the Christian Right. Somehow I was pulling for Romney. How can this be? I’m not supposed to be tolerant of Mormons, or anyone else for that matter. You just better be believin’ Jesus or you are going straight to the Huffington Post.
It really is going to hurt punching that card for McCain in Nov.
kirkill on March 18, 2008 at 4:28 PM
CONSERVATIVE, CHRISTIAN RIGHT: John McCain, a serious problem !!!”
stenwin77 on March 18, 2008 at 4:30 PM
As I watch Billary and Barry go at it and watch Barry squirm his way through the mess he hath made, I think it’ll be quite easy to pull that McCain lever this fall, thank you very much.
Hoodlumman on March 18, 2008 at 4:31 PM
As a member of the religious right, I’m destined to be unhappy this November. Now whether I’m unhappy at home, or unhappy in the polling booth depends on what McCain has to say between now and then.
This doesn’t help.
MarkTheGreat on March 18, 2008 at 4:34 PM
Conservatives are also a problem.
dogsoldier on March 18, 2008 at 4:35 PM
McCain and his camp of intolerant bigots who are gleeful that they can stick it to the religious right are making a big mistake here. There has been a sort of truce with the understanding that the GOP is stuck with most God-awful candidate possible (pun intended).
McCain’s camp all but comes out and speaks about Christians the way Jeremiah Wright speaks about white people. It’s in Triceratops best interest to keep his mouth shut and pretend he is tolerant of the religious right because they will most likely vote for him given what the Dems are putting up. A few more of these events where the intolerance, bigotry, and hatred emerge and the Christian right will stay home. They (we) care about this stuff and aren’t in the mood to be ignored so McCain can pander to the moderate Dem.
highhopes on March 18, 2008 at 4:36 PM
It’s obvious that he’s referring to that fact that the Jews don’t like the Christian right. McCain only encourages the worst excesses of the Christian right by getting the endorsements of Hagee and Parsley. He shouldn’t need to do that.
ninjapirate on March 18, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Nominate McCain. Called religious leaders “agents of intolerance.” Can McCain win without the religious right? No way, no more than Dems can win without the black vote.
This is why we are called the Stupid Party.
Hello President Obama.
Angry Dumbo on March 18, 2008 at 4:41 PM
I agree. Why in the world couldn’t he have said something conciliatory about the religious right being concerned about children and the family?
This is what the article said:
I’d love to know why he thinks he needs to fight us and exactly what he wants to fight about?
INC on March 18, 2008 at 4:45 PM
I’m not voting for this guy. I’m going to write-in Mitt.
cjs1943 on March 18, 2008 at 4:49 PM
The other day McCain was talking about the R’s who ran on an anti-illegal alien policy went down to defeat. Today his campaign goes after the religious right.I would like to add that a huge number of conservative Christians are some of the most pro-Israel citizens in our country. I wonder if Eagleburger knows or cares about that.
What a great candidate we have. I wonder which aspect of the conservative base will get the shaft tomorrow?
INC on March 18, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Ha! What a goober this guy is. He was waxing on about the horror story that is Rush Limbaugh not long ago.
I don’t know in what sense he meant it, but McCain has a big problem. If the Christians don’t show up to do the heavy lifting for the campaign, he will have no footsoldiers. It isn’t the Country Clubbers, or the Independents, or the Moderates that form the army for a campaign. It really is their turn though, and it’s really their candidate, so have at it guys.
thatcher on March 18, 2008 at 4:50 PM
…and reminded his listeners that he now lives in Charlottesville, surrounded by such people that he needs to fight.
OOH, CHRISTIANS! ICK!
GET THEM AWAY!
Shoo, shoo.
Gerard on March 18, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Good point. They can man the phones, walk the precincts and hold the signs.
INC on March 18, 2008 at 4:53 PM
I would imagine that he meant it would be a problem to convince the religious right to turn out. Not sticking up for Straight Talk’s record on intolerance, I’m just saying that I don’t think he’d send his top guy out there to grind some lemons in the eyes of the base right now. It wouldn’t make any sense.
NeoconNews.com on March 18, 2008 at 4:53 PM
The word is that John McCain’s reception at a major conference in New Orleans this month wasn’t very good.
McCain’s remarks.
http://www.policycounsel.org/66513/66445.html
FYI: Over at Daily Kos they refer to this group as “the council of sith lords”.
gabriel sutherland on March 18, 2008 at 4:54 PM
Why run the risk of cramping your hand? Just mark Obama.
NeoconNews.com on March 18, 2008 at 4:55 PM
I always vote a straight Republican ticket but this time I’m leaving the president blank and then voting Republican the rest of the way down the ballot.
Rose on March 18, 2008 at 4:55 PM
It is not just the left nor the frothing that noticed it, and he did it several times, until Joe whispered in his ear and he himself basically said that he was wrong. I guess figuring that Joe knows more than he does about such things. Some “accident”. It is just lucky for him that Joe was there to “Senior sit” or who knows how many “accidents” Juan would have had. Shiite Iran may have furnished some small selective support to some Sunni Al Q, some have claimed that, on a “case by case”, but that is not what Juan said.
Not knowing the difference between whom Iran is mainly supporting, Al Qaeda (Sunni) or the Mahdi Army(Shiite) is roughly the equivalent of a British politician not knowing the difference between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland. Any politician who has so much trouble with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites, and especially one who’s main claim is his experience and expertise in this area, at this advanced stage in the WOT, is not exactly real fit to assume the office of President of
America del Nortethe United States.Am I being too harsh? No, I don’t think so, not when being a foreign policy master is Juan’s big claim.
And words certainly do mean things. I suppose words like Americans being too lazy to pick lettuce even for $50 an hour don’t mean anything either and were probably just some “accident” too?
MB4 on March 18, 2008 at 4:55 PM
McCain really wants the Christian Right to support his campaign. It’s crucial to getting out the vote.
The last thing a Republican needs is 5 million Republicans advocating they stay home on election day.
gabriel sutherland on March 18, 2008 at 4:56 PM
Why in the world should we be talking about the Religious right, words mean things while the Liberals are stewing in
their Obamaination,let the Liberals get distracted by this!
I mean there was what,4-5 months of Religion bashing of Mitt
Romney and now it appears McCain is going to endure this,
you got to be kidding me,how about the Republicans stay away
from the Religious melee and leave that mess to the Democrats!
And I’m wondering when some smart unbiased Liberal media
talking head is going to figure out how to draw the Republicans into the fray of Obama mess,because you know how it goes,the next thing ya know Republicans are going to
get blamed for it!
Words mean things,AQ or Mahdi Army,whoopee do,ISLAMOFACHISTS
there problem solved!
And for McCain,keep the message going and don’t get sucked
into the Liberal storm of Political Party destruction!
canopfor on March 18, 2008 at 4:57 PM
I read it over at dKos and came to the same conclusion as you did.
Almost sounds like Lieberman misheard what McCain said or maybe it sounded confusing and he just cleared that up.
Connie on March 18, 2008 at 4:57 PM
MB4: I agree. It’s not JUST a gaffe. The subject was his trump card. You’ve got to play those cards wisely.
gabriel sutherland on March 18, 2008 at 4:58 PM
I appreciate your effort to tone it down, but that idea doesn’t fit with what was reported: “a serious problem,” and “surrounded by such people that he needs to fight.”
INC on March 18, 2008 at 4:59 PM
So why is it that I don’t just go join the Constitution Party? It sure looks a lot more like a Christian Right Party to me.
kirkill on March 18, 2008 at 5:00 PM
I agree with both you and NeoconNews. I don’t think a top political adviser would go out and say the Christian Right is a problem in the sense of perception, etc.
It’s true that it’ll be a problem to get them out and voting, and that’s most likely what he meant.
amerpundit on March 18, 2008 at 5:02 PM
But why the statement regarding “such people that he needs to fight”? And why would he be talking about Republican turnout to a group that had Obama and Clinton people there?
If it were a Republican conference, it would make sense to discuss turnout. However, this sounds like each was trying to make the case for their candidate, and to discuss turnout in this context does not make sense.
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:07 PM
Sounds like plenty of context. Establishment Republicans, well represented here at HA, have been at war with the Christian right and conservative base since Reagan formed the coalition. McCain is not the source of the disease, only a swarthy symptom of it we shall be rid of this fall.
If he only had enough confidence to give up his Senate seat so something good would come out of this.
Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:09 PM
The Christian right is Israel’s best friend. Conservative Jews like Netanyahu know this.
Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:12 PM
This explanation seems more likely than that of concern for turnout.
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Odd. He’s always struck me as being a bit on the pale side.
Blacklake on March 18, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Is he talking about fighting run-of-the-mill Christian Right members? Or is he talking about having to fight the Christian Right leaders around him that may be persuading their congregations not to vote for McCain?
It’s not exactly a secret strategy that he’s going to have to fight to get the C.R. on his side. That’s like saying,” You know, if Clinton takes the nomination by SDs, we might have to work to get Obama supporters to vote for us.”
McCain’s been trying to woo the Christian Right to his side since the campaign really began. Here’s an article in the Boston Globe back before he was even officially a candidate.
amerpundit on March 18, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Allah:
I wish I had the cite handy, but, a few months ago, there were documents discovered in Iraq showing that the Iranians were/are supporting both Shia and Sunni groups, trying to create as much chaos as possible for Tehran to exploit. I think these documents were found when we captured some IRGC officers, but, in any event, Mac wasn’t mistaken.
irishspy on March 18, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Could you please plainly and specifically explain what you mean by “Establishment Republicans”?
It is a term I’ve never really paid attention to before.
I googled it, but at a quick glance, it appears to me that half the people that have used it mean it to be the opposite of what the other half mean. I’m confused.
I’m leaving now, but if you can define that for me, I’ll appreciate it later tonight. Thanks.
LegendHasIt on March 18, 2008 at 5:18 PM
I’m one of the Catholics that Hagee says is going to Hell. Reagan sold his soul to Jerry Falwell, big reason why I’m an independent, and not a Republican anymore. Trying to instill religious values into politics is as unconscionable as income redistribution. If McCain wins this without the religious right, it’ll be a good thing. I think there are enough conservatives who want nothing to do with social conservativism, conservative independents like myself(actually I subscribe to neo-libertarianism these days), and bluedog Democrats that I think the religious right will be insignificant anyway..I care way more how conservative we are in foreign relations and free market economics than about the government’s policing teenage sex and how they deal with the consequences(individual rights)The religious right always seems to be telling everyone else how they should be having sex or even not having it at all. Good luck with that. I hope the religious right realizes they look pretty foolish to everyone else when they maintain the world is only six thousand years old, and Adam commuted to work on a Tyranasaurus Rex a la Fred Flintstone…All this has been fun to watch, especially with the empty suit and the empty pantsuit…
adamsmith on March 18, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Oh, and anyone else that wants to weigh in on giving me a consensus definition on what “Establishment Republican” means; Thanks.
LegendHasIt on March 18, 2008 at 5:20 PM
I love it when you’re in full righteous snark mode. I’d like to see what you and Mark Levin could come up with if you co-hosted his radio show.
Anton on March 18, 2008 at 5:20 PM
amerpundit,
I know it’s no secret, however, when competing with the Dems for votes I don’t come up with that as the likely context behind the statement.
Also, he spoke of living where he’s is surrounded by those he needs to fight. When I apply Occam’s razor to the topic, it simply sounds as if he doesn’t like the religious right at all, especially when you read the article and the writer gives you these clues. My emphasis below.
The writer states his thesis (mouth gets McCain in trouble) and then backs it up with a couple of minor points before telling you here’s the major reason (religious right is a serious problem). I’ve written numerous things in my life following a similar format.
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:28 PM
You are correct. Half the people use it to describe conservative Republicans and the other half use it to describe liberal RINOs. I see them as atheist/agnostic blue-blood party dwellers who don’t like Jews, Christians, or conservatives in the party, i. e. Northeastern liberal Republicans and John McCain and his minions. They are only interested in power, prestige, and the economic powers of government (taxes, regulation, etc.)
Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Eagleburger said that? Oh yeah, why should I care what that pompous RINO thinks?
David in ATL on March 18, 2008 at 5:33 PM
If I were going to define “Establishment Republican” I would take the words right out of the Republican Leadership Council website. IMO, it’s the revenge of the Rockefeller Republicans. (My emphasis).
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:34 PM
I can see why the Christian right would be a problem for McCain, given that they’re usually, when not hoodwinked by corpulent, bass-playing confidence men, pretty conservative.
Maybe they’re a problem because McCain’s drawn the lines in the sand against them every chance he gets.
Am I the only one who doesn’t see how any candidate can win, at this point? Has the time come for the triumph of a third-party? Constitutions? Libertarians? Greens?
emailnuevo on March 18, 2008 at 5:35 PM
P.S. That’s dead-on. And, like Montezuma’s Revenge, this won’t end well, either.
emailnuevo on March 18, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Well, as a member of the Christian right and I suppose, the vast right wing conspiracy, I guess I’m trouble for everyone.
INC on March 18, 2008 at 5:40 PM
“Establishment Republican” means the lefties in the party. They used to be called “Rockfeller Republicans” until everyone forgot who Rockefeller was, but for those of us who remember, he was a total and complete asshat.
They are the ones whose major quest in life is to kick the grassroots out of the party cuz they are so very….icky, peasant types. Whitman, and Danforth fall safely into this group. And yes, most of them come out of the NE which is another good reason why we should cede the NE to Canada so everyone can be happy. “Rockefeller Canucks” Kind of has a ring to it.
thatcher on March 18, 2008 at 5:57 PM
The media has one mission in this election and that is to make sure a Dem gets back in the White House. They will twist and/or amplify any statement by a Republican candidate or staffer or even supporter to drive a wedge between some groups and the R candidate, McCain.
We all need to settle down and don’t go off half-cocked on things like this. AND McCain and his staff need to suck it up and resist their dangerous little addiction to media attention and “maverickness”.
Now is the time to turn the Dem’s tricks on them… say everything very carefully and thoughtfully. Cool the wisecracks and the off-the-cuff insider leaks that make you feel important, because they could sink your party.
What do we have to hide – not a thing! We simply have to avoid giving the MSM any opening to tell lies about us, which they have proven over and over that they will do without shame. Our opponents, through their own hypocrisy, now find themselves in some of the straights where they usually rely on the media to place us. Be quiet, enjoy their discomfort, and let them keep talking, and dancing.
drunyan8315 on March 18, 2008 at 6:46 PM
Why repeat what you did by voting for McCain in the primary? You wanted a media-picked candidate, and you’ll get one in Obama. Republicans nominating McCain assured that.
spmat on March 18, 2008 at 6:47 PM
I despise McCain, but he has us over a barrel and he knows it. He’s a jerk, but the two Dems are anathema.
sulla on March 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Thanks for the input on “Establishment Republicans”.
Seems to me that it is a term that we should avoid using since it is used so equivocally. Given that ‘real’ conservatives are the ones that established and built the Republican Party, the term should be applied to them; But just like the RINOS have hijacked the Republican party, they have also hijacked a term that SHOULD be obviously NOT them.
Of course now that the RINOs have successfully completed their hijacking of the Republican Party, those of us who used to accurately call them RINOs are now the RINOs ourselves.
It is all so confusing.
Just to be clear, from now on, I think I’m going to just stick with using the terms Common Sense Conservatives (without representation), Mediocrats, and leftist loons.
LegendHasIt on March 18, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Agreed.
Valiant on March 18, 2008 at 8:45 PM
What? You mean the endorsement of Hagee’s death cult didn’t work? Of course if I was Mormon I would have trouble discounting Hagee being that he is Jesus’s brother.
LevStrauss on March 18, 2008 at 10:22 PM
The only good thing here is that there’s so little context actually supplied, and the media is so bad about getting the story straight if there’s any chance to bash the religous right, that it may not be anywhere near as bad as it sounds.
Of course, it sounds believable just because it sounds like the sort of things McCain has said before.
So, it’s plausible, but I’m not convinced it’s accurate.
theregoestheneighborhood on March 19, 2008 at 1:42 AM