On Friday’s "Early Show," co-host Julie Chen and reporter Chip Reid analyzed the Values Voters Conference in Washington this weekend and how conservative Evangelicals "are deeply frustrated because they can't find a Republican candidate they can coalesce around," according to Reid. He went on to exclaim that "There's one Republican candidate, though, who really has some Evangelicals dispirited. Rudy Giuliani, because of his support for abortion rights."
In order to emphasize the dire circumstances of the Republican Party, Reid continued by discussing how a third party candidate backed by the religious right could, "... allow Clinton to cruise to victory..." and that "Many Evangelicals say forming a third party to oppose Giuliani is a prescription for Republican disaster."
While there certainly has been division within the Republican Party, the mainstream media has consistently minimized or glossed over Democratic divisions, as in this exchange between "Early Show" co-host Harry Smith and "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer when analyzing the September 26 Democratic debate in New Hampshire:
BOB SCIEFFER: The headline of this debate last night, Harry, it seems to me, was other candidates now confirm that Hillary Clinton is the front-runner. They know it, she knows it, and they all acted that way. You know, all the little barbs were directed at her but they were very, very polite.
HARRY SMITH: Yeah, I mean It was like fish hooks. It was really not -- nobody took out the spear. Nobody took out the heavy weaponry. Everybody said leading up to this, if something's going to happen, these other candidates are going to have to draw blood. It's almost like they never drew their weapons.
In contrast, Reid and Chen concluded their analysis of the plight of conservative Christians on this note:
CHEN: And just how difficult would it be for -- to get everyone on the same page and rally behind one candidate?
REID: Extraordinarily difficult.
Here is the full transcript of the 7:42am segment:
JULIE CHEN: "This morning in Washington, thousands of Christian conservatives are gathering for a conference that is vital to them and the Republicans running for president. CBS News Capitol Hill Correspondent Chip Reid is inside the Washington Hilton Hotel. Chip, good morning."
CHIP REID: "Well good morning, Julie. There are expected to be about 2,500 leading Christian Evangelicals here for this conference this weekend. They are enormously powerful. By some estimates, Christian Evangelicals make up 25% of the electorate. But right now, they are deeply frustrated because they can't find a Republican candidate they can coalesce around, or as one participant put it, they can't find anybody who rings their bell. For decades, Evangelical Christians have been a driving force in the Republican Party, helping propel Ronald Reagan, and later, George W. Bush to the White House. But in this election, no Republican has yet earned the Evangelical seal of approval. The latest CBS News poll shows just how unsettled Evangelical support is. Fred Thompson leads by a small margin, but there's no clear front-runner."
AMY WALTER: "You're looking at a pretty dispirited base of people, pretty disappointed with the current field."
REID: "There's one Republican candidate, though, who really has some Evangelicals dispirited. Rudy Giuliani, because of his support for abortion rights. Tony Perkins is the chief organizer of the Values Voters Conference."
TONY PERKINS: "We're going to stand our ground. If that means we've got to look for a third-party candidate who's pro-life, then that's what we'll do."
REID: "And Perkins is not alone. A number of leading Evangelicals have threatened to abandon the Republican Party if Giuliani is the nominee."
RUDY GIULIANI: "I'm not running for religious office."
REID: "Giuliani, who leads the Republican field in most national polls, says Evangelicals should support him, because he has the best chance of defeating the leading Democrat, Hillary Clinton."
GIULIANI: "I run the most competitive against Hillary Clinton by a big, big margin."
REID: "But here's the problem for Giuliani -- if he's the nominee and Evangelicals follow through on their threat to form a third party, that would split the Republican vote. Some analysts predict that would allow Clinton to cruise to victory, much as her husband did in 1992. In his first race for the White House, when third-party candidate Ross Perot split the Republican Party. Many Evangelicals say forming a third party to oppose Giuliani is a prescription for republican disaster."
RICHARD CIZIK: "They want to prevent the worst candidate, the alternative, in this case, Hillary Clinton, from being elected. But a third-party candidacy will probably ensure a Clinton back in the White House."
REID: "And all the major Republicans will be here today and tomorrow to try to convince this group that he's the one. We'll see, Julie."
CHEN: "Yeah, we sure will. Well Chip, what is the group trying to accomplish at this summit?"
REID: "What they really want to do more than anything else is find a Republican candidate they can coalesce around, and that has been extraordinarily difficult at this point. Now, I should say there's another goal that many of them have, and that is simply to stop Rudy Giuliani before they figure out who the real candidate's going to be."
CHEN: "And just how difficult would it be for -- to get everyone on the same page and rally behind one candidate?"
REID: "Extraordinarily difficult. If you talk to people coming to this conference, everybody has a different opinion. Some people say Romney's the one. Some people say McCain, Thompson, Huckabee, all over the map, Julie."
CHEN: "We'll stay tuned. Chip Reid. Thanks, Chip."
REID: "You bet."
—Kyle Drennen is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Rally
October 19, 2007 - 18:13 ET by the mad poleCan't we rally around our disgust for nurse Scratchit?
}}---> Nurse who?
October 19, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Cool ArrowShe said it was just a cold sore, so Bill told her she'd better put some ice on it.
As a Christian Conservative Patriot
October 19, 2007 - 18:18 ET by Lame CherryJulie Chen and CBS should ask me as a Christian Conservative Patriot of this beloved Republic what the reality is.
I do not speak of a Body as Christ does that, but I speak for the Truth that Rudy does not despirit me as the Spirit of God lives in me. I fully understand as a Christian in voting here am I not voting for a God, a Bible, a Savior or a Life.........but simply voting for the best elected leader whom God can hopefully work through in praying for them instead of cursing them.
No Republican despirits me. There are some like Rudy I would not be the most pleased with, but casting a vote for a 3 time married, sometimes too cozy with sodomites and anti gun against a complete communist like Hillary, Obama or Edwards is not that difficult of choice as America is a Republic of majority rule with minority rites not being infringed upon as long as the rights are law abiding.
As a Christian, I do not condone aborticide no more than sodomy. I though am not in the least phobic, hateful or non voting for people who espouse the ideas for in a Republic here am I afforded the ability like St. Paul to win the debate in convincing people of the reality that like Rudy, 9 11 proved gun ownership is vital, that millions of aborticide children not being around to pay taxes bringing in an illegal problem proves butchering our own is wrong on so many levels and seeing millions of miserable homosexuals with their deathstyle choice proves that is not a fulfilling choice for life either.
None of that makes me sullen nor depressed as I know if these children of the left like Rudy, Ron Paul in his isolationism or Mitt practicing a cult religion that the life of hard knocks will educate them just like 9 11 educated a good portion of women that the founding fathers are correct on gun ownership.
I really hope that Julie Chen reads this or one of the liberal operatives sends this to her and Les, because there is no despirit in a Christian as we are not led by James Dobson but by Jesus the Christ Who is forever Hope and Always Victor for His children.
I love my American Republic which has been defiled by liberals, but that is what God intended in teaching Americans just like using the Philistines to chastise Israel.........liberals make horrid mistakes, but you do not toss them out as they have purpose too.......and Rudy if he fairly wins the nomination I like Ronald Reagan will back him as the GOP's candidate, but at the same time like President Bush needed to be reminded of Conservative ideals in Harriet Miers, I will by God's grace remind any Republican of the same correct path.
God bless you Julie Chen as your ignorance is highly distasteful in trying to speak for a Body you have no idea of.
I will though Mrs. Moonves be supporting Fred Thompson so get over that fact too.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
That was Beautiful
October 20, 2007 - 01:38 ET by KeithLame Cherry,
There certainly is NOTHING "lame" about you! What a beautiful statment of what you believe and how it affects your political world. I especially liked the line about not being led by James Dobson et al! However, while I respect your position, I do ultimately disagree with it. During President Bush's tenure, the radical homosexual lobby has been caught teaching children to take drugs, have orgies, have homosexual sex, AND to NOT use CONDOMS! Laws have sprouted up in California that MANDATE the "positive" teaching of homosexuality, as if there were such a thing. They have EVEN OUTLAWED THE USE OF THE WORDS MOTHER AND FATHER! When Mitt Romney was Governor, a radical homosexual group was busted teaching children about "GOLDEN SHOWERS AND FISTING". Mitt's response was painfully tepid, as I recall there was some trial balloon floated about him becoming an ambassador or something to Iraq and it was noised down because of this incident. The leading Republican Candidates for President of the United States and "leader" of the Republican party SKIPPED the VALUE VOTERS DEBATE. And it's because NOT ONE of them share the values of those voters, they are liars. They are wolves in sheeps clothing. When has Bush even ADDRESSED the idea of teaching SODOMY IN FIRST GRADE? They asked the Breck Girl about it at a friggin' DEBATE and you're telling me that a "Christian" President is SILENT?????? I agree with Tony Perkins, if the Republican party elects an ABORTION LOVING, FRIEND OF SODOMITES, the whole ballgame IS OVER. The "PRO-LIFE" movement could NEVER survive a Pro-choice REPUBLICAN! As far as I'm concerned there is NO DIFFERENCE between Hillary and Rudy as it relates to LIFE IN AMERICA. The war? Sure, there are some differences, I think Rudy'd go after the Islamists with more "vigor" if you will, but so what? America becomes Sodom either way. MY calling and election are sure, having received not only the Holy Ghost with the appropriate evidence of speaking in tongues AND been baptized APPROPRIATELY in the matchless name of Jesus Christ! I've also been blessed to receive subsequent gifts of the Spirit AFTER I received the Holy Ghost, so you elect a sodomite baby killer and you're on your OWN. See ya! I'm out. Don't know ya, don't wanna know ya! I believe that liberals are not misguided. I believe that most of them are EVIL. When Jesus sought to explain "people" to His Apostles, he told them the parable of the "WHEAT AND THE TARES (weeds)". You can find it in Matt 13:24-30 and he gave them the explanation here, Matt 13:36-43. He tells them that there are TWO GROUPS of people on the earth. Those that HE put here and those that THE ENEMY (SATAN) put here!
Matt 13:38,39
38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the TARES are the children of the WICKED ONE;
39The ENEMY that sowed them is the DEVIL; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
I realize that this isn't terribly "PC" but when you see a handsome, "articulate", gifted man like Barack Obama and then you realize that he voted TO KILL BABIES THAT SURVIVE ABORTIONS, it all becomes clear. When you see people that even CLAIM to be Christian, pissing on EVERYTHING Christ stood for and SUPPORTING everything He was against, it all becomes clear. So in my humble opinion, one sodomite loving babykiller is pretty much the same as another sodomite loving babykiller. I will take my toys and ride this out KNOWING that the righteous prophecies of Jesus Christ are true. Remember He said that it would be like it was in the "DAYS OF LOT" before His return. Lot, for those of you who don't know, was central in the Sodom and Gomorrah episode found in Gen 19, these cities were so riddled with homosexuals that they surrounded a man's house en masse and wanted to rape them in broad daylight. RUDY and HILLARY look like two "rungs" on that ladder to me! The ladder to HELL. If the Republicans, the last bastion of morality left on this spent globe, fall by the wayside for FILTHY LUCRE ( tax cuts) then you can all reap what you have sown.
As an evangelical
October 20, 2007 - 11:13 ET by misterbee241As an evangelical conservative Christian, I cant disagree with a single thing you say. There is no need for us to be dispirited. Disappointed maybe, that the Party of Reagan puts up two liberals as candidates.
Right now I cant see myself supporting Rudy or Romney, but I have until November 08 to pray about it.
misterbee
October 20, 2007 - 11:24 ET by botgneed i remind you that the SCOTUS does more to change society than any POTUS? Who will be appointed to the SCOTUS is my focus in this election. So you only get 50% of what you want; are you going to throw the country into Bader-Ginsberg-a-topia (and abandon the unborn) by allowing the Dem candidate to win?
"The more I study science, the more I believe in God." Einstein
"...Reid continued by
October 19, 2007 - 18:19 ET by Chris Norman"...Reid continued by discussing how a third party candidate backed by the religious right could, "... allow Clinton to cruise to victory..."
Between the lines, and under Reid's breath, you can hear, "Oh, please. Oh, please...".
Chris, my thought was "they
October 19, 2007 - 19:17 ET by motherbeltChris, my thought was "they can only hope....."
It worked for one Clinton it can work another
October 19, 2007 - 18:38 ET by exLibThis is exactly the same tactic they used in 92.
The difference between now and then is that there is alternative media and the influence these two dopes will have will still be significant but I think in the end, won't be that significant.
It is clear to me that as each election cycle draws near the media start recycling the same stories attempting to trick Christians into staying home or even be stupid enough to vote democrat.
In 06 it was David Kuo or whatever that useful idiots name was.
As Laura Ingraham says, "They think you are stupid".
Clearly a case could be made that the Republican side is actually debating issues and opinions on a wide range of issues. That having no clear leader is a GOOD thing because each canidate has some good points and bad points.
Meanwhile, the Democrat side could be viewed negatively that there is no substantive debate and that they are all just falling in line knowing that anything someone says could be used in a politcal ad by Republicans (Willie Horton anyone?).
Of course, you won't hear that argument made, since it's clear the media is in all out "elect a Dem at any cost" mode.
"As Laura Ingraham says,
October 19, 2007 - 22:38 ET by Sonny Lykos"As Laura Ingraham says, 'They think you are stupid".
Laura is right. They are stupid! Why do you think the phrase "ignorant masses" was coined. And the Evangelicals and others will prove I'm right when they stay home on 11/08/08, as they did in '06, and literally GIVE the Presidency to the Hildebeast. If they cannot get 90% of what they want, they, thru their pure stupidity and ignorance, will stay home and consequently get 0% of what they want instead of 50%.
They'll fix the Dems, and us too.
No, Sonny
October 19, 2007 - 23:04 ET by exLibYour stupid.
Obviously reading what I wrote and what Laura said (and continues to say) is beyond you.
You have taken the MSM bait hook, line and sinker.
Contrary to what you want to think Evangelicals are among the smartest around.
And if you think it was Evangelicals lack of a vote that put Dems in 06, you are drinking the MSM anti-Christian Kool-Aid.
I actually have respect for
October 20, 2007 - 02:02 ET by mostlymoderateI actually have respect for Giuliani's honesty. He could easily have lied and said he was pro-life and he chose to be honest-even if it costs him votes. Thompson is still my man, but I respect Rudy for being honest.
Definitely misreading Ingraham
October 20, 2007 - 09:20 ET by WingletDriverSonny,
You have definitely misread Ingraham. She argues forcefully against Giuliani as the nominee. And, unlike folks like Hannity, she doesn't even give in to the argument that he is better than Hillary.
A couple thoughts about your argument of getting less of what you want (e.g., less than 50%) by not compromising on 10%:
1) The knife cuts both ways. Giuliani supporters are going to go down with the ship with him and take the rest of the Republican Party because they won't compromise. They are making the fundamental error that you accuse values voters of making.
2) You imply that Giuliani will give values voters 90% of what they want. That is a bit generous on your part. Even Giuliani admits that he will give them almost nothing. Giuliani is now trying the same tack as Bush (promising conservative judges) as if the office of President is less influential than the SCOTUS.
3) Republicans win big when they act like conservatives. Reagan and George H. W. Bush united the base. They didn't ask for them to compromise their principals. Then H. W. raised taxes and pissed off those single issues voters known as "supply-siders." Taxes and a strong third party enabled Clinton to win the Presidency. Bob Dole and George W. Bush never turned the conservatives on in the party. As a result, four more years of Clinton and two close elections. Lesson learned: If Republicans want to win, nominate a conservative.
IMO, Giuliani will be a disaster because he will not deliver any states that the Dems took in 2000 or 2004. He will lose his home state of NY to a carpet bagger like he did when he dropped out of the senatorial campaign in 2000. He will also lose a lot of states that Bush carried. Ohio, Florida, Louisiana, Colorado and Nevada will go blue. It will be an electoral landslide with long coattails, meaning a stronger majority for the Dems in both chambers and a "mandate".
Again, IMO, Duncan Hunter is the best person for the job. Strong on every conservative issue, Viet Nam vet, no skeletons, honest. What's wrong with Giuliani supporters who won't vote for 100% of what they want in Duncan Hunter to ensure that everyone actually gets a little of what they want?
At least this transcript
October 20, 2007 - 11:25 ET by Clear thinkerAt least this transcript takes away any doubt that the liberal MSM is working for the DNC!
Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html
Rudy, the 'R' is for RINO
October 22, 2007 - 11:57 ET by Casey97I have to agree with you about Rudy. Speaking as member of the “ignorant masses” or as I like to call myself a Christian, I can not, and will not support, Rudy.
Rudy is: Pro Abortion, Pro Illegal, Anti Gun, Pro Gay Marriage, and Pro Hugo Chavez (his lobbying firm represents Citgo and Chavez).
If there were a Rudy mascot for his campaign it would be an Illegal Alien Lesbian filling up her Hybrid, with Hugo’s gas, to drive her wife/life partner to get a taxpayer funded abortion at a clinic built on paved over hunting land, no longer needed because of restrictive gun laws.
It will be sad if the only choice the republicans give the voters is a RINO like Rudy, or conservative-come-lately Romney.
If we have to endure another 4 years of Jimmy Carter type democrat rule, to wake up America, and then elect a Reagan type conservative, then so be it. The problem is the largest republican donors believing the Rudy hype, that he is the only one who can beat Hillary, because of his “moderate” stances. REALLY!!?
A pro-abort will support Rudy over Hillary? Really?
We are supposed to believe Rudy will appoint judges whose views are radically different than his own? This is laughable. President Rudy will appoint Rudy Judges. We will end up with a judiciary packed with socially liberal, anti-gun, pro-illegal judges.
This is why I (like Chuck Norris) support Huckabee.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58268
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58255
Huckabee won many of the debates, the ones he didn’t win he came in second. He won the values voter’s debate by an overwhelming percentage. Even with his average donation being in the double figures (some have said his average donation is less than $50) and his not getting the big money endorsements like the “frontrunners” have been getting, Mike has ran a very good campaign. He is doing very well in the south, where most of his support has come from word of mouth and e-mails to families and friends. By front-loading the republican primaries into liberal states, which will most likely not go republican in the election anyway, we have crippled the selection process. We are allowing liberal states to declare to the nation, “This is who the republicans should vote for.”
The end result is nominating someone who alienates a huge portion of the republican base. Why would you alienate such a large group of republicans, to pick up the pro-abort republicans who would have voted for you anyway. Huckabee represents a real republican, who has held a real executive position.
Education was Hillary’s big issue when her husband was governor of Arkansas. She took Arkansas from being #41 in the nation, at her husband’s first inauguration and left Arkansas ranked #49. Huckabee took over the state and made real progress. Remember Reagan didn’t win his first attempt at getting the republican nomination. The republican establishment said Reagan was too far to the right to be electable, so Regan didn’t get the nomination and our country got Jimmy Carter as a result.
So if this country needs a slap in the face wake up call, on the same level as Jimmy Carter, by electing Hillary, then so be it. I would rather show the country four years of the democrats way of government, than to elect someone who will damage the republican party for many years to come. The republican party has been damaged enough by being represented by pseudo-conservative Bush (immigration, letting Teddy write the immigration bill, campaign finance censorship, etc.).
Every time we elect a president they end up going a little soft. Clinton wasn’t as liberal as most on his side wanted him to be. He signed welfare reform and other legislation much to the chagrin of his own party. Bush has gravitated to the left and left his party dissatisfied. So we see a republican will end up being more liberal than advertised. Say what you want about Rudy, but he is not a liar. He knows his views are not popular with republicans, but he still lets us know where he stands. If he is elected and continues the trend of leaning leftward of his current positions, where will that put us?
What remains for Rudy to go left on? The war? Taxes? These are the only two “conservative” things he has left. I grow weary of Rudy defenders saying he would be better than Hillary. Is this his only slogan? Democrat Bill Richardson could run on the same slogan, “I would be better than Hillary.” By electing Rudy, Christian Conservatives are not getting 90% of what they want. I do not know where this made up figure came from. Here is a conservative report card on Rudy:
Immigration – F
Abortion – F
Gun Owner Rights – F
Gay Marriage – F
Terrorism and Dealing with our enemies – D *
Taxes – C**
*Rudy consorts with Hugo Chavez, who supports our enemies, and his record on terrorism is a record of rebuilding and not confronting. He has no record of mobilizing New York City’s Army and Navy to fight terrorism . His record was to rebuild New York and the new shining buildings replacing the twin towers, stand in recognition of his ability to rebuild. Ask firefighters and policemen about their Rudy support, and how he has abandoned them.
**While he may have cut taxes in a city, he supported a tax and spend liberal for the New York Governor’s position
Wow what a great conservative choice. If we elect Huckabee, and he shifts dramatically to the left, the worst we end up with is where Rudy is now.
/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-
With Democrat revisionist history and liberals guaranteeing the future (global warming, nuclear destruction, etc.) only the future is certain; the past is always changing.