This baffles me as well. I wonder if he is trying to defend Rudy? After all, he's praised him in the past.

No, you're not losing your mind, the religious right is losing it's single-mindedness.

While those on the left of evangelicalism like Wallis talk about broadening their values, in fact, fighting terrorism could reasonably be seen as also working the same way as talk of poverty or creation care. Like 80s law and order candidates, talk of terrorism allows some evangelicals to compromise on abortion (and get a more easily electable candidate) without losing their community cred.

But remember that this is only intra-party.

Also, it seemed to me while watching the Brody-Robertson exchange that Robertson may be sympathetic toward Guiliani. (Am I losing my mind?)

Robertson is def. sympathetic toward Rudy; he told ABC in 2005, "Rudy’s a very good friend of mine, and he did a super job running the City of New York. And I think he’d make a good president. I like him a lot." And has said similar things to CBS.

Based on his past praise of Giuliani as a good leader and his past expressions of concern over McCain as a leader in a time of potential nuclear war... I wonder if his comment was largely about what he sees as the importance of security concerns of evangelicals... maybe he was saying the FRC straw poll not fully reflecting those concerns.

Or maybe this is all about his concerns about global warming! http://www.beliefnet.com/story/197/story_19716_1.html

I'm not so sure about Robertson's apparent "change of heart". I think he was referring to the fact that there were actually people there at the Values Voters Summit that didn't hate Guiliani, and so therefore they might not be representative of all the rest of the evangelicals who (of course) do think that Guiliani is a reprehensible gay-loving baby-killer. (Sorry for that, but I think he was speaking in CBN code in this interview, and that it shouldn't be construed to make it look like he actually was acknowledging political diversity, as much as he was saying that "those voters" are not the real evangelicals and don't necessarily represent the "real" evangelical perspective.) That's how I heard him.

That said, I've never heard him defend Guiliani, but I don't listen to CBN much.

Jen,

It seems that Robertson hearting Giuliani is playing right into the split that Amy Sullivan, et al, note among some of the religious right leadership and the more ideologically oriented heads and their rank-and-file.

Carpetbagger writes:

In 2005, Robertson appeared on ABC News and said of Giuliani, “He did a super job running the city of New York and I think he’d make a good president.” He added, “Rudy’s a very good friend of mine. He’s a great guy.”

As it turns out, I’d argue this says a lot more about Robertson than Giuliani. Practically every prominent Christian fundamentalist leader in the country finds Giuliani’s personal life and social-policy positions offensive, but Robertson doesn’t seem to mind at all.

The obvious explanation happens to be the right one: Robertson’s principles are surprisingly malleable. He wants a seat at the table, and goes where the political winds take him. Giuliani knows this, so he’s happy to play the game.

Like Sean (also supporting Giuliani) Hannity's argument that one can't stop abortion if one is dead, terrorism seems to be "broadening" the religious right's agenda.

Note Robertson's comments in the CBN clip about the looniness of the "third party" press release from that part of the base a couple of weeks ago. And note his disparaging remarks about Huckabee's war chest.

Some of the leadership -- but not all -- seem to be making pragmatic hints, i.e., recently Richard Land quoted Voltaire on not making the perfect the enemy of the good.

It seems that the leadership would rather hitch onto a candidate who can win more easily than one who is more in line with the positions they espouse publicly.

The subtext here is that THEY know best how LITTLE POWER they have in actually electing a national candidate who really believes like the rank-and-file on abortion and homosexuality.

Pat Robertson, the self-appointed leader of the evangelical movement, does it more harm than good.

These are just a few of his quotes:
"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians."
"(T)he feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians."
That is in addition to his previous calls to assasinate Hugo Chavez and Ariel Sharon