Gingrich does a McCain, will he get the same result?

In 2008, John McCain sought and won the endorsement of megachurch pastor John Hagee. However, within months, McCain rejected the endorsement  principally because of unflattering remarks made by Hagee about Catholics
Now fast forward to 2011 and GOP candidate lookalike Newt Gingrich is courting Hagee’s congregation. Christian Post has the story:

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich spoke Sunday at a Texas megachurch where he railed against secularism and called for the defense of the nation’s Christian values.
Gingrich, who shows signs that he is interested in the GOP presidential nomination although he has yet to officially declare his candidacy, told thousands of conservative evangelical Christians at Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, that liberal college professors and mainstream media are turning America into a godless society.
He called on evangelical voters to protect the nation’s Christian roots and its freedoms, citing prayers of past U.S. presidents and the Declaration of Independence.
“I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they’re (Gingrich’s grandchildren) my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American,” said Gingrich, according to Politico.

Hagee vowed never to support a candidate again after the McCain debacle and he may not do so. However, this does not stop Gingrich from seeking favor. Aren’t historians supposed to learn something from history?

32 thoughts on “Gingrich does a McCain, will he get the same result?”

  1. Stephen,
    Reasonable guesses…but for a man with the beam in his own eye, you marvel at his worries.
    Gingrich might better ask for a grace oriented society.
    Warren,
    Are you criticizing Gingrich for associating with Hagee or
    Criticizing Hagee for potentially breaking his promise?

  2. Throbert –

    I assume Gingrich means that the country would be “dominated” from without, by radical Islamist foreigners — as a consequence of being dominated from within by secular atheists who were limp-wristed, politically-correct Casper Milquetoasts ^a bit too European-Union-ish in their foreign-policy response to would-be Islamic imperialists abroad.

    You are incredibly forgiving! 🙂

  3. Gingrich isn’t running. Neither is Trump. Nor, most likely, Bachmann. In the case of Newt he’s upping his speaking fees and keeping the brand fresh. As for Trump, to run for president he’d have to explain that thing on his head.

  4. they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    LOL!

  5. I love this quote:

    they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    Apparently Newt doesn’t know the meaning of the word secular or atheist.

  6. Timothy, I fear you are correct and Emily, I hope not.
    George Will said it best, If we are not pessimistic, then that is another reason to be pessimistic.

  7. Ken,
    I think you’re correct. “Atheist”, “Secular”, “Radical Islamists”. These are all buzz-words that serve as a political call to arms for the far right.

  8. I’m with Stephen on Gringrich et. al. They’re using presidential campaigning as a marketing gimmick-period. After their past and recent bomb-throwing, how could they possibly imagine being able to explain their actions/words to even moderate Republicans, much less the general populace?

  9. David b – If I am criticizing anyone, it is Gingrich. Hagee hasn’t announced that he is changing his plan so that would be premature.
    The whole thing will be a book selling exercise if Hagee doesn’t endorse him.
    My guess is that Gingrich will be unable to resist running, but will not get traction. He will however, keep pulling the GOP further right, near the cliff.

  10. They are already dancing on the edge of the cliff. And the more that Fischer is given deference, the wilder the music gets. For the sake of fiscal conservatism, moderate restraint on some wacky social issue, and our national security, I truly hope that someone figures out how to salvage the party before it becomes the official voice of the clinically insane.

  11. I’m with Stephen on Gringrich et. al. They’re using presidential campaigning as a marketing gimmick-period. After their past and recent bomb-throwing, how could they possibly imagine being able to explain their actions/words to even moderate Republicans, much less the general populace?

  12. Timothy, I fear you are correct and Emily, I hope not.
    George Will said it best, If we are not pessimistic, then that is another reason to be pessimistic.

  13. They are already dancing on the edge of the cliff. And the more that Fischer is given deference, the wilder the music gets. For the sake of fiscal conservatism, moderate restraint on some wacky social issue, and our national security, I truly hope that someone figures out how to salvage the party before it becomes the official voice of the clinically insane.

  14. David b – If I am criticizing anyone, it is Gingrich. Hagee hasn’t announced that he is changing his plan so that would be premature.
    The whole thing will be a book selling exercise if Hagee doesn’t endorse him.
    My guess is that Gingrich will be unable to resist running, but will not get traction. He will however, keep pulling the GOP further right, near the cliff.

  15. Ken,
    I think you’re correct. “Atheist”, “Secular”, “Radical Islamists”. These are all buzz-words that serve as a political call to arms for the far right.

  16. I think Gingrich was just trying to hit all the right buzz-words for his intended audience.

  17. I think Gingrich was just trying to hit all the right buzz-words for his intended audience.

  18. Good point, Jayhuck — it’s quite possible that Gingrich intended to say “America might be dominated by this non-Christian faction OR by that non-Christian faction.”

  19. I will admit Newt may have meant to include an OR in his rant, but it was not used, so I have to LOL 🙂

  20. Throbert –

    I assume Gingrich means that the country would be “dominated” from without, by radical Islamist foreigners — as a consequence of being dominated from within by secular atheists who were limp-wristed, politically-correct Casper Milquetoasts ^a bit too European-Union-ish in their foreign-policy response to would-be Islamic imperialists abroad.

    You are incredibly forgiving! 🙂

  21. they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    I assume Gingrich means that the country would be “dominated” from without, by radical Islamist foreigners — as a consequence of being dominated from within by secular atheists who were limp-wristed, politically-correct Casper Milquetoasts ^a bit too European-Union-ish in their foreign-policy response to would-be Islamic imperialists abroad.
    The charge that Europeans have been total pansy-doormats in letting unassimilated Muslim immigrants walk all over them is a pretty well established theme among many American conservatives. And among religious conservatives specifically, the claim is sometimes made that the Europeans were especially vulnerable because they’re all unchurched secularists who’ve been encouraged to forget and/or trivialize their Christian heritage, etc. (Whereas non-religious conservatives may focus, instead, on Euro welfare-state policies that create disincentives for Muslim immigrants to assimilate.)
    So I suspect that Gingrich was talking along these lines, and thus there’s no LOL-worthy confusion on his part.
    (Although of course one can challenge the entire thesis that the Islamification of Europe is actually occurring at a runaway pace and that Euro-secularists are to blame and the same thing could happen in America, etc.)

  22. they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    LOL!

  23. Stephen,
    Reasonable guesses…but for a man with the beam in his own eye, you marvel at his worries.
    Gingrich might better ask for a grace oriented society.
    Warren,
    Are you criticizing Gingrich for associating with Hagee or
    Criticizing Hagee for potentially breaking his promise?

  24. Good point, Jayhuck — it’s quite possible that Gingrich intended to say “America might be dominated by this non-Christian faction OR by that non-Christian faction.”

  25. I will admit Newt may have meant to include an OR in his rant, but it was not used, so I have to LOL 🙂

  26. they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    I assume Gingrich means that the country would be “dominated” from without, by radical Islamist foreigners — as a consequence of being dominated from within by secular atheists who were limp-wristed, politically-correct Casper Milquetoasts ^a bit too European-Union-ish in their foreign-policy response to would-be Islamic imperialists abroad.
    The charge that Europeans have been total pansy-doormats in letting unassimilated Muslim immigrants walk all over them is a pretty well established theme among many American conservatives. And among religious conservatives specifically, the claim is sometimes made that the Europeans were especially vulnerable because they’re all unchurched secularists who’ve been encouraged to forget and/or trivialize their Christian heritage, etc. (Whereas non-religious conservatives may focus, instead, on Euro welfare-state policies that create disincentives for Muslim immigrants to assimilate.)
    So I suspect that Gingrich was talking along these lines, and thus there’s no LOL-worthy confusion on his part.
    (Although of course one can challenge the entire thesis that the Islamification of Europe is actually occurring at a runaway pace and that Euro-secularists are to blame and the same thing could happen in America, etc.)

  27. Gingrich isn’t running. Neither is Trump. Nor, most likely, Bachmann. In the case of Newt he’s upping his speaking fees and keeping the brand fresh. As for Trump, to run for president he’d have to explain that thing on his head.

  28. I love this quote:

    they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists

    Apparently Newt doesn’t know the meaning of the word secular or atheist.

Comments are closed.