Giuliani is the only candidate that has experience in protecting people and using conservative economics successfully. He will undoubtedly win social conservatives without Robertson’s support.

Televangelist and social conservative Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition and “The 700 Club,” raised a few eyebrows when he announced his support for Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani.

Giuliani is struggling to win support from social conservatives because of his liberal views on abortion and gay rights, views that conflict with conservative orthodoxy.

Robertson’s support was coveted by many leading Republican candidates and will supposedly provide Giuliani with a major boost to convince social conservatives he is a suitable choice as the GOP nominee.

While some in the social conservative movement may see Giuliani as infringing on GOP beliefs, Robertson maintains that the “core know better.”

Robertson claimed while he and Giuliani disagree on social issues, such disagreements are minor compared to the fight against global terrorism and radical Islam.

Only two explanations of his support cross my mind. Either Robertson can’t bring himself to support Mormon Mitt Romney, even if Romney is more conservative than Giuliani, or Robertson is fighting like hell to keep Hillary Clinton out of office.

It should also be noted that it is debatable how much GOP voters care about Pat Robertson’s opinion. Republican voters are more likely to scrutinize Giuliani after Robertson’s endorsement.

Robertson’s name inspires more eye-rolling than applause. He’s been an embarrassment for years. He has a small cult of dedicated viewers who watch “The 700 Club” religiously, but moderates and social conservatives aren’t going to consider Giuliani just because a washed-up television preacher appeared at a press conference.

Christian conservatives are incredibly active when it comes to politics. Those who have chosen to back Giuliani wholeheartedly have already made the decision.

Those who cannot muster a vote for Giuliani have made the calculation based on his pro-choice stance, gay rights and possibly his immigration views. A Robertson endorsement won’t change these people’s minds. They have a hard-set objection to Giuliani for which no argument really matters.

Robertson’s support stems from reasons other than politics. His endorsement of Giuliani is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to regain the public spotlight. After the press conference, Robertson’s name was mentioned on every major news network and political talk show.

The press saw Robertson’s backing of Giuliani as a major development in conservative politics, but nothing could be further from the truth. His decision to endorse merely proved the views of a former political Christian leader are virtually irrelevant among social conservatives.

Robertson is sacrificing many issues he claims to fight for to bask in the public limelight. He seems more than willing to overlook so-called “flaws” in Giuliani’s pro-choice, pro-homosexual character in order to get his name in the media just one more time.

The only man who matters most to Giuliani’s campaign to win over “values” votes is undoubtedly Ted Olsen. Olsen is easily the most respected conservative lawyer, and a big Giuliani supporter.

I am a libertarian conservative. Thus Giuliani undoubtedly has my vote. The biggest issues in the 2008 election are the War on Terror and the economy. Giuliani has a proven track record in both areas.

Rudy believes in getting tough on terrorists. He will increase defense spending and then strategically stay on the offense and wage the War on Terror to assure American safety.

Rudy is the candidate who believes in Reaganomics and will pursue this policy to revitalize the economy. He is good for his word on his promises to cut taxes and decrease federal spending.

Giuliani is the only candidate that has experience in protecting people and using conservative economics successfully. He will undoubtedly win social conservatives without Robertson’s support.

> Comments