McCain Rejects John Hagee Endorsement

Hagee said some whack stuff, Phil, and while Hagee isn't McCain's pastor, McCain did actively seek out his nomination, so ... What was once a politically motivated act (seeking Hagee's endorsement), McCain is now doing the politically expedient thing and "rejecting and denouncing" Hagee.

I think McCain is doing the right thing now, but he did the wrong thing first. He should've never sought Hagee's endorsement (and Hagee should've never given his endorsement to McCain).

Now the question becomes, when will McCain "reject and denounce" Rod Parsley? Answer: As soon as the political pressure piles up on McCain because of Parsley, as it did because of Hagee.

Just yesterday.

Good Call!

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/mccain-rejec ...

I'm not McCain's biggest fan, but if he keeps on exercising common sense, I may have to vote for him.

This is not anything particularly new in the historical sense. Religion and religious figures have played prominently in American Politica historically ever since its founding. In fact, a lot things in our remembered past in recent campaigns has actually been pretty mild compared to things like the Jefferson Adams campaign in 1800. You want to see religion used as a club, read some of the history there!

What's different now is of course the means and the quick cycle on issues.

My guess is this is only going to get more attention and see more issues raised and used in the days ahead and even campaigns ahead. Church, Pastors etc. are now fair game and it will be automatic for journalist and opponents to dig all the dirt and inuendo that they can moving forward. The ground has been broken.

Ministries that have political figures associated with them now have to consider when and how they will be portrayed in the media should their members gain a national political spotlight.

It appears that something else is also at work here: The growing public perception, based on these two very vocal pastors, is that Christians (since all are lumped together in the public mindset) are "hate mongers."

Their fiery rhetoric does draw from scriptural terminology. So, if such terms and phrases are actually found within the Bible--regardless of the manner in which they were presented by a pastor's very subjective presentation--the public will come to certain conclusions about the whole based on misrepresentation of or by the few.

It seems as though the ebb and flow of the current of public acceptance of Christianity in America is changing radically.

Again, I find it interesting that pastors who are praised for blasting out are now being blasted as they prove to be the lightening rods of controversy in this election campaign.

Without dominant voices to direct the masses of Christians in their voting by coalescing behind a single candidate, Evangelicals and Charismatics alike will now be forced to think and pray for themselves about whom to support. Hmmm... that can't be all bad...

Let's see.... McCain seeks out Hagee's endorsement then disses him. He seeks out Parsley's endorsement, then disses him. This is a fore-taste of his leadership skills and character.

Sadly, methinks we have three skunks currently to choose from. Its down to picking which flavor of stink we want to be stuck with for four/eight years.

One thing about McCain, he sure has no problem thumbing his nose to the conservative/evangelical base. If the dems were not in meltdown, he would not have a chance.

I have always believed that high-profile preachers who publicly endorse one particular political candidate or party put themselves in a vulnerable position. Conservative Republicans especially court their support, in hopes of getting the evangelical Christian vote, obviously because they seem to think we are all monolithic in our thinking. Because they are either naive or egotistical, these preachers announce that they are "behind" this-or-that candidate, as though doing so is some momentous event. They find, however, that , all of a sudden, their sermons and remarks are scrutinized and/or taken out of proper context.Perhaps I lean on the skeptic's side here, but I tend to think that the only use politicians have ever had for the so-called "Christian Right" is for the sole purposes of obtaining their votes. McCain, if you may recall, had no love for the religious right until the past couple of years, when he wanted to gain their support. All of a sudden, there he was speaking at Liberty University's commencement and, most recently, basking in the light of approval from Hagee and Parsley, two heralded and influential televangelists. McCain has now distanced himself from Hagee and Parsley, not out of any sense of "rightness", but because they have now become a liability. He is, after all, just another politician and he does have to protect his own interests here.One of the reasons I so admire Billy Graham is that he has never really endorsed one politician over another, at least not publicly. He has visited and prayed with and for Presidents, over the course of his ministry, no matter what their party affiliation was. I'm certain that he, like any of us, has had his own personal preferences for whom he wanted to vote for, but he kept them private. In this way, his own ministry has not been compromised nor has the media been able to misconstrue his remarks, as has been the case in this recent situation.Should Hagee and Parsley encourage their church members and viewers to exercise their civic responsibility to vote and prompt them to pray for wisdom, regarding who to cast their vote for? Certainly. However, making a huge show of backing one politician and party over another alienates others and puts them at risk of being unfairly criticized by a secular press that is incapable of ever understanding anything based upon the Scriptures.Big "surprise": The world, just as Jesus told us would be the case, does not love us!

Republicans since Ronald Reagan have depended on the evangelical vote to get elected. In fact, when running for his first term, Reagan invited Jim Bakker to interview him on Air Force One.

It wasn't Bakker looking to endorse Reagan, it was Reagan knowing that Bakker had the ear of millions of Christians who watched his show, and wanting Bakker's nod.

My point is, these preachers have not sought McCain out ...it was the other way around.

In McCain's attempt to appear "conservative" enough, now who will he seek out for an endorsement? If he distanced himself from Haggee's and Parsley's support, is he so confident that the vote of those they represent wont' matter when he's toe-to-toe with the Dem nominee?

It would be interesting if the suddenly spurned evangelicals backed Hillary, as Coulter and Limbaugh encouraged them to do...

If anything, all this brouhaha shows is just how little McCain knows about big sections of conservative evangelicaldom.

He doesn't run with them and really knows very little about them, but will cynically accept endorsements from their "big name leaders" provided there is some political advantage to be had. Otherwise, he will dump them just as quickly if it suits him.

Really, Parsely and Hagee have said very little that is substantically different from what I have heard preached in a zillion different places in varying degrees of mutedness. For example, I have heard the old equation "Mystery Babylon=Roman Catholic Church" being made so often by so many that it's now dreary and boring. How often I have met people who dote on Alexander Hislop's 19th Century book "The Two Babylons," and the equation dates all the way back to Luther, Calvin, et al, and even before them. Yet when the MSM gets a hold of this little tidbit, they are shocked, shocked, and think they have discovered some kind of earth shattering news, which they think might come in handy for beating McCain over the head with.

So McCain, with his finger always in the wind, trims his sails and throws the endorsements and the endorsers overboard. Why is it so difficult for xtians to get it? Do we has some sort of masochistic streak where we like getting exploited, again and again, by cynical politicians?

McCain woke up just in time to prevent the destruction of his campaign. If he had accepted the endorsements of Hagee and Parsley, he would have walked right into a well baited trap.

Democrats and Libertarians would have made sure the happily naive American public heard the words Christian Nationalism & Dominionism for the first time. Then a short schooling on the types of political activism Hagee and Parsley advocate would have followed. That would have ended McCain's political career. As it is, his chances look good.

Make no mistake about it, McCain doesn't hold Christian conservatives in contempt, nor has he thumbed his nose at them. Hagee and Parsley don't represent all Christian conservatives; they're just two voices among many.

You don't have to be a McCain supporter to appreciate the possibility he may win. It could easily happen, and it wouldn't be a disaster if it did.