Top 4 GOP Candidates Refuse "Moral Values" Debate

Much as tonight's laughable GOP debate has garnered media and blogosphere attention today, it may have been easy to overlook yet another telling GOP debate story: the snubbing of a social conservative so-called "values voter" debate. This debate, scheduled for September 17th and hosted by ultra wingnutty ValuesVoter.org (I refuse to provide a link), will be attended by most of the 2nd-tier contenders for the GOP nod, but will be avoided by McCain (though he's pretty much 2nd-tier now), Romney, Giuliani and Freddy.

The Murdoch-infested New York Sun has the story:

If self-styled "values voters" have felt snubbed by the Republican presidential candidates this election season, that snubbing is now official.

Mayor Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, and Senator McCain are all declining to participate in a September 17 debate in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., that's being hosted by an umbrella social-conservative group called ValuesVoter.org. Social conservatives will be upset; other conservatives might well be heartened by the waning power of the religious right.

A number of second-tier Republican candidates have confirmed attendance at the event, according to the news site WorldNetDaily.com, whose editor, Joseph Farah, is slated to moderate the debate. They include Rep. Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Rep. Tom Tancredo, Senator Brownback, Rep. Ron Paul, and John Cox.

Much as the top-tier GOP candidates scrambled tonight to please the Neanderthal Christianist mirror-image of the Taliban that comprises an increasingly large portion of the Republican base, their refusal to attend this event was extremely telling: several major players in the Christian Conservative movement including anti-feminist icon Phyllis Schlafly will be asking questions, and the debate will be streamed over the Internet and on satellite television. In many ways--from media coverage to political environment (strong activist base), failure to attend this debate would be similar to a Democratic candidate refusing to attend YearlyKos. It's a duck of extremely significant proportions.

Not that Rudy McRomneyson aren't stuck between a rock and a hard place:

Without any of the top-tier candidates in attendance, the ValuesVoter.org debate is unlikely to garner much attention from the mainstream press. The question is whether skipping the debate will hurt the Big Four more with the base than attending it might have hurt them with the rest of the country. Given the agenda of those who will be asking the questions-- anti-abortion, anti-stem-cell-research, anti-judicial-independence, anti-immigration, and pro-censorship--it's likely the Fantastic Four made the right decision.

While they may have saved themselves from the stinging questions from these nuts, they haven't escaped the wrath of the base for evading the forum. Just look at the thread over at FreeRepublic:

Freeper Sun:

What a bunch of chickens.

Now we know that Rudy McRomney are part of the RINO establishment.

Freeper puroresu:

If social conservatives are losing power in the GOP, then the GOP is history and we’ll be a full socialist nanny state in twenty years.

Freeper jsdude1:

Lets see the Republican Party (and their liberal donors) Win without Christians..I WILL ACTIVELY PORTRAY THEM AS TRAITORS/AND CAMPAIGN FOR THE CONSTITUTIONL/LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE-AGAINST THEM!! If they support a liberal RINO as Republican POTUS Standard Bearer-08.

Freeper Man50D:The Republican party has been incrementally replacing Conservative core values with Socialism for many decades. Conservatives are the minority RINOS because they have been pushed out of the party. Consequently the GOP and the Socialist Democrats are essentially one party. Conservatives only logical alternative is to leave the GOP and unite with the large number of unaffiliated Conservatives.

Freeper AD from Springbay:

If this: GOP Candidates Snub Social Conservatives is true in September of 2007 then this: GOP Candidates Fail to Win Election in December 2008. As a 'social conservative' I'm tired of being a Republican step-n-fetchit.

Of all the candidates to take heat from the Freepers, however, Freddy seems to have come off the worst, because he would have been expected to attend:

Freeper GhostofFreepersPast

That’s a deal breaker for me. Fred is on my won’t vote for list rigth along with Rudy McRomney. Game time is over. These are the issues I take most seriously.

Freeper puroresu:

Fred should participate. I don’t understand why he’d avoid this. The other three have good reason for being busy elsewhere that night.

Now, it is true that some have with some reason argued that the major candidates cannot attend every forum--but with base conservatives already worried that the probable do not respect them or their "values", every evasive move like this carries increased significance. Personally, I think it's extremely enjoyable to watch the "moral values" party of Vitter, Craig, and Mark Foley excoriate their head candidates as they attempt to dance on the head of a pin.

Pass the popcorn!

Also at MLW

RNC fires its entire phonebanking staff

I have often said that trips to Freeperville and other counties in WingNutLand can be highly informative and often hilarious. Today is no exception. The Wingnutosphere is all over the firing of the RNC's phonebanking staff, reported by the Moonie rag The Washington Times. Why? It would appear that small-donor donations are off by 40% this year, largely due to Bush's stance on the upcoming immigration bill that so many of the xenophobic bigots are calling an "Amnesty Bill". Comically, the RNC spokeswoman says that there are no worries, since overall donations are still keeping the RNC performing at usual levels.

Translation? The GOP has told its small-donor base to go Cheney itself, because the big-donor base that wants the cheap labor is where all the money is.

For more, see hekebolos' excellent diary at dkos on the subject today.

Lautenberg outfoxes Gonzales on guns; Freeper meltdown ensues

I have to say that Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) is a genius.  He has created an extraordinary wedge to use against the Administration and its gun-crazy Republican allies with S. 1237, introduced on May 1st, officially (and brilliantly) titled the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007". 

The bill essentially gives the Attorney General the direct authority (above and beyond the Brady Bill) to prevent those on terrorist watch lists from purchasing firearms.  Gonzales and the Administration, in their quest for ever-increasing power, have offered no objection to the bill's contents.

This leads to a triple-bind for the GOP--if they support the bill, they do the following:

1) betray their rabidly pro-gun base in favor of federal power to prevent gun ownership, and

2) give the Democrats a legislative anti-gun victory in the wake of the shootings at Virginia Tech;

If they oppose the bill, they:

1) Deny the Executive authority in an issue of national security; and

2) Put themselves on record as saying that dangerous firearms should be in the hands of known terrorists.

And firearms in the hands of known terrorists is what is at issue here.  From Frank Lautenberg's website:

Under the federal Brady Act, a licensed firearms dealer must request a background check through the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) before an unlicensed individual may purchase a weapon.  However, even if a NICS check reveals that the prospective purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist, nothing in current law prevents that person from purchasing a gun unless he or she meets one of the other disqualifying factors, including felony or domestic abuse convictions. 

In January 2005, the GAO produced a report to Sens. Lautenberg and Biden (D-DE) that found that from February 3 to June 30, 2004, a total of 44 firearm purchase attempts were made by individuals designated as known or suspected terrorists by the federal government.  In 35 cases, the FBI authorized the transactions to proceed because FBI field agents were unable to find any disqualifying information (such as felony convictions or illegal immigrant status) within the federally prescribed three business days.  (emphasis added)

Now, while you might think that such a bill would be a no-brainer for the sort of Republicans like CA Republican Dana Rohrbacher who think that torturing innocent people is okay if it hurts people on the federal terrorist watchlists, it's actually not so simple.

The influential Second Amendment Foundation has issued a major press release eviscerating Alberto Gonzales for his support of this bill:

GONZALES WANTS ARBITRARY POWER TO BLOCK GUN PURCHASES; SAF SAYS HE SHOULD RESIGN

For Immediate Release:  5/1/2007

BELLEVUE, WA - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' troubling support of legislation that would allow him and future attorneys general the arbitrary power to block firearms purchases without due process is cause for him to step down as the nation's highest ranking law enforcement officer, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

The bill, S. 1237, was introduced last week at the Justice Department's request by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), one of the most extreme anti-gunners in Congress. Called the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007," this legislation would give the Attorney General discretionary authority to deny the purchase of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm license or permit because of some vague suspicion that an American citizen may be up to no good.

"This bill," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, "raises serious concerns about how someone becomes a `suspected terrorist.' Nobody has explained how one gets their name on such a list, and worse, nobody knows how to get one's name off such a list.

"The process by which someone may appeal the Attorney General's arbitrary denial seems weak at best," Gottlieb suggested, "and there is a greater concern. When did we decide as a nation that it is a good idea to give a cabinet member the power to deny someone's constitutional right simply on suspicion, without a trial or anything approaching due process?

"We're not surprised that General Gonzales has found an agreeable sponsor in Frank Lautenberg," Gottlieb observed. "The senator from New Jersey has never seen a restrictive gun control scheme he did not immediately embrace, and S. 1237 is loaded with red flags. It would allow an appointed bureaucrat the authority to suspend or cancel someone's Second Amendment right without even being charged with a crime.  (emphasis added)

I can't find an NRA statement on this; so far they have remained silent.  But I do find the newfound concern for the rights of "non-criminal" listed terrorists on the part of the wingers deeply touching and most charming.

And where are the Freepers on this issue?  Amusingly, with the terrorists and against the Administration, calling for Alberto's head, with comments like this:

Hemingway's Ghost: Holy smokes . . . this is truly difficult to believe, if true.

stockpirate: "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' troubling support of legislation that would allow him and future attorneys general the arbitrary power to block firearms purchases without due process is cause for him to step down as the nation's highest ranking law enforcement officer"

Well now I must agree, He must step down, and he would not support this bill without the okay of Bush.

So I guess Bush is now going to sell us the rest of the way down the road.

sourcery: If Conservatives were to call for impeachment over this issue, imagine the consternation that would cause among the Libs...

gcruse: Get this bunch out of government.

Vision: Get him out of the office!

I knew he was a disaster from the beginning. Great move Bush.

SamAdams2000: I wont say that the bush administration is ruining this country..I just wont say that. That's the history books job.

The meltdown accelerates and the pressure grows from the right now, as well as the left.  Kudos to Senator Lautenberg for this brilliant tactical move and no-brainer legislation.