The Undorsement

Rod Parsley withdraws endorsement of John McCain. Given McCain's decision to embrace Parsley, then continuing to embrace Parsley when Parsley's repugnant views were brought to his attention, and then to distance himself from Parsley when the MSM brought Parsley's repugnant views to the attention of the public, it's understandable that Parsley's not happy with McCain.

But still -- why not endorse? What's really changed here? From the point of view of a social conservative who yearns for Muslim blood to be shed, McCain clearly seems like the lesser of two evils whatever else you might say about him.

Comments

You mistake Parsley's motivations. He's far more concerned about maintaining his brand, and thus his money machine than he is about actually bringing about the Apocalypse. McCain disrespected him. His product image couldn't allow that to be unrebuked.

Posted by Sam Hutcheson | May 25, 2008 1:43 PM

Parsley and Hagee seem to me to be first and foremost in the business of doing what's best for Parsley and Hagee. If the let themselves be publicly slighted without consequences, why should anyone respect them?

From their point of view, it may be better for McCain to lose without them (they will say he lost because he didn't have them) than win with their support after he disavowed their views.

Posted by Leo | May 25, 2008 1:48 PM

Sam's right. Moreover, Parsley, like most on the religious right, has a huge persecution complex and takes any perceived slight personally. So he let his emotions get the better of him.

Posted by Jake | May 25, 2008 1:50 PM

I assume that Parsley and Hagee will both be hostile to the Democratic candidate-- which is probably all that McCain really needs from them.

Posted by MattF | May 25, 2008 1:52 PM

How any true evangelical Christian can endorse McCain and his policies of more war and torture is beyond me. But then evangelical Christians never should have given Bush such support either after seeing him go for war in Iraq and torture in Abu Ghraib.

I understand the part of the prolife issue, but doesn't being prolife mean being against preemptive war, and against torture? Doesn't being prolife mean helping the poor, caring about whether people have healthcare, etc?

So I don't see how any more mainstream pastor can really endorse McCain in this election cycle in all good conscience, and still lay claim to Christian beliefs.

Posted by cm | May 25, 2008 1:53 PM

I assume that Parsley and Hagee will both be hostile to the Democratic candidate-- which is probably all that McCain really needs from them.

Not quite. Bush only won because he was able to galvanize millions of evangelicals and get them to the polls, with the aid of a highly sophisticated ground operation and huge support from the pastors in the pulpit. If McCain can't at least create a shadow of the same operation, he's in deep electoral trouble. He needs people like Parsley and Hagee telling people, day in and day out, "Make sure you get to the polls to support John McCain!"

Posted by Tyro | May 25, 2008 1:56 PM

Who yearns for Muslim blood to be shed? What a disgusting attribution of evil intent.

Must be yet another example of the new politics.

Posted by Tim K | May 25, 2008 2:07 PM

Tim K -

Tim, you are defending Parsley now? Parsley called Islam an "Anti-Christ" religion and said that the US was, in part, founded to destroy Islam. I’ve seen the tape. Now how is the US to destroy Islam exactly? Care Bear stares? No, I imagine some blood would have to be shed.

You do understand that Parsley probably dislikes Hillary very much? Doesn’t that make him bad?

Posted by Raindog | May 25, 2008 2:23 PM

Parsley does, Tim. If you don't know what you're talking about, don't question ohter people who do. http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/05/john-mccain-rod-parsley-pastor-problem.html

Posted by mad6798j | May 25, 2008 2:24 PM

Sam's got it. In fact, supporting Bob Barr and whining through a Democratic victory may be the best thing for Parsley-- he'll have another Great Satan (and if he's lucky, someone he can brand a 'closet Muslim') to fan the flames for the next four to eight years.

Posted by Persia | May 25, 2008 2:24 PM

Here's a quote from Parsley for Tim: "We were built for the battle. We were created for the conflict. We get off on warfare."

Is that proof enough for you Tim?

Posted by mad6798j | May 25, 2008 2:29 PM

Some of you fail to understand that for most Evangelicals, Jesus Christ isn't their savior, Ronald Reagan or GWB are.

These people aren't Christians, they are just Republicans who have turned conservatism into a religion.

Posted by soullite | May 25, 2008 2:35 PM

I always figured Tim K was a right-wing troll, but I thought he'd pretend to make a more gradual progression toward supporting McCain for the general. I didn't think he'd jump right into defending some guy too nuts for McCain, even before Hillary drops out of the race.

Posted by fp | May 25, 2008 2:37 PM

My point isn't to defend Parseley or Hagee, or anyone else. What I am doping is pointing out how it is people on this blog who are contributing the very same divisiveness they claim to decry.

Posted by Tim K | May 25, 2008 2:50 PM

Yup, Tim K would seem to be, indeed, a right-wing troll.

"Contributing to the very same divisiveness they claim to decry"? Really? When does Matt decry divisiveness? This is just right wing troll boilerplate. No big surprise, I guess.

Posted by John | May 25, 2008 3:08 PM

1. Islam, is, to be fair, an aggressive intolerant religion - over time - that seeks the quick or gradual extermination of rival Beliefs from areas under it's sway.
Not just elimination of CHristians or Jews, but Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Hindi, African pagans...
In preventing Islam from imposing it's will and avoiding death, enslavement, or severe 2nd class existence as conquered people subject to Dhimmitude - it is well worth shedding "Muslim blood" to avoid such an awful fate.

2. Fundies are an embarassment just as open "Hate America" Lefties are to the Democrats.

3. cm - "How any true evangelical Christian can endorse McCain and his policies of more war and torture is beyond me."

It certainly IS beyond you, as McCain stupidly opposes enemy interogation even if it saves many lives, even "love the enemy" idiots such as you.

4.cm - "But then evangelical Christians never should have given Bush such support either after seeing him go for war in Iraq and torture in Abu Ghraib."

You confuse evangelicals with mainstream Protestant "powder puff" pacifists.

Nor did Bush have any involvement in Abu Ghraib, which was at best a minor incident of rogue soldiers. That the media, the ACLU hyped in hopes that it would rile up Muslims, motivate them to kill more US soldiers from the unrelenting CBS/NY Times propaganda about it, then all the extra American deaths the US media and ACLU incited would raise aversion to the extra US casualties enough to force an end to the war.

5. Some of you fail to understand that for most Evangelicals, Jesus Christ isn't their savior, Ronald Reagan or GWB are.
These people aren't Christians, they are just Republicans who have turned conservatism into a religion.
Posted by soullite

Stated by a bigoted Lefty asshole ignorant of what evangelicism entails.

Posted by chris ford | May 25, 2008 3:38 PM

I can't believe "bigoted" is really a term of abuse for chris ford.

Posted by southpaw | May 25, 2008 3:51 PM

I can't believe "bigoted" is really a term of abuse for chris ford.

That's exactly the kind of disgusting bigotry he's talking about, you filthy jew.

Posted by Rup | May 25, 2008 4:13 PM

No Tim, you were questioning Matt's factual accuracy. Now that you've been proven wrong, you're changing the subject. You stated that Matthew was implying evil intent unjustly to Parsley, but Parsley really has openly called for genocide.

Posted by mad6798j | May 25, 2008 4:14 PM

@chris ford: I deplore the lazy use of the word 'troll,' but your consistent habit of posting polemical diatribes without responding to your detractors, as well as this post's particularly misinformed series of caricatures, leaves one no choose but to deploy that pejorative against your inglorious prose.

Posted by Tom Tabersley | May 25, 2008 4:17 PM

By the way, McCain is fine with torture, just as long as it's not being done by the military. He has no problem with the CIA continuing to use "enhanced interrogation techniques". That's why he supported the Military Commisions Act, which allows the CIA to continue torturing.

And to the troll who suggested that Abu Ghraib was just a few bad apples at the bottom of the military barrel, I suggest you read "The Torture Team" by Phillippe Sand. You'll find that what went on at Abu Ghraib was just the kind of thing that Donald Rumsfeld and his team authorized for use in Guantanamo Bay. It's no surprise that the same techniques emigrated to Iraq. More and more information about torture's sanctioning by the very top levels at the Pentagon is starting to come out. It's just a matter of time before one of the torture enablers in the Defense and Justice Departments is arrested overseas and tried for war crimes.

Posted by Jake | May 25, 2008 4:57 PM

My point isn't to defend Parseley or Hagee, or anyone else. What I am doping is pointing out how it is people on this blog who are contributing the very same divisiveness they claim to decry.

What??? Parsley says the US was founded to destroy a religion that has over 1 billion followers and no one is supposed to say anything disparaging about it? Matt saying Parsley wants Muslim blood to flow is actually kind of tame I would think.

In my opinion, you yourself have said some fairly divisive and outright insulting things to commenters on this blog. You are not in the best posistion to criticize. You might want to pick your battles a bit better.

Posted by Raindog | May 25, 2008 6:17 PM

"Yup, Tim K would seem to be, indeed, a right-wing troll."

Was there ever any question about that?

He supports Hillary - by definition that's a right wing troll - because HILLARY is a right wing troll at this point.

As for Chris Ford, it was fortunate that he was busy elsewhere recently, so we didn't have to read his trollish rants. Unfortunately, he's back now, so...

STFU, troll.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 25, 2008 7:36 PM

"but doesn't being prolife mean being against preemptive war, and against torture? Doesn't being prolife mean helping the poor, caring about whether people have healthcare, etc?"

Sorry, but the only life these folks are concerned about saving is "preborn life". The fetus is innocent so worth going to all measures to save. The "enemy" in the "War on Terror" are evil terrorists, the men tortured in US custody are considered already guilty of something, and the poor just haven't been praying enough - otherwise they wouldn't be poor! Ask Benny Hinn or any of the Prosperity Gospel preachers - hello suckers!

Posted by CParis | May 25, 2008 9:19 PM

Isn't it at least possible that Parsley is being a rational actor here? In other words "1. I want McCain to win. 2. My endorsement is actually hurting McCain 3. Better withdraw my endorsement to improve his chances..."?

Or am I missing something here?

Posted by Sean Peters | May 25, 2008 9:58 PM

Maybe he had an ethical change of heart! Maybe he decided to join the the Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, and Quaker churches in opposing torture and the war! Miracles do happen!

Posted by Maria | May 25, 2008 11:02 PM

Tim K in the past has repeatedly demonstrated his racist tendencies (The darker the berry, the sweeter the juice), now he defends Hagee and Parsley.

Is there no end to your deficiencies, Tim? No wonder you're slated to die alone.

Posted by Tom J | May 26, 2008 7:36 AM