Monday, March 12, 2007

Brummett, Republibaptists and Rudy

John Brummett figures religious conservatives must be "extremists" because they, for example, do not want to vote for this man to be their next President.

It has been a while since I have de-constructed Brummett. His latest offering for the bird-cage scolds "Republibaptists" for their reluctance to back Rudy for President. In addition to being for abortion and gun control and the homosexual agenda, Giuliani has behaved abominably in his "private life", openly cavorting with a mistress while still married to his second wife.

While I too am amazed and frustrated that religious conservatives continue to support President Bush despite his abject failure to govern Biblically, no reasonable person (a group that of course excludes lefty newspaper columnists) could blame them for not supporting "America's Mayor".

Brummett tries to put the onus on the Republibaptists by writing, "What of this business of character, anyway? Can it really be defined by a number of marriages?" and "Finally, might not character be better defined by observable actions rather frequency of marriage?"

John Brummett is not an idiot, but those statements are idiotic. It's just silly babble. The logic does not rise to the level required for the Paron School newspaper before that school was shut down to Brummett's applause. The number of marriages may not define character, but it is a fair indicator of it. I am not anxious to disqualify people for something that happened when they were young, because many of us are not the same people that we were in our twenties, but Giuliani was and is a grown-up in all this. If a man's wife can't trust him, then why should I trust him? And yes character is defined by "observable actions", and how you treat your wife is an observable action. Its like an old Pentecostal preacher once told me, "If you don't minister to the people who see you in your underwear, YOU DON'T HAVE A MINISTRY". How they treat their wives is a big indicator of who they are. Most of the rest is just a media creation.

Brummett pulls out the one scripture liberals love to quote "judge not that you be not judged" and wags it at the "Republibaptists" after judging them to be extreme, intolerent, and judgemental. All adjectives that could just as easily be applied to old T-Rex himself.

I wonder why the media is trying so hard to ignore canidates like Congressmen Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and Tom Tancredo? They are running, but almost no one knows about it because the media won't talk about them. Or even someone else. There are many millions of decent men in this country who have been faithful to their wives. Is there not one among them that the Republicans can put forward?


Anonymous Anonymous said...


What a disgusting fellow.

8:52 AM, March 13, 2007  
Blogger GOPin08 said...

Brummett IS an idiot. The guy is questioning Rudy's character and points out Rudy's social indiscretions when Brummett supported Slick Willie??? Seems like a double standard to me.

4:02 PM, March 13, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To gopin08: I think Brummet is defending Giuliani and saying that his actions after 9-11 should define his character more than his history with women. You might want to reread the article.

7:22 AM, March 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Finally, might not character be better defined by observable actions rather frequency of marriage?"

Gee, I thought divorces were observable actions.

10:13 AM, March 14, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Brummett had enough Sunday school lessons growing up to know that "judge not" has a modifier at the end that changes the meaning from the usual usage (ie. wagging finger saying you aren't following the Bible when you judge me). That modifier isn't even a modifier it is the meat of Christ's statement.

What Jesus really said was that when judge someone the standard you use will be applied to you. "Judge not" is not a command, its advice warning of the danger contained in the rest of the statement.

For example, Newt to me is totally unfit because while he was harping on Clinton's behavior he was cavorting with a mistress of his own.

I'm no Rudy fan by any remote stretch but at least I don't recall him hypocritically declaring someone unfit for mistress cavorting while he was doing the same. That doesn't suddenly make his other positions right, it just means the judgment for his "indiscretion" as modern political language phrases it will not be judged as harshly as Newt's.

7:29 AM, March 16, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, hypocrisy is the only real sin?

12:57 PM, March 16, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Then most Republicans in office during the impeachment of Clinton better be praying real hard. Can't wait for that Madam's list of phone numbers to come out. Sure, there will be plenty of Democrats' numbers on there, but I bet it's those Republican's who are the "interested parties" trying to buy the list along with the news organizations.

7:52 AM, March 17, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home