As I continue writing about the Young Evangelical seduction, I want to point out, after receiving some e-mail, that I am, in fact, a young Evangelical in my mid-to-late 20s. Usually, age is irrelevant, but given the subject matter, I think it’s of some import.

Now, when one looks at how the secular left is getting the children of many Evangelicals to support their causes, we have to look at the issues both in the church and the conservative movement that are behind this. We’ve already talked about the lack of a systematic teaching of a biblical worldview and materialism.

Modern liberalism is a thoroughly post-modern philosophy that, at its core, denies absolute truth. Thus it becomes possible to hold the position that abortion is the taking of an innocent human life, but should be legal, because that’s just my opinion, and you may have a different one. There’s a different truth for every person. No culture is better than another culture. No system is better than any other system. Our constitution is a living document subject to redefinition.

Christianity, on the other hand, affirms absolute truths about God, Christ, the World, and society. How can you mix Christianity and post-modernism in politics? It’s pretty easy if you’ve been doing it in church.

A Sensitive Topic

To say the subject of morals in the church is a sensitive topic would be an understatement. An element in many churches is legalistic, placing demands on people that scripture does not place. I was in one church where we were told not to drink root beer from brown glass bottles because people would think we were drinking alcohol. Never mind that even drinking alcohol is never strictly forbidden in the scriptures, though drunkenness is.

Some elements demand pastors prescribe rules on courtship and schooling found nowhere in scripture. These preachers focus on cleansing the outside of the cup through external rules, rather than letting God work to change hearts. Many have been spiritually abused by such legalists and my heart goes out to these wounded souls.

Yet I’m reminded of the passage of the Screwtape Letters where Screwtape advises Wormwood to get Christians to focus on the exact opposite of their most pressing problem. Legalism is a minor problem compared to the church’s refusal to stand for biblical truth.

There is a maxim: “Where the scriptures speak, we will speak. Where the scriptures are silent, we will be silent.” Yet in many cases, where the scriptures speak, churches are silent. Issues such as divorce and cohabitation are rarely preached on from most pulpits. In a select few pulpits is the issue of abortion discussed.

Churches often appeal to Matthew 7’s command to, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.” In the context of scripture, when one reads the whole passage, it’s clearly about hypocrisy. Religious post-modernists turn it into a requirement to abandon all moral judgment about many things scripture speaks to. In other words, they use it, ironically, as a pretext to judge as acceptable what the bible condemns as sin.

However, Christ not only tells us to judge righteous judgment (John 7:24), which is odd if we were to resign from all moral judgments, but also lays out a system of Church discipline in Matthew 18:15-17, and Paul lays this out further in 1 Corinthians 5.

Yet, Church discipline is never practiced in most churches for several reasons: 1) fear of losing members, 2) fear of lawsuits, and 3) if church discipline is practiced, the person can just go down the street and find another church that will completely ignore the applied discipline. And condemn the church to anyone who will listen, and that will again hurt the church’s precious reputation, membership numbers, and coffers.

Thus, many churches misuse Matthew 7 and committing adultery is treated no more seriously than drinking root beer from a brown glass bottle.

This is especially problematic in churches where homosexuality will be condemned, but other equally grave sins are left untouched from the pulpit. What the church does is show partiality, and to young evangelicals, the hypocrisy comes across crystal clear.

Rush to War

To close this look at the issues in the church that have led to some of these shifts among young Evangelicals, I think we need to turn the issue of war.

War is a tough issue. Scripture doesn’t bar America from defending itself. It behooves us to stand behind our soldiers with love, support, and plenty of prayer. They’re risking their lives in service to our country.

While I did not support the Iraq War going in, once our troops are committed, there’s only one acceptable course: victory. Defeat strengthens America’s enemies and bring us dishonor at home and abroad.

That said, some Christians on the right are far too quick to embrace war. War is sometimes necessary, but there are consequences: The cries of widows and orphans on all sides, the inevitable collateral damage, the destruction of property and the scattering of families, economic destruction, loss of national treasure, and loss of liberties. The law of unintended consequences also comes into play, as we saw manifested with the fall of Saddam bringing persecution to Iraqi Christians. Proper respect for human life and our freedom, as well as humility, requires that we ensure war is absolutely necessary before we enter into it.

We must also be sure we do not pursue war with the dangerous belief that democracy alone can make a good society. Remember, the democratic process gave us Hitler. Let us not attribute to voting transformative powers that should be attributed to God alone.

Standing by America’s troops as they go into battle is one thing. Being out front agitating for wars without thoughtfully considering the consequences sends the wrong message to young Evangelicals.

Okay, it’s time to take a look at Senate races out there and where they stand, in terms of the GOP risk of losing seats.

Virginia: The State’s two immediate ex-Governors are going against each other, but it’s not even close. The latest Rasmussen poll has Warner by 27 points, while the PPP poll has him up by 31. Barring Former Governor Mark Warner being called to run as Obama’s VP, Former Governor Jim Gilmore is most likely toast. Certain Democrat Pick-up

New Mexico: Rep. Steve Pearce’s (R-NM) numbers against Tom Udall have been nearly as bad, with Udall’s lead in the low 20s. The only thing he has going in his favor is the support of Club for Growth and really members need to dig deep to help him out in the Fall. For the Club to involve itself in the Senate primary and then see the candidate suggested go down in flames: 1) weakens the Club’s external credibility, 2) hurts its internal credibility in terms of finding competitive candidates. Of course, some New Mexico Republicans might want to blame the Club for a November loss. Completely unjustified. Wilson trailed by more. Almost Certain Democratic Pick-up.

New Jersey: A little talked about race, but it may be a sleeper for Republicans. Four-Term Senator Frank Lautenberg survived a primary challenge, but one Rasmussen poll showed this a 1-point race. It may not be that close, but Lautenberg is vulnerable. His challenger, Former Congressman Dick Zimmer may not be a Conservative sweetheart, but he’s barely more liberal than McCain and if Obama is the President, someone who votes 60% conservative could counterbalance a lot of politices. However, I have to say that New Jersey has a tendency to give Republicans false hope in Senate races. Nearly every race there is close and it’s been 36 years since Republicans won one. Still, put this one as a sleeper that Republicans could win if Zimmer does things right and Lautenberg makes a few mistakes. Likely Democratic Retention.

New Hampshire: Former Governor Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) has a double digit lead on Senator John Sununu (R-NH) in recent polls. Sununu has several million dollars more in the bank than Shaheen and plans to re-introduce himself to voters. In tough year, Sununu has a fighting chance. Leans Democratic Pick-Up.

Colorado: The latest Rasmussen Poll has Congressman Mark Udall up by 9 over conservative Bob Schaffer. The state’s been trending Democratic in the last two years, but Schaeffer is probably a stronger and more appealing candidate than past Republicans. Still, it’s an uphill climb. Leans: Democratic Pick-Up.

Louisiana: The Democrat’s most-at risk seat. Polls show Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA.) clinging to a narrow lead in a state where Democratic elected official incompetence at State and local levels was a huge contributor to the Katrina crisis. Given the normal Democratic trend of the year that polls are so close, indicates that Landrieu has a fight on her hands from Democrat-turned-Republican John Kennedy. Slightly Leans Democratic Retention.

Alaska: Senator Ted Steven (R-AK) is nip and tuck with Anchorage Mayor Mark Begitch (D) and is dogged by corruption charges. The question of which party will retain this seat may be answered later this Month when Alaska hold its primary. Former Alaska Representative David Cuddy was within 15 points of Stevens in a poll conducted last month, but Cuddy now has several opponents for the anti-Stevens vote. If Cuddy can win the Primary, he probably will probably best Begitch in the poll. But if Stevens emerges weakened but not defeated (particularly with less than 50% support in the GOP primary), it could be another matter. Toss-Up.

Mississippi (Special): Former Senator Trent Lott did his party no favors when he left his Senate Seat 1 year after being re-elected. Now new Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) is left in the fight of his political life against Former Governor Ronnie Musgrove. And the polls tell us nothing other than the race is extremely close. Toss-up.

Kentucky: Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has a race on his hands against millionaire Bruce Lunsford (D). With the political blood of Ernie Fletcher on the floor, McConnell can’t take his own re-election effort for granted, which will hurt his ability to raise funds for other Republicans even though recent polls given McConnell a slight edge. Leans Republican Retention.

Maine: Senator Susan Collins (R-ME.), one of the Senate’s more liberal Republicans has had her lead over Congressman Tom Andrews (D-ME) shrink over the past three months from 16 points in the April Rasmussen poll to 10 in May, and 7 in June. The question is if Andrews has a hit ceiling or if he can turn out a 2-tearm incumbent. Leans Republican Retention.

Minnesota: The danger to Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN)’s re-election has gone down considerably after issues with Al Franken’s taxes came out, tarnishing his image. Note to Democrats: Send in the clowns is a great Sinatra song, but makes for a lousy Senate candidate selection process. Leans Republican Retention.

Oregon: Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) may still face trouble this fall, but polls have indicated a fair-sized lead for Senator Smith, who in a recent ad touted his ability to work across party lines with Barack Obama. This probably indicates Smith’s sense of the political situation in Oregon, and he’s a good judge of it. Leans Republicans Retention.

North Carolina: Senator Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) was said to be near the top of Democratic target lists among incumbents. However, she’s gotten out to a solid lead and barring a major stumble should be fine. Likely Republican Retention.

My prediction for U.S. Senate: Democrats +4.

Onto the Presidential race and I only have one change to the map. Based on a huge amount of date, I can no longer consider North Carolina certain McCain territory. I’ll have it as leans McCain, but with most polls showing the race in North Carolina 4 points or less, I can’t say its certain. My  electoral map of certain states gives McCain a 201-200 advantage. You can view it here as it won’t display on F3 Coalition.

My general map is 252-238 Obama with 48 electoral votes undecided when taking into account leaners.

Young Evangelicals are considered to be a key swing vote in this upcoming election. I’d suggest the issue of Young Evangelicals is far more important than this upcoming election. How they ultimately go but could determine the fate of our nation.

It is said that these young Evangelical voters are concerned about issues such as social justice, poverty, and the environment. These are not bad things to be concerned about in and of themselves. If because of this concern people become aware of the crisis of human trafficking, band together in community to help people escape poverty, and create backyard oasises n their home town, that’s a good thing. If, on the other hand, we recreate the mistakes of the 1960s and 70s and destroy people by making them dependent on government, create useless feel good government policies, and cripple the economy through idiotic legislation based on pseudo-science, that’s another matter.

How We Got Here

Why are so many Young Evangelicals being lured by people who are generally pro-abortion, anti-traditional morality, and radical? I would suggest that there are issues within the church and within the conservative movement and the Republican Party that will explain these issues. This column as well as the next one will deal with the issues in the church. A series next week will deal within the conservative movement.

Given the wide disparity between different churches under the label of Evangelical, there will be some general issues that will perhaps not apply to your church or my church, but their presence in many Evangelical churches across the country helps explain why so many young Evangelicals are moving left.

No comprehensive training of the mind: Catholics and many mainline Protestants use Catechisms to communicate the formal views and doctrines of their church and instill them into their children. There is no catechism for Evangelicals, in fact many would disdain the idea as formalistic. The result of this is that Sunday School classes and Youth Groups often provide a hodgepodge of scattershot ideas, but fail to inculcate a Biblical worldview, which Barna has found only 5% of Americans hold to.

Sermons are in many cases no help. The Word of God is as deep as the ocean, but I would think it fair to say that, in many churches across America, it’s a rare event when the congregations’ ankles get wet. Too often these sermons are general and non-challenging in order to be “seeker sensitive.”

While the church is lackadaisical about teaching a consistent biblical worldview, the public schools that 90% of church kids attend are certainly not lackadaisical about secularist views, nor are the makers of movies that Christian parents send their kids to without a second thought. Secular humanism is pushed in both education and the arts, and those two mediums take scores more of a child’s time than does the Church.

This general lack of biblical literacy allows secular liberals to slap a couple scriptures on old style Socialism and sell it to young Evangelicals hungry for adventure and purpose.

Focus on the Family has produced a wonderful series called, “The Truth Project” that teaches a biblical worldview, but it’s definitely an upstream effort against a sleepy church and a culture that’s more than happy to fill in the gaps.

Materialism: Within American Christianity, there are many people who sincerely love and serve God, regardless of denomination. However, there is also a greater degree of materialism than you will see in churches across the world. This is made even worse by the presence of a prosperity gospel that teaches God’s will for everyone is material prosperity.

There are many Evangelical Christians who live to keep up with the Joneses: bigger houses, bigger cars, more expensive toys. These are the things of a blessed life. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with these things in and of themselves. But when they become the focus of our lives, and when we would rather insure that we hold onto these things than put them at risk by standing for what’s right, children see. Many people do not become involved in public issues such as abortion, the display of the Ten Commandments, or the sanctity of marriage because they fear it will cost them their bobbles.

Ultimately, Christianity teaches that man has needs that go beyond the material, and it doesn’t just end with salvation as the focus of some churches would seem to indicate. As a minister, Paul declared, “Woe to me if I don’t preach to the Gospel.” And with each of us, it’s the same. “Woe to us if we don’t do what God has called us to do.” This spiritual shallowness at home, in the midst of physical abundance, leaves a great emptiness, a search for meaning.

It may be filled by Mission organizations that work through the local church. When it is not, and far too often, it is not, far left organizations are more than happy to provide grandiose meaning and purpose that promises something better than the shallow and materialistic faith witnessed at home.

Podcast Show Notes

Obama tries to buy the Evangelical vote while halting between two opinions on gay marriage.  Kos agrees with me that Obama is no new type of politician. (Hat Tip: Stop the ACLU.) And Binky Boy jumps off the bus, Obama has merrily thrown others under.

Things the left would like to do when they take over: Fund colleges that refuse to allow military recruiters on campus. (Hat Tip: Talk Left.)

Plus the Beverly Hillbillies in North Dakota. There’s oil in them thar plains.

No cutting in line, the State of California says it’s the law.

The danger of lowest low fertility (i.e. irreversible population decline.)

Plus the media makes a big deal anytime any Republican no matter how obscure does anything wrong, why is this story about a Democratic leader in North Carolina not getting more play? (Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin.)

Plus more complications from Gardasil. (Hat Tip: Idaho Values Alliance.)

Click here to listen, click here to download.

Well, Club For Growth is crowing about Governor Huckabee’s endorsement of Don Young. I’m on record saying that this was something I couldn’t go along with it.  I support Sean Parnell for Congress.

Huckabee didn’t pick the right guy. Nobody does 100 percent of the time. Huckabee’s choice comes from mostly out of loyalty for Young’s support. I can understand it, I don’t agree with it.

That said, the Club for Growth is full of hot air:

Over the past year, the Club for Growth has been criticized by Huckabee and some conservatives for painting the Arkansas Governor as a fiscal liberal. If ever there was proof that that the Club was right from the start, it is this outrageous endorsement of Rep. Young who embodies the worst of the Republican Party’s wasteful habits.

So, endorsing Don Young proves one is a fiscal liberal? Perhaps. I mean after all, Huckabee called him a hero to taxpayers with the bridge to nowhere, etc. Oh wait, that wasn’t Mike Huckabee, that was Grover Norquist and Americans for Tax Reform.

Why hasn’t the CFG run an ad explaining why Don Young is a corrupt fiscal liberal just like Grover Norquist? Probably because Norquist is one of the most powerful men in Washington. You give him this type of smackdown and you’ll smart from it. Huckabee, though is fair game. I don’t believe it’s true of Norquist (who I have many disagreements with) nor do I think it’s true of Huckabee.

To me, this show’s how blindly destructive the Club’s Huckahate is. Is there little press release going to hurt Don Young? Is it going to make people more willing to vote for Sean Parnell? Or, if this thing spreads will it make Alaska’s huckavoters (Huckabee finished 2nd in Alaska) give pause about whether they want to give Parnell their support and give the Club a victory in the Huckawar.

Instead of making this election about Don Young, Sean Parnell, the future of Alaska, and Congressional reform,  CFG is trying to turn this into a battle between them and Mike Huckabee, thus reducing the chance of their guy and my guy winning up there. It’s stupid and it’s destructive, but it’s anti-Huckabee, so the CFG says, “Let’s do it.”

Finally, Kathryn Lopez declares, “Goodbye, Huck.” as if:

1) She’s had anything positive to say about him since Iowa and there was any chance of her supporting him in any future effort after he beat Romney.

2) One Endorsement finishes a political career. This has never been the case, and if so who is going to go and check everyone’s “Endorsement purity” record to decide who is forever voted off?

Podcast Show Notes

Wesley Clark cluelessly attacks John McCain’s executive experience (did he forget who he was supporting.)

Barack Obama delivers a slick speech on patriotism.

A pro-life 527 forms to tell the truth about Obama’s support for infanticide.

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) helps save school vouchers in DC for now.

In Sweden, we now have government regulated birthday invitations.

Click here to download, click here to add this podcast to your Itunes.

IMPORTANT: Please take our listener survey

The Heller decision has been disdained by many liberal activists as “conservative judicial activism” to sell their favorite meme: That conservatives are big hypocrites. Of course, this is little more than liberal language revisionism, inspired by linguist George Lakoff.

Judicial activism, as the left is defining it, would mean anytime a law passed by the States is overturned by Court, it is judicial activism. Really? What if a law were passed requiring criminal defendants to testify against themselves in court? Would it be judicial activism if the court overturned it? Of course not. There has been a place for judicial review in the process since 1802.

So when does judicial review become judicial activism? I think you can apply two basic standards to the question (and I’m sure some people will add others):

1) Does the decision stick to the issue at hand?

This is a critical point. From Heller, we learn simply that the total ban put in place by the District of Columbia is unconstitutional because the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The Court doesn’t give an exhaustive list of permissible and impermissible regulations. It does state that this ruling doesn’t mean the insane and felons have a right to keep and bear arms, nor is it addressing banning guns in certain “sensitive locations,” such as schools. Is a reauthorization on the assault weapons ban, gun registration, etc. constitutional under the court’s ruling? We won’t know and we shouldn’t. The court wasn’t considering those issues and shouldn’t take it upon themselves to decide them in advance.

By contrast, an activist Montana Supreme Court ruling not only overturned a law regulating abortion, but advised the legislature not to send them specific other abortion regulations, or a law against assisted suicide, as they would be overturned as well. Pre-emptive judicial review is judicial activism, along with any ruling that goes beyond the scope of what has been argued and placed before the court.

2) Does the Court stick to the law and the Constitution?

In Heller, the court looked at some specific issues. What did the authors of the 2nd Amendment mean? This was the total of the decision. Liberals accuse the court of ignoring the first part of the 2nd Amendment, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” yet the court didn’t ignore it.

The court actually spent many pages on the topic and they designated this part of the Amendment, a “prefatory clause” that explains the reason for the Amendment, but doesn’t limit the right contained in the Amendment’s operative clause granting the right to bear to arms.
This prefatory clause had the following reason for existence, the Court found: “The Anti-federalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army, or a select militia, to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.”

In short, the point is that the right to keep and bear arms was a check on federal usurpation through an armed citizenry. The National Guard has nothing to do with the purpose of the Second Amendment.

Compare this sober reading of the facts to the bizarre ramblings of Justice Harry Blackmunn in the Roe v. Wade decision. Blackmunn’s argument begins by pointing out that American abortion laws had been approved in the past 110 years or so (by the same people who approved of the 14th Amendment) but that ancient pagan religions had no ban on it, that the Hippocratic Oath’s strict rules against abortion were the expression of a Pythagorean ethic, that the AMA had moved towards supporting abortion, along with American Public Health Association. What this has to do with interpreting Constitutional Amendments ratified in American in 1791 and 1868 is beyond the mere mortal, but not the activist judge.

The decision of a good judge reads like he’s interpreting the law, the decision of a bad one reads like he’s discovering it. When Supreme Court Justices concern themselves with laws in Europe, evolving social standards, or the general best policy for society, they’ve gone from interpreting the law to writing the law by fiat.

Want to see what’s behind some of the fuss about Bobby Jindal? At Race42008, Dave G warns that Jindal is “headed down the Huckabee route.” In the course of complaining about the legislative increase, we get down to brass tax about what’s bugging him:

But never fear, Gov. Jindal is not the sort of politician that will back down on all of his principles. Especially when those principles involve religion. Indeed, Jindal has just signed into law a measure that will allow public schools to teach something other than science in science class. Local school boards can now approve “supplemental materials” for schools to include in discussions of evolution. Something tells me those materials won’t involve the scientific method (because if they did, they’d already be there) and will involve lots of concepts that belong in philosophy, theology, and religion classes, not in science class.

With these actions, Gov. Jindal is off to a very Huckabeean start. But that should probably have been anticipated. Jindal was always more of a culture warrior than most of us secular conservatives liked to believe when we saw a non-Caucasian, young, smart conservative who could actually form coherent sentences make his way onto the stage. And he was always less interested in fiscal issues than economic conservatives would have preferred. He voted for the tax-hiking, pork-laden farm bill and against the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Meanwhile, he continues to support a ban on abortion with no exceptions, and has written articles on how Catholicism is the true Christianity and the true path to God. If you thought Huckabee’s women-should-submit language was unfairly taken out of context, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

So let’s just say that this skeptic remains especially skeptical of Jindal, who seems at this point to be an economic moderate and hard-right social conservative more in line with the former governor of Arkansas than with the former governor of California. If this trend continues, I suspect that economic conservatives, moderates, and Independents will ensure that a future Jindal presidential campaign has the same fate as Huckabee’s, and once again, a certain segment of the Republican base just won’t be able to figure out why.

First of all, there’s plenty of scientific texts on intelligent design, as well as global warming, and cloning (all of which are covered by the law). How wicked of Bobby Jindal. He wanted kids to be able to see something on Global Warming other than an Inconvenient Truth.

Bobby Jindal broke the unwritten law. Rather than paying lip service to the concerns of social conservatives he actually did something.

Neil Stevens has risen in defense of that most defenseless group, the Club for Growth in regards to their attack on Governor Bobby Jindal:

Hairs shot up on the necks of a great many Republicans. At least, among those who took Governor Mike Huckabee’s side against the organization, Club for Growth’s subdued, objective comments about the recall seemed an implied attack on Jindal. Jindal was The Next Target of the Club For Greed™.

However I saw no such thing. Certainly CfG wasn’t jumping to Jindal’s defense, but they are a single interest group. It’s not their job to get awed at the way he wantonly tears down the corrupt, fascist Kingfish legacy. In fact, if Jindal were to raise the tax burden of his state way up, I’d appreciate it if CfG were to warn us before we go and nominate Governor Jindal in 2016.

Why the posts, though? Soloveichik says that CfG is attempting to follow the news on all the leading prospects for Senator McCain’s running mate, and of course that includes Jindal. CfG is also looking at the economic records of each candidate, just as they did for the Presidential candidates.

I believe it. Governor Jindal does not have much of a record yet. It’s not his fault, but he hasn’t been in office for even a year yet. So naturally, Club for Growth has little to work with in evaluating him, and so when they count the pay hike as a strike against him, they don’t have much else to balance against it. But just the same, they’re not treating this one thing the same as, say, Governor Huckabee’s long record which included multiple substantial tax and spending increases.

One wonders what Huckabee people they’re responding to. As Leon at Red State linked to my piece cross-posted at the Next Right, I’m assuming they mean me.  To quote Robert DeNiro, “I don’t see anyone else here, so you must be talking to me.” 

Anyway with Club for Growth, it’s not what they tell you, It’s what they don’t tell you.

They were correct about Huckabee’s tax and spending increases. What they didn’t tell you is that Huckabee’s veto could be overridden by a majority vote and that he had a Democratic legislature that’s 70-90% Democratic through his entire tenure in office.

They didn’t tell you that there were 2 court rulings that forced additional money to be spent on Education and Medicaid.

I wonder what conservative here could have done better than Huckabee did under those circumstances?

As for Jindal, the idea that his record is short is notable except during his brief time in office, he accomplished a school choice program and introduced and gained passage of a tax cut for business.

His educational accomplishments has been given short shrift, and I’ve seen no mention in recent discussion of his vitally needed business tax cut.

They’ve gone after his Congressional record, but somehow failed to note his 98% anti-pork performance on the 2007 RePork card. Their own report card! And they didn’t bother to mention it when trying to explain that his record was uninspiring among their list. I don’t know, I consider someone with a 98% anti-pork record to be fairly inspiring.

I didn’t come out for Huckabee until after Super Tuesday. But then I began to research this, I became angry. The Club for Growth didn’t lie, but they sure as heck deceived me with incomplete information. They’re doing the same thing with Bobby Jindal.

The nomination of John McCain can be laid at the feet of the Club for Growth whose obsessive compulsive campaign against Mike Huckabee gave John McCain the South Carolina Primary and the nomination. Where we’ll their economic puritanism lead in 2012 or 2016?

I still read the Club for Growth blog and they find stories I use on my blog or website,two or three times a week. I have two currently endorsed CFG candidates, Lt. Governor Sean Parnell and Congressman Paul Braun (R-GA) on my slatecard, along with former CFG candidates, Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho) and Michelle Bachmann (R-MN). There’s no denying that CFG does some good work, but their recent antics have caused me to view their statements with a far-more skeptical eye.

Podcast Show Notes

Do we really need to know about comic heroes political affiliations?

Plus, the latest creepy Obama supporter trend: taking his middle name.

Plus Jon Stewart has his Jay Leno moment as he learns to stop worrying and poke fun at Obama like any other politician.

Republicans do a study to conclude that their strategy is not working after losing 3 special elections in traditionally Republican areas.

Richard Daley fights for Chicago’s ineffectual gun ban that puts the lives of citizens in danger.

Canada’s Human Rights Commission surrenders in their attacks on Mark Steyn and Maclean’s Magazine to go after easier pickings.

The bungling incompetence of Arapahoe County, Colorado traumatizes an 8-year old boy and his parents.

San Francisco shows contempt for the troops by banning Junior ROTC.

McCain says Amnesty a priority: today, yesterday, and tomorrow.

The Millionaire exemption gutted as a piece of McCain-Feingold bites the dust and calls into question what type of judges McCain will appoint.

Second Amendment updates from the South and Detroit.

Canadian Government forces kids to be taught homosexual propoganda against the will of parents. (Hat Tip: Political Correctness Watch.)

A dumb global warming solution: banning drive thrus.  (Hat Tip: Wizbang.)

The Vatican encourages Christian involvement in politics.

Homeless people in Texas pay it forward and give generously to help the poor in Africa.

Click here to listen, click here to download,