« Poling: Plus ça change ... | Main | Menken: Bias has consequences »

June 23, 2011

Pawlenty leads GOP hopefuls in evangelical poll

Nearly half of evangelical leaders want to see Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty win the Republican nomination for president in 2012, according to a poll of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Asked whom they would name the GOP nominee, 45 percent of the leaders said Pawlenty, the association reported Thursday. Fourteen percent said former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney; Twenty-two percent were undecided.

Pawlenty met with the association’s board of directors in 2008.

“Tim and Mary are devoted followers of Jesus, bright, articulate, a proven record and have none of the negatives of the other candidates,” said George Wood, General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God.

The National Association of Evangelicals posed the question in the June edition of the Evangelical Leaders Survey, its monthly poll of “CEOs of denominations and representatives of a broad array of evangelical organizations including missions, universities, publishers and churches.”

The association asked: “Assuming Barack Obama is the Democratic candidate, if you were to choose a preferred Republican presidential candidate for 2012, who would you name?”

Association President Leith Anderson said Pawlenty’s popularity “might be expected since he is so often identified as an evangelical.”

“Like the rest of the nation, there are still many undecided,” Anderson said. “With more than a year before the national nominating conventions, a lot can change.”

Romney is a Mormon. The association said none of the evangelical leaders polled mentioned Romney’s religious beliefs as a reason for naming another candidate.

“He has the executive experience, business background, moral principles, and electability to become the next President of the United States,” said Ron Boehme, Director of Youth With A Mission, U.S. Renewal.

Four years ago, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee was the top choice of leaders polled by the association.

Posted by Matthew Hay Brown at 1:51 PM | | Comments (19)


It is not surprising that the evangelicals are falling in line behind Pawlenty. The presumed front runner (Romney) has that whole Mormon cultist perception thing, that evangelicals can't stomach and that the rest of us can't take for the same reason, along with his false business acumen.

Romney's "business" was taking control of in-trouble companies, gutting them to the core (putting thousands out of work) then selling them (pocketing millions along the way), and most of them eventually went belly-up anyway. Romney was a vulture, who put lipstick on sick pigs after eviscerating them, and sold them for a profit before they died. When he tries to run on that record, Obama will have an easy ride to a second term and the Right (corporate Right) knows it. What they (the corporate Right) wants, is a candidate that can sell to the doctrinaire base without offending too many centrists (aka fence sitting dolts, who don't know the difference between good and evil). They are counting on the doctrinaire base, whom they need to be every bit on board with the corporate effort to concentrate even more wealth at the top, to make plutocratic rule an unchallengeable fact. That they are using the evangelicals in an attempt to achieve this goal is to be expected, they are the only segment of the population that, being already willing to accept absolutism in their delusional religious beliefs, can also subscribe to the absolutism of doctrinaire right-wing propaganda. Pawlenty is the patsy's choice, and getting the centrists to buy him depends on how high the right can ratchet up the fear levels and how low they can keep employment levels down, without getting caught, until election day.

And you call Christians delusional. Wow that little paranoid post about the corporate right. Any chance you can produce proof of the existence of that corporate right? I'm not a supporter of either Rommney or Pawlenty but I found your post entertaining and disburbing.

This is a time when the future of our nation is at stake. It is a time to look beyond our own interests and get behind the one person who has the ability to turn around our failing economy and restore jobs to America; the candidate who can best beat BHO in 2012.

It is real people who are suffering. Restoring jobs, pride, dignity and family relationships needs to be paramount in our actions during this most difficult of times.

Richard Mouw, professor at Fuller Theological College says that "Evangelicals' angst is partly motivated by the strong expansion of the Mormon church. Competition is a huge factor...they are competitors in the field of evangelism." This is a time for pastors to examine their own motives. Candidates who live a clean life and provide good examples should not have to pass a religion test. The Constitution affirms that.

Bobbie has no factual basis for any of his left wing extremist propaganda and it’s every bit as absolutist as the right he rails against so much. A typical post for him. A lots of accusations and attacks and no real substance to support his raving paranoia. From insulting centrists for looking objectively as opposed to falling in line with the propaganda of extremism to attacking candidates based on the perceived manipulation by his own version of Satan the Corporate Right Bobbie’s post provides proof that the left has as many nut cases as the right. Good and evil? You sound more like a the very evangelicals you ripped on. The one thing missing was actually intelligently pointing out things that should concern voters about either candidate. You are a poor mans Olbermann.

rino - And you are just a corporate shill doing your job. I hope you are getting your thirty pieces of silver for the job you are doing, because I would hate to think you would do something so despicable for free.

Bobbie I’d like to say your response surprised me. However, it was exactly what I’d expect from a paranoid left wing nut job unable to look beyond political propaganda and myth. As out there as any diehard Fox news follower I will say you use of a biblical reference surprised me. Once again instead of making your point with logic and evidence you simply make baseless accusations in a pathetic attempt to bully anyone questioning your dogmatic absolutist political nonsense. Anything not in line with your absolutist left wing propaganda is evil. For someone who rails so often against those who believe in God as believing something never having the slightest bit of proof for you seem perfectly willing to do it with your satan the corporate right. Never mind that you provided not even a shred of evidence to support your claims and even ridiculed those who stand in the middle and look at facts as dolts. That's why no one with any degree of common sense and intelligence takes anything you say seriously.

Rather disappointing that any a person's religion or lack of it becomes such a factor in determining candidates.

rino - Since the founding of our country as a secular state, religion has attempted many times to intrude beyond the bounds our founders established. The inclusion of "In God We Trust" on our coinage in 1862 and later on our currency in 1957, were both propaganda ploys (one against the South, the other against the USSR), that never should have been tolerated.

Today religion is making an attempt to institutionalize itself inside the government, going so far as to invade our bedrooms to contol breeding practices. It is bad enough that taxpayer money is spent for textbooks provided to students being indoctrinated in parochial schools, as well as transporting them for the same purpose. If ever there was a time when we should be examining the motives of hard-line religionists who mean to take positions of power in our society, that time is now, or we might as well get rid of The Constitution altogether and surrender to theocratism. Personally, I will go down fighting to protect that document and its hopes and aspirations. You, on the other hand, seem bound to destroy it for the crumbs your corporate master's drop from their table to the cheaply bought shills.

I actually agree with everything you said in that first paragraph. By the way it’s misguided religious people who have done the intruding. Somehow I doubt God cares what our money says. Unlike you I can be objective.

Today the secular world is also trying to restrict the free exercise of religion as well. I believe San Francisco was considering passing some rules to eliminate the circumcision of infants. A practice which has been around in the Jewish religion going back to Abraham. There are those who like to see hate speech slapped on anyone speaking out against homosexuality. The door of intrusion swings both ways. You only concern yourself with own direction. I can only assume your impersonal breeding references remark has to do with abortion. Sorry to once again have bring reality into your liberal fantasy world the pro-life movement contains not only religious but agnostics and atheists. To try and frame it as religion invading people’s bedroom is radical liberal propaganda.

While I oppose any public funds being spent on any private or parochial schools your indoctrination comment is beyond ludicrous and likely based on complete ignorance. Having been at parochial schools myself and having kids in both parochial and public school I can say the only difference was that the quality of the education was far superior at the parochial schools. Far more indoctrination went on at the public schools where were thinking and questioning seemed to be discouraged. Maybe that explains your tainted view of the world.

I realize in your left wing demented left wing fantasy anyone who thinks objectively or questions your propaganda is labeled a servant of your satan the corporate right. Of course you’ve yet to even remotely support with even the slightest evidence. Like a good little liberal sheep you bleat the far left line and when questions you attack the person as opposed to answering questions which would cause you to actually stop and think objectively.

rino - Even you cannot hide what the corporate Right is doing to assert their absolute dominance of our society, now that they have one political party dedicated to furthering their interests to the exclusion of the "We The People" of Constitutional myth, with a portion of the other party on board too. The blatant actions of the Neocon appointees who LIED their way onto the Supreme Court, have turned that branch of government into a corrupted device to make corporate entities into "super citizens" who cannot be touched by people who get in their way.

The corporate Right has all but declared war against the rest of society and you are just a pathetic foot soldier in their effort. I can only assume you are doing it for the few crumbs they drop from their table to the willing few who prostitute themselves in their cause. Maybe you think there is a place for you at the grown-up table, but they will gut you and cut you loose the second they don't need you any more, just like they are now doing with the Middle-class.

Bobbie what can’t be hidden is your complete lack of proof for any of that deluded paranoid left wing rant. Compared to you Moore & Olberman are conservative. You sound about as out on the left as Palin, Limbaugh, Beck and all the other fear mongers on the right.

Why is it you argue against religion so much based on lack of proof yet seem so willing to swallow the demented paranoid nonsense of radical left wing nut jobs. The only good thing I guess is it helps balance the demented paranoid lies of the radical right wing loons. All I see is a lot of accusations and paranoid fear with no reasonable or logical argument as to why anyone should take you what you say seriously. Instead you attack me personally as some sort of instrument your satan this corporate right you keep warning about. Maybe I should call you Chicken Little, or more appropriately Chicken Littel.

You can always tell an extremist by the need to frame things as some sort of war against good and evil. You gave a classic example. It’s unfortunate that the empty barrels on both sides with their paranoid fear driven accusations manage to keep any real change from getting done in this country.

rino - Like I said, you can't hide it. I attack the corporate cabal you serve, you attack me instead of showing how I am wrong, which you can't. Pretending that the outrageous idiots on the Right don't represent what you stand for is a laughable tactic also, as every position you support is right off the corporate "gimme list". It costs you nothing to dump on them as you are only here to drag the center to the Right, and having an admitted affinity for the clown princes of the Right would not serve that purpose.

Bobbie for some reason my first response didn't seem to make it. Let me remind you of what you have said here countless times to others. The burden of proof is on the person making the positive statement. That would be you. I am under no requirement to prove your claims wrong. It's up to you to make a logical argument for them. For some reason you seem to want to apply a different set of rules for your claims the n the claims of others. Maybe it's me but that rings of hypocrisy. Either make a logical case with proper evidence to support it or admit you can't. I'm more than willing to take your outlandish claims of this evil corporate right seriously if you can make a convincing argument.

rino - One can hardly pass up the opportunity to set you straight when your invitation is so inviting. When you stated, "I'm more than willing to take your outlandish claims of this evil corporate right seriously if you can make a convincing argument", you must remember that when defending the actions of thieves who have been at it for so long, there has to exist a long history of evidence, despite great efforts to hide it, or spin a rationale that somehow makes it seem doctrinally acceptable.

I can start out with the already established fact that fully 1/2 of all the wealth in this nation has come to be in the pockets of around 4000 individuals (admitted proudly by none other than "Forbes" magazine). They, of course, said that the top 400 were in possession of 1/3 of all wealth and that all 400 were billionaires. Many billionaires, unfortunately, were not wealthy enough to make that august list of 400 and if you take them and add to them those poor souls who only controlled mere hundreds of millions (perhaps the next 3600 wealthiest Americans), I think is is safe to assume that 4000 control 1/2 of everything. You may dispute this, but I'm pretty confident in the math. Needless to say, such concentration of wealth is not an accidental happenstance, as laws have to be crafted within a framework of seeming legitimacy to make so much accrue to so few, without generating outright rebellion.

I could point out how the concentration of wealth due to war profiteering during the Civil War, made the Republican party into a whole new animal from the one we associate with Lincoln, and whose monopoly on power for the next few decades set the stage for what we have today, in a party that serves the interests of the very fortunate few. With a packed Supreme Court by 1886, the forces of wealth started to solidity the corporate dominance of society by giving person-hood to them, which has led to super citizen status today as a result of another corporate packed court decision called disgustingly enough, "Citizens United", a decision that fairly well dismantles the electoral process in favor of letting only money, and primarily corporate money, have a voice in our fate.

But the proof that really tears it has barely hit the news yet. I will not bore you here with the particulars, as the effort would take far more typing than I have already expended on an effort that will undoubtedly be dismissed by you out of hand anyway. It establishes the corporate conspiracy that is now going on to finish off what is left of our quaint notions of how noble we are because we are Americans. It ties the Republican party directly to the zipper on the corporate pants. An organization with the innocuous sounding name of the "American Legislative Exchange Council" (ALEC for short) with founders named Koch, controlling Republican politicians across the country and who are fully involved in pushing the corporate agenda to create a wealth driven autocracy. They really should guard their documents and meeting records better, because it is all leaking out and you are going to have to eat it. Visit and see all the proof you can swallow.

Bobbie lets start with your first proof. I don’t ever recall saying that wealth allocation in this country, or any other isn’t disproportionate. Disproportional allocation of wealth doesn’t in and of itself prove any evil corporate right exists. The fact that the wealth have more influence doesn’t prove it either. I could counter with the fact that some of those wealthy are not on the right of the political spectrum. Also if you were to check contribution records you’d likely find that the wealthy and powerful play both ends. Finally you have not connected those wealthy into any singular group. There has always throughout history been such concentrations as wealth so all you’ve done draw an irrelevant conclusion from some information to try and paint the picture you believe.

Your second paragraph is while interesting is a distortion of the facts to what you believe not what actually is. The reason corporations were granted rights was to justify the double taxing of corporate profits. These so called super citizens lack the ability to vote so I’m not sure what is so super about them. You seem to focus on corporations money in politics while ignoring the flow from liberal groups like labor unions, trial lawyers and other groups. In fact both of those groups spend far more on elections than corporations and since corporations tend to focus on their interest as opposed to the interest of this corporate right you cry about in the end far more pull comes from the left. That said I’d be happy to ban all money corporate and liberal groups from the process.
Your website link is a propaganda site and I could give you similar links regarding liberal interest groups and their spending and influence. I could talk about or unions. But let me instead give you this link of heavy hitters in political contributions.

If you look at that list carefully you will notice the definite slant towards liberal democratic agenda. Why don’t you chew on that piece of reality for a while and come back when you can actually prove your point. I’ve seen Christians give you more to support their claims than you managed in that post.

rino - I've made my case, in spades. That you would blow it off was to be expected. You're just a low life corporate owned whore, doing your job, which evidently includes denigrating the truth and those who bother to express it. That you would even defend having 1/2 of all the wealth in this country in the pockets of less people than live on on small city block, or whose numbers would be a bad gate at a AA baseball game, only shows how mind numbingly corrupted, or cluelessly stupid ( I vote corrupted) you are. You would be ethically better off stupid.

rino - For your further edification about those you doctrinally serve, I offer you this bit of information that you, as a corporate owned shill, will also dismiss out of hand because it was not squeezed through the sphincter that is FOX News.

The corporate wealth driven plan to reorder our society to serve only them, is progressing according to plan, as long as they can distract the majority of us with minutia, and as long as they can manipulate the propaganda stream to paint anyone who is exposing the truth as a paranoid conspiracy socialist/communist.

The former conservative plan to accomplish this task involved slowly corrupting the political system and brainwashing the citizenry with jingoistic flag waving dogma, until enough of the electorate could be slowly won over to make the takeover seem seamless and legitimate appearing. The small government mantra and shifting all taxation away from the rich (now evidently only to be doctrinally referred to as “job creators”) was to win of its own perceived merits (Potemkin Village style). Then came the NEOCONS, who instead of leading us to the final goal through prudent fiscal manipulation through our electoral processes, desided that the quickest way to reach a total corporate dominated society would better be served by deliberately looting the government by transferring great gobs of unfunded wealth from the Treasury directly into the pockets of the corporate rich, bringing down the entire system. This would be done by bankrupting the country, setting it into free-fall and then handing it over to the Democrats, whom they would then obstruct to make them fail and, by default, take the blame. Once swept back into power by a panicking electorate, willing to sell out their freedoms for any kind of perceived security, the corporate Right would then claim a mandate to undo every gain made by the lower classes in our 236 year history.

Reagan got the ball rolling (the first manipulated puppet) by shelling out almost a trillion dollars for the “Star Wars” fiasco, which has born little fruit except to transfer all that wealth into the pockets of the already rich, and ended up being part of the tripling of the National Debt that was accomplished during the twelve years of Reagan/Bush1. Unfortunately, for them, the electoral process still allowed rational choices to be made and Clinton was elected.

The NEOCONS (under the direction of Cheney/Rumsfeld, for their corporate masters)got a taste of power under a clueless malleable puppet under Gerald Ford (restrained only by others, most notably Howard Baker, who held the real power in that sham presidency), and began making plans for their own clueless puppeted regime, accomplished when they got the clueless dolt George W. Bush “selected” president.

In the eight years of the Bush2 puppetancy, the National Debt more than doubled again, with the country and economy hemorrhaging as they handed it off to Obama. The rest of the plan has been so obvious since that time, that they have barely been able to hide it and because they thin k we are a nation of complete dolts, they think they can run this scenario to the finish line before America wakes up and fights back. They may be correct about that and they may win, in which case, you can kiss this country, and all it promised, good-bye.

Bobbie what a surprise instead of even trying to refute anything I said you make a personal attack on me. Not even a smart one at that. It's the same old worn out one you and other liberal extremist use time and time again when you can't support your raving paranoia with facts. You are basically a liberal sheep bleating the same old propaganda over and over. When someone challenges you to back your claims you attack them claiming they are either clueless or in league with the forces of darkness. The really sad thing is I knew that was what you were going to do. You are the liberal equivalent of Rush Limbaugh.

Bobbie what a surprise instead of even trying to refute anything I said you make a personal attack on me. Not even a smart one at that. It's the same old worn out one you and other liberal extremist use time and time again when you can't support your raving paranoia with facts. You are basically a liberal sheep bleating the same old propaganda over and over. When someone challenges you to back your claims you attack them claiming they are either clueless or in league with the forces of darkness. The really sad thing is I knew that was what you were going to do. You are the liberal equivalent of Rush Limbaugh.

One more thing maybe you could point out where I defended the allocation of wealth in my last post. You operate with the extremist view that anyone who doesn't agree with your crap is somehow defending the status quo. It's narrow minded thinking like yours which prevents real meaningful change from getting done.

Post a comment

All comments must be approved by the blog author. Please do not resubmit comments if they do not immediately appear. You are not required to use your full name when posting, but you should use a real e-mail address. Comments may be republished in print, but we will not publish your e-mail address. Our full Terms of Service are available here.

Verification (needed to reduce spam):

About Matthew Hay Brown
Matthew Hay Brown writes and blogs about faith and values in public and private life for The Baltimore Sun. A former Washington correspondent for the newspaper, he has long written about the intersection of religion and politics. He has reported from Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and the Middle East, traveling most recently to Syria and Jordan to write about the Iraqi refugee crisis.

Most Recent Comments
Baltimore Sun coverage
Religion in the news
Charm City Current
Stay connected