Radio shows

by Jen Green

Did Obama open a chasm for Romney to exploit with his endorsement of “homosexual marriage?” Did Romney bridge a gap between him and evangelicals when he spoke at Liberty? Can Rand Paul help to heal the rift between his father’s supporters and the GOP Establishment?

Will this End Badly for Obama?

Making the official announcement that he is the first sitting American President to support so-called “homosexual marriage” may have earned Barack Obama some serious cash in fundraising, but it may also have cost him dearly in other ways. Rasmussen polls since his announcement show him slipping behind Romney for the first time. Other polls show about half the country “doesn’t care” about the issue, but 26 percent polled say they definitely will vote against him now.

Social conservative leaders hit the airwaves over the weekend suggesting that Romney needs to make hay with this issue. Both Rick Santorum and Tony Perkins sounded a bit desperate (and almost wistful) that voters could (finally) look at the two men and see a difference.

It’s nice of them to say but it’s really not true (and they know it, which is why they word it the way they do). Romney’s record in Massachusetts is anything but pro-marriage. In 2008 he came out on Hardball with Chris Matthews for “gay adoptions,” and in December 2011 at a New Hampshire debate he proclaimed he was a “champion” of gay rights. He is in favor of civil unions, and benefits for “partners.”

He is merely defending a word, not an institution.

So, for now, the left will vilify him while Fox News and the establishment will build him up a warrior for marriage. Some will fall for it . . . because they are naïve to his true record or because they simply want to believe it. But, if Mitt Romney were to win and govern America the way he governed Massachusetts, marriage will be destroyed on a federal level just as he did to it in his state.

Was it Worth It? 

Liberty University, billed as “the world’s largest evangelical university” had their commencement this weekend. Their keynote speaker was Mormon Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. For all the hullabaloo they caused by inviting a cult member to speak in their pulpit at the largest ceremony of the year, they didn’t get much in return. His speech did not mention God, none of the social conservative issues that would “rally” evangelicals around him—except in his one “sustained applause” line when he said that “marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman.” Course, he didn’t say WHY it is that way. I guess those in attendance were willing to take what they could get . . . which wasn’t much.

But, he did finagle a way to quote one of America’s most popular seeker-friendly pastors when he said “Men and women of every faith, and good people with none at all, sincerely strive to do right and lead a purpose driven life.” Again, no explanation of how someone can be “good” without God, and how someone without God can lead life with a purpose since our purpose is to glorify HIM, but as I said, Liberty didn’t get much for the price of admission.

The New GOP?

We had the opportunity to interview Kentucky Senator Rand Paul on our show on Friday. His next engagement after speaking with us was at the Iowa Faith and Family forum. His speech there has caused ripples.

He  addressed some of the key disagreements Establishment types in states across the country, including Iowa, have had with the numerous Ron Paul supporters who have been elected to positions of authority within their state GOP. He urged them to recognize that Ron Paul supporters “aren’t hurting the party [ . . . ], they are helping to grow the party.”

The party establishment has always urged us to “widen the tent” and “expand our base.” Hmm. Let’s see if they are willing to take their own advice.

As a friend of mine said, “He’s talking to RINOs the way they have always talked to us.” Wonder how they like it.