The story:

SAN ANTONIO — Senator John McCain got support on Wednesday from an important corner of evangelical Texas when the pastor of a San Antonio mega-church, Rev. John C. Hagee, endorsed Mr. McCain for president. Mr. Hagee, who argues that the United States must join Israel in a preemptive, biblically prophesized military strike against Iran that will lead to the second coming of Christ, praised Mr. McCain for his pro-Israel views.

The response:

Yesterday, Senator John McCain said he was “very honored by Pastor John Hagee’s endorsement.” The Republican presidential hopeful also called Hagee “the staunchest leader of our Christian evangelical movement,” citing the minister’s pro-Israel stance.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this today:

“There are plenty of staunch evangelical leaders who are pro-Israel, but are not anti-Catholic. John Hagee is not one of them. Indeed, for the past few decades, he has waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church. For example, he likes calling it ‘The Great Whore,’ an ‘apostate church,’ the ‘anti-Christ,’ and a ‘false cult system.’

Hagee, to put it mildly, is an unpleasant fellow – I went over to McCain’s website to see if there was more on this, and so far I haven’t even found it mentioned. I hope that Senator McCain will address this issue – but I am also quite confident, due to McCain’s past actions vis a vis Catholicism, that he doesn’t in any way, shape or form agree with Hagee’s views of the Catholic Church. My bet is that McCain was aware of Hagee’s staunchly pro-Israel stance, and that is what McCain was thinking of in obtaining this endorsement.

In general terms, I never engage in a fight with my brothers and sisters in Christ – and even though I view Hagee as terribly wrong, I won’t even fight him on this. I’ll pray he’ll allow God to enlighten him on the truth of these matters, but I see no profit in fighting a fellow Christian – however erring – when the whole of religion is under attack in our nation. I understand, and respect, Mr. Donohue’s position and agree that such things need to be brought up, and condemned, but in my view there is a need, also, for a careful understanding of the real stakes in 2008; Hagee’s influence is relatively small, and no matter how destructive he might be, he won’t do nearly the damage that a President Obama or a President Hillary will do.

UPDATE: Given that our lefties are trying very hard to pick a fight between McCain and Catholics over this, I think it worthwhile to bring up Catholics for McCain; there are quite a lot of my fellow Catholics who are enthusiastic backers of John McCain and this is a much stronger indicator of McCain’s views about Catholicism than the fact that the anti-Catholic Hagee endorsed him.

UPDATE: John McCain responds to the firestorm:

Yesterday, Pastor John Hagee endorsed my candidacy for president in San Antonio, Texas. However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not.

I am hopeful that Catholics, Protestants and all people of faith who share my vision for the future of America will respond to our message of defending innocent life, traditional marriage, and compassion for the most vulnerable in our society.

Of course, it would have been better if the endorsement had never happened – but it did happen, and one can’t undo the past; meanwhile, we don’t want to alienate those followers of Hagee who are sincere, if misguided, Christians who do want what is best for America and the world. This is the best way around it all – making lemonade out of the lemons, as it were.

Seems that a liberal can’t crawl enough before it:

ROME, FEB. 27, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Senator Barack Obama’s claim that it was a “mistake” to vote in favor of an attempt to save the life of Florida woman Terri Schiavo is a statement that “dismisses life,” said her brother.

Bobby Schindler, the executive director of the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation, told ZENIT today that the senator’s comment “dismisses life in favor of death.” Schindler is in Rome to participate in the Pontifical Academy for Life’s congress titled “Close By the Incurable Sick Person and the Dying: Scientific and Ethical Aspects.”

Schindler also received an award today on behalf of his parents, Robert and Mary Schindler, from the Italian Movement For Life and Science and the association Life Rome for the couple’s efforts to fight on behalf of their daughter’s life, whose death was induced by the court-ordered removal of her feeding tube in 2005…

…During a presidential debate in Cleveland, Ohio, on Tuesday with Senator Hillary Clinton, Obama said of his vote in favor of the attempt to save Schiavo’s life: “It was not something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped.

“And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. As a constitutional law professor I knew better. I think that’s an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action.”

Given the number of times Obama has votes “present” or failed to vote at all, I can’t see where he think that “inaction” is a bad thing. For all of Obama’s rhetoric about hope all I can see in him now is the spindly, decayed finger of despair – a hideous malformation of hope, which has twisted itself into being the advocate of hopelessness – thus the utter degradation of modern liberalism.

Contrast this nauseating sell-out of basic human decency to John McCain’s views:

There is no greater nobility than to sacrifice for a great cause and no cause greater than protection of human dignity. Decency, human compassion, self-sacrifice and the defense of innocent life are at the core of John McCain’s value system and will be the guiding principles of a McCain Presidency.

If you are pro-life, there is only one person to vote for in November.

CTV (Canada) reports that Obama’s rhetoric against NAFTA is only rhetoric, and shouldn’t be taken seriously.

“Barack Obama has ratcheted up his attacks on NAFTA, but a senior member of his campaign team told a Canadian official not to take his criticisms seriously, CTV News has learned.

Both Obama and Hillary Clinton have been critical of the long-standing North American Free Trade Agreement over the course of the Democratic primaries, saying that the deal has cost U.S. workers’ jobs.

Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama’s campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada’s ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.

The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.”

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAJYMgX4JuU%5D

Greg McIsaac of CTV stands by the story, despite denials by the Obama campaign, and has said on record,”The facts of our story are accurate.”

HAT TIP: The Flyover Report.

UPDATE: Camp Obama denies… gee, ya think? More from NRO’s Jim Geraughty… Still more…

The New York Times, which already declared its intent to thwart John McCain’s candidacy, is now following up its previous smear with another ridiculous story questioning whether John McCain is even eligible to be President of the United States, because of his place of birth.

The question has nagged at the parents of Americans born outside the continental United States for generations: Dare their children aspire to grow up and become president? In the case of Senator John McCain of Arizona, the issue is becoming more than a matter of parental daydreaming.

Mr. McCain’s likely nomination as the Republican candidate for president and the happenstance of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 are reviving a musty debate that has surfaced periodically since the founders first set quill to parchment and declared that only a “natural-born citizen” can hold the nation’s highest office.

Almost since those words were written in 1787 with scant explanation, their precise meaning has been the stuff of confusion, law school review articles, whisper campaigns and civics class debates over whether only those delivered on American soil can be truly natural born. To date, no American to take the presidential oath has had an official birthplace outside the 50 states.

“There are powerful arguments that Senator McCain or anyone else in this position is constitutionally qualified, but there is certainly no precedent,” said Sarah H. Duggin, an associate professor of law at Catholic University who has studied the issue extensively. “It is not a slam-dunk situation.”

Mr. McCain was born on a military installation in the Canal Zone, where his mother and father, a Navy officer, were stationed. His campaign advisers say they are comfortable that Mr. McCain meets the requirement and note that the question was researched for his first presidential bid in 1999 and reviewed again this time around.

Obviously since this has been vetted before, the New York Times really has no reason to try to inject new life to the claim. This seems quite typical of the Left smear tactics. When Mitt Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts, his Democrat opponents called his residency into question because he had been temporarily living in Utah to manage the Olympics. When Tom DeLay has retired from the House and moved to Virginia, Democrats challenged his residency (by saying he was still a resident of Texas) in order to keep him on the ballot.

It’ll be interesting to see how the Democrats pursue this. If they make any attempt to challenge McCain’s eligibility, then they will do so out of fear.

The Los Angeles Times has the story…

As he emerges from a sometimes- bitter primary campaign, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain poses a stiff challenge to either of his potential Democratic opponents in the general election, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.

The findings underscore the difficulties ahead for Democrats as they hope to retake the White House during a time of war, with voters giving McCain far higher marks when it comes to experience, fighting terrorism and dealing with the situation in Iraq.

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton have made ending America’s involvement in the war a centerpiece of their campaigns. And even though a clear majority of those polled said the war was not worth waging, about half of registered voters said McCain — a Vietnam vet who has supported the Bush administration’s military strategy — was better able to deal with Iraq.

In head-to-head contests, the poll found, McCain leads Clinton by 6 percentage points (46% to 40%) and Obama by 2 points (44% to 42%). Neither lead is commanding given that the survey, conducted Feb. 21-25, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The Arizona senator is viewed favorably by 61% of all registered voters, including a plurality of Democrats

So, not only does McCain beat both Hillary and Obama in head-to-head match ups, but when it comes to dealing with the most important issues facing our country, McCain clearly has an edge as well.

This is good news, but we shouldn’t give too much weight to these polls. For starters, various other polls have shown different results, and a poll — even a scientific one — isn’t going be able to account for voter turnout factors, particularly the potential effect an Obama candidacy in the general election on the youth and minority votes, both of which lean Democrat.

But, liberals should stop pretending they have a landslide victory coming for them.

Earlier today, John McCain said of Obama, “I understand that Sen. Obama said that if al Qaeda established a base in Iraq that he would send troops back in militarily. Al Qaeda already has a base in Iraq. It’s called al Qaeda in Iraq.” Obama, in response said, “I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.”

While that may have gotten his supporters riled up, the fact of the matter is that Obama’s not telling the truth. All you have to do is do a search in the official 9/11 Commission report to find plenty of references to Iraq and al Qaeda — while there’s nothing that proves any collaboration in attacks, there’s quite a bit that indicates plenty of contacts and various forms of cooperation. Thankfully, QandO already ran through all the references back in 2004 and posted relevent excerpts which you can see here.

Unfortunately, Obama can lie through his teeth and it doesn’t matter. His supporters want to believe him and everything he says so badly they’ll just swallow everything up… Obama sounds more like the popular high school jock running for class president (promising shorter classes, longer lunch periods, and banning homework) than he sounds like a real leader who actually has the knowledge and experience it takes to be the President.

K-Lo reports the news.

I’m devastated to report that our dear friend, mentor, leader, and founder William F. Buckley Jr., died this morning in his study in Stamford, Connecticut.

He died while at work; if he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas.

More from The Associated Press…

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: John McCain on Bill Buckley;

I am very profoundly saddened to hear of the passing of William F. Buckley Jr. and offer my deepest condolences to the Buckley family. Bill had many friends, including my parents, who he even took time to visit when they were stationed at the U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii. My father and mother very much admired him and so did their son. With Bill’s passing, freedom has lost one of its greatest defenders. Bill was a great American who helped change the course of history. When conservatism was a lonely cause, he bravely raised the standard of liberty and led the charge to renew the principles and values that are the foundation of our great country. A man of tremendous vision and big ideas, he founded the National Review in 1955 and through its pages and his other endeavors, as a lecturer, commentator, debater and author of dozens of books, inspired many and advanced an intellectual rigor that transformed American politics. Bill was an American giant who shall be missed.

Just astounding:

London, Feb 26, 2008 (CNA).- A committee in the British House of Commons will investigate Catholic schools following the Bishop of Lancaster’s instructions to schools to place crucifixes in every classroom and stop “safe sex” education, the Independent reports.

Patrick O’Donoghue, Bishop of Lancaster, had circulated a 66-page booklet instructing Catholic schools to stop “safe sex” education. Bishop O’Donoghue wrote, “The secular view on sex outside marriage, artificial contraception, sexually transmitted disease, including HIV and AIDS, and abortion, may not be presented as neutral information.”

Additionally, he told the schools not to support charities that support abortion. He singled out Amnesty International, which recently renounced its neutrality on abortion and now favors the abortion of children whose mothers were raped in war zones.

The government’s investigating committee is chaired by Labour Party member Barry Sheerman, who is reportedly concerned the Church is adopting a “fundamentalist” line.

“A lot of taxpayers’ money is going into church schools and I think we should tease out what is happening here,” he added. “We seem to have a shift in emphasis on the ground despite what the reasonable voices of the leadership are saying,” Sheerman said.

Why does Sheerman get to decide who is reasonable? This is the thing which is really bothersome about this – a politician is going to bring pressure on a religious body to toe the government line because the politician has arrogated to himself the right to decide what is reasonable, and what isn’t. Now, if Mr. Sheerman thinks the Church wrong; that is fine. If Mr. Sheerman thinks that the Church is so wrong that it should not receive any government funding in Britain, then he may move a bill in Parlaiment to do just that. But to use a government committee as an attempt to browbeat the Church into doing the secularists’ will, that is an abominable infringement upon the rights of the people.

Chesterton said a very long time ago that, in the end, there is the Church, and her enemies – and Mr. Sheerman is demonstrating this to us in very stark terms. It isn’t enough for the Sheermans of the world to have all sorts of taxpayer funded programs to promote the leftist agenda – arrogantly self assured about their moral superiority, lefists insist that no one be allowed to dissent from their worldview. Britain, like the rest of Europe, is far gone down the road to socialist slavery – but this is the sort of world that the left wants to bring to the United States; a government controlled world of enforced political correctness. You want it, you can have it – all you have to do is “hope for change” in 2008, rather than learn and think.

Well, when someone said that the GOP governor of Alaska is sharp as a tack, and a babe, I just had to take a look – and correct on both counts:

Challenges lie ahead, but let’s look back at the last year and at some accomplishments. In Education, we are shaping a three-year funding plan to finally shift the school debate from perpetual “money talk” to accountability and achievement! We are focusing on foundational skills needed in the “real-world” workplace and in college. In Natural Resources, we’ve opened arms to welcome development – but only responsibly, or not at all. Thanks to those abundant resources we will be able to provide for the urgent needs of our citizens. In Revenue, Alaskans ushered in a new era of stability with ACES, our new oil and gas appraisal system. It will provide protection even when oil prices aren’t as high as they are now. Ronald Reagan warned, “Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets.” I agree and that’s why we must save our surplus. My administration is proposing $7 billion dollars into the Permanent Fund, Constitutional Budget Reserve, the Education Fund and PERS/TRS debt relief. In Fish and Game, we are managing our fisheries based on science, not special interests. Alaska’s predator control program is showing results with greater wildlife populations so more Alaskans can hunt and feed their families the world’s healthiest, cleanest protein on God’s green earth. In Environmental Conservation, our Climate Change Sub-Cabinet has begun working on ways to adapt to impacts and we’re implementing the voter-mandated Ocean Rangers program. In Administration, we redesigned technology for government efficiency and transparency, including our nearly-complete online checkbook, showing Alaskans where their money is spent.

A lot of this relates, of course, to Alaska issues, but the Reaganism is loud and clear, and not just in the wonderful Reagan quote; free markets, free people, responsible stewardship. As for the “babe” judgement – picture available here.

McCain could do far worse in his Veep selection.

Debating tonight… Leave your thoughts…

UPDATE, 10:17 PM: Not a good night for Hillary… She’s coming across as desperate to get a word in..