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.
Blogs For Victory 
Mark-
“That video is from September of last year. As I’ve said, McCain is probably keyed in on Hagee’s support for victory in Iraq and is likely unaware of Hagee’s views on the Catholic Church.”
If that’s true and we give McCain a huge benefit of the doubt on this then that means he’s too stupid to be president. If McCain and his people can’t do adequate research on who the pal up too I would dare trust the man to know jack squat about foreign policy.
Look Mark, Hagee has been a well-known anti-catholic for years. In any event his anti- Catholicism is the least of his problems as far as I’m concerned. This man is a fanatic who wishes to bring about the “rapture” by instigating the Muslims into an all out Holy War with Israel. He pretends to favor Israel but in reality he views Jews as just pawns in this chess game to the end of days. He has said before that the Jews who haven’t accepted Christ will be consigned to the depths of hell. Now I know that may not bother the likes of Jeremiah, Js, Freedom1, and maybe even you but as time goes on and more about this man’s views come to light it’ll destroy McCain’s chances at becoming president. In that case I’d say…. keep it up. 🙂
southerner – or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…
So, isn’t a pastor a person, a citizen, and entitled to worship as he pleases AND say what he wants? Who says it has to OR?
But I’m amazed that no liberals have a problem with the fact that a lot of us think you support organized murder. And I’m not even all that religious.
And doesn’t Louis Farrakhan advocate the same Christian/Muslim conflict. Certainly he has expressed extreme disdain for Jews. He support Obama. Same anger at Obama? Same outrage? What do you say, babykillers?
Mark, in what sense was was my post (#38) above, ‘off topic’? It converned Hagee’s beliefs and his connections with John McCain. Why was it deleted?
Kahn,
So, shorthand version of you is, “I think that Democrats are so bad that it doesn’t make any difference to me that my presumptive Republican candidate can be a complete hypocrite and panderer who will do and say anything, including saying that he is “very proud” of being endorsed by a religious bigot, so long as he is not a Democrat. Principles be damned as long as he has an ‘R’ after his name.” Short and to the point.
Kahn-
“But I’m amazed that no liberals have a problem with the fact that a lot of us think you support organized murder. And I’m not even all that religious.”
What fanatics think of us doesn’t affect us because they are irrational oweing to the fact that they are….fanatics.
“And doesn’t Louis Farrakhan advocate the same Christian/Muslim conflict. Certainly he has expressed extreme disdain for Jews. He support Obama. Same anger at Obama? Same outrage? What do you say, babykillers?”
Nice try slippery Pete but you already know that Obama doesn’t accept Farrakan’s endorsement. He has stated publicly that he repudiates them. Go try to float your “gems” in the toilet bowl where they belong.
Diana, I don’t think the endorsement is all that important. Clearly, just as you don’t think Farrakhan’s endorsement is all that important. Point?
Meanwhile – both Democrats advocate organized murder. AND, it is happening daily, not just some theory.
So why would I drop support of McCain? Do you agrtee to drop support of Obama because of the Farrakhan endorsement? Well? I haven’t even seen any of you respond to it at all.
Kahn,
I guess you haven’t been keeping up with the news (or many of the posts above). Obama rejected Farrakhan’s support quickly after it was offered. Also, Obama never had Farrakhan campaign for him or act as opening speaker at one of his events as McCain has done with Hagee:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Multimedia/Player.aspx?guid=5ca47a36-c7d8-4cf4-8451-0390c4581916
Well done for completely missing the point once again Kahn
I think it is just dandy for McCain to accept the endorsement, and I would like a picture of the two hugging.
Scratch that, too yucky.
Let’s just say I do not see how this helps the Republican candidate, so I am all for it.
Nietzsche – So I’m a fanatic now? What day and hour does the fetus change from being part of the mother to it’s own individual? Again, I’m not even that religious – you must be new here.
As to the Farrakhan endorsement, yes he rejected it after being pressured. It’s still there though. I wonder why ole Jew and white hating Louis Farrakhan endorsed him? Don’t you?
AGAIN – what do I care about the endorsement of one whacko? You don’t care when one endorses YOUR candidate. AND, your side advocates and practices organized murder.
Kahn,
Let’s try to lay things out nice and simply for you. Please follow along:
1. Under federal tax law, church officials can legally discuss politics, but they cannot endorse candidates or parties without risking their tax-exempt status. It is illegal for Hagee to endorse McCain. A pastor who endorsed Mike Huckabee is being investigated by the IRS.
2. As NiP already pointed out, Obama flatly rejected the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan. McCain has said, “[I]n 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.” Fine. Does he reject the endorsement? Nope.
And that’s why the outrage. That, and the hypocrisy of Mark attempting to dismiss this issue, when, if it were a Democrat, he’d be all over it for days.
Amanda,
1. So a religious person gives up the Constitution Right to free speech? You think that LAW squares withe CONSTITUTION? Really, you do? Because that looks like infringement on religion and speech from where I’m sitting. I’m not surprised that none of you are jumping up to decry this suppression of speech.
2. Obama “flatly rejected” Farrakhan’s” support when pressed by Russert and Clinton during the debate. Just to be clear. Right? He didn’t do it before. And he had to be pressed into doing it. At first he just said he decried Farrakahns anti-semitic remarks. (Apparently, he’s OK with the anti-Christian and anti-white remarks).
Yet that support is still there, isn’t it? Why does Farrakhan support Obama? WHY? It’s the same question you’re asking about McCain – so?
3. AND STILL – Both Democrats support organized murder and McCain does NOT. THAT trumps either of these stupid endorsements.
WHAT DAY AND HOUR DOES A FETUS BECOME A BABY? You don’t agree, and you don’t care. B-A-B-Y-K-I-L-L-E-R-S.
kahn,
Do you think all abortion doctors are Democrats?
Kahn,
I support a woman being able to do what she wants with her body. You support forced birth.
Call it what you want.
Senator Obama says that Louis Farrakhan’s anti-Semitic statements are “unacceptable and reprehensible”.
What has Senator McCain said about John Hagee who says that the world’s largest Christian denomination is “the Great Whore”? Why, here’s what he said while standing next to John Hagee in front of the press and not in the imaginations of those who want to create a “tie” between Senator Obama and Louis Farrakhan:
That, my friends, is what you call hypocrisy. In 2000, a John Hagee would have been an example of the “agents of intolerance” that brought “shame” on the Republican Party and the country in the words of Senator McCain. Yesterday, he was “very proud” to have that agent’s support. There’s no way to dress this up. It’s rank hypocrisy and pandering. However, that doesn’t matter here. It’s okay if a Republican does it.
So, Kahn, you want to talk about abortion instead of political pandering. We get it.
Kahn,
Again, did Farrakhan campaign for Obama and introduce him at camapaign events as Hagee has done for McCain? No he did not, there was no reciprocal relationship between them as there is between McCain and Hagee, a man whose support McCain is “very proud” to have.
As for your ongoing abortion rants, the legality of abortions in the US is decided by the supreme court, not the executive (ever hear of Rov vs. Wade?). You really think McCain is going to do ANYTHING about banning abortion? What has the religious right’s poster child George W Bush done on this issue over the past 8 years? Answer: absolutely nothing. And McCain (in the highy unlikely event he was elected) would do nothing too. Why not? Because the great majority of Americans are in favor of keeping abotion legal, therefore it would be political suicide to try to turn Roe versus Wade around.
However it makes tremendous sense for McCain to take an anti-abortion stance as it gets credulous fools like you to vote for him.
The best Senator McCain can muster is to say that he doesn’t “agree” with everything John Hagee says. Pretty weak tea. However, saying that Hagee’s repeated public statements attacking the Catholic Church were “unacceptable and reprehensible” might cost him some evangelical Christian support. Can’t have that, now can we?
js, where in the Constitution does it say a woman cannot decide to have an abortion?
No matter how hard you try to pick a fight here, you’re not going to get one from me.
Which only serves to highlight your massive hypocrisy. You scream loudly at every tiny imagined slight of Catholicism by people you perceive as liberals. Furthermore, you demand that Obama utterly denounce Farrakhan (which he did) because he offered Obama (unwanted) support.
Yet here is John McCain being quite proud of receiving an endorsement from a man who in no uncertain terms outright hates your religion, calling it a cult and a “great whore,” and all you have to offer is some mealy-mouthed platitude about Hagee’s support of Israel? Do you seriously not see the staggering hypocrisy you’re displaying, or are you merely OK with your staggering hypocrisy?
Kahn | February 29th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Amanda,
1. So a religious person gives up the Constitution Right to free speech? You think that LAW squares withe CONSTITUTION? Really, you do? Because that looks like infringement on religion and speech from where I’m sitting. I’m not surprised that none of you are jumping up to decry this suppression of speech.
If a church does not mind giving up its tax free status, then they can endorse all they want and campaingn all they want. Not all laws of this country are in the Constitution – you are just a little dim-witted here.
Jefferson was kind of involved in writing the constitution just in case you weren’t aware of that js.
Actually, Southerner, he kind of wasn’t.
The 55 delegates who drafted the Constitution included most of the outstanding leaders, or Founding Fathers, of the new nation. Thomas Jefferson, who was in France during the convention, characterized the delegates as an assembly of “demi-gods.”
I guess if Senator McCain were to call John Hagee’s statements “unacceptable and reprehensible” it might be an example of being an “agent of intolerance” in a campaign-harming way. One can only wonder what other words and principles Senator McCain is ready to shove under the Straight Talk Express along the campaign trail. We know that his saying “it is torture” about waterboarding during a debate a few weeks ago means nothing now. What’s next?
Retired Spook,
Nice catch on Jefferson, He was a great man. but he wasn’t able to be two places at once.
Mark,
Kudos for including this thread. It had to be a tough one. Perhaps next time Obama or Clinton picks up an endorsement from someone you don’t like, you will give him or her the same leeway.
Just remember folks, with John McCain taking foreign policy pointers from ‘pastor’ Hagee a vote for McCain is a vote for armageddon!
What’s even more embarrassing for all the attempt to dress up Senator McCain’s grotesque flip-flop on “agents of intolerance” is the fact that it seems, at least if Kahn is any indication, to be over abortion. That wouldn’t seem like much of a winner.
Under the best of circumstances, the possibility exists that a President McCain would have an opportunity or opportunities to nominate one or more justices to the Supreme Court which is the only influence he has over the issue. The possibility that he nominates someone does not mean they will be confirmed. The possibility that they get confirmed does not mean that the Court will hear any direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. The possibility that the Court hears such a case does not guarantee how such a new justice would vote on the particulars of the case heard. So, over that attenuated chain of possibilities, Senator McCain gets a pass for being willing to repudiate his own stated beliefs on a moment’s notice in order to accrue some perceived short-term political benefit. Who’s to say he won’t just dump his being pro-life if it suits the needs of the moment? After all, this is what he said in 1999:
Of course, he immediately turned around and repudiated his own statement then. Senator John McCain would seem to be most consistent in his inconsistency.