search forgrantsrecipientsfunderspeoplewebsite
researcharound the webhot topicsissuesconservative philanthropyresources

RELATED LINKS

Internal Links

Related stories:

Original MT Report Where's the outrage?

Cursor.org

MediaTransparency.org sponsor

More stories by Bill Berkowitz

PERC receives Templeton Freedom Award for promoting 'enviropreneurs'

Neil Bush of Saudi Arabia

Newt Gingrich's back door to the White House

American Enterprise Institute takes lead in agitating against Iran

After six years, opposition gaining on George W. Bush's Faith Based Initiative

Frank Luntz calls Republican leadership in Washington 'One giant whining windbag'

Spooked by MoveOn.org, conservative movement seeks to emulate liberal powerhouse

Ward Connerly's anti-affirmative action jihad

Tom Tancredo's mission

Institute on Religion and Democracy slams 'Leftist' National Council of Churches

Media Transparency writers

Andrew J. Weaver
Andrew J. Weaver &
Nicole Seibert

Andrew J. Weaver, et. al.
Bill Berkowitz
Bryan G. Pfeifer
Dave Johnson
David Domke
David Neiwert
David Rubenstein
Dennis Redovich
Eric Alterman
Jerry Landay
Mark & Louise Zwick
Max Blumenthal
Michael Winship
Phil Wilayto
Rob Levine

Fundometer

Evaluate any page on the World Wide Web against our databases of people, recipients, and funders of the conservative movement.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Bill Berkowitz
August 8, 2006

Conservative Christian Evangelicals take friendly fire from Ken Connor

In a series of columns in Ideas in Action, Connor, the former head of the Family Research Council, lambastes Tom DeLay, GOP opportunism and the Christian Coalition, and suggests engaging in civil debate with an emerging 'Christian left'

In early April, Ken Connor expressed his dismay that the scandal-ridden former Congressman Tom DeLay had been rapturously received by the crowd at the late-March "War on Christians and the Values Voters in 2006" conference. In a column, he observed that "the willingness of far too many Christian conservatives to cast a deaf ear and a blind eye" to DeLay's misdeeds was extremely disheartening.

In another column, Connor criticized the Christian Coalition of Alabama for its "series of scathing attack ads" that were an "inaccurate and unfair attack on trial lawyers." And in another, he suggested that liberal religious leaders shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, and should be engaged in a sincere and civil debate. In yet another column, he maintained that it would be mistaken if "some conservatives ...dismiss Al Gore's arguments [about Global warming] simply because he is Al Gore."

Last week in his column for the Center for a Just Society's (website) Ideas in Action newsletter, Connor cautioned Christian conservatives about becoming total pawns of the Republican Party.

Ken Connor is a trial attorney and Chairman of the Center for a Just Society, who knows the powerful organizations of the Religious Right from the inside, having once headed the Family Research Council (FRC), Washington, D.C.'s most prominent "family and faith" lobbying group.

Connor, who had succeeded former Reagan administration official Gary Bauer at the FRC, resigned from the organization in July 2003, citing unspecified "professional and personal reasons." According to a posting at Christianity Today, Connor left the organization because "of a disagreement with members of the board of directors over the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment." Some have speculated that Connor resigned because the organization was determined to strip the "Research" function -- the gathering facts and documentation -- from the operation and was more interested in raising its profile through rhetoric and speechifying.

In 2005, Connor, along with Colin Stewart -- who served as Executive Vice President for the FRC -- and Genevieve Wood -- who served for three years as Vice President for Communications at the FRC -- co-founded the Center for a Just Society. In addition to being the organization's Chairman he is also one of its principle spokespersons.

Only a pawn?

In Connor's provocative late-July column titled "Diamonds and Pearls: Are Christian Conservatives Being Bought Off?" Connor suggested that the GOP was trying to buy off "values voters" by presenting a flurry of conservative legislative initiatives that would hopefully appeal to its base:

As we approach the upcoming election, the Senate has been trying to energize the evangelical base by voting on bills supported by many at the grassroots level. The constitutional amendment against flag burning had little chance of ultimate success, but was brought to the floor anyway. The Federal Marriage Amendment had even less chance, but was voted on all the same. There are some authentic diamonds and pearls in the Senate's agenda. The bill that would prohibit the transport of minors across state lines for abortion without parental notification was brought before the Senate, and passed. Also, congress may soon debate a voucher program for students trapped in poor public schools.

We are glad these subjects are finally being debated. Nevertheless, few of these issues have been on the radar screen for the last year-and-a-half. Now, however, just before the election they become "priorities." Coincidence or calculation? A cynic might argue that most Republican senators really don't care about these subjects and that they are just doing what needs to be done to win in November. One who is not a cynic might easily come to the same conclusion.

Tony Perkins, the current head man at the Family Research Council has a less nuanced view of the GOP's legislative machinations. Recently, Family Research Council Action, the legislative action arm of Perkins' Family Research Council -- along with co-sponsors Dr. James Dobson's Focus on the Family Action, Rev. Donald Wildmon's American Family Association Action, and Gary Bauer's Americans United to Preserve Marriage -- announced the first annual "Washington Briefing: Values Voter Summit," scheduled for Washington, D.C. on September 22-24.

In late-July, Perkins issued the following statement:

We have seen an intense two weeks of value votes in Congress with the Pledge Protection Act, Internet Gambling, Preserving Mt. Soledad, Disaster Recovery and a Resolution supporting Responsible Fatherhood. We've had victories with the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, Fetus Farming Prohibition Act, Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, and the Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act all signed into law in the past six weeks. We continue to see victories in the courts recognizing the will of the voters on traditional marriage.

This conference in September will be a celebration of our victories and a strategy ensuring that values issues are high on the agenda for the upcoming elections. The nation saw two years ago what value voters can do at the voting booth. The past few weeks showed results. Now, we must continue the momentum behind this nation's strongest movement, Values Voters."

Recognizing an emerging Christian left

Connor's early-July column entitled "Come Let Us Reason Together" -- which later in the month appeared in the Washington Times -- recognized that the "Christian left" was finally "making its voice heard," and suggested that conservative evangelicals "should not be afraid to engage the evangelical left's ideas in a spirit of love. It would be a mistake, as we begin this dialogue, to view these men and women as ‘political enemies' rather than fellow members of the body of Christ. From the outset, we should insist that our discussions be grounded in our mutual love of Christ rather than our differing political commitments. Let Christ be the foundation upon which we all stand."

Many liberal evangelicals claim that the church, in its political thinking, has neglected a major aspect of Christ's concern: the poor and vulnerable. Their most cherished phrase is "social justice", and they say we conservatives have neglected it. Again, let's not dismiss this criticism out of hand. As I have written in the past, the Bible is unequivocal about our responsibility toward the poor. As Christians, we should not be shy about discussing our responsibility toward the "least of these," and we should think creatively about different ways in which we can serve them.

Connor pointed out that "The emergence of a progressive evangelical movement affords a wonderful opportunity to foster a public discussion about the role of faith in civic life. Sometimes, it must be admitted, we get lazy in our political thinking. We know that at some point we thought through the reasons behind our positions, but maybe that was years ago. It is always helpful to remember why we believe what we believe, reviewing our old arguments to see if they are still strong. Even worse, sometimes we allow others in the 'conservative coalition' to do our political thinking for us, even when they come from very secular starting points. Liberal evangelicals help us because they share our foundational commitment to Christ, yet they see political questions in a different light. As we actively dialogue with them about our political positions, hopefully both sides will benefit. Most importantly, let us pray that Christ will be glorified in the way we conduct our conversation."

Connor has also weighed in on corporate malfeasance and greed. In his column titled "Pierced With Many Sorrows: Greed and Corporate Corruption," Connor pointed out that the Center for a Just Society is a "strong supporter of the capitalist economic system ... [and] the value of free markets." But "when capitalism is unrestrained by moral scruples the result is often rapacious greed...Sweat shops, child labor, unsafe workplaces, exploitation of the poor, dangerous products -- all are manifestations of a form of economic Darwinism that measures success solely in economic terms.

Make no mistake, Ken Connor is conservative to the core -- he represented Florida Governor Jeb Bush in the Terri Schiavo case, and headed up Florida Right to Life, opposes embryonic stem cell research and has campaigned for a robust conservative judiciary. In taking on Tom DeLay, rapacious corporations, the GOP's recent legislative strategy, and recognizing that an emerging evangelical left is worthy of being dealt with in a civil and measured manner, however, Connor strays from the GOP's traditional talking points. In this period where the shrill paranoid style of Ann Coulter and the know-nothingness of Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity reign supreme amongst conservatives, whether Connor's kinder, gentler and more thoughtful approach has legs remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, don't expect Connor to get invited to speak at the FRC's first annual "Washington Briefing: Values Voter Summit" in late September.

Printer friendly

sign in, or register to email stories or comment on them.

divider

 

 

MORE ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Bill Berkowitz
March 16, 2007

PERC receives Templeton Freedom Award for promoting 'enviropreneurs'

Right Wing foundation-funded anti-environmental think tank grabbing a wider audience for 'free market environmentalism'

On the 15th anniversary of Terry Anderson and Donald Leal's book "Free Market Environmentalism" -- the seminal book on the subject -- Anderson, the Executive Director of the Bozeman, Montana-based Property and Environment Research Center (PERC - formerly known as the Political Economy Research Center) spoke in late-January at an event sponsored by Squaw Valley Institute at the Resort at Squaw Creek in California. While it may have been just another opportunity to speak on "free market environmentalism" and not the kickoff of a "victory tour," nevertheless it comes at a time when PERC's ideas are taking root.

In a story written just before Anderson's northern California appearance, Truckee Today's Karen Sloan described PERC as an organization that "contends that private property rights encourage good stewardship of natural resources." The story, headlined "'Enviroprenuer' scholar to speak at Resort at Squaw Creek," pointed out that "PERC scholars argue that government subsidies often degrade the environment, that market incentives can spur individuals to conserve and protect the environment and that polluters should be liable for the harm they cause others."

On its website, PERC -- a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization founded in 1980 -- calls itself "the nation's oldest and largest institute dedicated to original research that brings market principles to resolving environmental problems." PERC maintains that it "pioneered the approach known as free market environmentalism."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
March 10, 2007

Neil Bush of Saudi Arabia

During recent visit, President’s brother describes the country as a 'kind of tribal democracy'

In late February, only a few days after Saudi Arabia beheaded four Sri Lankan robbers and then left their headless bodies on public display in the capital of Riyadh, Neil Bush, for the fourth time in the past six years, showed up for the country's Jeddah Economic Forum. The Guardian reported that Human Rights Watch "said the four men had no lawyers during their trial and sentencing, and were denied other basic legal rights." In an interview with Arab News, the Saudi English language paper, Bush described the country as "a kind of tribal democracy."

Neil Mallon Bush, the son of President George H. W. Bush and the brother of President George W. Bush, attended the forum to renew old family friendships and to drum up a little business for his educational software company. "The Jeddah Economic Forum has been very productive," Bush told Arab News. "I have been to this conference four times since 2002. I have seen it develop from the very beginning. There was less participation in the past, now there is more international participation."

These days, Neil Bush is the chairman and CEO of Ignite Learning, a company devoted to developing technology-assisted curriculum. Ignite calls it COW: "Curriculum on Wheels." In an interview with Arab News' Siraj Wahab, Bush talked enthusiastically about his company's mission: "We are building a model in the United States for developing curriculum that is engaging to grade-school kids, and our model is to deploy this engaging content through a device. So it is easy for any teacher to use our device through projectors and speakers. The curriculum is loaded on the device. We use animation and video and those kinds of things to light up learning in classrooms for kids. It helps teachers connect with their kids. We are planning to develop an Arabic version of that model."

A video on Ignite!'s website makes clear the enervating, rote approach to learning taken by the Bush family. While this may not be an advance in actual education, it does serve to enrich Neil Bush and commodify teachers. In concept it is much like Channel One, whereby Chris Whittle enriched himself forcing millions of primary school students to watch repackaged TV News sandwiched between corporate advertising.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
March 2, 2007

Newt Gingrich's back door to the White House

American Enterprise Institute "Scholar" and former House Speaker blames media for poll showing 64 percent of the American people wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances

Whatever it is that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has come to represent in American politics, the guy is nothing less than fascinating. One day he's espousing populist rhetoric about the need to cut the costs of college tuition and the next day he's talking World War III. One day he's claiming that the "war on terror" may force the abridgement of fundamental first amendment rights and the next he's advancing a twenty-first century version of his Contract with America. At the same time he's publicly proclaiming how "stupid" it is that the race for the presidency has already started you know that he's trying to figure out how to out finesse Rudy, McCain and Romney for the nomination. And last week, when Fox News' Chris Wallace cited a poll showing that 64 percent of the public would never vote for him, he was quick to blame those results on how unfairly he was treated by the mainstream media back in the day.

These days, Gingrich, who is simultaneously a "Senior Fellow" at the American Enterprise Institute and a "Distinguished Visiting Fellow" at the Hoover Institution, is making like your favorite uncle, fronting a YouTube video contest offering "prizes" to whoever creates the best two-minute video on why taxes suck. Although the prizes may not be particularly attractive to the typical YouTuber, nevertheless Gingrich recently launched the "Winning the Future, Goose that laid the Golden Egg, You Tube Contest." According to Newt.org, participants are to "Create a 120 second video explaining why tax increases will hurt the American economy, leading to less revenue for the government, not more. Or in other words, explain why we shouldn't cook the goose that laid the golden eggs (the American economy) by raising taxes."

Although he hasn't formerly announced his candidacy -- and he probably won't anytime soon -- Gingrich definitely has his eyes on the White House. He's just still figuring out how he will get there. Over the past several months Gingrich has been ubiquitous on the media and political scenes.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 25, 2007

American Enterprise Institute takes lead in agitating against Iran

Despite wrongheaded predictions about the war on Iraq, neocons are on the frontlines advocating military conflict with Iran

After doing such a bang up job with their advice and predictions about the outcome of the war on Iraq, would it surprise you to learn that America's neoconservatives are still in business? While at this time we are not yet seeing the same intense neocon invasion of our living rooms -- via cable television's news networks -- that we saw during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, nevertheless, a host of policy analysts at conservative think tanks -- most notably the American Enterprise Institute -- are being heeded on Iran by those who count - folks inside the Bush Administration.

Long before the Bush Administration began escalating its rhetoric and upping the ante about the supposed "threat" posed to the US by Iran, well-paid inside-the-beltway think tankers were agitating for some kind of action against that country. Some have argued for ratcheting up sanctions and freezing bank accounts, others have advocated increasing financial aid to opposition groups, and still others have argued that a military strike at Iran's nuclear facilities is absolutely essential. For all, the desired end result is regime change in Iran.

If President Bush plunges the U.S. into some kind of military conflict with Iran, you can thank the Washington, D.C.-based American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a key player in the current debate over Iran.

President Bush acknowledged as much when he recently appeared at the AEI for a much-publicized speech on his War on Terror, which focused on the front in Afghanistan.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 18, 2007

After six years, opposition gaining on George W. Bush's Faith Based Initiative

Unmentioned in the president's State of the Union speech, the program nevertheless continues to recruit religious participants and hand out taxpayer money to religious groups

With several domestic policy proposals unceremoniously folded into President Bush's recent State of the Union address, two pretty significant items failed to make the cut. Despite the president's egregiously tardy response to the event itself, it was nevertheless surprising that he didn't even mention Hurricane Katrina: He didn't offer up a progress report, words of hope to the victims, or come up with a proposal for moving the sluggish rebuilding effort forward. There were no "armies of compassion" ready to be unleashed, although it should be said that many in the religious community responded to the disaster much quicker than the Bush Administration. In the State of the Union address, however, there was no "compassionate conservatism" for the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

The other item that didn't get any State of the Union play is a project that was once envisioned to be the centerpiece of the president's domestic agenda: his faith-based initiative. As Joseph Bottum, editor of the conservative publication First Things -- "The Journal of Religion, Culture, and Public Life" -- pointed out, Bush "didn't mention faith-based initiatives, which...[he] once claimed would be his great legacy."

The president's faith-based initiative is facing several tough court battles.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 10, 2007

Frank Luntz calls Republican leadership in Washington 'One giant whining windbag'

On the outs with the GOP, legendary degrader of discourse is moving to California

He doesn't make great art; nothing he does elevates the human spirit; he doesn't illuminate, he bamboozles. He has become expert in subterfuge, hidden meanings, word play and manipulation. Frank Luntz has been so good at what he does that those paying close attention gave it its own name: "Luntzspeak."

In a 10-page addendum to his new book ""Words that Work -- It's Not What You Say Its What People Hear," Luntz, formerly a top political pollster for the Republican Party, may have written so critically of the party's recent efforts that he has become persona non grata. Luntz used to be one of the party's go-to-guys for political guidance and strategy, a counselor to such GOP stalwarts as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former New York City Major Rudy Giuliani and Trent Lott.

"The Republican Party that lost those historic elections was a tired, cranky shell of the articulate reformist, forward-thinking movement that was swept into office in 1994 on a wave of positive change," Luntz wrote. According to syndicated columnist Robert Novak, Luntz went on to say that the Republicans of 2006 "were an ethical morass, more interested in protecting their jobs than protecting the people they served. The 1994 Republicans came to 'revolutionize' Washington. Washington won."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
February 4, 2007

Spooked by MoveOn.org, conservative movement seeks to emulate liberal powerhouse

Fueled with Silicon Valley money, TheVanguard.org will have Richard Poe, former editor of David Horowitz's FrontPage magazine as its editorial and creative director

As Paul Weyrich, a founding father of the modern conservative movement and still a prominent actor in it, likes to say, he learned a great deal about movement building by closely observing what liberals were up to in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Flash forward some 30-plus years and an Internet entrepreneur believes that it is time for a new conservative movement. He too has seen an entity on the left he admires enough to want to emulate: MoveOn.org.

"The left has been brilliant at leveraging technology," said Rod Martin, founder of TheVanguard.org, "and so have we to a point: our bloggers and news sites are amazing, and the RNC's get-out-the-vote software is unparalleled. But no one on our side has even begun to create anything like MoveOn. And after 2006, if we want to survive, much less build a long-term conservative majority, we better start, and fast."

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 29, 2007

Ward Connerly's anti-affirmative action jihad

Founder and Chair of the American Civil Rights Institute scouting five to nine states for new anti-affirmative action initiatives

Fresh from his most recent victory -- in Michigan this past November -- Ward Connerly, the Black California-based maven of anti-affirmative action initiatives, appears to be preparing to take his jihad on the road. According to a mid-December report in the San Francisco Chronicle, Connerly said that he was "exploring moves into nine other states."

During a mid-December conference call Connerly allowed that he had scheduled visits to Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota, Wyoming and Utah during the upcoming months to get a handle on how many campaigns he might launch.

"Twenty-three states have systems for putting laws directly before voters in the form of ballot initiatives," the Chronicle pointed out. "Three down and 20 to go," Connerly boasted. "We don't need to do them all, but if we do a significant number, we will have demonstrated that race preferences are antithetical to the popular will of the American people."

"The people of California, Washington and Michigan have shown that institutions that implement these [affirmative action] programs are living on borrowed time," Connerly said.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 25, 2007

Tom Tancredo's mission

The Republican congressman from Colorado will try to woo GOP voters with anti-immigration rhetoric and a boatload of Christian right politics

These days, probably the most recognizable name in anti-immigration politics is Colorado Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo. Over the past year, Tancredo has gone from a little known congressman to a highly visible anti-immigration spokesperson. "Tancredo has thoroughly enmeshed himself in the anti-immigration movement and with the help of CNN talk show host Lou Dobbs, he has been given a national megaphone," Devin Burghart, the program director of the Building Democracy Initiative at the Center for New Community, a Chicago-based civil rights group, told Media Transparency.

Now, Tancredo, who has represented the state's Sixth District since 1999, has joined the long list of candidates contending for the GOP's 2008 presidential nomination. In mid-January Tancredo announced the formation of an exploratory committee -- Tom Tancredo for a Secure America -- the first step to formally declaring his candidacy. While his announcement didn't cause quite the stir as the announcement by Illinois Democratic Senator Barak Obama that he too was forming an exploratory committee, nevertheless Tancredo's move did not go completely unnoticed.

While voters' concerns over the war in Iraq and the GOP's "culture of corruption" predominated in the 2006 midterms, Tancredo will be doing his best to make immigration an issue for the presidential campaign of 2008.

Read the full report >

Bill Berkowitz
January 18, 2007

Institute on Religion and Democracy slams 'Leftist' National Council of Churches

New report from conservative foundation-funded IRD charges the NCC with being a political surrogate for MoveOn.org, People for the American Way and other liberal organizations

If you prefer your religious battles sprinkled with demagoguery, sanctimoniousness, and simplistic attacks, the Institute on Religion and Democracy's (IRD) latest broadside against the National Council of Churches (NCC) certainly fits the bill.

For those who remember a similar IRD-led attack on the World Council of Churches two decades ago the IRD's latest blast appears to be -- to borrow a phrase from New York Yankee great Yogi Berra -- "déjà vu all over again."

The IRD excoriated the World Council of Churches (WCC) for allegedly being tools of the anti-American left over its support of the Nelson Mandela-led African National Congress in South Africa, and its opposition to President Ronald Reagan's contra wars in Central America; wars that destabilized governments and were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians. And now it is doing a similar job on the NCC.

"The institute, a Washington-based think tank, is allied with conservative groups on issues such as same-sex marriage. From its founding in 1981, its primary effort has been to challenge what it calls the 'leftist' political positions of mainline Protestant denominations, such as the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)," the Washington Post recently reported.

Author and longtime right wing watcher Frederick Clarkson recently described the IRD as an "inside the beltway, neoconservative agency [that] has waged a war of attrition against the historic mainline protestant churches in the U.S."

Read the full report >

View All Original Reseach >