Could Pat Robertson have clean hands and a pure heart afterall?

A well known comic and lesser known blogger, Scott Adams, coined a term (as far as I know) that I’ve adopted as it fits perfectly in the way I live my life. It’s called the sniff test. Basically, if something smells a certain way it more than likely is in fact that thing you’re smelling. In the case of Robertson’s endorsement, I think I’ll apply the sniff test:

Question: Is there any shred of evidence that Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Giuliani is of pure motive?

That’s a personal question I’ve been struggling with since I first read the news. I know a little bit about how Pat has spoken about the LDS faith historically, I know that there are plenty of ignorant people that buy into the palaver of websites like, I know that it’s very possible that Robertson is taking the enemy of my enemy is my friend approach. At least it smells that way, further investigation is needed.

What better place to start than Pat Robertson’s website to see what he really stands for as a religious leader. Deep down, does he personally believe that abortion is wrong all the time, most of the time with certain exceptions, or is it acceptable all the time? Does he believe that our 2nd Amendment should be a right that is earned rather than one that is lost? Does he believe that marriage should be a bond between man and woman, or are there acceptable alternatives? To my dismay I couldn’t find any content regarding these topics, so I’m left wondering what his personal stances on those topics really are.

So, assuming that his personal views on those topics are congruent to Giuliani’s, then an endorsement would be applicable. However, doesn’t it seem that he’d have to be conservative on those topics to consider himself an evangelical leader? Logic dictates that personally, he’d be a staunch conservative on those topics, and would be pushing for the conservative candidates (Romney, or anyone else for that matter). Potential, compromise number one; endorse a candidate he agrees with personally, but not religiously, or endorse a candidate that doesn’t appear to have any shot at actually winning, or the third option is endorse one of the front runners with whom you may disagree with on some topics, but overall the good outweigh the bad OR there’s something else.

Here’s the conspiracy that I call “SOMETHING ELSE”:

Reading his website again I started to read his biography, after perusing a short time I got two distinct impressions. One, I believe that he believes that politics is the next step for him. I believe, that he believes that he’s the man for the presidential position not these other guys. Two, I get the impression that as an evangelical leader he’s not a spiritual conservative. He’s a pragmatist. His teachings are about common sense (his teachings actually match up to the counsel given by the leaders of the LDS church, which he calls a cult). I also found this snippet that piqued my interest, “I’m an entrepreneur at heart…..”

That to me says that he sees himself as a business man first, and spiritual leader second. He would never publicly say it in those terms, but you get the idea. That’s why all of his books, teachings, etc, are all pragmatic. That’s what sells, leave the extreme viewpoints to Micheal Savage and the terrorists. Toe the middle of the road and people will support you, both vocally and financially; the perfect setup for a businessman.

Why do I bring this up? I (RationalZen) personally believe there are ulterior motives at play. They are of either a financial nature, Giuliani gave him the offer he couldn’t refuse for his endorsement (much like the other party candidates do with the unions), or they relate to his own political aspirations. Perhaps he wants to divide the Republican party, so in 5 years when Hillary has polarized the country he can be the pragmatist that saves America as the next great candidate.

I don’t think that Robertson is a bad guy, I don’t know him from Adam, nor do I know what’s in his heart (God looketh upon the heart). I respect him as a businessman, not necessarily as a spiritual giant, but for me something just doesn’t smell right with what he’s doing in this presidential primary race. If he is trying to position himself to fulfill his political aspirations, I fully support that notion. If you’ve got a goal, than do what it takes to accomplish it. I would congratulate him for that notion, rather than castigate, it may appear as a wolf in sheep’s clothing but that’s probably not the first time he’s been labeled that In this situation I’ve tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, but the more I analyze the scenario the more I believe that this endorsement stinks for both Giuliani and Romney. He’s too bright of a guy to not understand what ripple effect this endorsement might have, something is fishy and time will have to tell what he really is after.

Rational Zen (part-time contributor)



Filed under Candidates, Christian, Christianity, Conservative, Election 2008, Family, LDS, Mitt Romney, Politics, Religion, Romney, Rudy Giuliani

6 responses to “Could Pat Robertson have clean hands and a pure heart afterall?

  1. Pingback: Could Pat Robertson have clean hands and a pure heart afterall? | Political news - democrats republicans socialists greens liberals conservatives

  2. It might be more simple. Robertson looked terrible, like he was selling his soul. He has either been bribed with a huge donation that would solve money problems, or he is being blackmailed.

    Romney’s answer to all Christians:

  3. You wrote an intelligent article which seemed to come at the problem from all angles but one. Did it not occur to you that after mighty prayer, Robertson felt inspired (correctly or not) to endorse Rudy?

  4. Robertson is full of Satan’s power. He is an instrument of evil designed to wreak havoc on America.

    Well, maybe. Perhaps I’ll just settle for hypocritical idiot. Yes, I think that will do.

  5. rationalzen


    Thanks for the kind words on my coverage.

    I was very open to the fact that I don’t know what’s in his heart, nor do I pretend to know. That is why I give things the sniff test, it forces me to put myself in their shoes and find a rational reason why things have turned out the way they are.

    I can’t find a reason why that (Rudy being an answer to prayer) would be true, so if it is in fact inspiration from God we’ll see. Rudy doesn’t seem like the sort of candidate that God would endorse (given the conservative nature, of some of the other candidates). My inability to see God wanting a candidate that wishes to change some of the fundamentals our country has been built on (like the 2nd Amendment), is mostly because I believe that our Founding Fathers themselves were inspired by God for some, not all, of their actions in framing this country. I don’t think God would change His mind so quickly regarding the ideals of this country, that’s just a personal belief though, obviously not absolute.

  6. I have no problem being judgmental and speculating what is in one’s heart apparently :). It’s what I do best.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s