Posted by: rileydad | July 5, 2008

McCain, Soros, & Evangelical “Conservatives”

“There is no safety for honest men, but by believing all possible evil of evil men, and by acting with promtitude, decision, and steadfastness on that belief — Edmund Burke

In their desperate attempts to maintain their “place at the table” and their self-deluded influnce, evangelical “leaders” are becoming more and more irrelivant. As the failure of the Christian Right in the “culture wars” and in politics becomes more and more apparent, the results are getting beyond pathetic.  We have sold our birthright for a mess of pachederm pottage.

In an effort to be politically saavy,  many evangelical leaders bismirch the Name of our KIng with pragmatism & compromise. In an effort to grasp their dimishing status as big players in DC & the media, “conserative” and evangelical leaders mislead their followers into supporting candidates, policies, and ideas that would have been repugnant to Christians and conservatives just a few years ago. 

Case in point : Last week, a number of conservative and evangelical leaders — including the former stalwart, Phyllis Schaffley — met in Colorado to decide what to do about the presidential election. The decison/ announcement was made that they would get behind their former adversary. More and more conservative leaders are lining up behind John McCain’s bid to be President — either directly or indirectly by painting McCain in the best possible light and Obama as the boogie man in every news story ( in reality, they are both “boogie men” — more on this later).

Even James Dobson, of Focus on the Family who said he would “NEVER” under any circumstances vote for John McCain appears to be waivering.

What’s the big deal, Riley ? Isn’t McCain better than that fellow with the funny name ? Isn’t McCain’s voting record more conservative than his reputation ? Isn’t McCain pro-life ? Won’t Obama appoint liberal justices to our fragile Supreme Court ?

Let us consider “exhibit A” in the case for :
1) John McCain’s unfitness to receive any more support from Christians or conservatives than Barrack Obama; and
2)The desperate need to replace the leadership and worldview of the Christian Right (aka repentance)
George Soros.

Who is George Soros — some of you might ask ? Soros, for several years now has been the man that conservatives love to hate.  He is a multi-billionare, an ultra liberal, and a virulent anti-Christ who freely distrubtes millions of dollars to every far left/ globalist/ humanist cause one can imagine — both in the United States and across the globe. (For instance, the “Open Society Foundation“). From open borders to globalism; from Sodomy to abortion; from promoting statism in government to underminining tradition, faith, and family in the culture; and from Africa, to Europe, to Michigan: George Soros could be called a “behind the scenes public enemy #1” for those who are trying to advance a conservative, Christain agenda in the culture (whether what is being pushed is a truly Christian agenda is a whole ‘nuther issue).

One still might ask, : What does this have to do with McCain and his growing evangelical/ conservative suppoort ? Doesn’t Soros pour millions into the campaigns of Democrats to defeat Republicans ? Well, generally, yes. But, Soros and McCain have some very close ties :

Srdja Trifkovic (don’t ask me to pronounce it) just published a piece in Chronicles Magazine called :The Dream Ticket : [McCain and Soros: The Most Dangerous Man in America, Bankrolled By the Most Evil Man in the World].The article is a very detailed explaination of why no paleo -conservative or traditional right winger should ever support McCain. But, if one holds to an interventionist foriegn policy (which sadly, many conservatives & Christians now do), one might agree with many of the positions that Trikovic finds most damning. However, the broader sketch of McCain’s character and foundational premises should make any Christian or conservative of principle oppose him just as vigorously as they do Obamination.


Yes, this piece does acknowledge McCain’s campaign manager’s efforts to distance the campaign from Soros and shore up conservative support by deceitfully calling Soros a “liberal mega-donor” who wants to “buy this election.

Why then has McCain not returned the funds that Soros has funnelled to McCain through Foundations over the years ? Could it be that McCain and Soros are actualy still allies ?

Here are some highlights from the article, which I would highly recommend that you read in full Copy-and-paste this URL if the links don’t work:

The beginnig salvo :

“While the natural instincts of democracy lead the people to banish distinguished men from power,” Tocqueville wrote in Democracy in America, “an instinct no less powerful leads distinguished men to shun careers in politics, in which it is so very difficult to remain entirely true to oneself or to advance without self-abasement.”

Some 170 years and 36 presidents later, the choice presented to the American people at this year’s presidential election does not merely confirm the correctness of the Frenchman’s assessment; it amplifies his verdict in an absurd, almost surreal manner.

Among America’s presidents—many of them impressive and some great, especially in the early years—there have been a few warmongers, neurotics, ignoramuses, and dullards. No single chief executive has been marked by all of those traits, however . . .

Then after giving some historical context, McCain is identified as a man with this baseness & lack of qualifications :

John McCain is the most dangerous man in today’s America because this likely next occupant of the White House combines a muddled world outlook with an imbalanced personality, limited intelligence, and low character. Like Vladimir Ilich Lenin or Ted Kaczynski, he needs dehumanized adversaries and loves to hate, never mind the ideology. He pours scorn on powerful countries such as Russia or China, or weak ones such as Serbia, not because it makes any sense from the point of view of this country’s security interests, but because they resist—or may resist—what his archneoconservative advisor Robert Kagan terms America’s Benevolent Global Hegemony. He screams at his subordinates, red in the face and foaming at the mouth, and calls them names. He graduated 894th of 899 from the Naval Academy in Annapolis and famously lost five jets over Vietnam before finally being taken prisoner. He has taken money from his party’s declared enemies while simultaneously seeking that same party’s presidential nomination.

Then McCain’s ties to Soros, Theresa Heinz-Kerry, and other fellow travelers are meticulously laid out :

In brief, it is unsurprising that John McCain has attracted the attention of, and found a benefactor in, one of the most evil men in the world, George Soros.

As our readers may recall (“George Soros, Postmodern Villain,” Views, February 2004), there is hardly a bad cause that the Philanthropist From Hell does not sponsor. From open borders and one-world government to gun control and Kosovo’s independence, Soros is there, in person or through his Open Society Institute and a myriad of fellow-traveling outfits. In his “American” guise (he has a few others), he supports the Democratic Party because he sees it as the primary vehicle for the promotion of his agenda. Being an astute speculator, he is not limiting his options. In McCain he has discovered a nominal Republican who is willing to pursue key points of that agenda, to get the GOP to accept them as its mainstream position, and—potentially—to impose them on the country as official U.S. policy.

The point of contact was campaign-finance reform, and the channel of support was the Reform Institute, founded in 2001 and headed by the Arizona senator until 2005, when he resigned in order to prepare for another presidential bid. The RI was initially funded by Soros’s Open Society Institute and by Teresa Heinz-Kerry’s Tides Foundation. They were excited by the McCain-Feingold bill because it had the capacity to limit private groups’ ability to challenge the institutionalized leftist bias of the mainstream electronic media with “issue ads”—such as those Swift Boat ads that inflicted so much damage on John Kerry in his subsequent presidential bid.

The rapport between McCain and Soros was cemented during the 2000 presidential campaign. On July 30, McCain delivered the keynote speech at Arianna Huffington’s “Shadow Convention” in Philadelphia, an event bankrolled by Soros. That ultraliberal political forum was set up as a counterevent to the Republican National Convention, which was held in the same city two days later. Senator McCain was the only person to speak at both events. It was like a pretender for the presidency of the John Randolph Club giving the keynote speech to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in the same city, two days before the JRC’s annual meeting.

When the Reform Institute opened shop under McCain’s chairmanship in July 2001, Mrs. Huffington—a close associate and confidante of Soros—was on its advisory committee. The Institute was a pseudo-think tank designed to keep McCain’s staff assembled and gainfully employed in anticipation of another presidential bid. Its offices were in the same building in Alexandria as his election committee, his PAC, and the lobbying firm of his 2000 campaign manager, Rick Davis. The Institute hired three other key campaign staffers: legal counsel Trevor Potter as legal counsel, finance director Carla Eudy as finance director, and press secretary Crystal Benton as . . . communications director.

The Constitutions and Legal Policy Program of Soros’s Open Society Institute donated “above $50,000” to the RI while McCain was at its helm. In addition, the OSI distributed $300,000 in grants to different groups that defended McCain-Feingold from threatened legal challenges during its passage through Congress in 2002.

Last April, McCain tried to distance himself from his benefactor, with his old/new campaign manager Davis describing Soros as a “liberal mega-donor” who wants to “buy this election.” The performance was as convincing as George H.W. Bush decrying the influence of “those Washington insiders.” What matters is that McCain has not given back any money to Soros. He has not returned the $200,000 that the Reform Institute received in donations from Cablevision in 2002 and 2003 either, when McCain was on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. It was undoubtedly coincidental that, in a letter to the FCC written at that time, McCain supported Cablevision’s proposal for the introduction of a more profitable cable pricing scheme.

The Reform Institute has promoted another important pillar of Soros’s agenda: open and unlimited Third World immigration. According to an Investor’s Business Daily editorial (September 27, 2007), vast pro-illegal immigration rallies across the country in 2006 were anything but a spontaneous uprising of hundreds of thousands of angry Mexicans. Soros’s OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17-million Justice Fund, which included involvement in the immigration rallies and funding of illegal-immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases: “So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI’s glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI’s 2006 annual report.”

This is not to say that McCain’s support of illegal immigration correlates exclusively with the money he is getting from Soros. By all accounts he is an “honest” amnesty enthusiast. His man in charge of immigration reform at the RI was, until two years ago, one Juan Fernandez, who holds dual U.S. and Mexican citizenship and is a former member of Vicente Fox’s cabinet in charge of Mexicans abroad. This man believes that anyone of Mexican ancestry, even after going through the motions of becoming an American citizen (as he has done), remains a Mexican forever and should “think Mexican first.” Such a one should never contemplate—let alone accept—assimilation as an option. Dr. Fernandez now serves as John McCain’s Hispanic Outreach Director and is seen as a potential Cabinet-level appointee in a McCain administration.
McCain’s additional overlap with Soros is in Eastern Europe. The Arizona senator broke ranks with his party in March 1999 and voted for Clinton’s war against Serbia, which Soros enthusiastically supported directly and through generous donations to the International Crisis Group. The war was illegal, since the House refused to authorize it under the War Powers Act, but McCain was its enthusiastic advocate then and remains a supporter of Kosovo’s self-proclaimed independence now.

After covering a number of McCain’s other foreign policy positions and showing how the positions of the “conservative” Republican nominee were aligned with the “liberal” Soros’ agenda, there is evidence offered that the McCain agenda is even in basic agreement with the positions of his Democratic rival, Obama (while having some significant disagreements on specifics) and members of the Clinton administration :

McCain could have copied his one-world idea word for word from the mission statement of the Democracy Coalition Project (, a Soros-funded NGO led by two former Clinton White House officials. More remarkably still, there is little if any difference between McCain’s “League of Democracies” and the “Concert of Democracies” suggested by Obama’s advisors. The League/Concert would be Washington’s standing mechanism to circumvent the U.N. Security Council, which throughout the Cold War was the closest approximation of the 19th-century “Concert of Powers” that helped avoid a major European war from Napoleon to 1914.

The identity of the two mind-sets became obvious when Obama’s advisor Ivo Daalder and McCain’s advisor Robert Kagan coauthored an article in the Washington Post supporting the concept. As a former long-serving GOP Senate staffer who knows McCain warns, those who expect that the post-Bush era will mean a return to some kind of normalcy from the current neoconservative fever are sadly mistaken: “Think of the League/Concert as a permanent Iraq ‘Coalition of the Willing’ on steroids. The conscious goal of such a mechanism would include institutionalized hostility to Russia and China.” Come 2013, Iraq really might seem to have been a cakewalk.

A former top Clinton official, Strobe Talbott, praised both McCain and Obama as “moderate pragmatists” in foreign affairs, “with the demonstrated ability to reach across party lines.” This is “good news,” according to Dr. Talbott—the man who believes that the United States may not last until the end of this century because the very concept of nationhood will have been rendered obsolete, and all states will recognize a single, global authority. The ideological foundation for George Soros’s global vision is the same: Nations are social arrangements, artificial, temporary, and dangerous. In John McCain, they both recognize a man who can be manipulated by themselves, or people like themselves, in the service of global goals and political objectives that are contrary to American interests and detrimental to peace in the world.

And in a prior paragraph the philosophical differences between a Christian family worldview and the humanistic Brave New World perspectives of “archneoconservative” of the McCain are explained (in possibly the best quote in the article) :

A man that would be seen in a normal country as a dangerous charlatan—at best a dilettante in need of tutoring—has made it so far because the bedlam known as the U.S. foreign-policy community approves of “engagement” abroad and wide-open doors at home. The “community’s” impulse is neurotic; its justification, gnostic. It reflects the collective loss of nerve, faith, and identity of a diseased society, producing a self-destructive malaise that is literally unprecedented in history. The intoxication is the arrogant belief, in general, that our reason and our science and our technology can resolve all the dilemmas and challenges of our existence and, in particular, that enlightened abstractions—democracy, human rights, free markets—can be spread across the world and are capable of transforming it into one big Wal-Mart. Both the madness and the intoxication have a “left,” Sorosite narrative, and a “right,” McCainite one.

Why is the alleged conservative choice for president allied so closely with a man like George Soros and promoting an agenda like this ? More importantly, why is he beginning to receive support from Christian and conservative leaders who still have remnants of his spit on their faces ?

We can only hope that the actions of many “leading evangelicals” and “conservatives” who are supporting McCain is because of lack of faith; because of a faulty/ incomplete worldview & theology; and because of lack of discernment/ wisdom in some areas — not because they are trying to keep their mailing lists/ coffers full and trying to make sure they still get invited to White House dinners and Sunday morning talk shows.

It is time for a change — and not the kind some pro-abortion, humansist socialist like Obama or some globalist, humnist, facist neocon like McCain offers. No longer should we trust in short term. lesser-of-two-evils, pragmatic political solutions.

It is past time to repent. To turn to Christ in wholehearted faith and obedience. To live our lives, love our neighbors, raise our families, and yes,  involve ourselves in the culture as if He were not only Saviour, but King. Because He is.


  1. Pretty interesting Bro. Leslie, pretty interesting. Of course you know I will not be voting for the so called lessor of two evils and certainly not for the more evil of the two evils. Although I’ve about decided voting for either McCain or Obama is simply voting for the evil of two evils. Your article certainly supports my conclusions, but that’s no surprise to you.

  2. McCain Supporters: Don’t Google: “The
    wife U. S. Republican John McCain callously left behind”

  3. JT, Even the vast majority of ‘evangelical’ voters will not be voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

    They will be voting for the evil of 2 lessers.

  4. Christian neo-conservatives no longer distinguish their moral responsiblities to God and their blind fidelity to a bankrupt, degenerated political system.

    Evangelicals are looking for salvation in the likes of Rep. icons (idols?) such as Bush and McCain. They have left their first love of Christ – and are sowing the the fruits of their unfaithfulness.

  5. I can’t understand why more people can’t see it. McCain is the Frog Boiler!

    What do I mean? There is an old allegory about how to boil a frog. It is said that if you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water it will immediately jump out.

    But if you drop a frog in water that is slightly warm and turn up the heat gradually then the frog just sits there and lets itself be boiled alive, without attempting to jump out of the pot, without even knowing that it is indeed being boiled alive.

    This allegory has been applied again, and again regarding the American people’s reaction to liberalism/socialism. And it is pretty clear who is who if you apply this allegory to this year’s election.

    SO, let’s vote for the one who will make the frog jump and not the one who will get the frog boiled so that we can get a true conservative in 2012.

    After all it took Carter to get us Reagan.

  6. The article is fantastic and very informative. We must vote for the only candidate who is honest, pro-life; pro-family; has experience in the Reagan administration and is a Christian, Dr. Alan Keyes.

  7. […] & Evangelical Support Revisited Last week, when I wrote this piece about the growing support McCain has among the Religious Right, I thought — to show some […]

  8. If Alan Keyes manages to get on a single state ballot outside of Colorado I will be surprised. I will not be voting for any one for President this year, and may even stay home on Election Night. I have yet to find a single candidate for any race that I can begin to support. Keyes is a war-monger and I will not vote for a war-monger. A man that supports the slaughter and torture of innocent civilians is hardly pro-life in my book. I scour the Bible and have yet to find a passage where Christians are told to convert the infidel w/ the blade of the sword. It is ironic that Christians claim to hate Islam, but then turn around and use the same terrorism and jihad they condemn.

    BTW, define “Christian.” Alan Keyes is a RC and has never proclaimed a saving relationship w/ Jesus Christ.

  9. If by some miracle the delegates revolted at the Republican National Convention and Ron Paul got the Republican nod, he’d be the man to vote for. Otherwise, check out Chuck Baldwin, Constitution Party ( There’s no need to stay home on election day.

  10. Get real! America may deserve an Obama for four years, but our children and grandchildren do NOT. If you stay home, the blood of the unborn will be on your heads.

  11. I am VERY familiar with Chuck Baldwin and the Constitution Party. Do NOT insult my intelligence! I was the US Senate candidate for the Constitution Party of MN in 2006. I’m staying home.

    When all the choices on my ballot wink at baby-killers or blatantly support them, I am complicit in their sin if I vote for them. Please show me where the Bible commands Christians to vote for the least of evils. I will not be a collaborator w/ evil by giving them my stamp of approval by voting for them. The Lord tells us to kiss the Son lest He be angry, we are not to be collaborators w/ evil.

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



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: