CNN

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

More proof that religion and politics are deeply connected in the U.S. - especially if you're a Republican.

A new Gallup poll shows the religious intensity of Americans is a strong predictor of whether they're Democrat or Republican. In a survey of nearly 30,000 people:

49 percent of Americans who call themselves Republicans say they're "highly religious"... meaning they go to church at least once a week and say religion is important in their daily lives. That's compared to 37 percent of Democrats who feel that way.

At the other extreme - only 26 percent of Republicans say they're "not religious" - meaning they never attend church and say religion isn't important... That's compared to 56 percent of Democrats.

When it comes to race - the poll shows that African-Americans are strongly Democratic - regardless of how religious they are. Also, Latinos skew more toward the Democratic party.

However, the religious connection is strongest among whites. Consider this: Whites who are highly religious are more than twice as likely to identify as Republicans rather than Democrats... and - exactly the opposite pattern emerges among whites who are not religious - by a 2-to-1 margin they are likely Democrats.

In all - about half of the white population in this country is both highly religious and leans toward the Republican Party.

With numbers like these - it's no wonder we hear Republican politicians invoking God and morality more often than the Democrats.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean that Republicans are more likely to be "highly religious" than Democrats?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

L to R: Newt Gingrich, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Mark Sanford (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It seems the Republicans can't agree on the party's proposed "purity test" which would bar financial support for candidates who don't meet 8 of 10 tests on social and fiscal issues...

These include:

• Supporting smaller debt and lower taxes, opposing President Obama's so-called "government run" health care plan, opposing amnesty for illegal aliens, opposing government restriction on gun ownership and supporting the Defense of Marriage Act.

Many Republicans - even some who claim they'd pass the purity test - say it's a bad idea because the party should offer a larger tent. With a Democratic White House that's growing more unpopular, and with Republicans hoping to pick up congressional seats next year, they say this purity test could just cause more inter-party fighting.

Plus it seems pretty hypocritical. Here are a few examples of Republican "purity":

• Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich admitted to cheating on his wife around the same time Congress was impeaching Bill Clinton for his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

• Former Congressman Mark Foley resigned after reports he sent sexually explicit instant messages to a male Congressional page.

• Idaho senator Larry Craig was arrested in an airport bathroom where an undercover cop accused him of soliciting sex.

• Or Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina who went MIA for several days over the summer, lied to his staff about his whereabouts - when he was really visiting his mistress in Argentina. His wife and kids left him, but he's still in office - although probably not for much longer.

These guys define Republican purity.

Of course - Democrats do this stuff too, but they're not the ones trying to sell political purity to the public.

Here’s my question to you: Do Republicans suffer a credibility problem trying to sell the idea of "purity"?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Add Mike Huckabee to the growing list of Republicans publicly taking one another down as they fight for the soul of the party. The former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate is blasting some GOP leaders.

Huckabee writes on Fox News' web site:

Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee.

"It's hard to keep from laughing out loud when people living in the bubble of the Beltway suddenly wake up one day and think they ought to have a listening tour; even funnier when their first earful expedition takes them all the way to the suburbs of Washington, D.C."

Huckabee is referring to the National Council for a New America, formed by folks like Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, and John McCain. Their first meeting was held at a Northern Virginia restaurant.

Huckabee also suggests the party is at risk of becoming as "irrelevant as the Whigs" if it moderates its policies. That sounds a lot like what Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh have been saying. These right-wingers are not helping the Republican Party to portray itself as more moderate and inclusive.

Huckabee's a lot more likable than Limbaugh or Cheney, but the message is just as shrill; and at the end of the day... it seems like Republicans are self-destructing without any help from the Democrats.

Meanwhile speaking of the former vice president, his daughter is picking up right where he left off. Liz Cheney suggests President Obama appears to be siding with terrorists for agreeing to release photos showing alleged abuse at U.S. prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush administration.

President Obama has now ordered government lawyers to object to the release of these photos because he says it could endanger our troops.

Here’s my question to you: How damaging is it for the Republicans to continue to criticize each other publicly?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As the Republican Party continues to struggle, some of them are starting to sound silly. Rush Limbaugh is now suggesting that Sarah Palin is the most prominent and articulate voice for good old-fashioned American conservatism. Recalling the disastrous interviews Ms. Palin did with Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News during the campaign, 'prominent' and 'articulate' are not the words that immediately pop into my mind.

But the leader of the Republican Party, Rush Limbaugh, thinks differently...

Limbaugh also insists that some Republican leaders hate, despise and fear Sara Palin as well as find her embarrassing. The embarrassing part I definitely understand.

He's referring to that new group formed by old Republicans called the National Council for a New America. It's made up of folks like Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal and John McCain who are working to re-brand the GOP.

Limbaugh says it's nothing more than an early campaign event being held by a bunch of Republicans who have what Limbaugh calls "presidential perspirations." While some members of this Council for a New America are calling for doing away with the Reagan era and finding a more forward looking message, Limbaugh says a lot of that talk is code meant as a knock on Sarah Palin who is conspicuously absent from the National Council for a New America.

Well don't you know, once again Limbaugh speaks and Republicans snap to attention and salute. No sooner had he said all this stuff than Congressman Eric Cantor announced that Palin had finally accepted an offer to join the National Council for a New America. Go figure.

Here’s my question to you: Rush Limbaugh says Sarah Palin is the most "prominent and articulate voice" for conservatism. Is he right?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Jeb Bush says it's time for Republicans to leave the Reagan era behind them and look forward. The former Florida Governor insists the party's ideas need to be "forward-looking and relevant" instead of dwelling on the nostalgia of the good old days. He's also acknowledging how well President Obama's message of hope and change resonated with the voters during the election.

Cafferty: Jeb Bush could perhaps regroup the GOP… if only his brother weren’t considered by many to be responsible for the party’s downfall.

Jeb Bush - who's part of the Republicans' new effort to reconnect with voters - is right about all this stuff, but here's the problem: He's the brother of the man who could very well be more responsible than anyone else for the downfall of the Republican Party.

Jeb Bush's name has been mentioned as a potential presidential candidate in 2012; but it seems hard to imagine that the American people would go for that... again.

Meanwhile Former Georgia Congressman - and former Republican turned Libertarian - Bob Barr says it's hard to "overestimate the damage" that's been inflicted on the GOP. He says the party lacks "any coherent philosophy, vision or leadership."

And Meghan McCain, daughter of John McCain, continues to speak out about this stuff too; she says the party needs to become more inclusive if it wants to rebuild and attract younger voters. As things stand now, Meghan McCain says Republicans tend to look down on moderates such as her, saying: "Get rid of the dirty moderates."

So, as the Republican Party continues to search for its voice and a leader...

Here’s my question to you: Is Jeb Bush the right person for Republicans to listen to at this time?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The Republicans trotted out one of their hopefuls for 2012 this week and he pretty much landed with a loud thud. Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal got lousy reviews from across the political spectrum after giving the Republican response to President Obama's address to Congress Tuesday night.

Some Republicans say Jindal came off at best off-balance and at worst downright amateur in his national debut.

The criticism even came from conservatives who have been promoting the 36-year-old rising political star as the person to revive the GOP. Some Republicans say Jindal came off at best off-balance and at worst downright amateur in his national debut. They're calling for the person who wrote Jindal's "cheesy" response and coached him to be fired and say Jindal shouldn't be allowed near a teleprompter again. Others point out that Republicans are looking for a "conservative version" of President Obama. Jindal ain't it.

Although some Republicans actually praised the content of his speech, others were left fuming at Jindal's swipe at government spending to monitor volcanoes. The mayor of Vancouver, Washington - which is in the shadow of Mount St. Helens - asks if Jindal has a volcano in his backyard. He points out that Mt. St. Helens is still very active and potentially dangerous.

In all fairness to Jindal, the opposition party's response rarely wins praise and politicians often come back from moments like these. But if Governors Bobby Jindal and Governor Sarah Palin are the great hope for Republicans in 2012, they might want to go back to the drawing board. And my guess is Mitt Romney is sleeping very well these nights.

Here’s my question to you: Did Gov. Bobby Jindal help or hurt himself with his Republican response to Pres. Obama's address this week?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

The National Debt Clock in New York City. President Bush increased the national debt more than all previous presidents combined. (PHOTO CREDIT: TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/GETTY IMAGES)

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

In the Republican response to President Obama's speech last night, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal called the stimulus package "irresponsible". He said it will grow government, increase taxes in the future and saddle future generations with debt.

"Who among us would ask our children for a loan, so we could spend money we do not have, on things we do not need? That is precisely what the Democrats in Congress just did," said Jindal.

Interesting, after the last 8 years, it would seem that Republicans are hardly in a position to lecture anyone about fiscal responsibility. When President Bush took office in 2000, the national debt was about $5.7 trillion dollars, which after two wars and lots of other spending, is now approaching $11 trillion. President Bush ran up more debt for this country than all previous presidents combined.

Jindal acknowledged last night that in recent years, "our party got away from its principles." No kidding.

Keep in mind, Jindal - who some see as a possible contender for his party's presidential nominee in 2012 - is one of the Republican governors talking about rejecting stimulus funding for his state. Jindal says he plans to turn down $100 million because it would require his state to change its unemployment laws. I guess when you're a wealthy state like Louisiana you don't need no stinking stimulus money.

Here’s my question to you: Are the Republicans in any position to lecture President Obama on fiscal responsibility?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Republican Senators have vowed to fight the economic stimulus package after it passed the House with no support from their Party.

U.S. Sen. Robert Bennett (R-UT) (C) speaks as (L-R) Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) look on during a news conference on the economic stimulus package on Capitol Hill January 29, 2009 in Washington, DC.

They swear this is not a case of the usual political games and insist that the bill is a waste of money unless it includes more tax cuts and details on where the more than $800-billion is going.

But they are also still whining about being left out of the process, saying the Democrats are ignoring their concerns. This despite the fact that several changes were made in the House version of the bill specifically to placate the Republicans.

The Democrats have launched an offensive. They've started running ads targeting Republican Senators who are up for re-election and urging them to vote for the stimulus package.

Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker pointed out an ad in the Washington Post in which 300 economists agree with Wicker and his Republican colleagues that passing the bill is the wrong thing to do. He added, "a trillion dollars is a terrible thing to waste. Let's be careful we're not making the situation worse in an attempt to make it better."

Despite all the bickering, at the end of the day it's expected the bill will pass the Senate, but with changes from the version that passed the House.

Here’s my question to you: How should the economic stimulus bill be changed?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Our sister publication, TIME Magazine, has a great story about how the Republicans are grappling with what they call Obama's "Charm Offensive." The piece says that after President Obama met with Republicans on Capitol Hill Tuesday to discuss the emergency stimulus package, many walked away gushing as if they'd met their favorite rock star and admitting the new Democratic President was paying more attention to them than their own Republican President George W. Bush ever did.

President Barack Obama walks towards the podium to speak to the media at the U.S. Capitol January 27, 2009 in Washington, DC. Obama was on the Hill to meet with Congressional Republicans for support to stimulate the economy.

Barack Obama is by no means the first President to meet with leaders of the other party to get a bill passed or to be open and willing to changes. He even made calls to leaders of his own party requesting changes to get this thing through, all in an effort to achieve the bipartisanship he campaigned on.

He even took it a step further, hosting a happy hour at the White House for House and Senate leaders from both sides of the aisle.

But his maneuvering may have backfired. The Republicans are staying away from attacking the popular President, who's only been in office for a little over a week, but they aren't letting him coast on through. The stimulus package that passed the House yesterday did so without a single Republican vote. Perhaps a calculated move so they won't be responsible if things don't turn around. Of course if they do, those same Republicans might as well go stand in front of a bus.

Here’s my question to you: How should Republicans handle President Obama’s "charm offensive"?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

While the Republican delegates and party officials scream and stomp their feet in support of John McCain in St. Paul, it turns out the rest of the Republican Party is less fired up about the election than the Democrats are.

A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows a slight increase in voter enthusiasm among both parties since the Democrats held their convention and McCain named Sarah Palin as his running mate.

But, Democrats hold a significant lead: 61% of them say they're more enthusiastic than usual about voting this time around, compared to just 42% of Republicans who feel that way.

It's worth noting that there's been a decline in voter enthusiasm since January and February when the numbers were off the chart during the heated primary season. In fact, levels of voter enthusiasm are now lower than they were in 2004 at this same time.

Part of the reason might be that some people have gotten tired of what seems like a never-ending race to the White House. Also, Gallup suggests the decline in Democratic enthusiasm could be due to the disappointment of Hillary Clinton supporters.

Nevertheless, the Democrats hold the edge – and it's something that couldn't be missed in the excitement and size of that crowd at Invesco field last week, much like the crowds Barack Obama has been drawing since he entered this race.

There's no question that for either Obama or McCain to win in November, they're going to have to rally their bases and get their supporters out to the polls.

Here’s my question to you: Why are Democrats more enthusiastic about the election than Republicans are?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Read the rest of this entry »