EXCLUSIVE: Family Leader and Bob Vander Plaats Will Not Endorse Gingrich, Great News for Bachmann or Santorum



At Governor Huckabee’s Gift of Life movie premiere last evening, I had an opportunity to sit down with The FAMiLY LEADER president Bob Vander Plaats. In an earlier interview I heard him suggest that the Family Leader may have to make a pragmatic decision on who to endorse for President. I was concerned that “pragmatic” might mean picking a pro-choice candidate over a pro-life candidate because they have a better “chance” at beating Barack Obama (or Mitt Romney!).

When I pointed out that Rick Perry and New Gingrich hold positions that include exceptions on abortion he said:

“If I find that to be true, if I find that your comments to be true, that will be part of the board’s calculations…. Let me cut to the chase. It is my position and the boards position is that life begins at conception…we don’t have exceptions on life… as an organization. So, If what you are telling me is true. Okay, I guarantee that this will go to the board…that will be brought to the board’s attention…that is most likely a disqualifier. We don’t fudge on this issue.”  (Listen to the Audio)

After he was finished I said “I am going to hold you to it,”

Mr. Vander Plaats finished with “Alright, do that.”

Later on in the evening, I presented an article to Mr. Vander Plaats showing that Gingrich indeed is pro-choice. If you believe in exceptions, you are pro-choice; it is just that the number of babies you would choose to have killed is smaller than say Barack Obama.

After the film was over I had an opportunity to show Speaker Gingrich a picture of nine babies of various ages and ask him which one was a victim of rape and should be killed. Instead of using it as an opportunity to say he had changed his mind (in light of the claim that he believes life begins at conception),[1] he grimaced, ignored my questions, and walked away.

Since Gingrich is pro-choice and refused to sign the Family Leader Vow, I am certain Mr. Vander Plaats and the FAMiLY LEADER board will uphold the standard of no exceptions they have promised to the prolife people of Iowa. Thankfully, Mr. Gingrich (or Rick Perry) will not be endorsed by him or the Family Leader on Monday. This is great news for Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann and a real opportunity to show Iowa really is a FAMILY LEADER and send a truly prolife candidate on to South Carolina, New Hampshire, and the rest of the country.

Picture by Dave Davidson – Prezography.com



[1]  It should be noted that from the beginning the Family Leader has said “The signing of the pledge will be a requirement for any future endorsement by The FAMiLY LEADER.  (Email sent out by Family Leader).

It is important also, I think, to point out how the two documents differ.

In his response, Gingrich doesn’t mention pornography, prostitution, human trafficking, women in combat, Sharia Law, or “robust childbearing and reproduction”, all mentioned in the Family Leader vow.

If you like what you read, sign-up to get CT in your inbox!

Comments

  1. says

    Kind of shocking how Gingrich responded to what you said to him.  What a churl!!  So not only is he not pro-life, he’s not even that good at faking it.  

    As for the title of your article, we don’t actually know 100% that TFL won’t endorse him (unless BVP confirmed that with you after you showed him your article), but it does sound like a pretty good bet, and that’s reassuring.

    • says

      Of course, Mr. Vander Plaats could violate the principles he laid out for me, and the promise made not to endorse anybody who didn’t sign the pledge, but I trust better things of a Christian leader.

  2. metor says

    Why has Ron Paul been thrown out of potential endorses ? Paul had a bill up in Congress that essentially would have overturned Roe  v. Wade. If Pro-Life movement would have supported it we would have prevented millions of abortions.Paul gets criticized for not supporting a Constitutional Amendment but is this the best strategy? It requires every State to agree. If we can’t even pass a pro life bill in Mississippi how can we get States like NY and California to agree? Paul’s State by State Strategy is realistic, If we get half the States to outlaw or  reform their laws we can reduce abortion 30-60%. On a personal level Paul is most Pro-life of all he has never flip/flopped and has personally delivered 4000 babies.He is articulate. Check out his defense of life when he was attacked on “The View” He left Woopi Goldberg and Joy Behart speechless which is quite an accomplishment. Ron Paul is married to the same  woman 54 years and a member of the same church 35 years.One more war on the scale of (Iraq/Afganistan) will push this country into bankruptcy, and Paul is the only one who can keep us out of foreign wars.

    • David j Shedlock says

      I left out Paul because I have already dealt with his pro-life credentials (see below) but I’d be glad to deal with them again, if you would like.

      First, he opposes regulation of the morning-after pill or other abortifacients, which kill millions of unborn children.

      Second, he said he would not have come to the defense of Terri Schiavo.

      Third, he is inconsistent on state’s rights. The right to own a gun is more important than the right to live. He would never say a state could ban gun ownership, he would admit that the Federal courts could intervene on behalf of the 2nd Amendment, but he won’t use the 14th to try and protect unborn children.

      Fourth, he supported the abolition of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and does not believe that government should protect marriage at all!

      • metor says

        I have been listening to every Republican Candidate since Reagan promising pie in the sky to pro lifers. Here we are 30 years later. I worked for the most pro-life candidate in Republican history: Pat Buchanan only to see him betrayed by Ralph Reid of the Christian Coalition.Ralph gave the Coalition endorsement to Bob Dole while admitting that Pat was stronger on Pro-life,He said Dole had a better chance of winning. Dole turned out to be the most lackluster candidate ever. Reid got a cushy job with the Party later on and  the Buchanan campaign was stopped.In New York State we had a Right to life Party on the Ballot at one time.They too wanted 110% or nothing. They got nothing and are no longer on the ballot. They would not nominate a candidate unless he was opposed to the birth control pill as well as the abortion procedure. They forbid candidates to take a position on any issue other than abortion consequently if you were running for Mayor( with no input on this federal issue) you couldn’t tell voters what you were going to do for mass transit.Their candidates were defeated. Any politician who lets say proposed Parental notification, or opposed Late term abortion, or supported a rape exception was labled an incrementalist and not supported. Santorum will either win Iowa or lose Iowa but he will not get you a Constitutional Amendment, What he may do is plunge this nation into another War from which our economy will not recover.The man most flippantly speaks of bombing Iraq, Increasing Drone bombing over Pakistan and getting involved in Syria. It puzzles me to understand how people who care about the unborn can be so indifferent to the lives of the born. Paul on the other hand has seen the victims of war close up having been a flight surgeon during Vietnam. Paul was only one of two veterans on that stage.He knows war is something which should only be a last resort.You mention don’t ask don’t tell, well I thought it was quite interesting seeing Santorum, who never served, telling that Iraq veteran that he’d be kicked out of the service if he was President.On Marriage Paul believes that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has no business making laws because it is the States who issue Marriage licenses. He has no problem with the States defining marriage and is personally opposed to Gay Marriage.At the Constitutional Convention 1787 the founders decided against a National Criminal Code giving the States the authority to sanction crimes and this is why Paul believes Abortion abolition should proceed at the State level.On the other hand the Right to bear Arms is clearly a federal issue defined in the bill of rightsThat would be his reasoning. It is not as you say “He cares more about guns than the right to live” That statement is very unfair maligning of a fine and decent man and I might add unchristian.

      • says

        ” supported a rape exception was labled an incrementalist”

        I don’t label them an “incrementalist”, I label them “pro-choice”. Just because the number of babies they refuse to protect is smaller doesn’t mean they didn’t choose to let them be killed.

        ” It puzzles me to understand how people who care about the unborn can be so indifferent to the lives of the born. Paul on the other hand…”

        If you read the article linked to above you would have seen Ron Paul’s indifference to the life of Terri Schiavo, very much alive, very much born. He chose to use her life to tout his belief in smaller government and belittled her person, while not lifting one finger to help her.

        Mr Paul has enough smarts to know that marriage cannot ultimately be a state’s rights issue when one marriage definition will be forced on all other states and institutions. Because he does not believe the Bible on this issue, he is blind to the import of it.

        I am afraid you misrepresent Paul’s position on National Crimes. He has stated that he could see the federal government lawfully intervening in a state that allowed infanticide (but not abortion) – see the arguments here:

        http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2011/05/ron-paul-holds-three-irreconcilable-views-on-abortion

  3. metor says

    I WANT TO CREDIT THIS WEBSITE. I HAVE RECENTLY POSTED SEVERAL TIMES AND ALTHOUGH I VEHEMENTLY DISAGREED WITH THE AUTHORS HAVE NEVER HAD MY POSTINGS “MEDIATED” AS SOMETIMES HAPPENS ELSEWHERE. often posts are answered by the authors themselves.FAIR PLAY.

    • says

      Thank you, Metor. Even though we have the world’s fastest-growing blog called Caffeinated Thoughts, we still take time for the little people. :-) However, we are so busy with appearances on Meet the Press, CrossFire, and NBC News with Huntley and Brinkley, we don’t have to time edit/pare down the posts of people we disagree with. Maybe next week.

      Anyway, thanks for posting.

  4. says

    Now this is interesting.  From an article that was published Sunday afternoon on Newsmax:

    One influential Christian conservative in Iowa said [The Family Leader] group leader Bob Vander Plaats, a respected force in Iowa Republican politics, is facing opposition from members for his support for Gingrich.

    “Bob wants to go with Gingrich,” the source said. “Too many supporters around him think that’s utter madness. So they may go their separate ways.”

  5. Faceswithin says

    do you want to know why there are many who will not come to  God? this is one reason when there things like Bob Vander Plaats’ standing for God  they wonder why God lets him say any thing in his behalf. If you want to save  soul  you need to  get out of the God business all together. go to a small town some where and shut up. you are not helpping saving souls. you were one of the men who lie to make them  think the other mary was a hocker  not  one of the 12  of the Lord. You hate women and only show up talking about God for what you hide in your soul.
    max