Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dobson Warns GOP Senators on Specter
Human Events Online ^ | November 15, 2004 | Robert B. Bluey

Posted on 11/15/2004 1:04:53 PM PST by hinterlander

Republican senators who support Sen. Arlen Specter's bid to chair the Judiciary Committee could face retribution from disgruntled conservative and Christian voters, warned Dr. James Dobson in an interview Monday with HUMAN EVENTS.

Dobson, the founder of Focus on the Family Action, a political group he organized to help re-elect President Bush, said Specter is frantically trying to save his spot atop the Judiciary Committee after suggesting Bush shouldn't bother nominating pro-life judges.

Specter has since distanced himself from his November 3 comments, but the protests against him haven't diminished. For the second straight weekend, he appeared on Sunday morning news programs trying to allay fears voiced by activists like Dobson.

"It may not be possible to derail Senator Specter," Dobson conceded to HUMAN EVENTS, "but if they [Republican senators] don't do that, I think it ought to be very clear that when the senator reneges on his promise to do the right thing, it's going to be remembered."

Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee are expected to meet with Specter this week, which will be followed by a secret vote taken in January to elect a chairman. Their offices have been inundated with phone calls protesting Specter's possible promotion.

GOP-imposed term limits are forcing Sen. Orrin Hatch (R.-Utah) to step down as the committee's chairman. Next in line is Sen. Chuck Grassley (R.-Iowa), who would rather lead the Finance Committee than Judiciary, leaving Specter with the most seniority.

"He's been out there for the last week on every show that would invite him," Dobson said of the Pennsylvania senator. "He's been trying to save his chairmanship by bobbing and weaving and telling us that he didn't mean what he said when he said what he meant."

Dobson has used his radio program, which reaches 7 million listeners per week, to rail against Specter's possible ascension. Other conservative and Christian interest groups are protesting as well, including a scheduled demonstration Tuesday at the office of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.).

"We're certainly going to do everything we can to let people know that Senator Specter not only threatens the court, but he is also the champion of stem-cell research and he is opposed to protection of marriage within the Constitution," Dobson said. "This man is going to be in an extremely powerful position to oppose most of what President Bush was elected to do. That is irritating a large number of people."

Dobson said Specter owes his victory to Bush, who chose to campaign with him instead of his more conservative Republican primary opponent, Rep. Pat Toomey. Specter narrowly beat Toomey by a little more than 17,000 votes in the April primary.

"He was very clear about what his intentions are," Dobson said in reference to Specter's November 3 remarks. "It's not only the court, he stands in opposition to just about everything the President ran on in terms of the moral and social agenda. How arrogant is that?"

Robert B. Bluey is Assistant Editor for HUMAN EVENTS


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: arlen; committee; conservative; conservatives; dobson; evangelicals; gop; judges; judiciary; liberal; nominations; nominees; republican; santorum; shutup; specter
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-287 next last
To: Reagan Man
Of course it is.

If it is, why isn't it up under VOTE BY RELIGION? Why isn't it separate?

BTW, I notice that not all of the Evangelicals voted for Bush.

221 posted on 11/15/2004 4:16:28 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: cyborg

LOL......I thought I just read something kind of detrimental about that FOTF within the last few weeks. Can't remember what.


222 posted on 11/15/2004 4:17:20 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: Taggart_D

Mikey has a problem with Dobson, not God.


223 posted on 11/15/2004 4:18:38 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Why is it separate?


224 posted on 11/15/2004 4:20:32 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

The Pat Robertson mode that he gets into sometimes can be grating on the ears. Otherwise, it's a good show. I wished that Mike Trout came back after his little marital indiscretion but something tells me he got a divorce.


225 posted on 11/15/2004 4:21:01 PM PST by cyborg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I still don't get it....what's wrong with what Mr. Dobson said? Why shouldn't he speak out against Specter?


226 posted on 11/15/2004 4:25:09 PM PST by Taggart_D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
>>>>If it is, why isn't it up under VOTE BY RELIGION? Why isn't it separate?

Are you blind? These are two separate questions. Each one has its own block. I posted one, after you posted the other. REMEMBER??? One question asks what religion you belong to: "VOTE BY RELIGION". Right below it is a different question that asks are you a: "WHITE EVANGELICAL/BORN-AGAIN?" They are two different questions.

>>>>BTW, I notice that not all of the Evangelicals voted for Bush.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. 21-million voted for Bush and 6-million voted for Kerry. So what.

227 posted on 11/15/2004 4:25:10 PM PST by Reagan Man ("America has spoken")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Never tattle to Jim, either, do you?

Characterize it however you wish.

I have gone to Jim a couple of times, when your petty little games have gone too far in sniping at conservatives, in exact contradiction of Jim's clearly expressed wishes.

Still bitter about your little vacation?

228 posted on 11/15/2004 4:32:27 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Are you blind? These are two separate questions. Each one has its own block. I posted one, after you posted the other. REMEMBER??? One question asks what religion you belong to: "VOTE BY RELIGION". Right below it is a different question that asks are you a: "WHITE EVANGELICAL/BORN-AGAIN?" They are two different questions.

You really need to see the questionaire to determine this. It would tell you whether the you a: "WHITE EVANGELICAL/BORN-AGAIN? was asked of Jews and others, or whether it was asked of Catholics. It could well have been a follow up question. Common sense doesn't necessarily apply to polling.

229 posted on 11/15/2004 4:34:46 PM PST by SJackson ( Bush is as free as a bird, He is only accountable to history and God, Ra'anan Gissin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Are you blind? These are two separate questions.

Well, thanks for finally getting the right answer.

The are the SAME CATEGORY, but the second questioin is a qualifier for the first one; all the second one is a a percentage of the voters who answered under "Votes by Religion" who consider themselves evangelicals or born-again; they are included in the Protestant, Jewish, Catholic, None, and Other Categories. So it's 23 percent of those who consider themselvees belonging to ANY religion, not a separate one.

So your statement:

"The Religious Right as a voting block accounted for 23% of all voters in this last election."

is wrong.

They accounted for 23 percent of the people who identified themselves as belonging to a religion. And since some voted for Kerry, only 18 percent of the Evangelicals actually voted for Bush.

230 posted on 11/15/2004 4:36:32 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
It could well have been a follow up question.

That's the way I've always seen it; something like "Do you consider yourself to be a born-again Christian?"

231 posted on 11/15/2004 4:37:55 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
>>>>You really need to see the questionaire to determine this.

No you don't.

When you get an Exit Poll, the questions are asked of everyone who participates. The questions are specific. That's why you have 23% who answered YES, I'm a member of the "Religious Right" and 77% who answered NO, I am not a member of the "Religious Right".

232 posted on 11/15/2004 4:44:11 PM PST by Reagan Man ("America has spoken")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
>>>>You really need to see the questionaire to determine this....No you don't.... When you get an Exit Poll, the questions are asked of everyone who participates. The questions are specific. That's why you have 23% who answered YES, I'm a member of the "Religious Right" and 77% who answered NO, I am not a member of the "Religious Right".

Clearly you know far more about polls than I do. The occasional poll I've seen does, in fact, use follow ups.

For example, religion, Jewish, on to the next question and skip the White Evangelical question, which is clearly irrelevant. Same would apply if a race question was asked earlier, if you're not white, you can't be a white evangelical.

The results look reasonably accurate to me. If Kerry got 21% of the 23% Evangelical vote, and 56% of the not Evangelical, that would get him to 47.9%, about right.

But there's no was of knowing how they got there without seeing the questionaire. If you're right, then Jews, Hindus, Muslims and Blacks could have answered yes to the White Evangelical question, thus the results are completely flawed. If they used sub questions, the results might be reasonably accurate.

233 posted on 11/15/2004 4:55:37 PM PST by SJackson ( Bush is as free as a bird, He is only accountable to history and God, Ra'anan Gissin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Are you blind? These are two separate questions.

>>>>Well, thanks for finally getting the right answer.

You can do better then that, Howlin. I've been telling you from the get-go that these are two separate questions. You're the one whose been attempting to link them and for good reason. You have NO specific data and NO relevent info to back up your silly assertions. And now you're attempting to obfuscate the issue by employing sophistry. Wont' work.

>>>>The are the SAME CATEGORY, but the second questioin is a qualifier for the first one

Not true. Two different questions. One has nothing to do with the other.

>>>>So your statement:
"The Religious Right as a voting block accounted for 23% of all voters in this last election."
is wrong.

You haven't proven me wrong, because you can't prove the exit polling data wrong. I'm totally correct. 23% of voters identified themselevs as members of the Religious Right and as I pointed out in an ealier post to you, PresBush received 78% of the "Religious Right" vote.

Either you don't know how to read basic exit poll data, or you're in total denial. My monies on the latter.

234 posted on 11/15/2004 4:57:21 PM PST by Reagan Man ("America has spoken")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Still bitter about your little vacation?

Not as bitter as you seem to be about yet another failed campaign.

Actually, I thought your "Get rid of the people who disagree with me or I'm leaving!" tantrum was hilarious - that alone was worth a few days off.

235 posted on 11/15/2004 5:09:21 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I gave you an article published in the New York Times. You'll have to pardon me if I believe the Pew guy who has actually SEEN the numbers, rather than you.

Not true. Two different questions. One has nothing to do with the other.

So you're saying that NO Protestants or Catholics consider themselves evangelical or born-again?

And are you also saying, then, that the 41 percent who identified themselves as gun owners don't count themselves in Male or Female, or Religion or any of the other categories? That's the only explanation for the way you are using that number.

That's silly; if you'd ever taken a poll yourself, you'd know they ask you if you are religious, if so what religion, and then do you consider yourself part of what is called evangelical and/or born-again, i.e., the Religious Right. They are ALL the same numbers.

236 posted on 11/15/2004 5:11:57 PM PST by Howlin (I love the smell of mandate in the morning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: Amelia

Hey, I said I was leaving as long as the anti-Keyes haters had free play.

Came back 24 hours later, because Jim called a halt.

If you had listened to him, you wouldn't have gotten suspended.


237 posted on 11/15/2004 5:11:59 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Let me say this. The most reliable poll around, is the one taken on election day. On this past election day, some exit poll data was leaked to the MSM. The MSM turned around and misreported the early results to give the false impression that Kerry was leading Bush. But generally speaking, exit polls contain reliable data. Are they 100% accurate? Of course not. Are there variables that should be considered when reviewing exit poll data? Definitely. However, there is absolutely no evidence that indicates, the questions in question do not stand alone on their own merit. And anyone attempting to link one question with another, is setting up their own standards and not taking the data at face value.


238 posted on 11/15/2004 5:14:01 PM PST by Reagan Man ("America has spoken")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Thanks for perserving in the face of such willful ignorance.

"None are so blind as those who will not see."


239 posted on 11/15/2004 5:14:25 PM PST by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Came back 24 hours later, because Jim called a halt.

As I say, your little tantrum was hilarious.

240 posted on 11/15/2004 5:14:31 PM PST by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-287 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson