Christian leader rejects McCain

NewsNetDaily.com ^ | Januaru 13, 2007 | Bob Unruh

[Reagan Man]

Dobson says he couldn't support senator 'under any circumstances'

A prominent Christian leader whose radio and magazine outreaches are solidly in support of biblically-based marriages – and keep in touch with millions of constituents daily – says he cannot consider Arizona Sen. John McCain a viable candidate for president.

"Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," said James Dobson, founder of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family as well as the Focus Action cultural action organization set up specifically to provide a platform for informing and rallying constituents.

Dobson, who always is careful to note that he's not speaking for the non-profit ministry, which cannot advocate for or against candidates legally, also doesn't hesitate to state his personal opinions on social or political issues and agendas.

Several times he's talked to Republicans, the traditionally conservative political party, about the need to maintain the values of that large part of the U.S. population, or lose the support of those people.

His most recent comments came during an interview on the Jerry Johnson Live program on KCBI 90.0 FM.

The show host noted that pro-family conservatives already are thinking about the next cycle of leadership in the United States, which will be determined in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. He also noted that McCain and New York mayor Rudy Guiliani appear to be the leaders.

Then he asked Dobson to listen to a statement from McCain and respond.

"I think, uh … I think that gay marriage should be allowed if there's a ceremony kind of thing, if you wanna call it that … I don't have any problem with that," McCain says.

"Dr. Dobson, would you be comfortable with someone like John McCain as the … conservative or Republican candidate for president?" Johnson asked.

"Well, let me say that I am not in the office. I'm in the little condo so I can speak for myself and not for Focus on the Family," Dobson said in rejecting McCain's leadership.

He noted that legislation he'd just been discussing on the program, regarding an attempt by Democrat leaders in Congress to create obstacles for ministries such as Focus to reach constituents with action messages about pending legislation, is being supported by McCain, too.

"That came from McCain, and the McCain Feingold Bill kept us from telling the truth right before elections … and there are a lot of other things. He's not in favor of traditional marriage, and I pray that we won't get stuck with him," Dobson said.

The provisions of the new congressional proposal, hidden deep inside a plan to reform lobbying rules to eliminate the many recent scandals involving members of Congress, would require pro-family groups to provide documentation of their actions to the government any time they try to spark any "grass-roots" action.

Phone calls, personal visits, e-mails, magazines, broadcasts, phone banks, appearances, travel, fundraising and other items all would be subject to government tabulation, verification and audits, Dobson said during a recent program. "On and on it goes."

"Clearly, the objective here is to hide what goes on from the public and punish and silence those of us who would talk about what our representatives are doing," Dobson said of the plan by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. American Family Association Chairman Donald Wildmon, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins and American Values President Gary Bauer joined Dobson in urging listeners to flood Capitol Hill with phone calls demanding those speech limits be removed.

Bauer said the telephone number to call is: 202-224-3121.

Focus also has begun an online petition, at Focuspetitions.com.

Wildmon characterized the Washington proposal as a message to the American public: "We don't want to hear from you, and this is the way we're going to handle it."

Dobson also earlier scolded Republicans for blaming the 2006 election victories by Democrats in many races across the country on conservatives.

"Dick Armey emerged from four years in the wilderness to blame conservative Christians for Tuesday's defeat. They were, he said, 'too involved' with the party. He can't be serious! Someone should tell him that without the support of that specific constituency, John Kerry would be president and the Republicans would have fallen into a black hole in '04," Dobson said in a story WND reported earlier.

"Values Voters are not going to carry the water for the Republican Party if it ignores their deeply held convictions and beliefs," he said.

"Republican leaders in Congress during this term apparently never understood, or they forgot, why Ronald Reagan was so loved and why he is considered one of our greatest presidents. If they hope to return to power in '08, they must rediscover the conservative principles that resonated with the majority of Americans in the 1980s – and still resonate with them today. Failure to do so will be catastrophic," Dobson said.

Dobson noted he'd been interviewed by U.S. News and World Report after the 2004 elections and warned if Republicans squandered their opportunity, they would pay a price at the polls in either 2008 or 2006.

Dobson's predictions about values and the Republican Party go back even further than that, too.

In 1998 he told a reporter that the GOP was in danger of losing its ability to "claim to speak for those of us with deep moral convictions."

He said at that time the party has "ignored the moral issues year after year, term after term" and said at that time it was "time to fish or cut bait."

At that time he also warned the GOP Christians and conservatives "will abandon them if they continue to ignore the most important issues."

[Mia T]

But you SHOULD fear another clinton presidency.

Did you read my essay/listen to clinton in my above posts? clinton slyly equates Evangelicals with the islamofascist terrorists. The clintons want to marginalize you; they want to crush you. As you listen, note the hate.

I refuse to believe someone of your intelligence cannot discern the difference between a clinton and ANYONE the GOP would serve up. I must, therefore, conclude it is you who is doing the blackmailing....

BTW, who is a 'uniting candidate' anyway. I don't believe there is such an animal. Seems you wouldn't be satisfied with anything less than a doctrinally pure conservative, which is hardly 'uniting.' (I suspect you are operating on the theory that the less ideological Republicans will vote for whomever the GOP fields, i.e., the only 'uniting candidate' is one who pleases the Religious Right.)

These perilous times require a different way to assess a presidential candidate. None of your concerns will matter one whit if we don't win the war.

[Mia T]

Okay. You made your choice. You are voting for hillary. (And for free, no less.)

P.S. I dislike McCain. Hope he does not get the nomination. (Personally, I don't think he will.) But I can discern the difference between McCain and clinton.

[dixiechick2000]

BTTT!

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Well, we better run a conservative in 08 and mccain aint the guy.Hunter sure fits the bill to me. Are you listening RNC?

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Well, we better run a conservative in 08 and mccain aint the guy.Hunter sure fits the bill to me. Are you listening RNC?

[epow]

Dr. Dobson is not going to endorse anyone. Focus on the Family would loose their tax shelter.

Focus on the Family is the tax exempt organization founded and headed up by Dr. Dobson. There is a politically oriented organization also founded and headed by Dr. Dobson which I believe is called the Focus on the Family Action Committee, or something close to that, that is not tax exempt and can endorse candidates without being penalized. I contributed to both organizations until my recent serious illnesses forced me to limit my financial support to just the original tax exempt FOTF org.

[rhinohunter]

The Big guns in the GOP should be able to figure this out or maybe they just don't want to win in '08.

The problem is that ALL they want to do is WIN, and could care less about principles. For whatever reason, they think that RINOism is the winning paradigm.

... or maybe they're just SCARED of the hot-tempered McPain =)

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

So having liberal light would be ok huh? Just so they had an R by their name. Whats the difference? Run and serve as a conservative and there wont be a problem.

[rhinohunter]

Dobson just said what many people have said for years. I can't understand why anyone would think that this is a big deal.

Because Dobson is a prominent individual in Conservative politics. Certainly grassroots Conservatives can't stand McPain, but can you name prominent personalities in Conservative politics who have denounced him? (Other than talk-show hosts, eg. Levin)

[tkathy]

Dobson has done nothing positive for the Republican Party, all he does is complain and threaten over social issues.

[TommyDale]

He helped register voters in 2004 and was a major factor in gaining over 4 million new GOP conservatives.

[TommyDale]

There is a primary campaign for the purpose of finding the right candidate. Having a McCain or Giuliani forced down our throats at this early point is ridiculous, and it is only serving to marginalize the religious right as much as the Clintons.

[Popman]

... why vote? ...

If it boils down to a McCain or Hillary POTUS vote, why vote?

Taking my quote out of context like a reporter from the NYT's....

As far as I am concerned voting for either Hillary or McCain is a meaningless choice. Both are bad for the country, like a choice between jumping off a 500" or a 1000' cliff. Both have the same results

If you think voting for McCain is a patriots choice, go ahead and get a big box of tissues to clean those rose colored glasses, you are going to need it.

[Popman]

These idiots are the ones who have hurt the Republican Party by turning it into the party of the bible thumpers instead of the party of fiscal conservatism

What propaganda have you been reading? The posts at DU?

Almost all "bible thumpers" are fiscal conservatives.

If you are remotely paying attention, the party turned away from being fiscally responsible tying to placate the democrat side of the aisle to take away their opposition talking points instead of fighting for conservative principles.

Bottom line is they SOLD OUT to get votes.

[Popman]

Agree with every point.

Conserativism needs a re-awakeming which takes leadership.

Sadly, the current leadership of the GOP is spineless, dickless and compromised

I find it troubling that so many members of this conservative site think the GOP is still or has been a conservative party since the 1990's.

[Mia T]

Those candidates aren't being 'forced down your throat.' The primary process is at work. What may be bothering you is that the conservative delegates are being what I would call mature, responsible and smart.

• They are looking beyond ideological purity to traits required to lead this country in this time of great peril.
  
  
• They are looking beyond ideological purity to electability. (If he can't get elected, then everything else is beside the point. And if you think the country is desperately seeking another 'born again' president, you haven't been paying attention.)
  
  

It is silly to say this electoral process is equivalent to what the clintons would like to do to you. (Again I implore you: Listen to clinton.)

I am a Jew. The fate of my people decades ago has taught me the difference. I hope you don't learn this terrible lesson the same way.

JIM TOWEY DEBUNKS KUO BOOK
BOOK ANOTHER CLINTON-SIMON SCHUSTER MACHINE EFFORT TO MARGINALIZE EVANGELICALS, SUPPRESS TURNOUT


ALERT! CLINTON-SIMON & SCHUSTER MACHINE TARGETS RELIGIOUS RIGHT: ANOTHER INSIDIOUS EFFORT TO DENY THE FRANCHISE TO EVANGELICALS


WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY: CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS


AFTERWORD: A Note to the Religious Right

[Mia T]

AFTERWORD: A note to the Religious Right
WHY THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT MUST MOBILIZE AGAINST HILLARY:
CLINTON CONFLATES EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND ISLAMO-FASCIST TERRORISTS
by Mia T, 03.16.06

I am not arguing that you change your deeply held convictions. To the contrary.

Your convictions--the evangelical ethos-- is precisely my premise, my starting point. It is precisely why I cannot envision how you would doing anything to help elect hillary clinton, someone who is anathema to all you believe.

But that is exactly what you would be doing if, in the next presidential election, you stay home or vote for a 'Perot.' You don't have to physically pull the lever or mark the box or touch the square next to the name 'hillary clinton' to help elect her. To think otherwise is to play with your mind.

It is tempting to rationalize this issue... even to ignore it. It's a difficult issue. It's a dilemma. But rationalizing the issue won't make your actions morally right... and ignoring the issue won't make it go away.

The clintons equate the Religious Right with the islamo-fascist terrorists, with the enemy. They are attempting to transfer onto the Religious Right the hate and fear and disgust Americans feel for the islamo-fascist terrorists. To disseminate their vile invective, the clintons chose a church for the venue and what the they believe to be a vulnerable, easily demagogued population for the audience. (A population they've exploited forever.)

The purpose of this article is to inform you of the clintons' contemptible and dangerous scheme. To let you hear clinton for yourself.

It is critical that you know fully what the clintons think of you and to what extremes they are willing to go to harm you, to defeat you, to crush you.

You must not ignore or rationalize away this threat to your existence. As a Jew, I tend to be vigilant about such threats. I implore you to do likewise. You must not make the same mistake my brethren made almost seven decades ago.

 

READ MORE

"It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important." 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT?
clinton legacy of lynching update
by Mia T, 7.23.05

Ironically, the logic of this pronouncement by Martin Luther King would, in short order, be refuted by the reality of his own lynching. King's hope was misplaced and his reasoning was circular. The resultant rule of law relied on by King presumed an adherence to the rule of law in the first instance.

Adherence to the rule of law is not something normally associated with the clintons. Moreover, racial and ethnic disrespect, intimidation, exploitation and hate have always been a fundamental clinton tactic and the reflexive use the "N"-word and other racial and ethnic slurs, an essential element in the clinton lexicon. When the "first black president" and his wife ran Arkansas, the NAACP sued them for intimidating black voters at the polls.

The Curious Candidacy of Carol Moseley Braun:
an Extension of clinton drag and drop and legacy of lynching
by Mia T, 2.20.03

 

[Brilliant]

I don't have any problem with Giuliani. It's McCain I won't vote for.

Obviously, I'm hoping it won't be McCain v. Clinton, but if it is, I'm not sure what point there is to voting at all. McCain is as bad as Hillary.

[Mia T]

McCain is as bad as Hillary.

Your name belies your analysis. ;)

Please, people. Don't deny reality. It is precisely the sui generis, lethal danger of the clintons that has united us here at FR over the years.

[Mia T]

And history has proven us right.