Posted on 01/13/2007 1:56:54 PM PST by 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."
Choosing between President George Herbert Walker Bush and President William Jefferson Clinton was not a false choice. Any choice other than Bush was a foolish choice.
It will be the same in 2008. We are at war.
Yes, absolutely, you're right. However there are many of us on the right who are bitter, also. Anyone of the issues you mentioned can be used as examples. Take euthanasia and the TS issue. The Christian caricature of her more vocal supporters scared secular folks and was counterproductive and contributed to the losses we suffered in November. That demonrat dirt agents use the caricature is a closely related 'other matter'.
Anyone who thinks Mrs. Clinton is the be all, end all of the '08 election has already conceded defeat.
Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy...
Thanks, but I wasn't offended.
I want to win on ISSUES... the personality cult does nothing to win ISSUES.
If war is the ISSUE, close the freaking border...
As I pointed out in another post: for whom would Reagan vote? No doubt he voted for the "RINO" (sarcasm there) Gerry Ford in 76. No doubt he would vote for McCain, if he were alive.
What difference does it make whether it's Hillary, Obama, or some other Democrat? "Hillary" is just a slogan word representing any of the leading Democrat candidates. They're all just as bad or worse.
There are many issues, and the Democrats are wrong on all of them. I surmise from your comments that you can tolerate them in power.
If Rosie O'Pig-Donnel were running as a republican, do you vote for her or the democRat? McCain is just about as bad. He is no more Republican than Rosie. Should that happen, I think you'll see a big movement for a third party, which will get my vote. I won't vote democRatic and I won't vote for RINO'S.
As soon as I read your first sentence, I realized there was little need to respond. But since I'm here, I'll just say that your question is about identical to the following:
"If God became Satan, would you still go to church every Sunday?"
Thank you, TommyDale. I think you may have hit on something here.
Bridge-building and respect are criteria we should insist on in a candidate; I think we must focus on that, rather than whether or not the candidate is our ideological clone.
The underlying logical inconsistency of the Religious Right argument is another area we must not ignore.
You say: "the Religious Right will never accept a candidate or platform that finds abortion acceptable, nor will it find partial-birth abortion, gun control, federally-funded infant stem cell research, or assisted suicide. Those issues are not negotiable because of their religious beliefs."
This is certainly a reasonable position, (although I argue that it is mooted by the very threat to our existence).
But the Religious Right's solution is not reasonable.
It is an exercise in self-delusion to argue that the solution to an ideologically and otherwise imperfect candidate is to place a de facto vote for the one candidate--hillary clinton--who unabashedly and intractably holds each and every one of those abhored positions... and worse, i.e., think Supreme Court; think rape; think WOT; think treason....
If the Republicans are doing the same damn things as the Democrats, what difference is there?
A Madison Avenue designer label?
abhorred
It is logically inconsistent to vote for a label and not on the ISSUES.
I am an atheist and I will not vote, give money, or do precinct work for a Democrat clone.
Now, if you want to bash the religious people, fine, they won't vote for you - - and neither will I...
Israel is but the canaryinthemine for all of western civilization.
Excellent.
But by not voting for a 'Democrat clone' you are perforce voting for the Democrat-for-real. Not to recognize this fact is to delude yourself.
This is called a dilemma.
Hey, you may in the end say, "OK, I will place my de facto vote for hillary clinton," and that is an intellectually honest (if misguided) position.
But to massage your sense of righteousness by voting 3rd party or not voting at all and ignore the plain fact that you are voting for hillary clinton is dishonest. And it is reckless.
You are the deluded one. I vote on the issues. Your cults of personality with fancy Madison Avenue labels mean very little.
I could win the war on terror inside of two weeks. The first battle would take twenty minutes with no U.S. casualties, so don't throw that boogie man out there...
(Photoshopped pictures of Mrs. Clinton the ghoul don't impress me neither.)
If anyone needs to suck it up, it is the "moderates" and RINOs who lost this last election. The check pant, country club wimps are gonna have to have some gonads and give the conservatives what they want or they will lose.
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.