The Values Test [Dobson Will Back Third-Party if Giuliani is Nominated]

The New York Times ^ | October 4, 2007 | JAMES C. DOBSON

[Soft Bigotry]

After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous.

The other issue discussed at length concerned the advisability of creating a third party if Democrats and Republicans do indeed abandon the sanctity of human life and other traditional family values. Though there was some support for the proposal, no consensus emerged.

Speaking personally, and not for the organization I represent or the other leaders gathered in Salt Lake City, I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed.

[Grunthor]

“Single issue voters who will not compromise = another Clinton in the White House.”

Single?

1. Pro Baby murder (on our dime, no less)

2. Pro-gay “marriage”

3. Pro-Illegal Alien

4. Anti-gun

Now I’m not sure about your mathematical abilities, but I count more than one issue there. Those of us that REFUSE TO VOTE FOR YOUR LIBERAL, will not be the ones to put another Clinton in the White House. Those that insist on Rudy will be the ones doing that.

[Grunthor]

“I will never vote for Rudy. Flame away.”

Neither will I. Maybe there oughtta be an FR poll on that.

If the general election is between Rudy and Hitlery, would you;

A. Vote for Rudy

B. Vote for Hillary

C. Vote Third Party

D. Pass the popcorn and watch the Repubs go down in flames.

[Dustbunny]

Not hardly. He is a devout Christian who wants a sure enough pro-lifer on the ticket.

Well, he won't get it! Encouraging Christians to vote for a third party candidate will GUARANTEE that there will NOT be a pro-lifer elected to office. It is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Albion Wilde]

They should switch to a candidate like Hunter, Huckabee, Thompson, who support life. As it stands, Rudy has zero chance of winning.

Lord knows those are the ones I want. We all may be wasting our breath over this because it's still early. Let's hope Fred gathers steam. I don't see the others having the recognition, sadly.

[Uri’el-2012]

XS>........”Dobson needs to seek the face of the L-rd.
He needs to address issues and not people.”..........

HE MAY HAVE, HAVE YOU???????

THE ISSUES ARE IN THE PEOPLE.

129 posted on 10/05/2007 3:34:33 AM MDT by Lily4Jesus

Yah'shua commanded us to preach his good news to all the world.

We are to love YHvH our Elohim with all your heart and with all your
soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.'[Deut. 6:4,5]

The second is this: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.'
[Lev. 19:18] There is no commandment greater than these."

Yah'shua did not ask anyone of us to be power brokers in the Republican Party.

We are not in charge of this world ; we can not change YHvH's timetable for the world.

To believe that we need to save the world so Yah'shua will return is to indulge in the sin of the Evil One.

shalom b'shem Yah'shua

[Uri’el-2012]

But I think this Dobson person is really full of himself.

BINGO !

[Preachin']

Well, he won’t get it! Encouraging Christians to vote for a third party candidate will GUARANTEE that there will NOT be a pro-lifer elected to office. It is called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Call it what you want to call it. I see no difference between one candidate and another, so long as both are pro-abortion.

The bottom line is that I’m not gonna back off of my principles in order to let the pro-aborts take over the party.

If Rudy is nominated, then goodbye.

It kills me that some want me to hold my nose and vote for him, when in fact they are the ones letting go of a strong voting block. That’s what I call “cutting your nose off to spite your face”.

If Rudy is nominated, you can’t imagine the horror it will be for the GOP.

[astounded]

That is right. Dobson would be a traitor to his country if he did that. Nothing - I mean nothing - is more important than stopping the Clintons. I don’t care about Rudy’s pro-life or pro-choice position, his position on handguns, or any of the rest. Those pale in comparison to giving the the lying, thieving Clintons the keys to the WH. If the GOP nominee is Rudy, we must hold our noses if need be, and vote for him.

We cannot allow another “Perot Moment” here. In his hatred for GHWB, that arrogant little bastar* gave us Bill (43% plurality) Clinton, which ultimately begat 9/11. The Clintons sold the USA down the road and must be stopped.

[Uri’el-2012]

Is Dobson still supporting Ted Haggard ?

[astounded]

bttt

[elpadre]

“Is Dobson still supporting Ted Haggard ?”

I dunno

However, Dobson’s “Focus on the Family” has done marvelous works over the years. As I said, I do admire him and the work he has done, but not his influence in promoting one issue politics - even if I do agree with his issues.

If he continues, maybe we should put some highway signs out in Colorado Springs saying “JAMES DOBSON SUPPORTS HILARY CLINTON.”

[Uri’el-2012]

However, Dobson’s “Focus on the Family” has done marvelous works over the years. As I said, I do admire him and the work he has done, but not his influence in promoting one issue politics - even if I do agree with his issues.

If he continues, maybe we should put some highway signs out in Colorado Springs saying “JAMES DOBSON SUPPORTS HILARY CLINTON.”

He had his people at FoF write oped pieces against Congressman Lanborn recently.

After the primary a year ago they ( FoF ) still spoke out against Lanborn who won the primary.

FoF has been a un-Christian force in 5th CD politics in Colorado.

[seemoAR]

Would you vote for the Beast if she had a startling revelation and became a republican?. There is no hope for you if you say yes. You would know how I feel about rooty tootie if you answer no. An enemy is an enemy no matter what you call him or her.

[taxesareforever]

Just don't complain when Hillary wins the election

I, for one, do not believe that Hillary is going to win. The mainstream media has created paranoia amongst the conservatives in order to get them to support Guliani for President. I also believe that Thompson will be the nominee and therefore there will be no fracture among conservatives. If the people want Hillary then so be it. Who am I to say they shouldn't have her? Many in this country are leaning toward socialism. It is not that far away if Hillary gets in, which I doubt will happen.

[taxesareforever]

Yep, and we can take that to the bank.

[elpadre]

and that is wrong

[Uri’el-2012]

Amen !

[Ol' Sparky]

First, if you're a Christian as your tag line sugggest, how can you even consider voting for someone that favors slaughtering the unborn at taxpayer expense, spoken before NARAL, marched in gay pride parades, advanced the homosexual agenda and was an open adulterer as mayor of New York?

Secondly, there is no question that Giuliani Presidency would be worse than Hillary Clinton Presidency for the following reasons:

1) A liberal Republican has a much better chance of getting liberal legislation passed than a liberal Democrat. Republicans aren't going generally block legislation pushed by their own President but would stop a Democrat from pushing the same legislation.

2) A Giuliani Presidency guarantees Republicans continue to lose seats in Congress and become an entrenched minority. A Hillary Clinton Presidency will result in the Republicans gaining seats and, likely, retaking Congress.

3) A Giuliani Presidency effectively makes both parties left-of-center parties, especially on social issues.

4) A Giuliani Presidency guarantees no conservative in the White House for eight years.

[Ol' Sparky]

Other 2002, name a mid-term election where the party in the White House hasn't lost seats, And, you seem to forget that the Republicans have lost a considerable of seats during Bush's term in office.

And, Giuliani is guaranteed to drive social conservatives in the south back to the Democratic party and realign the parties pre-1994, something that would take years for the Republicans to recover from.

[Ol' Sparky]

How do I proposing fixing the problem of the Republican party moving to the left?

By giving the Republican party the message that it most return to the principles of Reagan and give us conservatives candidates to vote for. Either that, or they need to lose as many elections and seats as is necessary for them to comprehend that.