Posted on 01/04/2008 12:24:09 PM PST by Tlaloc
Focus on the Family founder James Dobson said Friday that GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's victory in the Iowa caucuses shows that Christian conservatives still have considerable influence.
Huckabee easily defeated second-place finisher Mitt Romney in Iowa Thursday thanks to a wave of support from evangelical Christians.
"The results of the Iowa caucuses reveal that conservative Christians remain a powerful force in American politics. That had to be a great shock to those on the far left," Dobson said in a written release.
Dobson criticized what he called media elites, saying they had written off religious conservatives.
Huckabee's victory "was evidence of an energized and highly motivated conservative community," Dobson said. "Not bad for a supposed bunch of demoralized, depressed, disillusioned and disengaged Reaganites."
Dobson said he has not endorsed Huckabee and said the former Arkansas governor may not win the GOP nomination.
In the next test, the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, Christian conservatives are expected to be less of a force than they were in Iowa.
By all means, provide a link.
I cannot promise I’ll find it. It’s not like I keep a dossier.
I don’t know why you think evangelicals worship Dobson.
***Wow, what an amazing straw argument. If ANY evangelical worships Dobson, he’s no christian. Of course, you’ll just backtrack and claim the time-honored fred-follower approach, call it “sarcasm” without a sarcasm tag.
I’m glad you have a godly man as a father. That anecdote is one down, does that mean we are going to go through 5M more? At the end of such a process, we still wouldn’t be addressing the real issue, which is whether evangelicals would feel comfortable in Camp Fred. Hunter is an evangelical, unashamed and unabashed. If I were a Huckabee supporter looking for a more conservative candidate, I’d wander through the Huckabee threads and see whether it’s the Hunter team or the Fred team that’s giving them the most grief, as part of my assessment of which camp would be more suitable. And, of course, this thread is good evidence as well.
Let the readers decide for themselves. Thanks for your participation.
This was Fred Thompson's initial response:
Thompson, who stopped in Dallas Thursday, brushed off Dobson’s harsh criticisms.“When someone who I never met or never had a conversation with says things, how do I know if I identify with that individual or not, or whether he has any basis for identifying with me?” said Thompson, according to the Dallas Morning News.
“It’s a free country. If this e-mail reflects his views, so be it,” said the presidential contender.
Christianpost.com -Thompson Brushes Off Dobson Remarks 9/21/07
Did he have a right to be pissy about it? Yes, I think he did, but I don't suppose it was very politically expedient. Dobson's remarks were from a leaked internal e-mail, providing him with "plausible deniability" to say the least. Thompson's retort was straight from the shoulder, and would be hard to retract.
He could have just as easily said something like: " I don't put too much store in an e-mail from a leak source. It could easily be taken out of context. If Dobson has a bone to pick with me, I welcome him over to my house. We can sit on the porch, have some tea, and hash the whole thing out."
Not only would that have been the high road, he would have also paved the way to a reconciliation by waiving an olive branch with no real injury to himself.
That is what I mean that it was handled poorly.
See typing quickly ,and typed the wrong word,WORD.
Iowa is more liberal then Minnesota. And that says something about who they picked.
I’m accused of being a bigot, and your pathetic response is to demand that I define bigotry. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the moron that accuses others of Christian bashing, to explain, with some specificity, why he thinks what I, and others, said constitutes bigotry.
The logic of asking me to come up with a definition is sophmoric. But if you insist, I will define what Christian Bashing is not. It is not, pointing out the fact that Dobson, appears to be pretty much a single issue voter, willing to overlook all of Huckabee’s baggage, simply because of Huckabee’s history as a Babtist preacher. Pointing out the fact that Dobson appears to be practicing “identity” politics. (Voting for someone because of who he is not because of what he stands for) is not Christian Bashing.
The Huckster will probably not get the nomination but his fall is going to hurt the Christian Right political movement big time. Following this guy blindly and not asking questions will set the movement back years if not generations.
For example, it has been reported that the #1 issue for Republican caucus voters in Iowa was illegals and yet they voted for a open border/total amnesty guy.
Sad days ahead if this trend continues.
I recognize Hunter as a very great conservative. He is not really in the race.
Well, I can certainly understand that, especially on this thread. So I gather you are no longer saying Duncan Hunter is a RINO? A RINO is an acronym for Republican In Name Only. If they ran as democrats, it would barely register as a blip on the surprise-o-meter.
I believe it was badeye who was accused of “anti-christian crap” by Theo, not NavVet. I said it was possible that Theo was right.
I know how it feels to be accused of being a bigot. On a couple of mormon threads where I brought up the deity of Christ and tried to drill down on it, I was accused of being a bigot.
I doubt we’re going to come up with a suitable definition.
So we’ll just have to leave it to the readers to decide. At this point, most of us know that this thing with Hucklebee is most likely a flash in the pan. So we would hope to harness its energy when it plays out, and attract the Hucklebee supporters. They appear to be Pro-life evangelicals who don’t seem to focus on much else, at least in terms of spending the resources to discern. So, when the Hucklebee supporters read through Free Republic, which is supposed to be a “pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government” website, which candidate fits that bill? Duncan Hunter. He is an evangelical conservative. Is Thompson conservative? Yes. Is he evangelical? Well, the answer to that simple question is never simply stated, and when Hucklebee supporters start looking for a candidate they can feel comfortable with, they’ll need to answer that question for themselves. This thread is a reasonably good example of how evangelicals are treated within the Hunter camp and the Thompson camp.
From the front page of Free Republic:
Statement by the founder of Free Republic
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. .... We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. .... We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.
It would please me to see the terms defined, these terms we’re using and being accused of like bigotry, anti-christian, etc. But it’s not likely to happen because they’re difficult to define. However, the other side of the coin is that in an emotional, spiritual, and practical sense the terms are easy enough to see when you read through threads like this. Evangelicals are welcome in Hunter’s camp, encouraged even. Evangelicals are not really wanted in Rudy’s camp. Are they wanted in Fred’s camp? Well, it’s obvious that Fred’s camp wants their votes, but does Team Fred really want Evangelicals in their camp? I would encourage undecided evangelicals to read through as much as they’re willing, see who it is that’s calling evangelicals “stupid” and “easily led” and that kind of thing on other threads, and decide for themselves.
The Huckster will probably not get the nomination but his fall is going to hurt the Christian Right political movement big time. Following this guy blindly and not asking questions will set the movement back years if not generations.
***Your presumption is that the Christian Right will follow this guy blindly. I am encouraged by the Huckster’s rise. Huckabee has surged because he won a couple of debates and he’s got evangelical support. If a quick rise can happen to the liberal pro-life evangelical Huckster, it can happen to the conservative pro-life evangelical Hunter. And today is the primary in Wyoming. If Hunter does well there, he will have some momentum moving as New Hampshire winds up.
For example, it has been reported that the #1 issue for Republican caucus voters in Iowa was illegals and yet they voted for a open border/total amnesty guy. Sad days ahead if this trend continues.
***Again, I see it exactly the other way. What we have is a large voting bloc that is Pro-Life Evangelicals who are most likely going to be soon disillusioned by their candidate. The only other Pro-Life Evangelical in the race is Duncan Hunter, and he just happens to be the strongest on illegal immigration. I see very happy days ahead if this trend continues.
I suppose we’ll see today, whether he does well in Wyoming. And then in New Hampshire, where Thompson has high negatives because he chose not to debate there but preferred to announce on Jay Leno instead. Then the real battleground will be North Carolina. Hunter did well in a straw poll in Spartanburg, with tootyfruityrudy’s staff all over the place and Hunter was basically there all alone.
The more I look into Hunter, the more I see of him, the more impressed I am. That is not true of any of the other candidates, for me.
Oh I agree, they should take responsibility for who they nominate. You have to understand though they are usually not very fiscally responsible, as the results bear out...
No. Iowa showed than Iowans are retards.
No. Iowa showed that Iowans are retards.
If Huckabee wins the nom the Pro life movement will be set back generations. Folks need to take a close look at this guy before its too late.
Theo accused me of “anti-Christian crap” as well. Nature of the internet I guess. It is just easier to hurl insults than articulate arguments.
If Huckabee wins the nom the Pro life movement will be set back generations. Folks need to take a close look at this guy before its too late.
***How? Huckabee is pro-life. Hunter is pro-life. Thompson is pro-life. Any of these guys would be a pro-life president. How would electing a pro-life president set back the movement by generations?
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.