Posted on 01/04/2008 12:24:09 PM PST by Tlaloc
I am not a historian, so I cannot answer your question directly. I assume Teddy Roosevelt was what the country desired in 1900 since he won the election. I am voting today for whom I would prefer leading the country in 2008.
Since when did being on good terms with Dobson define and evangelical?
Here I thought Jesus was the important factor.....
...in Iowa.
Ya had to do it didn’t you....
;-)
Yes, it shows that the right is still powerful. Powerful and naive. Some just downright stupid!
GOOD POINT!!
Excellent, well-balanced insights. Unlike what most of these rabid FReepers are spewing.
***There does seem to be a lot of antichristian sentiment. They seem to forget that this is a socon website.
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’s not disdain for their beliefs, it’s disdain for their recent approach which is ‘circular firing squad’
For the most part, I’m a social conservative myself in terms of my political beliefs, but I cannot understand how unrealistic many social conservatives have become in terms of enforcing their version of ideological purity on their fellow Republicans. In the 1980’s and the 1990’s, Social Conservatives had room in the party for all kinds of Republicans and that’s why we were successful...they are no longer inclusive and that’s why we are going to lose in 2008.
Actually, it shows that so-called “conservative” Christians aren’t.
I definetaley like this approach better than plain insults :)
But I don't understand your statement, please read back my message to you. I gave you a concrete example (The Military's future if the Democraps can do it). And I asked you a question: "what should we do then?"
Dobson is a Christian. Your mischaracterization of him is based solely on his being a Christian with a platform and a voice. By definition: anti-Christian.
He is not claiming to have had any role at all in yesterday’s vote. He takes no credit for anything. He’s merely observing that many Evangelicals (foolishly, IMO) voted for Huckabee, and that’s evidence of the power that Evangelicals have.
The statement you quoted by the founder of Free Republic sounds pretty good to me, but apparently the folks who voted for Huckabee didn’t read that very carefully. They allowed the fact that he is an Evangelical Christian to push their vote in Huckabee’s direction despite the fact that he is Big Government Populist who is weak on matters of immigration, national security and crime.
So THAT is why I am angry, because any Evangelical who voted for Huckabee is ignoring 95% of his record and supporting him just because he shares their religious devotion.
It’s actually kinda funny to me. I do believe that many of our problems are due to drifting away (as a nation) either from God, or simply from our traditional morals and values, and, especially, the decline of the family unit. At the same time, I think a segment of the Evangelical base is so dedicated to restoring that in America, they go to nanny-state lengths to try and achieve that goal.
I am socially conservative, but I always thought of myself as just a “normal” American - believes in God, Family, Tradition, I think the family unit is important, and it’s important to be patriotic and understand how lucky we are to live in America. However, in this day and age I suppose that makes me socially conservative. However, some believe that to be socially conservative you have to be the finger-wagging, no dancing allowed (think about the movie “Footloose” for an example) Bible-Thumper type and the President must be that way too...
So I take it your either not a Christian or not a conservative if you’re so willing to denounce all Christians as “gullible”?
Yes, foolishly. Unfortunately, a chunk of evangelical Christians are voting by “identity politics” just like Dems do - same reason a Hispanic wants to vote for a Hispanic, or a Christian wants to vote for a Christian, without any regard to the positions they take on the issues. That’s what’s going on with Huckabee’s support.
No they are not, they know exactly who they are voting for. They are not Conservatives in the sense of small government, low taxes, strong defense. They are pro life #1, which is a conservative position but that is it. They do not care about the rest of the package.
If Huckabee dropped out and Hillary and Bill put on a crying Jimmy Swaggert act claiming to have seen the light. If they made a good show and promise to put forth a pro life amendment, they would get almost every one of Huckabees supporters.
Dobson is a sinner. Just like me and just like you. He’s not infallible.
That said, he’s a very honorable man. Not someone we FReepers should so quickly denounce.
I agree. But the pragmatist in me doesn’t see Hunter winning the nomination in 2008. Thompson has a chance.
Though I’m a Christian, I have no problems having a President who is not a Christian, or who is nominally Christian. Scripture has several examples of ungodly leaders who have done well for the people of God.
As a Republic, winning the election means you get to make the policy. Therefore, short of revolution, our only option is to work harder to get conservatives elected the next time. In the meantime, you make it as hard as possible for liberal policies to be enacted.
This is why I prefer seeing Congress controlled by one party and the Presidency controlled by another. Gridlock slows the process way down.
Of course, if we are sending people to Congress with no ideological difference from the President, party affiliation doesn’t mean anything except for who gets their names engraved on the gavels.
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.