Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dobson Says He Won't Support Thompson
AP ^ | 9/19/07 | Erik Gorski

Posted on 09/19/2007 7:14:10 PM PDT by pissant

DENVER (AP) — James Dobson, one of the nation's most politically influential evangelical Christians, made it clear in a message to friends this week he will not support Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson.

In a private e-mail obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, Dobson accuses the former Tennessee senator and actor of being weak on the campaign trail and wrong on issues dear to social conservatives.

"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?" Dobson wrote.

"He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"

The founder and chairman of Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family, Dobson draws a radio audience in the millions, many of whom who first came to trust the child psychologist for his conservative Christian advice on child-rearing.

Gary Schneeberger, a Focus on the Family spokesman, confirmed that Dobson wrote the e-mail. Schneeberger declined to comment further, saying it would be inappropriate because Dobson's comments about presidential candidates are made as an individual and not as a representative of Focus on the Family, a nonprofit organization restricted from partisan politics.

Dobson's strong words about Thompson underscore the frustration and lack of unity among Christian conservatives about the GOP field. Some Christian right leaders have pinned their hopes on Thompson, describing him as a Southern-fried Ronald Reagan. But others have voiced doubts in recent weeks about some of the same issues Dobson highlighted: his position on gay marriage and support for the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation.

Dobson and other Christian conservatives support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would bar gay marriage nationally. Thompson has said he would support a constitutional amendment that would prohibit states from imposing their gay marriage laws on other states, which falls well short of that.

Karen Hanretty, a spokeswoman for the Thompson campaign, said Wednesday in response to the Dobson e-mail: "Fred Thompson has a 100 percent pro-life voting record. He believes strongly in returning authority to the levels of government closest to families and communities, protecting states from intrusion by the federal government and activist judges.

"We're confident as voters get to know Fred, they'll appreciate his conservative principles, and he is the one conservative in this race who can win the nomination and can go on to defeat the Democratic nominee."

In his e-mail addressed "Dear friends," Dobson includes the text of a recent news story highlighting Thompson's statement that while he was baptized in the Church of Christ, he does not attend church regularly and won't speak about his faith on the stump.

U.S. News and World Report quoted Dobson earlier this year as questioning Thompson's commitment to the Christian faith — comments Dobson contended were not put in proper context. Dobson in this week's e-mail writes that suppositions "about the former senator's never having professed to be a Christian are turning out to be accurate in substance."

Earlier this year, Dobson said he wouldn't back John McCain because of the Arizona senator's opposition to a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

Later, Dobson wrote on a conservative news Web site that he wouldn't support former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani should he win the Republican nomination. Dobson called Giuliani an "unapologetic supporter of abortion on demand" and criticized him for signing a bill in 1997 creating domestic-partnership benefits in New York City.

Last week, Dobson announced on his radio show that the IRS had cleared him of accusations that he had endangered his organization's nonprofit status by endorsing Republican candidates in 2004. The IRS said Dobson, who endorsed President Bush's re-election bid, was acting as an individual and not on behalf of the nonprofit group.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: b4dh; byebyefred; christianvote; dobson; elections; firstnamebasis; fotf; fred; fredthompson; jamesdobson; pissyfit; spartansixdelta
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,100 ... 1,341-1,343 next last
To: greyfoxx39

ayup


1,061 posted on 09/21/2007 8:04:52 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1060 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; Jim Robinson; Politicalmom
Well, I think Dobson gave his reasons, such as they are in his e-mail:

"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?" Dobson wrote.

"He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"

Like Dobson's reasons or not, in this e-mail he gave them. I don't think it's any more "covert" for him to e-mail groups of his friends or political allies than it is for us to. I also am worried that Thompson isn't going to be the great campaigner that everyone hoped. Someone early in this thread asked if everyone wanted flames to jet out of Thompson's @$$ . . . and the response was yes! He did a good job in building up expectations, but now, if he doesn't deliver, we have Guilianni . . . because he froze conservative support that could have rallied to a guy like Hunter.

I've been saying for a while that we all, we being conservatives, need to support Hunter because Thompson could stumble and if he does conservatives are left holding an empty bag without Hunter in a viable position, even as a longshot candidate. Hunter is also 59 and can grow in national stature for later runs, so it is no lose for conservatives to give some support to Hunter in this election, and in primaries you can help multiple candidates, especially early in the process.

I do not know that Dobson has supported Gingrich and think, personally, that this support is moot anyway since Gingrich truly is too late in announcing to be an effective candidate, barring bizarre circumstances. Gingrich's call for 30 million dollars a couple of days ago was laughable in my opinion. Gingrich was unusually (and in my view) overly confessional in a radio broadcast with Dobson; I think it's more a question of what Newt thought he was doing than what Dobson was doing.

These are my opinions, not facts; I don't know Dobson.

1,062 posted on 09/21/2007 8:10:43 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1055 | View Replies]

To: Greg F

Just noticed your sign-up date ~ May 31, 2007

You wouldn’t perchance be a recycled freeper, now would you?


1,063 posted on 09/21/2007 8:16:19 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1062 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39; Politicalmom; JRochelle

“Playing” with their influence? Does anyone else find this ethically troubling?
____________________________

Politics is a rough game. I don’t find hardball morally offensive. And it is not clear that this is what Dobson is doing — it may have been an unintended leak. I also think that it’s o.k. for a guy like Dodson, who has no power in a theological sense, and isn’t even anyone’s pastor. A Pope or a Mormon prophet playing politics in the same way would probably be inappropriate, since there is sort of an implicit threat of hell, banshment from the church etc., when the Pope or the Great Prophet of the LDS church speaks because they are heirarchical churches that believe that their leaders have special powers. That said, I wouldn’t mind Benedict condemning Guilianni’s pro-abortion stance at all.


1,064 posted on 09/21/2007 8:19:56 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1060 | View Replies]

To: b9

Nah, I had a few memberships in the past, but lost their passwords or whatever. Never really posted much before.


1,065 posted on 09/21/2007 8:21:07 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1063 | View Replies]

To: Greg F

Suuuure.

CYA L8R, “LITIG8R”


1,066 posted on 09/21/2007 8:24:51 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1065 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom
We have been hammered with people impugning our intelligence, (”You only like him because he’s an actor.”, people lying about Fred’s record, people making fun of his age, his baggy eyes, his wife, and people calling him “lazy” and an “empty suit” against all evidence.

Yah, I've had the same sort of stuff supporting Hunter. People get so aggressive in attacking other candidates who "threaten" the guy they like that they lose all perspective. I like Hunter. That's nothing against Thompson. I do worry that Thompson looks so darn old and tired though and that's not superficial. I never doubted Reagan had the energy and drive to do what he needed to do even at an older age. I do with Thompson. Hope he proves me wrong and makes a great VP for Hunter ; )

1,067 posted on 09/21/2007 8:26:23 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1056 | View Replies]

To: b9

Give me a laugh. Who do you think I am the reincarnation of? I’ll take a look at their posts and tell you why they do not have my clarity of insight and understanding of governance and principle.


1,068 posted on 09/21/2007 8:33:42 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1066 | View Replies]

To: Greg F

You’re a royal phony baloney, “Greg.”


1,069 posted on 09/21/2007 8:38:07 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1068 | View Replies]

To: b9

You’re a royal phony baloney, “Greg.”
______________________
I think you have spent too much time online at Free Republic. I recommend a weekend of fresh air, sunshine, good food, family and friends. We’ll talk again on Monday when you’ve reconnected to the real world!


1,070 posted on 09/21/2007 8:42:34 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1069 | View Replies]

To: Greg F
A Pope or a Mormon prophet playing politics in the same way would probably be inappropriate, since there is sort of an implicit threat of hell, banshment from the church etc.,

I have to disagree with that statement. By your own admission, Dobson has great influence over many, many voters...it's a matter of influence, not of supposed "special powers".

My daughter, for one, thinks that Dobson hung the moon as a CHRISTIAN. I wonder what she would make of this statement, " "He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!" ?

That has nothing to do with Fred's supposed stance on the issues.

Dobson's email statement, to me, reeks of some kind of PERSONAL animus against Fred, and I really believe that someone in his influential position is harming his mission and himself here.

BTW, I would really be happy if Hunter were at 20% in the polls.

Thanks for your input.

1,071 posted on 09/21/2007 8:44:13 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 ( Mexico does not stop at its border, Wherever there is a Mexican, there is Mexico. Calderon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1064 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Dobson's email statement, to me, reeks of some kind of PERSONAL animus against Fred, and I really believe that someone in his influential position is harming his mission and himself here.

Very well put.

1,072 posted on 09/21/2007 8:47:28 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1071 | View Replies]

To: Greg F
Well, I think Dobson gave his reasons, such as they are in his e-mail:
"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?" Dobson wrote.

Let's take these errors in Dobson's thinking one at a time.

opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage - Freds belief in Federalism lends itself to bigger government is not necessarily better for everyone. There are some pretty smart people in all the states that can make these kind of decisions without Federal oversight. As a matter of fact, it's much easier to correct a mistake at the state level than it is at the Federal level.

favors McCain-Feingold - Fred has addressed this on many,many occasions. The influence of unaccounted for corporate money promotes what in the real world amounts to bribery. Campaign Finance was an effort to control that, and since it has not worked out as planned, Fred thinks it should be scrapped.

won't talk at all about what he believes - This is confusing. Beliefs in what? Type of government we should have? Religious? Fred has made numerous statements about a variety of subjects from guns, Immigration, to Federalism and Taxes. To me this sounds like Dobson is pandering for some personal attention to commit his support.

and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail - Amazing. Since he has neither met or seen Thompson on the campaign trail, how can he make a judgement like this? It shows disrespect and complete foolishness.

All in all, Dobson has shown himself to be uneducated and mis-informed. Whether this is intentional to garner some 'butt-kissing' for support is probably more the reason for the email.

1,073 posted on 09/21/2007 8:55:43 AM PDT by Pistolshot (Keyes/Paul '08 - When you can't get crazy enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1062 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Does anyone else find this ethically troubling?

I find the whole platform of Dobson and the Arlington Group ethically troubling.
.
1,074 posted on 09/21/2007 9:01:19 AM PDT by radioman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1060 | View Replies]

To: Saundra Duffy
Look at the small “g” in gods and the capital “G” in God. Realize that the “we” in Genesis is the trinity, which is a mystery. Satan knows the Bible better than either of us, in a sense; he is more intelligent, he has had more direct contact with God and knows the spirit world far better than we do. He knows where to insert falsehood into areas that are mystery, are beyond man’s full comprehension, being of God. This is where he has played with you. I assure you that no one reading the Bible with the guidance of the Holy Spirit could miss the singular power, the oneness of God, and no one with the guidance of the Holy Spirit would imagine himself becoming God. There is only one God. This is bedrock Christianity; it has been the word of God for thousands of years. You are deceived.
1,075 posted on 09/21/2007 9:03:34 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1059 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

~ BUMP! ~


1,076 posted on 09/21/2007 9:10:35 AM PDT by b9 ("Fred... doesn't suffer fools and he has the guts and the microphone to say what I think" ~ Samwise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1073 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

I disagree strongly about marriage. It is so fundamental to society that it trumps federalism. It is more important that our government itself, so it should be an Amendment. I think the Founders would agree, if they could even contemplate a society so self-destructive and perverse that it allowed homosexual marriage in law.

Marriage is permanent, it is unlike every other social arrangment and contract at law in that respect, so every homosexual couple in the United States could travel to a single state that allowed homosexual marriage and be “married.” I understand the Thompson idea of an amendment that makes states not obligated to recognize other states laws regarding marriage . . . but that doesn’t undo social destruction and one of the final nails in the coffin of the traditional family.

So I’m with Dobson on a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage and not Thompson. I disagree with some of your other points but don’t feel as strongly about them and want to see more of Thompson before I make up my mind.


1,077 posted on 09/21/2007 9:16:53 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1073 | View Replies]

To: MissouriConservative
Right now they are doing it through the courts....what if they had the authority to do a Constitutional amendement? You think it’s bad now....sheesh.

That's just the purpose of an Amendment process: it takes time for the People to develop a consensus, and to do so, there must be a dialog and involvement of the state legislatures. This way, the People will not overturn the social order without being convinced of the rightness of it, as they were when they were willing to fight a ghastly Civil War to affirm the basic human dignity of African-American people.

The gay lobby knows it cannot win at the ballot box now, in no small part because of their own overreaching demands that small children be indoctrinated in government schools from kindergarten onwards about the mechanics of gay sex, instead of, say, requiring that school guidance counselors be able to make a referral to a counselor, with the permission of the parents, of a high schooler who thinks he or she might be "gay."

1,078 posted on 09/21/2007 9:42:08 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ( America: “...the most benign hegemon in history.” —Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 989 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

And thank you for your input, I agree with a lot of what you said (especially the part about wanting Hunter to move up in the polls). I do think there is a difference between a Pope saying “don’t do this” and a ministry leader saying “don’t do this” because of the difference in the structures of the respective churches. In fact, Dobson runs an nondemoninational ministry, so he has no authority at all over people, even as their pastor. It’s solely respect for him that cause people to consider his views.

There was a Catholic Priest and politician, Father Drinan, and the Pope said he had to choose, his vows or being a Congressman. Drinan gave up his office. That is a very different level of authority than a guy like Dobson who runs a ministry. Think about the damage John Paul II did to the Polish governement and the Soviets with three words: “Be Not Afraid.” Think of what that meant to Polish Catholics living under foreign and athiestic rule in 1979, and look at how they reacted. Dobson could do a full frontal assault with books, speeches, e-mails, spend the rest of his life devoted to one issue, and never get more than a fraction of the result that John Paul II did with those three words alone. Different structure, different symbolism etc.

If a Pope said “you shouldn’t vote for this politician” that would be a BIG deal compared to Dobson saying it; I think because it would different in kind.


1,079 posted on 09/21/2007 10:22:13 AM PDT by Greg F (Duncan Hunter is a good man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1071 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

I don’t agree with Dobson’s tactic however your absurd regugitation of the do nothing position of Federalism alegedly espoused by Fred Thompson DOES NOT HELP his campaign.

Marrige IS a federal issue. Hiding his head in the sand with an absurd and non-credible federalist position is about as valid as rudy guiliani’s position that the second amendment is a local issue.

Teh Federal Marriage Amendment codifies the common law. IOW it keeps what has been the law of the land since before the consititution.

The Federalist BS better be dumped FAST because it IS A DEALBREAKER. This position puts him on par with the kook ronpaul.

Now in addition Fred Thompson has weaseled on this so he actually has had TWO position on the Federal Marriage Amendment cited here on FR.

Those of us who actually practice law can see right through the legal BS espoused by these candidates.


1,080 posted on 09/21/2007 10:22:38 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1073 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,041-1,0601,061-1,0801,081-1,100 ... 1,341-1,343 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson