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.
ditto!
Hunter’s great - I just wish he had the instant name recognition that someone like Dobson would have. I also wish he was willing to go off his talking points a little bit more. However, I have great respect for Hunter and trust him completely.
Lol, close but slightly off. I am 24 year old second year law student at Wake Forest School of Law. So, yeah, the odds of me actually pulling anything like that off would be slight. I was just responding to B9 who said that if I liked Dobson so much I should try and draft him.
We have posted tons of info from Hunter on every subject under the sun here. Raster has a huge archive of videos and interviews. When you are in a debate, you get a few minutes max to get some points across. So many people do not know him, so he hits on the same themes in the debates. Just like Rudy talks about what he did in NY. But in other forums, like the interview on FR, he is able to expand the conversation.
..right now I don't understand why you can't see whoever wins the Presidency....
..their religious views will be wrapped/incorporated into their political governing
.. whether their view is closer to Judeo/Christian tenets of faith
...or an atheistic view.
The decision to abort unborn babies in 1973 didn't happen overnight....
..This happened because someone had an agenda that included their antipathy of Judeo/Christian ethics.
Now, almost 35 years later, we have 50 million dead babies.
You say you don't want Dobson or Evangelical type folk mixing with politics.
Well, SEMom, I'm not ready.....and a lot of other folk here at FR and in this nation...are not ready-(nor will we ever be ready) to cede our heritage to those who have a disdain for Godly principles.
One can't govern or guide a nation from a vacuum..
....something or someone will fill that vaccuum!
True - I know that he has great positions on other issues (his website actually has a very good listing of his views on issues) and I know that you have done a great job of publicising them here on FR. I just wish that he would get into the social issues more during the debates - since I really want his candidacy to catch on with social conservatives.
Well, he certainly sent out the press release when he re-introduced his Right to Life Act again in 2007. And he had a A section article in the USA today in March defending General Pace’s comments about homosexuality in the military. But just like most folks, the christian right does not pay as close attention to these things as we do. So people in their ranks need to help spread the word.
I’m beginning to think that the culture war is now not in government at all, but it is in the leadership of the political parties, and that this is the reason men like Duncan Hunter can’t get nominated.
I believe that there is an apparatus in the NRC that keeps men like Duncan Hunter from ascending to an electable position. And then they keep saying, “Well, Hunter can’t defeat Hillary.” Yes, Hunter and men like him could defeat Clinton if they were not stymied by the party Duncan serve so well.
I believe (my opinion through observation) the NRC leadership must be controlled by the lowest end of the moral spectrum, and that they loathe men like Hunter.
I also must wonder if the NRC leadership is not somehow working to actually push people like James Dobson out of the party, and I would not doubt anymore if there are efforts at the top to denigrate the James Dobsons within the party and marginalize their influence.
I am coming to the conclusion that the NRC only wants to hold on to an economic “conservatism” and really couldn’t care less whether the Nation and our families are overrun by the larvae of the various moral cesspools.
Points well taken....keen observation.
E rroneous
G loomy
O pinions
Good one!
He worked multiple jobs to put himself through college AND law school while raising a family. You have a lot of nerve saying Thompson does not work hard.
I’ll take the word of people who WORKED for him, over YOUR ignorant opinion.
I heard directly from one of Fred’s former speechwriters that Fred being lazy is a load of garbage, that Fred often was in his office long after everyone went home. I also heard an interview with the author of the new Thompson biography and he described his conversation with one of Fred’s Tennessee aides, who laughed at the charge and said she QUIT because it was killing her trying to keep up with Fred’s pace.
From John Fund:
Indeed, it is his need to wake up at 5 a.m. the next morning, so he can tape three Harvey segments before returning to the “Law and Order” set for a long day of shooting, that prompts Mr. Thompson to close out our chat. “With my current schedule I might have more time to myself if I gave all this up and did start a campaign,” he says as he dons a sports coat and heads for his car.
*
Every profile I’ve read on Thompson contains references, by the typical unnamed coward sources, to him being “lazy”, his Senate career lackluster, and gasp, there’s not a piece of legislation with his name on it! (Well gee, Teddy Kennedy has his name on a bunch of bills - and that’s made the nation a better place, n’est ce pas?)
My experience with Senator Thompson dates to when I was the public affairs chief for GAO, the Government Accountability Office, a legislative branch agency providing oversight of the feds. Thompson was chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, the complementary panel to GAO. It’s kind of a backwater committee, with not the visibility of say, Foreign Affairs, or Armed Services, or Appropriations. But the committee is essential to investigating the mechanics of government - and how those gears can be made to work more efficiently.
So yeah, Thompson was a big show boater - a huge proponent of the Clinger-Cohen Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, doncha know; which required that the “government information technology shop be operated exactly as an efficient and profitable business would be operated.” Then there was his support for the President’s Management Agenda, announced in the summer of 2001, “an aggressive strategy for improving the management of the Federal government…focusing on Expanding E-Government: Improved Service Delivery for the American People Using Information Technology and Expanding E-Government: Partnering for a Results-Oriented Government.” Yowzah, man, hot Hot HOT! Front page baby!
...So now I hear the stories about Thompson, which are typical of 1. Opponents who want to drag him down, which is the way it works, and 2. A lazy press corps who but for a few stalwarts, didn’t cover this subject matter when Thompson was preaching at the wind.
Now, I’m too much of a nothing burger to have any say in this race. But Thompson, whatever his faults, is not getting a fair shake. When you’re waxing on about OMB circulars and Clinger-Cohen’s e-billing protocols, you’re not exactly lazy or lackluster. In fact, you’re actually doing what government is supposed to be doing, which is trying to do better.
- Jeff Nelligan, The Coastmaster..., June 8, 2007
http://coastmaster.blogspot.com/2007/06/no-slacker-big-fred-grinds-it-out.html
*
Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank, said he saw Thompson as a thoughtful lawmaker able to reach across party lines.
“He worked plenty and he absorbed plenty,” said Ornstein.
Thomas Ferraro, Capitol Hill Blue, June 2, 2007
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cont/node/2619
*
In interviews, several of his former Senate aides expressed surprise at suggestions by unnamed critics that their old boss might be lethargic.
“Whoever says this man is lazy never worked for him,” said Bill Outhier, a former aide who recalled the campaign finance staff “working until midnight” because the senator was still in the office.
- Julia Malone, Cox News Service, May 11, 2007
*
As Robert Novak reported last week, the rap againt Thomspon is that “he was not a hard worker during his eight years in the Senate.” Yet I’m told by a source who was there that Thompson was a reasonably diligent member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. In any case, this rap is unlikely to hurt Thompson with voters outside the beltway.
What will matter is whether Thompson is prepared to campaign diligently for the nomination. If so, he likely will represent a force to be reckoned with.
- Paul Mirengoff, Power Line, March 25, 2007
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/017150.php
*
The rap on Thompson is that he was “lazy” when he was in the Senate. This is precisely the same sort of rap that Leftists made about Ronald Reagan. In fact, this is strength. Because Thompson acts from principle, he does not need to engage in the Machiavellian machinations which pass for “work” in Washington. The reality is that it is absurd to consider Thompson, who has worked during his life in more real jobs than almost any politician in Washington and who today stars in two television programs as well as being the substitute for Paul Harvey and a frequent commentator in conservative periodicals is “lazy” at all. Like Reagan, he probably works harder than anyone in Washington.
- Bruce Walker, Intellectual Conservative, March 22, 2007
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/03/22/yes-the-next-reagan
Thanks. Good to see you.
Roe vs. Wade is not so much about religion or even abortion but about Federal Courts setting policy from a twisted interpretation of the Constitution.
Before Roe, there were abortions. But after Roe there were many more abortions accompanied by a significant change in the cultural mindset of Americans.
Before Roe there were Christian presidents. During Roe there was a Christian president. The Presidency had no affect on Roe.
Without Roe there would have been far fewer abortions and there would be a more disciplined populace.
But to reiterate Roe was not the result of a President that lacked Christian values. It was the result of a Supreme Court that lost its way. Therefore, Dobson is in error in bringing his moral issues into the Presidential Election in anyway other than ensuring the candidates understand the importance of appointing strict constructionists to the Federal judiciary. But he has overplayed his hand with his complaint about FDT. Even George Washington preferred to worship in private. He was so private in his religious beliefs that some today have attempted to label him as a deist, but in fact his close family members attested to his complete devotion to his Lord.
~ BUMP! ~
I think it's telling that Dobson wants to comment on Fred's poor campaigning, as if effective campaigning is part of the "values vote."
LMAO! No way they'll take a Masshole liberal but a NewYawk liberal is good to go? That's the dumbest thing I've heard today.
good stuff! thank you.
I believe the culture war never gets won but it gets unbalanced to the extent that the Constitution is severely abused. The fallout is that everyone suffers.
There is no conspiracy keeping Hunter back. He does not get traction because he does not possess ‘the presence’ in sufficient quantity to be taken seriously.
Put it this way, Barry Goldwater like Hunter had all the issues dear to conservatives of his time. He got the nomination but was trounced in the general election. He did not have the presence to win enough swing voters.
Fred Thompson has the presence but he was not ‘selected’ by the MSM of the RNC or any other leadership. He was drafted and now leads because he has the issues and the presence.
What is presence? Hard to define but an example everyone understands or can relate to is Michael Jordan. He was genetically as close to members of opposing teams as could be but he had something special inside him that you could see when he stared at his fellow teammates. It was the look that told them they better play at his level if they wanted to play at all. That’s ‘presence’.
FDT’s presence is in his ability to articulate a message that connects well with people. They hear him and say “I like what he says”. But what they really mean is “I like the way he says it” because inside their own minds they are trying to express what FDT finds so easy to express for them. And other aspects of his presence reside in his keen legal mind, this is what makes democrats sit up and pay attention. They fear his intellect.
Positions are more than words, they are expressions. They are words accompanied by trumpets. Fred plays a really good trumpet. Hunter’s trumpet is like some cheap prize out of a box of Cracker Jacks. His words are good but his trumpet is a joke.
And the really stinking fact about Hunter is that he has so-called supporters that think Hunter’s chances will be better if they bash FDT. Yeah, if your candidate can’t get traction, go and try to hobble the candidate that is getting traction. That’s a real winning strategy isn’t it? Hunter deserves better.
-—That is totally laughable. You claim to be Christian...Sorry, but you may buy into that apostacy, false doctrine abomination stuff but don’t try to tell the rest of us who actually know something about the real Holy Scriptures-—
You sound like the type that goes into church and prays, “Thank G-d I’m not like these others...”
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.