Christian Leader James Dobson Endorses Huckabee for GOP Nod

foxnews.com ^ | February 7, 2008 | Associated Press

[BibChr]

Is there a place you go to study to be able to say such barkingly, droolingly imbecilic things about Dobson?

Or does it just bubble out, like Eddie Murphy and obscenity?

[Politicalmom]

Yup. I will never take Dobson’s advice again. His eagerness to
pronounce judgment of the Christianity of a man HE NEVER MET showed me he has NO wisdom....and no class. And then that “leaked” email. Right, I really buy that it was leaked. Leaked by Dobson’s aide, I’d believe.

Anyone want to buy some books? I am divesting. I was going to just toss them, but hubby said I might as well make some money. LOL

[dotnetfellow]

James Dobson you should have done this months ago.

[Vermont Lt]

I know exactly what you mean.

At one time in my career I spent a week at a Disney University Service Course in Orlando. They showed us the guts of the Magic Kingdom.

Once you understand how the manipulation of the experience occurs, you forever lose your interest.

[Little_GTO]

Had you not attacked Huck last year

Got a source for that?

[HawaiianGecko]

"What if Romney endorsed Huck and he got his delegates?"

Technically he could do that, but do you seriously believe he would, especially since the best speech of his life, yesterday, centered around him suspending his campaign in order for the party to coalesce.  I don't think Romney is going to ruin all the good will he has achieved by trying to stop the candidate with 60% of the delegates and give to the guy with only 15%. 

Secondly, no matter what Mitt does, McCain and his campaign has a say in what happens in the future, and aren't likely to roll over and play dead. Combined with Mitt, Huch would still only have 467 compared to McCain's 714.  He'd still need to get 724 votes compared to McCain's 477.  McCain has won 59% of the delegates awarded to date and only needs to pull 40% of the ones left.  I see no reason on Earth why he'd poll at a lesser rate then before Romney bowed out.

All that said, he still doesn't have it mathematically locked up yet.

[unsocialist]

“Got a source for that?”

Attending a closed door meeting debating a third party candidate was a slap to all the Republican candidates running at that time. Dobson believed that Rudy was going to win, discounting Huck and everyone else. Dobson only now endorses Huck when he needs over 80% of the delegates up for grab. A little too late for that now. Had he not snubbed him at that meeting, giving his support instead, McCain would not be an issue. Instead, Dobson brought doubt to the voters.

[loboinok]

"Huckabee supporters need to realize this isn’t about religion—it’s politics. In politics, you have to be able to compromise in order to get what you want. Stand firm against sin, but don’t equate politics with your walk with Christ. It’s not the same thing, nor can it be."

And politicians and voters compromising their principles is precisely the reason we are where we are now as a nation and culture.

"This isn’t about voting for the “devil” or choosing Christ. It’s about setting public policy for mostly secular matters."

The founding fathers would most likely disagree...

"Consider well the important trust . . . which God . . . [has] put into your hands. . . . To God and posterity you are accountable for [your rights and your rulers]. . . . Let not your children have reason to curse you for giving up those rights and prostrating those institutions which your fathers delivered to you. . . . [L]ook well to the characters and qualifications of those you elect and raise to office and places of trust. . . . Think not that your interests will be safe in the hands of the weak and ignorant; or faithfully managed by the impious, the dissolute and the immoral. Think not that men who acknowledge not the providence of God nor regard His laws will be uncorrupt in office, firm in defense of the righteous cause against the oppressor, or resolutly oppose the torrent of iniquity. . . . Watch over your liberties and privileges - civil and religious - with a careful eye."

[Matthias Burnett, Pastor of the First Baptist Church in Norwalk, An Election Sermon, Preached at Hartford, on the Day of the Anniversary Election, May 12, 1803 (Hartford: Printed by Hudson & Goodwin, 1803), pp. 27-28.]

"[T]he time has come that Christians must vote for honest men and take consistent ground in politics or the Lord will curse them. . . . Christians have been exceedingly guilty in this matter. But the time has come when they must act differently. . . . Christians seem to act as if they thought God did not see what they do in politics. But I tell you He does see it and He will bless or curse this nation according to the course they [Christians] take [in politics]."

[Charles G. Finney, Lectures on Revivals of Religion (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1868), Lecture XV, pp. 281-282.]

"Now more than ever the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature. . . . [I]f the next centennial does not find us a great nation . . . it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces."

[James A. Garfield, The Works of James Abram Garfield, Burke Hinsdale, editor (Boston: James R. Osgood and Company, 1883), Vol. II, pp. 486, 489, A Century of Congress, July, 1877.]

"Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation , to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."

[John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, Henry P. Johnston, ed. (New York: G.P. Putnams Sons, 1890), Vol. IV, p. 365.]

"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate--look to his character. . . . When a citizen gives his suffrage to a man of known immorality he abuses his trust; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor, he betrays the interest of his country.

[Noah Webster, Letters to a Young Gentleman Commencing His Education to which is subjoined a Brief History of the United States (New Haven: S. Converse, 1823), pp. 18, 19.]

And a quote that many would almost consider Fulfilled prophecy...

"When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, "just men who will rule in the fear of God." The preservation of government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be sqandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws."

[Noah Webster, History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337, 49.]

Socialists have been successful in removing God from governments and now Communists are succeeding in removing God from America.

"Jesus was not a politician." Westbrook

Romans 13:1-7 1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
3For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;
4for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.
5Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
6For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.
7Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

Jesus wasn't an 'engineer' per se, but He created the Universe and everything in it.

"Christian Leader James Dobson needs to stay out of politics or his church needs to start paying taxes." Hazcat

Dobson is the head of two organizations. One is tax-exempt and the other is political and not tax-exempt.

As such; he has every right to exercise his Constitutional rights...or do you not think so?

[CitizenUSA]

I don’t think I ever wrote Dobson doesn’t have the right to say or do what he wants. Secondly, I don’t think a candidate’s faith is irrelevant. If forced to choose between a devout Christian and a secular leader who are nearly identical on the issues, I’d pick the Christian. However, please consider, that’s not so easy to tell.

Huckabee, for example, is by far the most vocal Christian, but I have no way of knowing his sincerity. The loudest singers in church aren’t necessarily the strongest believers. What I can do is evaluate Huckabee’s history as governor and decide whether or not he translated his faith into deeds.

This is where there’s a distinction between liberal and conservative Christians. Liberal Christians who think government needs to take care of people might appear moral, but I think they are quite wrong and immoral. I don’t see anything “Christian” about taking from one person against their will to give to someone else. That’s stealing.

So, I’m trying to show how it isn’t enough to simply vote for the Christian guy, Huckabee. You probably agree, and I think your post made the point we should select our leaders carefully.

[Twink]

Don’t fret. I’m cluess about most things I read here but posters help in giving info. I do know who Dobson is but that doesn’t mean I know more than you, lol. I didn’t know about Hunter and Thompson or a slew of other things until I started reading here.

I’m honestly at the point where I don’t give a damn who endorses whom because we’re screwed anyway.

[Twink]

omgosh! ITA with your entire post.
Especially your last two paragraphs.

We are screwed for the next 4 years at least. IMO

[loboinok]

Sorry. I forgot to ping y’all.

[loboinok]

"I don’t think I ever wrote Dobson doesn’t have the right to say or do what he wants."

No, you didn't. I forgot to ping the posters I was responding to. Hazcat in this case.

"Secondly, I don’t think a candidate’s faith is irrelevant."

I don't either, obviously. I was responding to your statement......this isn’t about religion—it’s politics. Which implied to me that Christians should stay in church and out of politics. Also, In politics, you have to be able to compromise in order to get what you want., which I read as - principles should be compromised to attain the desired goals.

Apparently I jumped to conclusions that I shouldn't have. I also agree with your response.

[pollywog]

Put me on your PING list please.
polly

[Hazcat]

Dobson is the head of two organizations. One is tax-exempt and the other is political and not tax-exempt.

As a citizen certainly he does. BUT how does he separate Chuch and non-profit followers? Does he tell his chuch not to listen to his non-church opinions?

Render unto God what is Gods', Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars'.

[loboinok]

As a citizen certainly he does.

At the bottom of the article...

"Dobson emphasizes that when he endorses candidates, he is doing so as a private citizen and not as a representative of Focus on the Family, a tax-exempt organization he founded. His endorsement of Huckabee was to be e-mailed to 110,000 people through Focus on the Family Action, a separate entity that is allowed to be more politically active, Schneeberger said.

"Most of Focus' work is apolitical. Under IRS law, nonprofit organizations like Focus can neither endorse nor oppose candidates, but they can spend limited money on legislative issues such as gay marriage."

"Dobson's fight against gay marriage went further. Concerned by its emergence this year, he created Focus Action, a separate organization with a different IRS designation and no spending limits on political activity."

Concord Monitor

[Hazcat]

As I asked before, just how does he perform this dance?

Put your left foot in and he’s a minister, put your right foot in and he’s a citizen, thats the how you do the hokey pokey?

[Little_GTO]

Attending a closed door meeting debating a third party candidate was a slap to all the Republican candidates running at that time. Dobson believed that Rudy was going to win, discounting Huck and everyone else.

Were you at this meeting?

Do you have a press account that says Dobson discounted everyone else?

[loboinok]

As I asked before, just how does he perform this dance?

I'm really not sure what you mean, but if you think that FoF, FRC and Focus Action are all in the same location...they're not.

FoF has an IRS designation of 501(c)3 and Focus Action is a 501(c)4. He has apparently incorporated (JDI) himself as well.

[unsocialist]

I was not at this meeting. Many wrote of the event, here is Salons take:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/30/giuliani/index.html

While the defense relates to Rudy, the consideration of a third party so early states the lack of faith in all the candidates.

As I stated, had Dobson come out in support of Huck last year, he would actually have a chance. Right now he is betting not only on a dead horse, but a pot of glue.