Posted on 01/17/2012 2:50:57 PM PST by VinL
At the now-controversial meeting of evangelicals at a Texas ranch, influential evangelical leader James Dobson made a strong pitch for Rick Santorum's wife — and noted that Callista Gingrich was her husband's "mistress for eight years," questioning whether that's what people want in a first lady, three sources told POLITICO.
The moment left several attendees at the confab at the Pressler ranch stunned, according to the sources.
It came on Saturday, before the group of about 150 conservatives voted on a candidate they wanted to back. On the third round of balloting, the vote went to Santorum, but Gingrich backers and other attendees have argued that the voting was done unfairly, and in a way that seemed to benefit the former Pennsylvania senator.
The meeting was initially described as an event to try to unite behind a single candidate to thwart Mitt Romney, but his representatives also ended up speaking there, and despite the third round of balloting — which took place after some Gingrich backers left, thinking the meeting had ended — broad consensus was never reached, according to multiple attendees.
"Dobson first talked about how great Santorum is," recalled one source, who had first-hand knowledge of Dobson's comment. "[He said,] 'I want to tell you that I've gotten to know Karen [Santorum] and she is just lovely. She set aside two professional careers to raise these seven children. She would make a fabulous first lady role model. And Newt Gingrich's wife, she was a mistress for eight years."
Another source confirmed the account, and said Dobson concluded the sentiment about Callista Gingrich with, "Who do you want as your first lady?"
"It was like a chill [set into] the room," said one source. Several people were offended by the comment, said another source, adding that it was noted among some participants that Callista Gingrich had only been married once.
Unfortunately, part of the discussion IS about that because you introduced the idea. Dobson DOES have the right to speak out contrary to your quoting a scripture intending to negate his right to do so.
You and Dobson prefer a different candidate- fine!!!!
Wrong yet again. I do NOT prefer a different candidate. I will vote for whoever takes the nomination against Obama. However, I am not avidly in favor of any of them.
To caste Calista as a prostitute
No, no one claimed this. You are again misrepresenting what was said.
Afro-
LOL! You know, on this thread, they are making the argument she can’t be First Lady because of her morals. That I adamantly contest.
Now, if they have argued,— would I’d like to see her every day on tv-—wellllll
Actually, you were engaging in hypocrisy, claiming that someone had no right to judge unless they were sinless while you yourself were busy judging another.
Respectfully, I’ve made my point to my satisfaction- and will not discuss it further.
Whatever you believe, you believe.
Perhaps, we’ll be on better terms on the different thread. God Bless.
Vin
So Dobson wants Romney nominating Souters and O’Conner’s?
Santorum is obviously a nice guy and he would make a terrific Senator.
Maybe he should run against Casey again in PA?
So Dobson wants Romney nominating Souters and O’Conner’s?
Santorum is obviously a nice guy and he would make a terrific Senator.
Maybe he should run against Casey again in PA?
I absolutely believe that a christian leader who has devoted his life to the sanctity of marriage has a right and perhaps a responsibility to speak out against infidelity.
I am amazed that Dobson is attacked so vociferously by christians for doing so, and even Scripture is wrongly interpreted and used against that activity.
Well that’s fair.
We’ve about had it with you “forgive me or else” hypocrites.
How does it feel to be on the same side as the guy who killed John the Baptist?
I don’t believe either Clinton or Gingrich has “truly repented.” Both will say whatever advances their personal ambitions.
You say that as if it's important to you.
Good for you.
Now go out and get 51% of the electorate to either agree with your worldview, or find a large enough group of folks that will coalesce with you to form 51% and win the election.
That's fair.
Therein lies Newts' mistake.
He should never have asked any group organized around religion for forgiveness besides his own family, friends and congregation.
He should have gone about building his coalition of the willing without regard to what Dobson and his ilk thinks of him.
He would have been more respectable.
I think you miss my point.
Would it make more sense to you if I said “the same side as the ‘Gay Pride’ parade?”
Would it make more sense to you if I said “the same side as the ‘Gay Pride’ parade?”"
Yeah, well, if they love liberty more than their desire to impose their doctrine on me or mine, I'll guard their march.
And I'm a very, very good guard.
I hope to see you around. We can continue this.
My comment had nothing to do with Newt’s comportment.
I was commenting on those who want to throw rocks at Dobson.
That's absolutely fair and reasoned criticism, of me as well.
Hell, we don't even know if he really said it.
If he did, count me as one of the hypocrite sinners throwing the first rock. At Dobson.
I'm probably AT LEAST as bad as he is...and he's bad.
You just don't say those sort of things about a mans' wife. In front of 150 or more people.
It's a damn disgrace and I'd punch his lights out if he said it about my buddys' wife, and she's...ah...a sinner too.
Surely a thoughtful man can see this.
They don’t need you to “guard” anything.
And if you truly believe your conceited nonsense about “imposing” on you, your vanity has blinded you to the center-of-gravity of your outrage.
I find it quite interesting that Dobson doesn’t seem to have any qualms about a guy who has spent his entire adult life violating the First Commandment but he has a problem with Newt because his wife spent a few years violating the seventh.
How do you know it is anti-christian if it is gibberish? LOL!
I just don't have a use for big business nonprofit "religion". And it is a big business in the case of Focus on the Family*
* Warning - That link is to their IRS filing. Big pdf. I have to say I have looked at these type of groups for years and in this case they actually have their IRS filings on their web site. They do some good stuff but they are also very political.
No. A thoughtful man doesn't see it, and a thoughtful man wouldn't assert it, either.
You don't borrow the troubles of someone who throws his hat in the ring when he's criticized truthfully, no matter what your sensibilities. If he wasn't willing to run with the big dogs, he would have stayed on the porch.
What his critics choose to say is none of your business, especially when it's true.
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.