Quote of the day
posted at 11:10 pm on October 9, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
“If I believed in God, I’d be tempted to thank him for James Dobson…
In a way, people like Mr. Dobson and Mr. Scarborough are merely remaining true to the precepts of their beliefs. They are fundamentalists and proud of it. As is the case with all fundamentalists, they prefer the pursuit of complete victory to anything that carries the odor of compromise.
Mercifully, political progress still depends on things like argument, persuasion and conciliation. Advances tend to come by the inch, not by the mile.
Mr. Dobson and his comrades do not want to sully themselves with that. They have instead fashioned a plan for their own electoral suicide.
Good for them. I hope nothing gets in their way.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Dobson thread?
I’m there!
Slublog on October 9, 2007 at 11:12 PM
It would be too easy to guess that this is Hitchens writing, but I suspect you’re being sneaky and quoting someone else.
BadgerHawk on October 9, 2007 at 11:18 PM
This election, I’m afraid there’s more to a dem-controlled presidency/legislature than just a 4-year-long fire sale on wall street (remember Jimmah?). This time, nothing short of our survival as a civilization is at stake, and we know where the dems stand on that one. Damn, they feel we caused the barbarians to strike us, and that we deserve to be eradicated, just as long as they’re the head dhimi’s.
stonemeister on October 9, 2007 at 11:18 PM
I can only liken Dobson’s approach to “Why are we landing at Normandy? We should parachute straight into Berlin!”
I am as pro-life as you can get and I think you have to reverse things the same way they got here: incrementally.
DavidM on October 9, 2007 at 11:21 PM
The abortion debate will be resolved with technology. Who can look at one of those 3d pictures of the womb with a baby and think that’s not a human?
Why do you think california banned the devices for home use?
lorien1973 on October 9, 2007 at 11:24 PM
http://www.opinionjournal.com/weekend/hottopic/?id=110010608
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/christians_for_selfdefeat.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/us/21evangelical.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
The first two links show how Dobbs has done his part to handicap the republicans. Second is a parker analysis about why they won’t accept a Mormon
and the last is a potential rebuttal to the power Dobson thinks he has.
Bradky on October 9, 2007 at 11:26 PM
A-ha!
The thing that bugs me about Dobson is how easy it is for him to pass judgement on others. He drives me crazy (and I’m a fairly conservative Christian), so I can only imagine what he does to some others.
The only valid point I saw during Dobson’s entire interview with Hannity was that voting for Rudy in the general might fracture the religious right beyond repair. While I don’t really agree, it’s still a possibility. But for Dobson to realize, and not care, that his actions will bring about something guaranteed to be worse than Rudy is insanely frustrating. And I know it’s a long ways out and anything could happen, but without some major terrorist attack on U.S. soil during Clinton’s watch we’re very likely to suffer through her and a democratic controlled congress for 8 years.
BadgerHawk on October 9, 2007 at 11:29 PM
disclaimer: I don’t want any attack on U.S. soil ever.
BadgerHawk on October 9, 2007 at 11:31 PM
The man tells us who he doesn’t like, and who we shouldn’t pick. But he’s yet to stand behind a candidate he’ll support, that can actually win.
amerpundit on October 9, 2007 at 11:32 PM
lorien1973-
Too much use of ultrasound has been examined for possible links to birth defects and autism, so there are other reasons for not overdoing this essentially experimental technology upon the helpless.
It amuses the born, but may not be so good for the un.
profitsbeard on October 9, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Another thread where Christians are under attack? Allah needs some traffic folks so pour some sauce on that red meat and chow down! Seriously, Dobson reminds me of those emails I get telling me I should boycott Ford, Nike, or detergent companies because they support the “wrong” causes. If I really did that, I’d end up walking to work barefoot, smelling like a farm animal. No thanks! I don’t want to take political advice from Dobson either - no matter if he believes he has my family’s best interest at heart or not. I’m leaning toward “not”.
thedecider on October 9, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Amerpundit et al here is really good artcle:
Evangelical Christians never had it so good, but they seem not to know it. Instead of supporting the candidate who most shares their values — Mitt Romney — they seem hell-bent for the proverbial cliff.
Mcguyver on October 9, 2007 at 11:36 PM
AP, you seem to care more about what Dobson says than any ‘evangelical’ I know.
I don’t understand your need to vilify him. What did he do to you?
So he doesn’t like your messiah, Rudy. He won’t vote for him. Because of that he’s a ‘bad American’? Last I checked this was still a free country and we can vote for whomever we want.
Why don’t you spend more time casting aspersions at people who will actually vote for Hillary. With or without Dobson, there are going to be more of them than there will be of people who vote for your messiah, Rudy. Those national polls that you post to show how dominant Rudy is also show him trailing Hillary by more than McCain in the general election. You blame Rudy’s failures on Dobson because - I don’t really know.
The Republican party should have put up a conservative. If they don’t, they should lose - even if it is Hillary. I don’t appreciate that the only choice for President of the United States of America coming from the same state (my opinion).
ThackerAgency on October 9, 2007 at 11:38 PM
And again, you don’t seem to want ‘evengelicals’ in YOUR party. . . so why do you care? Get over it already. Isn’t that what Rudy said to Dobson? That’s what Dobson should say to you and all the ‘Rudy is the greatest’ posters.
ThackerAgency on October 9, 2007 at 11:39 PM
Maybe things would have been different if Jesus was a compromiser.
Connie on October 9, 2007 at 11:39 PM
We know he wasn’t. But he was seen eating with “publicans and sinners”, and frequented the temple despite his disdain for the practices of the Pharisees or activities of the money-changers. Dobson comes off as someone who believes anyone that doesn’t tow the hard-right Christian line is an unworthy leader and must be shunned. Honestly, who does he support? Hillary?
thedecider on October 9, 2007 at 11:43 PM
I’m afraid Republicans are going down to a heavy defeat (the White House, more House seats, maybe one or two more in the Senate). Fanatics will cling to Dobson, and to the war in Iraq, as if any US troops will be there within one year after the next election, no matter who wins.
Fortunately, the current Dems appear a lot less sophisticated than the ones booted in the ’90s, so it won’t take too long to win back the White House and most of Congress back.
doufree on October 9, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Wherever you go, go with all your heart.
- Confucius
MB4 on October 9, 2007 at 11:49 PM
Dobson has ONE vote just like any other American, and you people are making him out to be some king maker. The problem is that the Republican party is no longer a ‘conservative party’.
This country still has a lot of conservatives. There is a distinct possibility that the Republican party will become the third party (liberal lite) and allow for an actual Conservative party to emerge (including conservative blacks and Latinos). If Rudy had a ‘D’ next to his name you’d all be hating him for his positions.
It’s high time for a CONSERVATIVE party.
ThackerAgency on October 9, 2007 at 11:50 PM
With all due respect, Allah, the quote of the day appeared on Brit Hume’s show tonight. On the story about Seattle’s crackdown on the homeless, a politician (I believe) said something to the effect that “liberals have begun to realize it is possible to hate George Bush and still be opposed to someone crapping in their doorways.”
If you get the actual quote, please post it. It was wonderful.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 9, 2007 at 11:51 PM
In a sense, I think he does. I was “horrified/angered/not really all that surprised” by his statement in the O’Reilly interview that a Hillary win is almost preferable because it would mobilize the pro-life movement.
After all, why not give the judiciary over to pro-choice extremists if social conservative leaders can benefit from having such a wonderful enemy?
Slublog on October 9, 2007 at 11:51 PM
MB4 on October 9, 2007 at 11:51 PM
Years ago he stole his iPod?
MB4 on October 9, 2007 at 11:54 PM
EXACTLY! And, thank you for framing the point better than I. He seems eager to punish the Republican party. And why? Can we agree that Christian and conservative values don’t necessarily have to agree on everything but, in the end, reach many of the same goals? We are, after all, a two-party system for the immediate and foreseeable future. Support the party and effect changes within, not without.
thedecider on October 9, 2007 at 11:57 PM
Agreed. Now is not the time in history to teach the Republican Party whatever lesson he feels needs to be taught. The next President will preside during a very crucial time, at a very important point in the war on terror, and will most likely appoint several Supreme Court judges.
amerpundit on October 10, 2007 at 12:03 AM
Dobson is in the process of cutting off his nose to spite his face. He is of the philosophy that you must destroy something before you can fix it and, as has been said, it would mean certain electoral suicide.
Dobson and his followers proclaim their convictions for their intended destruction of the Republican party.
But, suicide by convictions can be found throughout history and it should have taught one lesson – that after all is said and done it means absolutely nothing, except that you are now dead.
pocomoco on October 10, 2007 at 12:16 AM
If the Republican party doesn’t represent the values that Christians embrace, then why should Christians support the party?
You want Christians to “get over it”? Why don’t you just “get over” the fact that Christinas might not be there for you if you are not there for them?
The traitor-crats will never again represent southern Christians, so they have all left that party. But if the Re-pube-icans are only going to pander to the left and the centrists/moderates/et cetera/whatever, then why should they simply expect support from Christians based on–what–habit? Is that to say that the (R)s have the Christians over a barrel? As a conservative, I will not be coerced into assuming a political stance that is anathema to my moral sense.
From the standpoint of national defence, Rudy will arguably do a better job that Hillary. But is it worth it for me to protect a nation that is morally repugnant to me?
I am already livid that we have gone as far down the leftist/progressive/treasonous path as we have, without more action on the part of people in a position to stop it. As far as domestic policy is concerned, Rudy is indistinguishable from Hillary. For me, that is an untenable position.
urbancenturion on October 10, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Yeah, I know. The situation does make it very difficult. But, like you, I look at the bigger picture. I don’t know if anyone here is familiar with Fr. Jonathan Morris who does FOX commentary from Rome. I like the guy a lot. He doesn’t quite agree with Dobson either. His take was that we have an obligation to fight for the candidate who represents Christian views - up until the primary only. After that, we have to support whoever the candidate is - even if it ends up being the lesser of two evils. He is NOT a Hillary fan, to say the least.
Connie on October 10, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Connie,
I agree with your comment. You can carry conviction just so far, but the result will only mean that you will wind up on the outside looking in and have no place to go.
pocomoco on October 10, 2007 at 12:32 AM
If Rudy wins the nomination, the rich irony of what people like Dobson are doing is that the “Christian coalition” ala Falwell and company will be shown as much less relevant than they posture.
read
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/us/21evangelical.html?_r=3&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
and you will see that there are ripples in the force so to speak. More Christians may be willing to see a Rudy candidate than Dobson realizes.
I know I know. They must be CINOs (christian in name only) or whatever acronym you want to label them with.
Bradky on October 10, 2007 at 12:42 AM
Agendas of one Religious Extremist is leading everyone around by the nose.
We’re electing a President not the Pope or the 12th Imam.
Since when did politicians come with halos anyway.
Kini on October 10, 2007 at 12:45 AM
This could work at about week 6, but might push people in the opposite direction on questions between conception and week 6.
dedalus on October 10, 2007 at 12:52 AM
If his move makes a Dem majority in all things it wil hinder the big picture result that he desires.For a long time. Supreme court judges are for life.
bbz123 on October 10, 2007 at 1:04 AM
If damnation awaits me because I chose to give my children a chance to avoid damnation then I guess eternity is gonna suck.
Limerick on October 10, 2007 at 1:12 AM
Liberals could. If the humanity of the unborn is inconvenient to their established narrative, they merely need to will it out of existence and….voila…not human! Problem solved.
Regarding Dobson and the right-wing, fundamentalist Christians (which I would certainly be considered one of)…stay focused on appointing the right judges. If we can return the abortion debate to the state legislatures (instead of SCOTUS) and just let the chips fall where they may, the issue will take care of itself. It won’t be an outright ban in most states, but it will be a compromise and probably more restrictive than Roe v. Wade allows.
I have no respect for anyone who is willing to lose everything so that they won’t have to compromise on a single issue.
Nosferightu on October 10, 2007 at 1:22 AM
Chalk me up as another wacko right-wing Christian conservative who thinks Dobson needs to go back on his medication. I don’t doubt his sincerity, but he is sincerely clueless. My 7-year-old daughter could debate him and win.
I agree with Connie — we push for the candidate who best represents our ideals, right up until the general election. In the general we vote for the candidate who’s closest (on balance) to our ideals, knowing that any other action will at best be meaningless and at worst help the opposition.
Splashman on October 10, 2007 at 1:59 AM
We’re not sheeples, peoples. Whenever “Christian Leaders” get big-headed and start pontificating, I leave it to God to humble them, as I know He will. I remember when Pat Robertson was certain God wanted him to run for President. A man can be a Christian and still a fool. Ask Jimmy Swaggart.
James Dobson is a good man, but lousy at politics.
As I’ve said before: We should pray and ask God to NOT give us the President we deserve.
Doug on October 10, 2007 at 2:05 AM
I question the patriotism of anyone who would knowingly throw the election to the Democrats in wartime, thus - knowingly - giving the strategic advantage back to al-Qaeda. There is no conservative or moral principle that could ever justify what Dobson seems to be planning on doing.
Halley on October 10, 2007 at 5:22 AM
My wife worked at Focus on the Family during the 90s and I will be one of the first people to defend Dr. Dobson as a good man who has more integrity than anyone else I know and truly does what he feels is best. I’ve never disagreed with him until now though. I do not agree with his reasoning or the potential results. But I do know that this in no way changes my view of Dr. Dobson or his ministry. If any of you knew him at all, even the atheists in the group, you might not be so quick to judge him and condemn him for his views. Last I checked, his status as an American citizen allowed him the right to say what he believes in both the spiritual and political arenas. If you don’t agree, fine, but to go after him with personal attacks like he is some sort of evil man bent on destroying “us”, well, that’s just pathetic.
Oh, and from one conservative Christian to you others who claim Christ on here, nice job attacking a fellow believer with the belittling comments. Last I checked we were to bear with one another, even if we don’t agree with each other on some things. Way to build unity in the body in front of these non-believers. I’m sure Christ would be proud of your pontificating.
Centurion68 on October 10, 2007 at 5:40 AM
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 9, 2007 at 11:51 PM
Thanks for the catch. That was some comedy sugar.
Limerick on October 10, 2007 at 1:12 AM
LoL. More funny shugah.
urbancenturion on October 10, 2007 at 12:21 AM
ummmm …
Here’s a message from Jesus: Get over yourself.
Seriously.
Think about it.
silverfox on October 10, 2007 at 6:04 AM
There’s so much Christosterone in this thread I’m gonna hurl.
Nonfactor on October 10, 2007 at 6:40 AM
Well said centurion. Allah - What arrogance! I guess to you “political progrss” is worth one’s soul. That being the case - It truly doesn’t matter one bit who is elected. Because when Conservatives give up on God, give up on small government, and become that which they despise (which this board truly has done), there becomes only one political party.
King of the Britons on October 10, 2007 at 7:02 AM
Dobson is like any other one issue voter. He only cares about one thing, his is abortion, and that is IT! It doesn’t matter what our American system is, it doesn’t matter who is the better choice for a wide range of issues. If a candidate goes against his ONE issue, he takes his ball and runs home to Mommy.
I hate one issue voting! It’s so empty of any intellectual effort.
Warner Todd Huston on October 10, 2007 at 7:12 AM
we could “give up on god” tomorrow…and by representing a stronger defense, a smaller government, and a deregulated free market economy…still be conservatives
ernesto on October 10, 2007 at 7:18 AM
Of course you can. However, for Christians, God comes before politics. So by compromising what one believes is God’s will for us, in order to win an election is not a principled stance. The Republican party once, at least more so than now, actually stood for most of the values that Christians hold dear and could count on Christian votes. That is becoming less and less so and Christians are now saying (and where this happens is an individual decision), “This party no longer represents what I believe in.” That many on this blog feel that politics are more important than God or principle speaks loudly about the current Republican party and “conservative” politics.
King of the Britons on October 10, 2007 at 7:42 AM
They even go so far as to tell the truth about an unborn child’s humanity in order to hide the truth about an unborn child’s humanity!
Example: They tell young people that ultrasounds (a technology that has had no side effects for over thirty years) can hurt the unborn in order to keep them from viewing the unborn child’s obvious humanity so they can continue killing the unborn!
The abortion activists rely on the cognitive dissonance brought on by emotional manipulation to continue their evil. Freud and Bernays would be amazed to see their work used so successfully.
angryoldfatman on October 10, 2007 at 9:22 AM
Let me correct my last statement. The liberal/leftist leaders, not just the abortion activists (a mere subset), rely on cognitive dissonance to continue their evil. This is why there is so much weapons-grade crazy on the left; they operate in a constant state of emotion-driven cognitive dissonance, with not a bit of logic in sight.
angryoldfatman on October 10, 2007 at 9:27 AM
One-issue voters could lose us the election to a destiny far broader than loss of the issue itself.
Though not religious, I respect Dobson, and appreciate his influence up until now. But I resent his kamikaze tactic, and worry it will end up with our defeat in ‘08.
Hannity did a good job last night, I thought.
petefrt on October 10, 2007 at 9:45 AM
can’t argue with you there. i’m not ashamed of the fact that god doesn’t play a role in my politics, and no one should necessarily have to compromise their stance on the matter.
the question is, if god voters were to leave the republican party, and start their own…who would they bring to the table? what other constituencies would be brought in? god voters, without the support of the hawks and the suits, could not have won in 2000 and 2004. How does Dr. Dobson plan on making any sort of electoral impact without those constituencies?
If anything, Dr. Dobson’s opening lies in immigration. The suits and the hawks tend to differ on that issue, and positioning that as a wedge and pushing more protectionist trade policies, dobson could offer hawks and social cons a republican party minus the suits.
the suits could then try and court bill clintonesque free trade democrats and maybe even steer those folks in a more fiscally responsible direction. If they can convince the entitlement folks that less dividend and capital gains taxes DOES increase revenue…and that a simpler tax code would further increase revenue (maybe even huckabee’s “prostitutes and drug dealers” fairtax)…BAM, a new 2 party system.
ernesto on October 10, 2007 at 9:48 AM
Exactly. Wish this were more widely understood.
petefrt on October 10, 2007 at 9:49 AM
I’m a Christian and a conservative. I agree with Dobson and will never again vote for a liberal Republican for President. If this is the best that the party has to offer than they deserve defeat in ‘08! Conservatives are fed-up with being ignored. Our issues are not being addressed by the party and current Republican leadership spends most of it’s time trying to make nice with Pelsosi and Kennedy! Enough!
sabbott on October 10, 2007 at 9:55 AM
I enjoy a blog called Brutally Honest (www.brutallyhonest.org) and the title of one of the posts is:
Someone tell James Dobson that Jesus is not running for president.
For me, that’s exactly right. We’re all still flawed, sinful human beings. The question is, who is the person best suited to do well and good by this country?
Mommynator on October 10, 2007 at 10:24 AM
So if I follow this logic to it’s conclusion, the rest of the rest of this statement would go like this
“… but I’d rather vote (or not vote) for the U.S. to go up in flames with the Billary at the helm in the White House, than to vote for some perfect candidate that meet 100% of my expectations or passes the the right litmus test.”
So let’s all just act like children and when things don’t work out our way, “just take all of our toys and go home”.
Here’s a thought… Isn’t it better to get at least some of your message out, than none at all? Things just didn’t get this way over night, it was a gradual, but continual chipping away that got us here. And wishing for a Billary win just because it will energize the base, is as asinine as the tactics that are employed by the poverty pimps like Rev. Jackson and Sharpton.
RINO_Hunter on October 10, 2007 at 1:56 PM
However little I may respect some of the Republicans’ Presidential candidates, I think the prospects for the survival of the American regime are better under most any of them–except perhaps John McCain–than under Hillary Clinton. A desire to withhold one’s vote from “the lesser of two evils,” even at the expense of helping a leftist candidate, may stem partly from an opinion that punishing the Republicans now will improve their Presidential candidates in future elections. However, in this time, it seems any election may be the Americans’ last election or last free one. Thus, Dobson’s publicly withholding his vote may be evidence that he has learned to love to punish more than to love the wellbeing of the United States.
At any rate, AllahPundit’s desire to criticize James Dobson seems to stem from an opinion that his public statements are likely to make the outcome of the American Presidential election worse rather than better. It may stem from a quite reasonable fear for the continued existence of the United States. I will supply the Nietzschean, Machiavellian, and even Platonic gloss: James Dobson seems to think he can afford to be cavalier with the wellbeing of the United States because Earth is not his home. He’s like a rock star who trashes his hotel room; he thinks he has many mansions and a valet has gone to prepare a place for him.
Kralizec on October 10, 2007 at 2:41 PM
James Dobson would look great in a ball-gag and leather chaps…all hunched over and sweaty.
Am I in the right place?
Ochlan on October 10, 2007 at 4:15 PM
SINGLE ISSUE VOTERS: One child parents.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on October 10, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Or the problem could be Hegelian and Dobson feels his choice is the the only viable solution to that problem. It certainly seemed to play out that way with Ford-Carter-Reagan.
I don’t know why you’re so opposed to Hillary anyway. She should be your dream candidate. She’s a woman obsessed with destroying Christian fundamentalism, just like Rand and her disciples. Except Hillary’s going to do something about it, as opposed to endlessly kvetching like Objectivists.
angryoldfatman on October 10, 2007 at 11:03 PM