Posted on 05/17/2007 2:24:22 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
World Net Daily is out with a story just a few minutes ago in which James Dobson, President of Focus on the Family says there's no way he'll vote for Rudy Giuliani. Boy, that's a news flash. That's like saying, "This Just in: George Soros says he is no fan of George W. Bush"
Obviously Dr. Dobson isn't going to vote for Giuliani but his comments were pretty straightforward and biting, especially when he brought up the fact that Giuliani has been divorced multiple times. Here's part of what he said below:
The jig is up. Rudy Giuliani finally admitted in a speech at Houston Baptist College last week that he is an unapologetic supporter of abortion on demand. That revelation came as no great shock to those of us in the pro-life movement. His public pronouncements as mayor of New York, together with his more recent tap dances on the campaign trail, have told a very clear story.
There are other moral concerns about Giuliani's candidacy that conservatives should find troubling. He has been married three times, and his second wife was forced to go to court to keep his mistress out of the mayoral mansion while the Giuliani family still lived there. Talk about tap dancing. Also during that time, the mayor used public funds to provide security services for his girlfriend. The second Mrs. Giuliani finally had enough of his philandering and, as the story goes, forced him to move out. He lived with friends for a while and then married his mistress. Unlike some other Republican presidential candidates, Giuliani appears not to have remorse for cheating on his wife.
Harry Truman asked, "How can I trust a man if his wife can't?" It is a very good question. Here's another one: Is Rudy Giuliani presidential timber? I think not. Can we really trust a chief executive who waffles and feigns support for policies that run contrary to his alleged beliefs? Of greater concern is how he would function in office. Will we learn after it is too late just what the former mayor really thinks? What we know about him already is troubling enough.
One more question: Shouldn't the American people be able to expect a certain decorum and dignity from the man who occupies the White House? On this measure, as well, Giuliani fails miserably. Much has been written in the blogosphere about his three public appearances in drag. In each instance, he tried to be funny by dressing like a woman. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, who loved a good joke, doing something so ignoble in pursuit of a cheap guffaw? Not on your life.
My conclusion from this closer look at the current GOP front-runner comes down to this: Speaking as a private citizen and not on behalf of any organization or party, I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision. If given a Hobson's – Dobson's? – choice between him and Sens. Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran – or if worse comes to worst – not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else.
Read more about Dobson's comments here. James Dobson has made his choice. He's influential for sure and believe me, there will be people who listen to his national radio show and decide not to vote for Giuliani just because Dobson won't. Now, as for other Christians with strong pro-life views, what say you? Can you reconcile them with a Giuliani candiacy? Are you out there?
Not only does Rudy support abortion on demand, he wants American taxpayers to fund it. And THAT is the Republican that is leading nat’l polls for our nomination.
God help us all.
bttt for Dr.Dobson
That's worse than "Nappy-headed Ho!"
His talk show days are over!
..the Kingdom of Rudy hath fallen...
The “JIG” ???
D’oh.
May I suggest instead that people who listen to his radio show will decide not to vote for Guiliani for the same reasons Dobson won't.
That's worse than "Nappy-headed Ho!"
His talk show days are over!
Some nitwit from the left will surely call him on it. I'm sure many today have no clue what that phrase relates to.
Right you are! Remember the hubub over “niggardly”?
Elections have consequences
Dobson is a punk, a spoiler, a dog in the manger, when it comes to politics.
Jerry Falwell was much, much more of a team player. Really a very reasonable man.
Sure do. That was a word I learned early in high school. But it's uncommon today, much like 'the jig is up'.
Some DIM/MSM nut out there will jump on it; especially since it comes from Dr. Dobson.
LOL....If Rooty gets elected, and his current wife kicks him out of the White house, will he be entertaining foreign dignitaries at his friend's place?
Falwell would not have supported Rudy the Opportunist. Your a tad crazed if you think Falwell would ever have endorced such a nutcase!
“Conservatives can help themselves by accepting the fact the Republican party has abandoned its core Conservative values in place of socialism and separate themselves from the socialists by forming a Conservative party.”
I’m in.
I think Rudy’s policy agreements with Hitlery are overstated. But clearly, there are more than I’d like to see (which is almost any). I was very disappointed, though not surprised, that Rudy in the South Carolina debate said all the candidates for president in both parties are good people, blah blah blah. Didn’t like that one bit.
In the primaries, you’re certainly right, Falwell would never have endorsed Rudy. But I think in the general election, in ‘08, given the tremendous dangers of a Democratic victory and the very high chances of a Democratic victory, Falwell would reluctantly have endorsed Rudy. I’m not sure of that, but you won’t convince me I’m “a tad crazed” to say it unless you can cite some pretty strong evidence of Falwell going south on the Republican nominee in a presidential election, or even in a truly important election for governor or senator. I’d be surprised if he did.
I have to run, but I just wanted to put out there that I think it should not be an issue how many times he’s been married. I know plenty of Christians who have gotten divorced and are suited for public office; and some for the presidency. I think that the marriage debate should be off the table unless it comes to light the reasons for someone’s divorce included abuse or neglect of children. Support or oppose someone based on their positions (i.e. abortion, Iraq, terrorism, taxes) not based on their family tree.
No they are not.. Giuliani could easily be a democrat..
And in fact is one in spirit..
The danger to America has never been a “democratic” victory, but a “liberal” victory. The election of Rudy Giuliani would be a liberal victory. You people need to stop thinking inside your little party appartchik boxes.
Your words are harsh and they upset me
..., but then I realized it's the only way you know how to talk...
..rather than argue the fine points..
..you know...
..civil discourse...
..Calling Dr.Dobson names makes you feel good/important.
Would that you ever knew as fine a man as James Dobson!
Elections have consequences
My only wish would be that the Republicans would give us someone to vote for instead of just having to vote for the lesser of the two evils.
Candidates who inspire the electorate don't have to hope the other side stays home to win. So far I haven't seen a candidate that has the ability to inspire the country.
Say, how do you like Arnold? He’s a “republican” too.
I’m there.
I don’t like Arnold, and I’ve said that even to many Republicans who are less militant than I am.
JIG IS UP
The phrase “the jig is up” surfaced more than 200 years ago. The exact origin is unknown, with speculation ranging from the end of a musical performance to the removal of a fishing line (a jig) from water – although the anglers’ term didn’t catch on until the 1860s, so this seems unlikely.
Some scholars believe it originally referred to the end of either a trick or game, since the word jig (sometimes spelled gig) had acquired this meaning by the time Shakespeare was writing plays.
The first recorded use of “the jig is over” appeared in 1777. About 20 years later, a Philadelphia newspaper published the earliest known version of our current expression – throwing in an extra “g” (the jigg is up) for good measure.
What does “the jig is up” imply today? The Canadian Oxford defines it as a scheme that’s been “revealed or foiled,” while Webster’s suggests it means “all chances for success are gone” – especially when applied to “risky or improper” strategies.
The gigantic Oxford English Dictionary broadens the scope to “the game is up, it’s all over.” The Gage Canadian Dictionary says the expression is slang for “it’s all over; there’s no more chance,” and The Houghton Mifflin Canadian Dictionary of the English Language offers a similar entry: “the game is up; all hope is gone.”
As with many words and phrases, then, there is a spectrum of meaning. What’s obvious, however, is that “the jig is up” could easily be uttered with conviction by a disgruntled Alliance MP who believes that “it’s all over” for the party if the leader doesn’t quit.
GIG IS UP
Replacing the “j” with a hard “g” (as in “guffaw”) suddenly makes the expression far less familiar, if not actually strange, to the ear and eye.
Musicians have called short-term jobs “gigs” since the early 20th century – especially one-night engagements. But do jobs ever become up? Certainly contracts can be up, which means they’ve expired on a specific date. But gigs?
Although there is no reason we couldn’t start saying “the gig is up” to mean “the gig is over,” the phrase isn’t well established.
“The jig is up,” on the other hand, is cited by lexicographers all over the western hemisphere. Indeed, in his Dictionary of Historical Slang, Eric Partridge points out that “the jig is up” was actually “standard English” until 1850, when it slid down a few notches to colloquial status.
Dobson may be good in other roles — preacher, family-values activist. In general-election campaigns, he is sometimes a spoiler. I’ll take back the words “punk” and even “dog in the manger.” They were excessive in this case. You were right to point that out. Also excessive, however, was your claim that “it’s the only way” that I “know how to talk.” Not true at all. Most of my posts on FReep, even in which I disagree with someone, are pretty civil.
I’m sure that I’ve known several people at least as fine as Dr. Dobson.
Rudy is much better than any conceivable Democratic nominee. Being less liberal can matter quite a bit in the White House, even though I agree, it’s certainly not what we really want.
I made this decision months ago, but it isn’t news until Dobson announces my position. But to say he influences is trite. Prolifers are not mind numbed Dobsonbots. He merely voices opinions many in the pro-life movement agree with.
Yeah, whatever.
Maybe you should look into it a little further. There are many important points against Rudy, granted. There are also many important points for him.
Right now, I want Gingrich. But right now, he isn’t running. I’m not “with” anyone who is. But I think Romney’s minuses are perhaps as serious, in their way, as Rudy’s — substantively, not just in terms of electability. McCain is unacceptable to me (in the primaries). The minor candidates will never be anything but minor. Fred Thompson isn’t running yet either.
The jig is up? I didn’t even know the jig was down. Should we return jigs to their upright position before landing?
thank you for stating it correctly!! I value Dr.Dobson's opinion, but I certainly would not just blindly follow the leader..... Conservative Christians' are known for being clear thinkers. We base what we believe on the Word of God!!Thank you Dr. Dobson for standing for what is right!
Shouldn’t it be “gig” instead?
.....I see him as a man of integrity, Godly, fighting with all he has for the family, and for traditional values that were in fact, the foundation of our country! That takes COURAGE!!
I couldn’t agree more but if the only choice is between a capable villain and an inept villain, give me the goof every time
We’ve only been saying that here for months.
It definitely does. I do think that Dobson has integrity and fights hard for these things, and I also agree he has a lot of courage. I have already, in another post on this thread, taken back my “punk” and “dog in the manger” comments, which referred only to his role in (some) elections. However, he is sometimes a “spoiler,” or more precisely, takes a spoiler’s approach, in elections.
Well, it’s always possible that the majority of conservatives are wrong. The majority of Americans are often wrong, and I see no reason why the majority of conservatives wouldn’t sometimes be wrong too, if more rarely.
And I’m not sure it even is “the opinion of a majority of conservatives.” It may BECOME their opinion based on future campaigning, but I’d bet that it isn’t yet. Not unless you define “conservatives” very narrowly.
Better a Dem with an energized opposition than a liberal “Republican” with no opposition.
No, he’ll throw her stuff on the White House lawn and we will be subjected to pictures of him rummaging through the piles looking for his favorite gown that got thrown out there accidently.
I think Mr. Dobson is just echoing the same thing that conservatives have already came to the conclusion on. Anyone who has “objectively” looked at Rudy as a “candidate” in the party that has the “conservative” platform has got to realize he is in the WRONG primary. Rudy’s positions are liberal DEMOCRAT and not Republican.
I compare it to my days in the Navy. There were times in some Far Eastern countries where there were sailors out on liberty. On occasion there would be an inebriated sailor that would be hanging around with a “beauty queen” in a bar. Well, the sober ones in the room would look at the “queen” and immediately were able to determine that the queen was actually a “king” dressed in the queen’s clothing. (Not to mention laughing hysterically at the poor swabby!) Rudy is that queen! The sober ones (the ones that have taken a good look at Rudy) know that Rudy is NOT a conservative. He is just a DEMOCRAT that has come to a Republican dance dressed in drag trying to appear to be the Beauty Queen.
The strange thing about it is that Rudy has stated his position as a liberal. It isn’t even up for debate, Rudy is a LIBERAL! Why on God’s green earth do people think that he will be “electable” in a primary with a conservative platform?
The main issue is the serial adultery.
Yeah — judging from his history, do you really think he won’t do it again, when he has added “Leader of the Free World” to his resume? I can just imagine Rudy, after being elected president, talking with Bush years later.
Giuliani: “So, wait a minute - you said that you promised to bring dignity back to the White House? On national television, in the middle during your campaign?”
Bush: “Yes - and I did it.”
Giuliani: “Unbelievable. And the public didn’t say anything? I brought Dignity over too, but I had to disguise her and Cinnamon as secret service agents just to get them past the press.”
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.