Skip to comments.Dobson Endorses Rand Paul for Senate
Posted on 05/10/2010 10:49:32 AM PDT by FTJM
Dr. James Dobson, founder and former chairman of Focus on the Family, has endorsed Rand Paul, son of Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), in the race to succeed retiring Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). The irony of it is that Dobson had formerly endorsed Pauls opponent, Trey Grayson, because, as he put it, Senior members of the GOP told me Dr. Paul is pro-choice and that he opposes many conservative perspectives.
Paul is, in fact, simply a federalist with regard to abortion, just as his father is. That is, he believes that abortion is an issue to be dealt with at the state level, as it was prior to Roe v. Wade. Constitutionally speaking, Paul is right on the money: Since regulating abortion is not one of the federal governments enumerated powers, then by the explicit wording of the Tenth Amendment, it is reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Dobson also found that Paul opposes earmarking and supports Israel. He identifies with the Tea Party movement and believes in home schooling. Concludes the good doctor: Sounds like my kind of man.
Its unfortunate that Dobson had to do an end run around the Republican Party bosses he checked with other OB/GYNs in Kentucky whom he trusts and interview[ed] the candidate himself to find out the truth about Paul. But theres a reason for that: The GOP is deathly afraid of ending up with another Paul in Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...
Why isn’t he supporting Trey Grayson?
Good for Dr. Dobson. It is wise to follow Sarah’s lead.
I’d vote for Paul despite Dobson’s endorsement.
Ping for later
Authentic American Love Must Be Tough, DDS FRiend.
(All of the senior GOP Senators leaders must go). they have stop the conservative movement for years!!!!!
He endorsed Trey Grayson, but then discovered that he had been lied to about Rand's views, he reevaluated and switched his endorsement to Rand, that was in the same week (IIRC) that DeMint endorsed him.
The protection of the unalienable right to life is the primary reason for being of all government, and the first duty of every officer of government, at every level, and in every branch.
This phony doctrine goes to the core of what America is and destroys it.
I wonder what other unalienable right the writer would apply this illogic to? Free speech? Freedom of the press? Free association? The right to peaceably assemble? Trial by jury? The Right to Keep and Bear Arms? Parental rights?
And the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments make it clear that "no person shall be deprived of life" without a fair trial. The Fourteenth explicitly requires the states to protect innocent human life and to provide for the equal protection of the laws for all persons within their jurisdiction.
Rand Paul obviously inherited his copy of the Constitution from his father, with the Fourteenth Amendment excised out.
Dobson should be ashamed of this endorsement.
So what was the factor that made him switch?
"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness.
-- George Washington
You would have to look it up for the specifics, but Rand definitly wins the pro life vote.
Paul leads Grayson among pro-lifers by a 50%-32% margin. Grayson leads Paul among pro-abortion Republicans by a 42%-27% margin.
Conservatives, Christians, social conservatives, and the statewide Kentucky voting population support Rand Paul.
Conservatives favor Paul by 51 percent to 29 percent with 16 percent undecided. Those who attend religious services regularly or occasionally favor Paul by double-digit margins. Gun owners back Paul 48 percent to 22 percent with 22 percent undecided.
Rand Paul leads by double digits among men and women, among conservatives, pro-life voters, gun owners.
Grayson leads today only among the 1 in 5 Republican primary voters who say they are pro-choice.
What is the difference between them on the issue?
SumProVita, I’m not your go to guy for internet research, you can look things up yourself.