Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Incredible. Let he who is without sin...
1 posted on 01/17/2012 2:51:01 PM PST by VinL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last
To: VinL

We’re not electing a First Lady, we’re electing a President. If what you’re looking for is a nice happy family in the White House, you’ve already got it, so reelect B.O.


147 posted on 01/17/2012 4:34:35 PM PST by JediJones (Newt-er Romney in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

Though I am leaning toward Rick Santorum, Dr. Dobson did not ingratiate himself to me by making such a statement regarding Newt Gingrich. Our country is nearly beyond repair so by throwing red paint on the Grinch, probably the only man running who can bring down the communist now in power, does not bode well for my country!

If we can live through Bill clinton and his squalid escapades, we can can survive a love affair which, at least, ended in marriage!

Rather than increasing my zeal for sanatorium, Dobson’s catty remark makes me side more with Gingrich! Dr. Dobson would do better to keep his eye on the Lord rather than fostering derogatory remarks against a viable GOP candidate.


154 posted on 01/17/2012 4:40:57 PM PST by Paperdoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

Gingrich did well last night. He’d be a better president than Obama and Romney. But let’s face it. His wife was a mistress for years. She was under Newt’s desk for years because newt told his other mistresses that that way wasn’t really cheating. I won’t enjoy her as first lady because she chose to cheat with another woman’s man. For years. She could have chosen to wait for the divorce. She did not. It’s the truth. Why should it be avoided?


160 posted on 01/17/2012 4:47:38 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

Say what you want about the candidate, but leave the wives and children out of it. They aren’t running for anything. I hope that Dobson apologizes.


171 posted on 01/17/2012 4:59:30 PM PST by Clintonfatigued (A chameleon belongs in a pet store, not the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL
I know many of you are upset with Dr. Dobson, but he is a really good man. I was a democrat with values like them. His teachings did show me that I must do more than call myself a Christian, but live like a Christian. He was not condemning, but encouraged people that we are all imperfect, but with God help we can be the people we want to be. He got me excited about politics to the point I changed to republican and started helping with republican campaigns. How sure are we this is true?

1. This was suppose to be a private meeting where people promised not to leak anything, so I don't think Dobson was trying to hurt Newt. My guess is he wanted people to think about each candidates baggage and how Obama will use that info. Pretending it did not happen isn't realistic. My guess (from the article below) is that the Romney team was ticked and leaked something to hurt Newt. Dr Dobson has warned Christians about the growing Mormon and other cults, push on young people. They hate Dobson.

2. How do we know Policito is telling the truth? Politico is a big McCain fan who also hates Dobson because he would not endorse McCain at the beginning of the primary. He eventually said he would vote for him when Sarah became his VP pick. Note how the Romney team became nasty in the article. I have seen dr Dobson viciously attacked over lies before. Please be sure of what you read knowing how the media manipulates people and stories. Dr Dobson is a Godly man, and a humble one.

The Evangelical Vote

Posted by Erick Erickson (Diary)
Monday, January 16th at 4:46AM EST

“The evangelical movement might have just sown the first seeds of division for 2016 — seeds that, like in 2008 and 2012, prevented evangelicals from getting one of their own the nomination.”
I had the privilege to attend the meeting of evangelicals in Texas this weekend. Due to pressing matters before me Saturday I could not make the Saturday portion, but was there Friday hearing the advocacy for the candidates, the run down, etc. I did not vote.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As with all meetings of Christian conservatives, we all pledge to have an off the record meeting and a handful of the sinners start leaking like sieves. It is aggravating and typically why I never say a word in these meetings.

Since a few have decided to leak so many details from the meeting as background and anonymous sources, I want to clarify a few things from my perspective and I will do it decidedly on the record.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The first thing you need to know is that taking shots at Tony Perkins for his statements this weekend is both ignorant and wrong. Tony was selected to speak for the group as a whole and he has done a tremendous job reflecting the views of the consensus whether they are his or not. He didn’t really volunteer as much as he was chosen (I cannot have been the only Presbyterian there) and he has done his job ably.

The second thing you should note is that I personally view the state of the Christian conservative movement poorly. It is such an honor and privilege to be in the same room with James Dobson. Truth be told, I’ve been in the room with him several times and have yet to work up the courage to meet a man who has meant so much to my wife and me. Hopefully I’ll work up the courage one of these days.

But Dobson and the other men and women in the room exemplify my problem with the state of the Christian conservative movement — it is getting really old and I do not yet see authentic, strong voices rising up to succeed these pioneers. I take it as a good sign that these men picked Tony Perkins as their spokesman. In the generation that bridges the gap, Perkins is one of the few honest brokers and genuinely authentic good guys in the evangelical community and conservative movement as a whole.

A great deal of the passionate, younger voices of the Christian conservative movement are focused on Christ and not politics. While that’s a far better position to focus on, I fear the Christian conservative movement is going to be handed down to a few good young men and women surrounded by others with less sincere intentions — people who advocate people and positions in furtherance of things other than Christ’s Kingdom. The up and comers will have to rely on men like Tony Perkins to avoid irrelevance and charlatans both.

The third thing you should know about this weekend is just how well the Gingrich and Santorum camps handled themselves and how poorly the Perry and Romney camps handled themselves. I won’t even get into the advocacy on behalf of Ron Paul, which didn’t go well.

There was a decidedly sympathetic view toward Rick Santorum going into the meeting. He has been one of the leading advocates for socially conservative views. They like him on that. I was, frankly, stunned that even when some of the people chosen to speak objectively about the field pointed out that this will be an election about economics, the crowd really was focused on social concerns.

I won’t go into quotes from the men who advocated for the various candidates. Even on the record here, I want to respect the organizers’ wishes more than others have on background, but both Santorum’s advocate and Gingrich’s advocate (each candidate had someone to speak for them) did those men a great service. The Santorum pitch was largely focused on what he had done for the movement, including for the babies. The Gingrich pitch really reflected what Jonah Golberg wrote recently in his column about Newt. If you think the end of the world is nigh, you want the Churchill, not the technocrat.

Rick Perry had a lot of supporters in the crowd, but too few who thought he could win and many who want him to get out and endorse Gingrich or possibly Santorum before South Carolina votes. His advocate, a friend, was not as well prepared as the others, but many in the crowd did speak up for him.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Romney advocacy did more harm than good and I think the biggest story to come out of this event has to be both the hostility between evangelicals and Team Romney and the absolute endorsement for “Not Romney.”

If you are reading this from the media, I think the story you should tell is that Mitt Romney will probably become the nominee of the Republican Party with even less good feelings between evangelicals and him than John McCain had.

The problem for Team Romney is that the distrust of Romney is overwhelmingly about his record and shiftiness, but the Romney campaign fundamentally believes it is about his religion. When Team Romney concluded the pitch (read from an iPad seemingly without a passionate delivery) with an admonishment to not be an anti-Mormon bigot, it was game over. Several of the attendees felt like the Romney campaign was almost implying that they’d win without evangelicals and would expect everyone to line up when it was over even without Romney reaching out.

Note to Team Romney: when you are in a room full of Christian leaders like those who were in that room and who have all long been attacked by the left as bigots, it is unwise — no, it is damn foolish — to accuse them of being anti-Mormon bigots, something too many Romney supporters have descended to as the only possible explanation for daring to not get on board with Romney.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It’s interesting that the outreach concerns are so universal. Inside the conservative blogosphere, among social conservatives, and among specifically the evangelical community there is a great deal of concern that, unlike John McCain, once the Romney camp has it in the bag they’ll go off to woo independents and leave smoldering or un-repaired bridges back to the base.

As to the vote itself, there was a consensus, but not as strong as the reported vote would have you believe. According to several I talked to who were still there for the vote, it was divided with many thinking Gingrich is the only one who can win and many not sure they want to hitch a wagon to the Gingrich train. On this, there is no difference inside and outside the evangelical community.

What gets me is that given Rick Santorum’s polling in South Carolina, his funding and campaign apparatus, the admonition from one influential person that Santorum doesn’t have the campaign to run for President, etc. separate reports suggest a number of people present decided to vote for Santorum not to beat Romney, but to be Romney’s running mate — something that most likely will not happen.

At this point, a vote for Santorum really does help Mitt Romney, but few are willing to acknowledge that. When given the chance to beat Romney, I was kind of shocked by the people who were already reconciled to his win, though that was not the majority view. Most want to fight till the end, fight to the convention, broker a convention, or do anything else to stop Romney. But by voting for Santorum, the group largely undercut more serious efforts waged by Gingrich to stop Romney and, even more troubling if Romney is the nominee and loses, potentially sets up a claim by Rick Santorum, a man who will have been out of office a decade by then, to be the 2016 front runner.

In a year when we could possibly see Bobby Jindal, John Kasich, Rick Scott, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, and others, the evangelical movement might have just sown the first seeds of division for 2016 — seeds that, like in 2008 and 2012, prevented evangelicals from getting one of their own the nomination.

That brings up a problem with the evangelical movement within the political sphere — it is often poorly advised on strategy and cuts short term deals that undermine long term goals. But that’s a topic for another day.

184 posted on 01/17/2012 5:13:54 PM PST by Linda Frances (Only God can change a heart, but we can pray for hearts to be changed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sparky21555

PFLR


204 posted on 01/17/2012 5:47:28 PM PST by Sparky21555
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

I want proof Dobson said this.
Three unnamed witnesses?
How convenient.

Here is the NPR article.
Not a word about Dobson’s comment.
http://m.wfiu.npr.org/news/front/145247491?page=0

The Big Daddy Weaver.
Not a word about Dobson’s comment.
http://www.thebigdaddyweave.com/


222 posted on 01/17/2012 6:08:00 PM PST by Jo Nuvark (Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. Gen 12:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

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?


245 posted on 01/17/2012 7:13:53 PM PST by proudpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

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?


246 posted on 01/17/2012 7:14:07 PM PST by proudpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL
Very ungracious of Dobson.

Newt is the one running for office.

264 posted on 01/17/2012 9:49:07 PM PST by Manic_Episode (Politics is fake. I think it's owned by Vince Mcmahon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL
adding that it was noted among some participants that Callista Gingrich had only been married once.

These attacks on spouses are getting pretty rediculous (the post last night attacking Rick's wife for living with a guy when was 22 were particularly sleezy).

On the other hand, it's kind of sad that at a meeting of evangelical christians, there were men who would make the claim above, as if sex outside of marriage, and sex with a married man, were no longer of any concern to the evangelical community, so long as you eventually get married. Marriage is failing, and that is one of the reasons why.

It has NOTHING to do with her being a fine first lady, which she surely is. Forgiveness is a fine trait, but not dismissal. It's not about her, it's about the flippant treatment of the sin by these spiritual leaders.

Dobson was crass, although also accurate. And sometimes when you sin, though you can have forgiveness, you can't undo the sin -- she will always be the woman who slept with a married man. That's not disqualifying, and it certainly has nothing to do with picking a Presidential candidate.

279 posted on 01/17/2012 10:45:14 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

This whole story doesn’t smell right.

I’d wait for confirmation of Dobson’s remarks before commenting.

I have met Dr. Dobson and been acquainted with his work, from the pro-life side.The Jim Dobson I knew was gracious, humble and a forgiving person, knowing full well his standing as a forgiven sinner before his Savior.

If this story is found to be untrue, it won’t be the first time Politico has fabricated a story.

Because of his hard work in the pro-life and family trenches, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt first.


281 posted on 01/17/2012 10:53:01 PM PST by exit82 (Democrats are the enemies of freedom. We have ideas-the Dems only have ideology.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL
Dr. Dobson, with all due respect, SHUT YOUR PIEHOLE!

Dobson is an ignorant political novice who screwed conservatives in 2008 by maliciously slagging Fred Thompson with an "off the record" email that said Fred wasn't a Christian. That action resulted in leaving the GOP with John McCain as their nominee.

Please see my original FR article from January 29, 2008:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1961546/posts

*****************************

The Death of Conservatism? - 43 Mistakes and the GOP's Dobson's Choice
Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:55:19 PM by Sideshow Bob

There have been more than a few recent articles and editorials attempting to affix blame for the demise of the Republican Party. Peggy Noonan blames President Bush. Rush Limbaugh believes a McCain nomination will kill the party. However, even in a worse case scenario, the Republican Party will probably stagger along for several years much like the last decade of the Whigs. Conservative Republicans should probably be more concerned about the impending demise of the conservative movement within the party. Some individuals can be blamed more than others, but this folly has many fathers. The latest blow to conservatives has come from within – thanks to Dr. James Dobson and other egotistical evangelicals. Political doomsayers may be correct and it is likely too late to save the conservative movement in 2008. Conservatives can correct their path to destruction for 2010 and beyond, but only if they look back at recent history, recognize the actions and actors that have brought the party and movement to this point, and to learn from a long series of missteps and mistakes.

Ronald Reagan built a winning coalition of conservatives, independents and establishment moderate Republicans in 1980. A coalition of social, economic and security conservatives had come together to form a plurality within the GOP and wrest leadership of the party from the establishment, moderate GOP. The Iran-Contra scandal (Mistake #1) weakened the coalition and the moderate wing of the party regained control of the GOP (Mistake #2), which led to the election of President George H.W. Bush (Mistake #3).

While the elder Bush had adopted – albeit reluctantly – many conservative ideals, he and the moderate GOP leaders advocated a “kinder, gentler” approach (Mistake #4). Conservatives might have been content to take a back seat to moderate GOP leadership, but they read Bush’s lips and their support and enthusiasm for the Republican Party evaporated after the Bush tax increase (Mistake #5). In 1992 some conservatives were taken in by Ross Perot and his anti-establishment, anti-Washington message (Mistake #6). Others just stayed home (Mistake #7) and helped Democrats elect the Dope from Hope, Bill Clinton, with just 43% of the popular vote (Mistake #8).

The only positive to come out of 1992 was that it helped create an opening for an obscure, but brilliant Congressman from Georgia to lead conservatives to regain control of the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich reformed the three-legged conservative coalition and took an upstart innovative approach of leading the GOP from the House with a 1994 national congressional campaign platform – the Contract with America.

It is important to note that prior to the ’94 elections, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole and other establishment, moderate GOP leaders scoffed at and were dismissive of Gingrich and the Contract. Dole and Senate moderates rode the Contract’s election coattails, but made it plain that the GOP Senate did NOT sign on to the program, was not obligated to it, reluctantly followed Gingrich's lead, and worked to water down each and every one of the Contract's provisions (Mistake #9).

By January 1996, Dole was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee (Mistake #10). Dole sought to convince Speaker Gingrich to fold up the federal government shutdown stalemate with President Clinton and allow Dole to lead the GOP via his presidential campaign.

Dole gave Gingrich the choice of single-handedly continuing the shutdown and fight with Clinton and the media with Candidate Dole seeking a different path from the House GOP or deferring to Dole's presidential campaign and resuming the conservative battle together with Gingrich’s friend Trent Lott to keep President Dole honest after the ’96 elections. Gingrich made the wrong choice (Mistake #11). Gingrich probably should have run for President himself in 1996 (Mistake #12).

We all remember what happened. By caving in and compromising on the shutdown, the conservative House leadership lost some of their ability to control their more moderate members (Mistake #13). Bob Dole lost (Mistake #14). Trent Lott built his own voice separate from the House (Mistake #15). And with no help from Lott & the GOP Senate and a Clinton veto looming on all conservative issues, Gingrich, Armey & DeLay focused too much of their efforts on the growing Clinton scandals (Mistake #16).

Gingrich was able to maintain order within the House even during the Clinton impeachment. But after the Senate RINOs failed to do their duty and convict Clinton (Mistake #17), the House moderates began feeling their oats (Mistake #18).

Then, the impact of the missing FBI files took effect. Allegations of marital affairs against Gingrich and Hyde took their toll (Mistake #19). Seeing his conservative House coalition slowly diminish and Lott's desire to set on a different path, Gingrich stepped down as Speaker (Mistake #20). Then his presumed successor, Bob Livingston from Louisiana, was also taken out by a marital affair (Mistake #21).

House Moderates became emboldened and championed the lackluster Dennis Hastert as Speaker to muzzle Armey & DeLay and appear less confrontational (Mistake #22). This effort also helped to clear the agenda of party leadership for the 2000 GOP presidential candidates (Mistake #23). And in 2000, conservatives settled for the "compassionate conservatism" of George W. Bush (Mistake #24). Many conservatives stayed home, nearly costing Bush the presidency and actually losing GOP control of the Senate in 2000 (Mistake #25).

To be fair, conservatives should thank God everyday for W's leadership in dealing with 9-11. But Bush also squandered the opportunity to push the party and country to the right following that horrible event (Mistake #26). The GOP regained control of the Senate in 2002, but based solely on the country’s fears of Democrats’ inability to deal with national security concerns and not on conservative social and economic principles. Meanwhile, the House drifted further to the center (Mistake #27).

Conservative fears of repeating Florida 2000 helped Bush win reelection in 2004, despite the party's overall drift to the center. By now, any conservative elements in the House and Senate were in complete retreat. The moderates ruled the roost in both houses. RINO defections on the Iraq war (Mistake #28), wasteful earmarks (Mistake #29) and ethics scandals (Mistake #29) were now front and center for the GOP. The only conservative victories of 2005-06 were the confirmations of Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court. And it took a battle to defeat Bush on his nomination of Harriet Miers to do it.

By Fall 2006 conservatives had become utterly disheartened. Attempts to make the Bush tax cuts permanent stalled (Mistake #30), the continued treachery of Arlen Spector, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the Gang of 14 (Mistake #31), increased dissatisfaction with George Bush and the Miers nomination debacle all caused conservatives to stay home in November 2006 (Mistake #32). And the GOP lost both the House and Senate.

Occasionally, the conservative movement can still rise up. The reaction to the Amnesty bill was encouraging. But other than that, conservatives have again been wandering in the wilderness. GOP moderates and RINO's have been resistant to allowing a conservative to assume leadership in Congress. And any potential conservative congressional leader has held back (Mistake #33), in part due to the extremely early start of the 2008 presidential race (Mistake #34).

And what did conservatives get for 2008 GOP candidates? Were there any Reagan conservatives who possessed all three legs of the coalition stool - strong national defense, social conservatism, economic conservatism?

Nope.

Instead, we got Rudy Giuliani. An autocrat who has little affection for social conservatives, but pledged to nominate strict construction judges. Whoopee!

Instead, we got John McCain. An angry RINO maverick who enjoys flouting social and economic conservatives AND even the GOP establishment to gain favor and positive reviews from the liberal media.

Instead, we got Mitt Romney, an uber-wealthy GOP establishment moderate. At least Romney panders to social and economic conservatives with recently discovered flip-flopped positions on issues of importance to those two factions.

Instead, we got Mike Huckabee – the Dope from Hope, part II. While he is just as slick and manipulative as Bill Clinton, Huckabee is nowhere near as smart.

Instead, we got Ron Paul, a true blue, libertarian nutbag. Paul has a few economic bona fides that have pulled away a few non-nut job libertarians. But I'm sorry, Dr. Paul is a kook.

Instead, we got the Obscure Four - Tom Tancredo, Alan Keyes, Tommy Thompson & Duncan Hunter. Tancredo & Keyes are single issue candidates. Tommy & Dunc are well-rounded politicians (especially Hunter), but they lacked the ability to have broad nationwide appeal.

Seeing this morass of blech, Fred Thompson entered the fray expecting to be the savior of the Republican Party and the conservative movement. Fred should have been that candidate.

Unfortunately, Dr. James Dobson and a few evangelical leaders decided to cut off their nose to spite their face (Mistake #35). You see, Fred's not a Bible thumper. Neither was Ronald Reagan. And like Reagan, Fred is a bona fide, all-around, federalist conservative. That wasn’t good enough for Dobson. And when Fred refused to kiss Dobson's ring of evangelical purity, Dobson went shopping for a candidate he thought he could control.

Flim Flam Huckabee seized on that opportunity. Huckabee played Dobson into thinking that Dobson could be a GOP kingmaker (Mistake #36). A handful of evangelical leaders blindly pushed Huckabee as a viable conservative (Mistake #37). The media, who knows a GOP loser when they see one, helped fan the flames of Huckabee's support. For a time, the scheme worked. Huckabee won Iowa (Mistake #38), but eventually the truth of Huckabee's Christian Socialism became evident to most conservatives.

But the damage had been done. Social conservatives were now spilt. Some had been taken in by Huckabee's class warfare (Mistake #39). Some had been taken in by the media's false depiction of Fred as a lazy campaigner (Mistake #40) and settled for Romney, Rudy or, worse, McCain (Mistake #41).

Added into this deceptive mix was the ability of independents and Democrats to participate in and distort the Iowa, New Hampshire & South Carolina Republican primaries (Mistake #42). Media darling McCain was back! McCain – the new Comeback Kid – was ready to lead....the GOP down to defeat. Meanwhile, Fred's race and the ability for the GOP to unify behind a Reaganesque conservative died (Mistake #43).

At best, the GOP could still end up with a George W. Bush-lite nominee like Mitt Romney. He will at least pretend to care about conservative ideals from his Country Club wing of the party.

At worst, the GOP could end up with John McCain. McCain, the perennial thorn in the GOP's side who was once touted as a possible VP running mate for John Kerry!

Who knows? It’s still remotely possible that none of the moderates and RINO’s still in the presidential race will win a majority of the primary delegates. Maybe a conservative nominee could still rise up in a brokered GOP convention. Maybe a conservative national congressional campaign like the Contract with America could still arise in time for the 2008 elections. But really, that’s a fantasy.

The reality is that conservatives will have to wait until 2010 or 2012 to reassert itself as the true and legitimate leaders of the Republican Party. The reality is that conservatives have allowed numerous people to make numerous mistakes which have led the movement to this precarious point. The reality is that conservatives and the GOP are now left with this Dobson's Choice of Romney or McCain. Pass the nose clips and prepare for the worst.

************************************

It's absolutely scary how many of these mistakes I identified in 2008 are being repeated!

306 posted on 01/18/2012 8:28:22 AM PST by Sideshow Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: VinL

Dobson vs LaHaye?

LaHaye has endorsed Newt.


313 posted on 01/18/2012 12:18:04 PM PST by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson