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

Skip to comments.

Dobson to Santorum: 'We need you in the Oval Office'
The Gazette ^ | 02/01/12 | John Schroyer

Posted on 02/02/2012 5:31:46 PM PST by writer33

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum commands a lot of respect in the Pikes Peak region.

And that support was hammered home Wednesday evening when Focus on the Family’s founder, Dr. James Dobson, made a surprise appearance at a Santorum rally to announce his endorsement.

“I’ve been watching you,” Dobson said to Santorum, with a quiet smile on his face. “We need you in the Oval Office.”

Santorum grinned broadly, and the thousand people at the rally stood and cheered.

And the senator told them solemnly, “God called me to do this.”

The event was Santorum’s second in the Pikes Peak region on Wednesday, during a campaign swing through Colorado. He stopped first in Woodland Park, where supporters filled the Ute Pass Cultural Center to capacity. So many people showed up that organizers worried about violating the fire code, and the campaign moved its evening rally to Mr. Biggs Family Fun Center, which had a much more room than the original location.

(Excerpt) Read more at gazette.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dobson; santorum
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 02/02/2012 5:31:58 PM PST by writer33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks; Antoninus; Colonel_Flagg; cripplecreek; darrellmaurina; fieldmarshaldj; ...

For those interested.


2 posted on 02/02/2012 5:33:16 PM PST by writer33 (Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33
'We need you in the Oval Office'

As a sweater vest cleaning lady...take off that stupid sweater...drop out...and endorse Newt!

You will NEVER be president...make your point and go away!

3 posted on 02/02/2012 5:35:26 PM PST by RoosterRedux (Newt: "Why vote for the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33

Thank you.

According to FOX tonight, Santorum’s fundraising has nearly tripled after Rush Limbaugh’s comments yesterday.


4 posted on 02/02/2012 5:37:18 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: writer33

It scares me when a politician says, “God called me to do this.”


5 posted on 02/02/2012 5:46:26 PM PST by Mangia E Statti Zitto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33

6 posted on 02/02/2012 5:46:33 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33
“I’ve been watching you,” Dobson said to Santorum, with a quiet smile on his face. “We need you in the Oval Office.”

The numbers are just not there, and Dobson has a tin ear for politics. It will never happen, no matter what Dobson says. Better to be practical, than to idealistically go down in defeat.

Dobson's endorsement is a liability, plain as that.

7 posted on 02/02/2012 5:47:33 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33
“I’ve been watching you,” Dobson said to Santorum, with a quiet smile on his face. “We need you in the Oval Office.”

The numbers are just not there, and Dobson has a tin ear for politics. It will never happen, no matter what Dobson says. Better to be practical, than to idealistically go down in defeat.

Dobson's endorsement is a liability, plain as that.

8 posted on 02/02/2012 5:47:46 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: writer33
This is very interesting. I was wondering if Dr. Dobson would make an endorsement.

Last election, he was one of the prominent evangelicals who hesitated for a long time to endorse Huckabee because he believed Romney was also a pro-life candidate. Dobson’s endorsement will carry significant weight in many conservative Christian circles, not because Dobson would be likely to endorse someone else, but because he chose not to remain neutral and come out aggressively in support of one candidate rather than remaining quiet.

9 posted on 02/02/2012 5:52:21 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: writer33
I love Dr Dobson. I listened to his radio show for years, and Adventures in Odyssey. My sister lives in Colorado Springs, so I go to FOF every time. I'm headed there next week.
10 posted on 02/02/2012 5:54:57 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: writer33

We NEED him and nutcase to drop out. They aren’t doing us any favors..


11 posted on 02/02/2012 5:55:55 PM PST by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Linda Frances

Enjoy your trip.


12 posted on 02/02/2012 5:56:56 PM PST by writer33 (Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie
Dobson’s endorsement is a liability, plain as that


Have you ever read any of his books or hear his radio show? When I was a counselor at a Crisis Pregnancy Center Dobsons FOF helped all the CPCs out so much. He is a well respect man in the Christian community. He always took a lot of heat from the left because he was one of the first Christian leader to warn about the gay agenda.

13 posted on 02/02/2012 6:01:52 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 8 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

lol rick will never be prez so endorse newt...like saying kim k will never be faithful so start dating paris hilton


14 posted on 02/02/2012 6:05:14 PM PST by skaterboy (Hate=Love....Love=Hate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: writer33

What’s with the hateful comments directed at Christians?

I can’t believe what’s happening on the Free Republic lately.


15 posted on 02/02/2012 6:06:38 PM PST by bimboeruption (Clinging to my Bible and my HK.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW; writer33; napscoordinator
First off, my compliments to DJMacWOW for finding this. All Republicans should be glad when we get the opportunity to review past things said by Republican candidates now, **BEFORE** we choose our candidate, since we can be sure President Obama’s “opposition research” staff has lots of this already and will use it against us in the general election regardless of who wins the nomination.

Now a challenge to Writer33, napscoordinator, and any others connected with the Santorum campaign: somebody needs to go through this brochure, line by line, and identify 1) what items on the brochure are taken out of context, 2) what items were written for a Pennsylvania audience and can be defended as Santorum voting for what his home-state constituents wanted, and 3) which items (if any) represent an old position he has since changed. The whole brochure should be obtained and posted online; my guess is Santorum said a lot of other things Freepers will like if presented in full and in context.

Obvious examples include #9 on stem cell research — I'm all but certain Santorum was supporting adult stem cell research, not fetal stem cell research, but that needs to be clarified. If he was supporting fetal stem cell research then, we need to make sure he doesn't do that now.

Also, I think #2 can clearly be defended on conservative principles — we definitely **SHOULD** be promoting use of coal, because not only Pennsylvania but many other states make America the “Saudi Arabia” of coal and we need to be encouraging reliance on domestic rather than foreign fuel sources. Related to that, #2 makes clear that while lots of candidates were sitting on the fence about global warming or actually supporting steps that would damage our economy for no good reason, Santorum was promoting coal usage despite the greenhouse gas garbage.

I could cite other items on the brochure, but I'd rather see someone from the Santorum campaign do this work and give us something officially from Santorum’s mouth, not our guesses about what he meant to say.

16 posted on 02/02/2012 6:08:06 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: writer33
And the senator told them solemnly, “God called me to do this.”

Any questions? I have known this guy was a sickie and have said so, much to the dismay of the boobs and doo-dahs who think he's special. But I didn't know he was a paranoid psychotic with delusions of grandiosity.

17 posted on 02/02/2012 6:08:28 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skaterboy

Rick is NOT presidential timbre! Great social conservative...just not presidential!


18 posted on 02/02/2012 6:09:53 PM PST by RoosterRedux (Newt: "Why vote for the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

What’s with the hateful comments directed at Christians?

I can’t believe what’s happening on the Free Republic lately.

Some are acting like the establishment, telling us who we have to support and slandering Rick and his supports.


19 posted on 02/02/2012 6:10:10 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 15 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Earth to Darrell. Dobson endorsed Santorum two or three weeks ago at the meeting of the evangelicals in Texas.


20 posted on 02/02/2012 6:12:04 PM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption

Catholic spammers have taken over the the Religion Forum, and moral degeneracy is endorsed in Newt Gingrich. Never thought I’d see the day...


21 posted on 02/02/2012 6:14:48 PM PST by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: writer33
“God called me to do this.”

I have no doubt that called Rick to try. But He did not annoint Rick or Rick would not be losing!

22 posted on 02/02/2012 6:15:50 PM PST by RoosterRedux (Newt: "Why vote for the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimboeruption; writer33; napscoordinator; All

15 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 8:06:38 PM by bimboeruption: “What’s with the hateful comments directed at Christians? I can’t believe what’s happening on the Free Republic lately.”

Considering you’re from the Class of 1998, you’ve been here long enough to see lots of things, including how Huckabee got treated. I certainly do remember complaints about him, but I don’t remember this level of vitriol directed toward conservative Christians in 2007 and 2008 — perhaps because several other candidates, not just Huckabee, were open-and-out evangelicals.

However, maybe my memory is wrong.

I try to be fair here. If I were a Gingrich supporter, how would I react seeing my candidate’s marital history dragged all over the media? If I were a Roman Catholic, I would be much more willing to presume the legitimacy of the decision of the Church to accept Gingrich’s third marriage as a legitimate marriage. And as I’ve said numerous times, there is a piece on the internet crossposted on Free Republic and authored by the pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church of San Diego which I find helpful in addressing concerns about the sincerity of Gingrich’s repentance.

A Pastoral View of Newt Gingrich
By Rev. Jim Garlow
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2822096/posts

I think the Gingrich supporters have reason to be annoyed at the way some Santorum supporters have behaved, and vice versa. I don’t see Gingrich or Santorum behaving the way some of their supporters behave. That’s good, because if we’re going to defeat Romney and then Obama, we need to realize that we’re in this together.

There are good reasons a conservative evangelical or conservative Roman Catholic may choose to support Gingrich. I respect that.

However, if Gingrich wins the presidency he’s going to have to address the fact that there are conservatives supporting him because they don’t like “preachiness” or an emphasis on personal morality. I’ve read enough of Gingrich that I believe he understands the need for a moral foundation for society, unlike some of his backers.

Long-term, I am seriously concerned about the anti-Christian spirit being voiced in conservative circles, not just here on Free Republic. A shift is underway among younger conservatives, and it’s not friendly toward social issues. Too many young conservatives are buying into a form of conservatism which is more libertarian than conservative, and that needs to be addressed.


23 posted on 02/02/2012 6:25:11 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Linda Frances

I used to listen regularly to his radio show.

From a practical matter, no matter how Godly Rick Santorum is, he cannot win. Dobson’s attacking of Newt’s wife was just plain hateful. Rather than being righteous losers, we need to get Obama out of office. Some Christians have a purist, nihalistic quality about them, and I don’t know for a fact that Dobson is one of them, but he could be.

Why would a Christian endorse a candidate who cannot win?


24 posted on 02/02/2012 6:32:37 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: writer33

Santorum does seem to be getting the good endorsements.


25 posted on 02/02/2012 6:36:49 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

If the trend continues in the gallup tracking poll, in another 4 days Santorum will actually pass Gingrich. Will you then be calling for Gingrich to drop out and support Santorum?

This isn’t a prediction on my part. Just an observation. Newt could turn things around tomorrow. Maybe we can buy him a trampoline.


26 posted on 02/02/2012 6:40:21 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Rick has come to his own — he has his own self-appointed spammers.


27 posted on 02/02/2012 6:41:11 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

“We NEED him and nutcase to drop out. They aren’t doing us any favors..”

There is a school of thought out there that Santorum staying in actually hurts Romney, cause many of the Evangelicals backing Santorum will reluctantly back Romney cause they can’t stomach Gingrich with his personal baggage. Plus, keeping Santorum in keeps two guys attacking Romney, and Rick only gets 10% to 15% of the vote anyway. In states like SC, his percentage didn’t really hurt Newt. Another thing-if it’s down to just Newt & Mitt, then the guns will REALLY come out after Newt to take him out. I kind of think it’s a good insurance policy to keep Santorum around.

As for nut job Ron Paul, he’s not getting out regardless who asks him to. In addition, a lot of his voters are independents and moderate types who like his anti-war anti-U.S. stance. Many of those voters would either go to Romney or not show up at all, so Paul getting out would probably be a wash.

Bottom line-I’m with Newt, but cautiously. Newt can win states with 4 in the race-he proved it in S.C. I heard today he made some campaign staff shake-ups and is trying to be better disciplined and stay more on message. If these changes help him get it together, then he can be the anti-Romney choice regardless of what the other 2 guys do.


28 posted on 02/02/2012 6:41:19 PM PST by lquist1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

There’s a lot of good stuff I read from time to time at FOTF, but sometimes Dobson does a little more harm than good. I remember in 2008, he said Fred Thompson wasn’t Christian enough for him, which soured me some towards Dr. D. And Santorum, granted, I agree with him on social issues 100%, but we’re electing a President, not a preacher. If Newt has repented for his misdeeds, well, isn’t it Christian to believe in redemption? Certainly, if Santoroum had a better shot, I’d be behind him. But he doesn’t, and I’m fearing he’s doing more harm than good right now, and helping the Flipster get the nomination by staying in.


29 posted on 02/02/2012 6:41:34 PM PST by stratman1969 (Anyone but Obama, Romney or Paul in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ngat
Ngat, you're basically right, I'm definitely wrong, and I need to apologize.

Dobson endorsed Gingrich about a week after the Texas conference and two days before the South Carolina primary.

I was aware of the endorsement by the leaders of the Family Research Council, which is closely related to Dobson, but somehow I missed Dobson’s official endorsement, which is reported here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/focus-on-family-founder-james-dobson-endorses-rick-santorum/2012/01/19/gIQAr8eCBQ_blog.html

Also, while the endorsement wasn't made official in Texas, NGat is right that Dobson was supporting Santorum and criticizing Gingrich then.

I'm not posting the Politico link since 1) it could easily be interpreted as “bashing” of Gingrich, which I do not want to do, and 2) Politico could not get Dobson to confirm on-the-record the reports of what he had said in the closed meeting. Dobson may have subsequently gone on-the-record with the comments quoted by Politico, but I would need to research that, and I've been a reporter long enough not to put too much trust in unconfirmed reports of what somebody has said off-the-record.

Anyway, NGat, you're right (on the important parts), I'm wrong, and I need to thank you for the correction.

30 posted on 02/02/2012 6:42:12 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

That’s from his 2006 campaign. What’s your problem?


31 posted on 02/02/2012 6:44:38 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: lquist1

I love Ron Paul.. if we could combine his ideology of freedom and that of a strong military defense stately, we would have a winner. Other than that old fart being delusional, I get it..


32 posted on 02/02/2012 6:52:11 PM PST by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

Gallup tracking now has Gingrich at 25%, Santorum at 17% — within the margin of error, but admittedly at the hairy edge. Trending in Santorum’s direction though.

IN head-to-head with Obama, Gallup now has Gingrich trailing 53-41.

In swing-state comparisons a few days ago, Gringrich trailed Obama by 14%, 54-40, while Santorum only trails 7%, 51-44.

Rasmussen just did a poll that shows Santorum is now virtually tied with Obama, 46-48%, while Gingrich trails Obama by 8%.


33 posted on 02/02/2012 6:53:19 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Linda Frances
What’s with the hateful comments directed at Christians?

There are some people (even here on FR) who hate God as much as they do democrats. Unfortunately, we have to put up with them. Best thing to do is just ignore them. They just want attention.

34 posted on 02/02/2012 6:53:25 PM PST by mtg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

Excuse the auto correct from my phone..but I wish RP wasn’t RP.. we would have a winner. Mental illness is rampant..


35 posted on 02/02/2012 6:55:39 PM PST by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Why go through it? The one abiding rule of the Newt Gingrich presidential run is that nothing that happened before October of 2011 is of any concern to us.


36 posted on 02/02/2012 6:55:39 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: writer33
"He stopped first in Woodland Park, where supporters filled the Ute Pass Cultural Center to capacity. So many people showed up that organizers worried about violating the fire code,...."

Wow, I always thought Woodland Park was full of hippies.

37 posted on 02/02/2012 6:57:55 PM PST by oprahstheantichrist (The MSM is a demonic stronghold, PLEASE pray accordingly - 2 Corinthians 10:3-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

We had an entire drawn-out thread discussing the 2006 flyer a week ago — in it’s own thread, as we do for items of interest.

Posting it randomly in threads about other articles is “spam”, a distraction from the discussion of the article.


38 posted on 02/02/2012 6:58:57 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

These numbers are before the Dobson endorsement.


39 posted on 02/02/2012 6:59:16 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie
Dobson was in a meeting where every person promised to keep every word said confidential. They were all looking at the good side and bad side of every candidate. He mentioned it because he knew it was already out there and if someone did not know it could be a liability. If the media didnt get it out, obama would. To pretend it isn't an issue is naive. Do you really think it would not come out? Everyone said it was Romneys people who were angry because they did not get any votes except there own. They said all the leaders at the meeting were antimormon. Just like Obama pull the religion card.

Secondly, no one knows what the future holds. We are only 5% into this primary. Romney is starting to explode and has McCain out there saying he doesn't want any more debates (because he's scared of blowing it) He might have to get a TelePrompTer. Maybe he can borrow obamas. Remember, even if Newt got all of Santorums votes, which he would not have gotten, Newt still would not have won fl.

40 posted on 02/02/2012 6:59:53 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 24 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Sorry bud but you aren’t the thread police and I don’t CARE what you discussed. Not everyone has seen it.


41 posted on 02/02/2012 7:01:39 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

I too listen to Focus on the Family and applaud their Christian mission, but what The_Media_never_lies posted is not wrong. Dobson does have a tin ear for politics, and if his endorsement isn’t a liability, his condemnation of a candidate seems to be pretty effective. Dobson was behind sure loser Huckabee way before he formally endorsed him, and Dobson torpedoed Fred Thompson among evangelicals way early when their support could have helped. Why? Same issue; divorce, then taking up with a younger woman.

Dobson’s playing secular politics based on his moral judgements of candidates is not a positive thing.


42 posted on 02/02/2012 7:04:53 PM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mangia E Statti Zitto

Wonder if God called on him to vote for Title X? Heck, even McCain voted against PP.

Also, does God call on him to vote on spending tax payer’s money with reckless abandon? Does God call on him to be one of the biggest whores for the lobbyist “Johns” in DC? Does God call on him to create a huge secular bureaucracy?

Santorum, do not bring God into your power plays, the desperation shows too much.


43 posted on 02/02/2012 7:05:57 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: writer33

He must not have been watching when Santorum backed Specter.


44 posted on 02/02/2012 7:06:14 PM PST by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie
24 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 8:32:37 PM by The_Media_never_lie: “From a practical matter, no matter how Godly Rick Santorum is, he cannot win. Dobson’s attacking of Newt’s wife was just plain hateful. Rather than being righteous losers, we need to get Obama out of office. Some Christians have a purist, nihalistic quality about them, and I don’t know for a fact that Dobson is one of them, but he could be. Why would a Christian endorse a candidate who cannot win?”

I've been trying over on the World Magazine website, and other conservative Christian forums where I am personally known to the leaders, to make a similar case for the legitimacy of voting for Newt Gingrich. I think someone can vote for either Santorum or Gingrich in good conscience. I happen to think Santorum is the better candidate but I can live with Gingrich.

Some comments:

1. You are absolutely right that too many conservative evangelicals apply the same purist approach to secular politics that they do in their churches. I have major problems with that approach.

Considering that I spent a decade fighting against outright liberalism in the Christian Reformed Church (the “official” conflict over ordaining women and creation/evolution issues masked a more serious problem of denial of inerrancy that led to fights over homosexuality and similar issues), I have legitimate credentials to say that I understand the difference between fighting over secondary issues and fighting when the gospel is at stake.

2. I do not think I have ever attacked Callista Gingrich either in private or in public. I think it looks bad and wins no votes. However, we need to realize other people **ARE** doing that, not just Dobson.

Santorum has spent his entire political career having to answer questions about his own wife's repentance from some rather wicked decisions in her past. People have brought up the background of Mrs. Santorum several times on Free Republic. Callista Gingrich is going to have to deal with that sooner or later — the criticism won't come from me, but it will come.

My answer, if I were Callista Gingrich, would be to say some version of “I did something horrible, I deeply regret it, and my church spent many years evaluating me and Newt before allowing Newt to join the Catholic Church. It's not easy for a twice-divorced person to join the Catholic Church, and you can rest assured that my priest and my bishop investigated our situation. I've repented, Newt has repented, and if people refuse to believe that, all I can say is my church did hard work my critics have not done.”

3. You asked, “Why would a Christian support a candidate who cannot win?” In the current situation we don't have that problem. The race has been so volatile that I believe pretty much any of the four candidates except Ron Paul could still win the race.

However, if someone sincerely believes as a matter of conscience that they cannot support Newt Gingrich, I'm not going to tell them they have to vote for him. Sometimes we have to follow our consciences even knowing we will probably lose. I think the people here on Free Republic saying they'll back a third-party candidate if Romney wins the nomination understand that logic quite well. Frankly, I don't want to have to think through what choice I will need to make if the ballot is Romney versus Obama, and I hope the Republican Party doesn't put me in that position.

45 posted on 02/02/2012 7:06:47 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

You care enough to argue over it. If I’m not the police (and I’m not) why do you care that I call your comment “spam”? It’s just an opinion.

I wouldn’t take it personally, multi-page comments often elicit negative responses. Especially from people (not me) who try to read FR on small devices.

You didn’t post it to discuss it — because if you wanted it to be discussed and well-known, you’d make it a thread. Or maybe not, but that’s what a person SHOULD do if they have something that they want everybody to see, and to discuss.

If you really want to make sure people have seen it, why stick it in some silly endorsement thread that only a few poeple will read?


46 posted on 02/02/2012 7:07:31 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: writer33

Seems kinda late for that.


47 posted on 02/02/2012 7:08:43 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; onyx

Stick it in your ear you pompous windbag.


48 posted on 02/02/2012 7:11:22 PM PST by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

I have said for weeks I will vote Santorum then newt maybe even Paul but never Romney. I have defended newt when he was attacked (I think by romney supporters) because if he has made things right with God, who are we to judge.


49 posted on 02/02/2012 7:22:23 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 45 | View Replies]

To: ngat
42 posted on Thursday, February 02, 2012 9:04:53 PM by ngat: “Dobson was behind sure loser Huckabee way before he formally endorsed him, and Dobson torpedoed Fred Thompson among evangelicals way early when their support could have helped. Why? Same issue; divorce, then taking up with a younger woman. Dobson’s playing secular politics based on his moral judgements of candidates is not a positive thing.”

Please remember that Dobson ran “Focus on the Family.” The importance of the family is a core issue for him.

Also, with regard to Fred Thompson, church attendance is one problem he had that Gingrich does not have. Gingrich gives every impression of being a sincere and committed Roman Catholic convert. I'm impressed by what the pastor of Skyline Wesleyan Church wrote about Gingrich's personal faith and repentance, and while I am not Roman Catholic, I am very much aware that Gingrich would have had to go through a lot of "hoops" to have his marriage to Callista Gingrich recognized. I cannot simply accept the Roman Catholic Church's verdict on the matter without question, but it carries weight with me, knowing how seriously the Roman Catholic Church takes divorce and remarriage.

The biblical principle is that if a man cannot rule his own house he cannot rule the house of God. A man's success or failure in his family life is a good though certainly not perfect predictor of how he will handle greater responsibilities.

We can debate for a long time just how much the general equity of that biblical principle applies to secular rulership. For example, I campaigned for Ronald Reagan despite his divorce, and did so back when most Republicans I knew thought Reagan has no chance of winning, because I believed Jimmy Carter was naive and incompetent in addition to having bad policies. That's part of why I believe a Christian can support Newt Gingrich in good conscience -- President Obama really is a terrible president, and we need the best person possible to run against him.

However, Dobson is not saying something new or unusual. A few generations ago, what Dobson says now was standard wisdom not only in the church but also in many secular positions of leadership.

Our society isn't getting better when it comes to family life and Dobson’s views make a lot more sense than much of what gets said today about the role of the family in public service.

50 posted on 02/02/2012 7:31:57 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

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.

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