Posted on 06/05/2012 1:44:18 PM PDT by TIElniff
It is clear you choose to believe and promote lies.
For other FReepers who want to know what Dobson really said, a simple google search will reveal the truth. Check out, for example, the first two Google results at this limk:
http://www.google.com/search?q=what+did+dobson+say+about+thompson
If not, you cannot "know" how it was said. For everyone else, we only know how it has been reported (initially by a member of the "Christian" media, no less).
For other FReepers who want to know what Dobson really said, a simple google search will reveal the truth. Check out, for example, the first two Google results at this limk...
****
OK, I followed the link. And it did change my view and understanding of one point.
I mistakenly thought the initial reporter worked for a Christian media source. Instead, it was US News & World Report. On that point alone, I apologize for that misunderstanding. It takes the malicious nature of Dobson's statement down from a level of 11 to just a 10.
Other than that, my statements on the incident are 100% factually correct and my opinion of Dobson's comments and intent remain as accurate analysis.
From YOUR link:
Gilgoff quoted Dobson (in May 2007) saying of Thompson, “Everyone knows he’s conservative and has come out strongly for the things that the pro-family movement stands for, [but] I don’t think he’s a Christian; at least that’s my impression.”
In the U.S. News story, Dobson added, according to Gilgoff, that such an impression would make it difficult for Thompson to connect with the Republican Party’s conservative Christian base and win the GOP nomination.
In a statement issued today (June 7, 2007), Focus on the Family said Dobson did not mean to disparage Thompson.
“His words weren’t intended to represent either an endorsement of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich or a disparagement of former Sen. Fred Thompson,” the statement said.
“Dr. Dobson appreciates Sen. Thompson’s solid, pro-family voting record and his position that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.”
Dobson, according to Focus on the Family, was “attempting to highlight that to the best of his knowledge, Sen. Thompson hadn’t clearly communicated his religious faith, and many evangelical Christians might find this a barrier to supporting him.”
That's your exculpatory evidence for Dobson??!!
Dobson never denied making the statement. Nor did Dobson claim he was misquoted. He laughingly claimed his comments were misunderstood.
Dobson knew he was talking to a reporter. And not just any reporter.
US News & World Report isn't Better Home & Gardens, Conde Nast Traveler or Southern Living. It's a political news organization, for crying out loud!!
And to this national politcal reporter Dobson (a national media figure with vast amounts of media relations training) chooses to speculate - note he is not responding to a direct question - about a candidate's faith because...WHY?
In his pathetic CYA press release statement on Focus on the Family letterhead, Dobson claimed he wanted to make sure that some evangelicals did not mistakenly support Thompson because:
1) Dobson wasn't sure of Thompson's Christian faith, and/or
2) Dobson didn't believe Thompson had clearly professed his faith (to a level of a Dobson's liking).
Are you freaking kidding me??!!!
It is beyond implausibility that Dobson didn't know who he was talking to, how his quoted statements would be interpreted by the segment of Evangelicals with limited political acumen, and how those Evangelicals might influence the 2008 GOP presidential primary.
If you read between the lines of the "exculpatory" press release, any sentient person can see Dobson's true intent for the original Thompson slur. And it's the exact opposite of his denial.
Dobson absolutely intended to represent an endorsement of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich! He was trying to push Gingrich to enter the 2008 race.
Dobson absolutely intended to disparage Thompson. Besides Gingrich, Thompson was the only other candidate or potential candidate that could appeal to social, fiscal and national defense conservatives. Huckabee, Romney, McCain & Giuliani appealed to at most 2 of those groups.
Theo, you have repeatedly called me out as a liar. I have now responded using your own link to refute your scurrilous charge. What has now been revealed for all to see is that your creepy faith in Dobson's virtue and political acumen has clouded your ability to cognitively see facts and events as they truly are.
Call me a liar again and I will seek to have you banned from this website.
Seek help, please.
You speak of my “creepy faith in Dobson’s virtue and political acumen.”
That is a lie.
Yup, I said it. It’s a lie because it has no basis in truth, but is something that’s simply arisen in your rabid anti-Dobson imagination, since I choose to promote the truth over the media (and your) spin.
Now, look at Dobson’s “money quote” from the initial article:
“Everyone knows he’s conservative and has come out strongly for the things that the pro-family movement stands for, [but] I don’t think he’s a Christian; at least that’s my impression.”
You’re a FReeper. You should have decent eyes, and be able to pick up on things fairly easily. Note that there is one word that the publication/journalist added that wasn’t in the original statement. The word “but.” Why was this word added? Either:
1) To change the tone of the statement
2) To replace other words or a long pause or a reporter’s question ... that may have been ... deleted
Do you remember the 911 call of Zimmerman that were edited, to remove the dispatch’s question about what Trayvon looked like? Maybe something like that happened here. It happens. The anti-conservative media does it all the time.
The truth is that Dobson in fact did NOT know whether Thompson was a Christian. There wasn’t any evidence that he WAS a Christian. And one is not a Christian simply because they’re a decent person living in the States — we can agree on that, right?
At the time, I was 100% in the Thompson camp. I was pro-Thompson. The thing is, I don’t have to be anti-Dobson to prove my pro-Thompson creds.
I don’t understand your motivation for assuming the worst about Dobson, Bob. I don’t understand your passionate attack of those who are calling for a more reasoned evaluation of what Dobson said. Are you a Christian yourself? Are you simply suspicious of all high-profile Christians?
I make a big deal about this because a decent man (Dobson) is being misrepresented by the media and by you. That’s why I’m taking the time to leave a comment. Why are YOU taking the time to express your overwhelming emotions?
Theo reported for abuse 6-9-12.
“Everyone knows he’s conservative and has come out strongly for the things that the pro-family movement stands for, [but] I don’t think he’s a Christian; at least that’s my impression.”
You’re a FReeper. You should have decent eyes, and be able to pick up on things fairly easily. Note that there is one word that the publication/journalist added that wasn’t in the original statement. The word “but.” Why was this word added? Either:
1) To change the tone of the statement
2) To replace other words or a long pause or a reporter’s question ... that may have been ... deleted
Including [but] almost certainly replaced a long pause. It is common journalistic practice to insert a speaker's inferred word from a quote in parentheses, i.e. Dobson paused and meant to say "but" and skipped over the word in his actual comment.
The excerpted quote I provided in my post is from Dobson's own press release. Dobson has NEVER claimed he was misquoted or that his quote was selectively edited. After the initial quote was published, there were some press reports that Dobson initially attempted to deny his statement (which I believe to be a fact), which led to Dobson releasing his non-denial denial press release. Dobson's only acknowledged objection to the publishing of the quote was Dobson's dubious claim that his comments might be misinterpreted and that he had no intent to injure Thompson or support Gingrich with those comments.
The truth is that Dobson in fact did NOT know whether Thompson was a Christian.
And if Dobson didn't know, why was he speculating about it?
It's not like he was asked "Do you think Fred's a Christian?" or any other direct question. Perhaps Dobson was asked "You like Newt, why don't you like a similar conservative like Thompson?" That would seem to match Dobson's speculative response. But again, why did Dobson speculate?
As an international speaker, author and radio host, Dr. Dobson has gone through extensive PR and media training. It is extremely hard to believe that he could make such a rookie interview mistake. It was well-known at the time that Dobson favored Newt Gingrich and had been pushing Newt to enter the 2008 race. Dobson supporters are the only people who do not believe he was intentionally slurring Thompson.
There wasn’t any evidence that he [Fred Thompson] WAS a Christian.
Irrelevant and Dobson's opinion only. Prior to the Dobson slur, Thompson made no public comments on his faith (other than listing his religious affiliation for the Senate directory).
And one is not a Christian simply because they’re a decent person living in the States — we can agree on that, right?
Umm, no. If you believe yourself to be a Christian, you are a Christian. That is NOT for me, you or Dobson to judge - only God can judge. Ronald Reagan called himself a Christian. By Dobson's standards, his comments would have applied to Reagan's faith (or in Dobson's eyes - a lack thereof).
At the time, I was 100% in the Thompson camp. I was pro-Thompson. The thing is, I don’t have to be anti-Dobson to prove my pro-Thompson creds.
Irrelevant, impossible to prove and I really don't care about your anti/pro-creds about anything.
I don’t understand your motivation for assuming the worst about Dobson, Bob. I don’t understand your passionate attack of those who are calling for a more reasoned evaluation of what Dobson said.
Passionate attack? Read the thread again.
I made a one-line joke. I commented further only upon the request of others or in response to personal attacks -mainly from you. My motivation is that Dobson has repeatedly used the "pulpit" of his radio program and its accompanying fame in an attempt to influence GOP voters. His vanity and political ineptitude has been extremely harmful to both conservatives and the GOP. He bears much responsibility for sticking us with McCain (and Obama) in 2008 and some responsibility for sticking us with Romney in 2012.
Are you a Christian yourself? Are you simply suspicious of all high-profile Christians?
I've been waiting for that comment. Irrelevant and none of your business, but yes I am. And thanks for insulting me yet again. I am suspicious of all inept political operatives and few are as inept at politics as Dobson. Please note that I encouraged others throughout this thread to continue to follow Dobson for religious instruction. My only objection to Dobson is that people need to stop following this political fool for political advice.
I make a big deal about this because a decent man (Dobson) is being misrepresented by the media and by you. That’s why I’m taking the time to leave a comment. Why are YOU taking the time to express your overwhelming emotions?
And I've only responded to the questions of others and to your personal attacks. Please stop attacking me.
Judging from the fact that I am not banned, it looks like you’ve overreacted.
Consider yourself to be like President Clinton. Impeached, but not convicted due to Scottish law.
And still with no substantive, reasoned rebuttal.
I had no “substantive, reasoned rebuttal”?
Everything I had to say was in comment #64.
Consider yourself to be like Monica Lewinski. Yeah, that’s as silly a metaphor as yours.
Again, I’m not sure what your problem is with high-profile Christians, and why you’re bent on believing smears against them. Whatever. You’re free to hold whatever opinions you’d like.
As posted repeatedly above, I believe the direct quote of Dr. James Dobson. I do not believe Dobson's non-denial denial press release and your GROSS mischaracterization of what Dobson actually said as a smear of Dobson. If you want to believe that Dobson intended no harm to Thompson, that's your business. I don't think highly of the political intelligence and pretzel logic of those who continue to be Dobson political supporters.
I have no problem with high-profile Christians, per se. However, my dislike for Dobson the political operative is augmented by the fact that he is thought to be a high-profile Christian.
As a Christian evangelical myself, I want high-profile Christians to be involved in the political process. But I expect them to be honest, accurate and/or intelligent when they do practice politics because when high-profile Christians are not honest, accurate and/or intelligent, the mainstream media AND the secular GOP will pillory them and the Evangelicals' status within the GOP is tarnished.
With his slur of Thompson, Dobson failed himself, conservatives and evangelical voters within the GOP. If you want to live in Fantasyland and deny that Dobson failed us, that's your business. But I will debate and dispute anyone who wants to perpetuate that Fantasyland. As the saying goes, "Repent and sin no more!"
Unfortunately, Dobson and his political followers have not repented. Worse still, he and they remain in denial of his political sin.
Beyond that, Dobson remains a poor commenter or leader on politics. His public comment on Obamacare - y'know the news item that spawned this thread - comes 2 MONTHS LATE to be of any real help to the GOP or to the Catholic organizations who are most in need of support in fighting off HHS Obamacare mandates.
Sorry if I don't give Dobson any kudos for his late-to-the-party comments. Where were you 2 months ago, Dr. Dobson? Where were you 2 years ago when Obamacare was first promulgated? Where were you when Santorum or Perry or even Gingrich could have used your support earlier this year?
To repeat, I have no problem with high-profile Christians. I am merely frustrated that Dobson is such a poor example of a high-profile Christian involved in politics. And that you and others appear to be blissfully ignorant of that reality.
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.