Dr. James Dobson: Fred Thompson 'Not a Christian'

Focus on the Family founder James Dobson has dealt a potentially devastating blow to Fred Thompson’s presidential aspirations, saying the former senator is not a Christian.

" I don’t think he’s a Christian. At least that’s my impression.”

"We use that word – Christian – to refer to people who are evangelical Christians. Dobson wasn’t expressing a personal opinion about his reaction to a Thompson candidacy.”

Although Dobson has not endorsed any Republican presidential candidate, he told Gilgoff that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was the "brightest guy out there” and "the most articulate politicians on the scene today.”

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/3/28/151351.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3058-1

Yea, I know...it's NewsMax, but I find it interesting that the candidate the media has been pushing as "The acceptable" candidate to the Christian RW seems now quite good enough to the most prominent of their leaders!

Of course, I also don't understand Dobson's support of the Newt!

who evangelize. :dunce:

Christians are those who, in addition to believing in Jesus, try to incorporate his teachings into their daily lives. Talk is cheap - witness our supposedly "Christian" president. If you want to claim yourself a Christian, you've got to walk the walk. Of course, you don't have to be perfect; nobody ever will be. But you at least have to make a good-faith effort to follow the teachings of Jesus.

sound familiar, Dobson?

:eyes:

God please give your children the gift of logical thinking someday?

faux "christian" who is the worst kind of hypocrite. Using Jesus' name to further his hate. Not only that..I have seen references to the Bible that say.."There are those who will use my name falsely"..I think that encompasses dobson, the whole mass bushit whoring gang, rush limpballs, and any other bush worshipper.

I don't like fred thompson cause he's repuke and you have to a liar to be repuke these days. Who knows :wtf: his religion is.

Where they belong. Eventually even the corrupt corporate media will end up going along with this.

:yoiks::scared:

go watch the freeps gnash and gnaw their paws off.

:eyes:

makes a person look alot more reasonable. But we won't get carried away, right? ;)

he'll tell Dr. Dobson to take a flying leap, and to take Jerry and Pat along for the ride. He could be the saviour of the Republican party.

:)

They may finally outdo us on the efficacy of their circular firing squad.

This is tooooooo good.

bear with me here, even if you're a skeptic... I spent a lot of years to come up with a couple of things that are of value (or at least will always distinguish good religion from harmful religion):

1. Its always Inclusive never Exclusive.
If God is the creator of everything, God doesn't love some more than others... end of story.

2. Its always Expansive.
Example: If you have your head on straight, understanding science/evolution makes you appreciate the creation more, not disbelieve in it.

3. Its always a Surprise, larger than the mind of any one person.
Lots of people may say things that point toward a spiritual truth but no one person or religion fully comprehends it.

The Dobson group is characterized by what I call "belly-button" theology- very concerned with who is in and who is out of their group (innies/outies) according to what they say about particular beliefs. They don't think twice about calling Catholics or Jews or anyone who differs from them non-Christians and they really do think you're going to hell! Its about as exclusive and limiting as you can get. I have a hard time being civil to these people.

Isn't that what the evangelicals object to with Catholics? (Among other things.) That Catholics have requirements beyond just "being saved"??

Will anybody be able to make hay with this?

(Which is why we do need religious credibility)

I remember it being very very bad form to question someone's status as a Christian - even if you had serious doubts. There are verses that talk about "only God knows the heart of a man" etc. I'm surprised Dobson would come out so bluntly like this. These doubts are usually couched in "fundese" lingo - someone is "backslidden" or some such. This could really come back to bite Dobson in the ass.

Ugh - sorry for the visual there . . .

needs to look harder at his tax exempt status for his organization.

The family values people seem to want somebody who's just crazy enough that they can control their every move (just like Bush).

Guiliani? Nah, too moderate.

Thompson? Not Christian enough.

Newt? He's hanging out with Falwell, been divorced multiple times, and has stated really extremist right-wing views in the past, he could be the one... :yoiks:

many years ago, pre 911, james dobson was a guest on john mcglaughlin show...pat buchanon and 2 or 3 others were also there. they were discussing the 'man o the year' and they all spouted the usual bromides until pat buchanon said it was willie horton (which caused some confusion, guilty chuckles)... sometime later, i heard dobson talking about the time he was on mcglaughlin (he was preaching) and he was discussing the mcglaughlin show when ideas for who to be 'man o the year' were discussed (it lead into whatever dobson was preaching on)...he covered all the names mentioned by the guests, but then said Pat Buchanon made an 'off the wall' suggestion, and dobson then hurried on with his spiel. Was i the only 'shut-in' on earth who
a)saw the very show dobson was referring to and
b) heard the religious broadcast where he skipped over the vile racist technique that doomed the dukakis campaign?
was i?
Anyway, enraged by dobson's slick avoidance of the issue, i wrote him a letter. In it, i pretended like i was a born agin christian, fanatically devoted to jesus christ and in my early to mid teens...the letter mentioned seeing dobson on mcglaughlin (rather unusual teen!) a couple years earlier, then hearing his program when he skipped over the heartless racist use of a doomed man's (horton) record to destroy a decent politician (dukakis) etc. (ot - since then, i've lost any record of either the letter or dobson's mealy mouthed reply). But he did reply, and in his own hand! He never apologised for playing down or laughing off the using of willie horton in the '88 campaign, or the impact that it had on later US politics. Certainly not in terms of jesus christ saying 'whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me' In fact, he never even mentioned the Willie Horton suggestion at all, just defining it as 'off the wall' as if buchanon was joshing, or being silly. The fact is, that year, Horton might well have been 'man o the year' in terms of his effect, but dobson must figure no one was paying attention!
fukk jim dobson

Newt should be the Repub nominee. His fav/unfavs are even worse than Hillary's. I think he would be the easiest Repub candidate to beat.

cause all the lefties to go running toward them and tip the damn world over, and drowned everybody.

candidate. Toeach of those posters I've said the same thing. BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!

I live in Ga., and Newtis almost as capable a politician as Bill Clinton! He knows all the right buttons to push, and can sound everybit as convincing as John Dean on FindLaw! Yes, he's a total AH, but he is the BEST I've seen at convincing people that "yes I've made mistakesin my life, but I've REFORMED!"

I don't want to see him as a candidate for anything, anymore than I want to see Tom DeLay return to power...AND THEY'RE BOTH TRYING DAMN HARD!

of any candidate on either side. There was a recent poll that had @ 55% of voters saying they would never vote for him. That sounds a lot better to me than McCain and Rudy, who have very good favorable/unfavorable ratings, and beat most Dems in most polls.

Of all realistic possibilities, who would be an easier nominee to beat?

And I doubt his doctorate is worth the toilet paper it's written on

I just wish his followers realized this.

guys. Could it be campaign finance reform? Or it is that he knows stuff about them personally that will come out later, and he's warning his sheeple?