Baldwin seeks support of Dr. James Dobson

The following is a message from the Chuck Baldwin presidential campaign to persons who have signed on to their site:

From: Jon Kayser [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 7:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Baldwin’08 Update: URGENT-Please call Dr. Dobson and show your support for Chuck Baldwin

Dear Concerned Citizen,

The much loved and well-respected Dr. Dobson is as shaken as everyone else by the upcoming elections. However, a recent news article on Yahoo! News reported that Dr. James Dobson is considering endorsing John McCain for President.

“I never thought I would hear myself saying this,” Dobson said in a radio broadcast to air Monday. “... While I am not endorsing Senator John McCain, the possibility is there that I might.”

We have talked to many conservative leaders over the past month encouraging them to endorse Chuck Baldwin - the only candidate that is ProLife; the only candidate that will secure the borders; the only candidate that will fight for traditional marriage; the only candidate that will appoint Constitutional judges.

Now it’s YOUR turn to encourage Dr. Dobson.

He needs to hear from you - TODAY.

Please call Focus on the Family at: 719-531-3427 and remind them that not only is Chuck Baldwin the RIGHT CHOICE - He’s the ONLY CHOICE! You can also email them at this link:
http://family.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/family.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=
11O4Xemi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=14190
=11O4Xemi&p_accessibility=0&p_lva=14190>

For example:

“Hi,

I recently heard that Dr. Dobson was considering endorsing John McCain for president, and I just wanted to encourage Dr. Dobson that McCain is not his only choice in this election. There is a candidate in the race who is unashamedly Christian, 100%
Pro-Life, and who is committed to defending our families at any cost. His name is Chuck Baldwin, and he gives me hope for the future of our country.

Thank you for your time, and please let Dr. Dobson know that we hope he chooses to endorse Chuck Baldwin for President.”

Thank you for your help in this urgent matter,

With radical optimism,
~Jonathan Kayser
Deputy Director, Web Campaign
616-534-5861
www.baldwin2008.com

Note: You are receiving this email because you signed up on our website
at www.baldwin2008.com

34 Responses to “Baldwin seeks support of Dr. James Dobson”

  1. Red Phillips Says:

    Here is what I just sent.

    Dear Dr. Dobson,

    I recently read that you are considering endorsing John McCain. If you do so it would be a tragedy. There is clearly a better candidate running, Chuck Baldwin. In ‘96 you voted for Howard Phillips over Bob Dole. Well is McCain somehow a better candidate than Dole? No. He is much worse. So why would you vote for McCain now? Stand by your word of not supporting McCain, and do the right and courageous thing, endorse Chuck Baldwin. Let the GOP know you are not in their back pocket.

    Sincerely,
    Red Phillips

  2. John Lowell Says:

    Dobson is a ReichsChurch phony. He was a phony on stem-cells by approving the noxious compromise of 2001, he’s backed the illegal and immoral war in Iraq and now, after swearing an oath never to support McCain, he appears ready to support him. Dobson is a Republican first and man of faith decidedly second. Like most of his ReichsChurch pals, he’ll fall in line. He always does.

  3. Red Phillips Says:

    John, he didn’t fall in line in ‘96. He is on record as voting for Howard Phillips. So my question is, what happened or what changed?

    Is Dobson aware of Baldwin’s support of foreign policy non-interventionism? If so, that might be what is hindering him from endorsing Baldwin. It would be nice to know if he is even aware and if that is factoring in.

  4. Sean Says:

    My letter:
    Dear Mr Dobson,

    My local radio host spent a lot of time bashing on you for possibly supporting McCain. I couldn’t believe it to be the case, so I checked the news articles and it seems as if you are open to that.

    Please, do not! There are a number of reasons that McCain is unacceptable, from his opposition to good supreme court justices (gang of 14), to his attack on our national sovereignty (by amnesty). Please know that McCain will battle everything that you stand for, despite any concilliation you may get from him now.

    Please consider that the vote for the less of two evils is not wise, nor something that a Christian should in good conscience do. Please consider that if you endorse John McCain, you will reward his lifetime record of opposition to social conservatives. Please consider that the Republican party will take note, and send even worse candidates for our acceptance in the future, as they will be confident that we will hold our noses and vote anyway because the Democratic candidate is so bad.

    Please consider either not voting, or supporting someone like Chuck Baldwin who is strong at pro-life (and will seek to end abortion far sooner than McCain, as well as consistently oppose the loopholes unlike McCain). McCain will use his political capital to fight the Iraq war, Baldwin will use it to end abortion and UN involvement. Please take a hard look at him.

    My family has benefited over the years from your ministry. Please continue to stand firm. Be strong. Don’t waver. For if salt loses its saltiness, it isn’t good for much.

    Sincerely,
    Sean McKay

  5. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    Yes, it occured to me that Baldwin’s opposition to the war and to the scurrilous interventionism of the regime would keep any ReichsChurch stallward from voting for him, Dobson particularly. Dobson’s kind of Christianity is the Christianity of the earliest Martin Niemoller, the Niemoller that felt comfortable with National Socialism. It becomes clear that Dobson is only a creature of his enemies, in no respect is he free of their impact. As he has evolved, Dobson is not a Christian, he is simply an anti-Democrat, nothing could be more clear. Frankly, I don’t know why you’d be interested in pursuing him, actually. You play into the lie that he’s “pro-life” which he is not. And no one knows that better than Chuck Baldwin, much to his credit.

  6. Richard Anselmo Says:

    Dr. Dobson is making a critical mistake even considering endorsing John McCain. If Dr. Dobson would like to endorse someone that shares his views, he should endorse Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.

    John McCain will use Christians once again for their vote and nothing else. McCain has always had an anti-Christian agenda as being a member of the CFR. The CFR promotes a one world order and John McCain favors amnesty, open borders and a North American Union.

  7. Anti-Corporate Says:

    It could be a tremendous boost for the Baldwin campaign if Dobson even mentioned that he was considering him. Every MSM channel ran the story yesterday about Dobson considering a McCain endorsement. If Dobson switched to Baldwin now, or if even indicated that he might, a lot of people would look at Baldwin who wouldn’t otherwise even hear about his candidacy. I hope Baldwin supporters and McCain detractors will ensure that Dobson hears their voice!

  8. Donna Says:

    Dobson is an embarrassment to the Christian community. It amazes me that these so-called Christian leaders can stand in the pulpit preaching the Gospel and telling us to place our faith and trust in the LORD, but, then go into the voting booth and vote out of fear. Many people I know have drawn that proverbial line in the sand and refuse to compromise God’s Word. Who needs Dobson? Not me.

  9. John Lowell Says:

    Why in heavens name should Baldwin approach Dobson with such unusual deference? Why should he approach him at all? It is the measure of his, Dobson’s, pro-life commitment that he’s even considering supporting McCain, a stem-cell research enthusiast on a par with Josef Mengele. Is it that Baldwin wishes to do a kind of Bo Jangles shuffle for massa? Or can he be self-respecting enough to avoid the temptation to tap dance for these lice? Lets hope the latter.

  10. Ben Says:

    Why would any national figure even consider Baldwin now that he will not be on the ballot in California or New York?

  11. John Lowell Says:

    Ben,

    “Why would any national figure even consider Baldwin now that he will not be on the ballot in California or New York?”

    Perhaps we might turn that one around, Ben, and inquire why Baldwin would want to abase himself for benefit of vermin like Dobson. I mean does he need him, goodbye already.

  12. Citizens For A Better Veterans Home[s] Says:

    Dear Doctor Dobsen, DD:

    Plz protect my spiritually,

    please keep religion out of

    secular public administration!

  13. Dobson for a better veteran home Says:

    CFABVH,
    Your pleas have been granted. We’ll discuss at the White House Chapel.

  14. Joe Harrell Says:

    That’s what’s wrong with America!! Why the hell would you vote for a candidate who you thought would be bad for the country? So what if he’s marginally better than the other guy. Why should we be forced to accept whatever sellout the party faithful (from either of the major parties) try to shove down our throats. The difference between McCain and Obama is the difference between being gutshot and left for dead, and being shot in the head outright! Either way, you’re dead! Should we 10% of American voters who actually know what’s goin on in American politics and what it will take to turn America back from the abyss, really care who the other 90% of voters who are too uneducated/uninformed/fearful/lazy to cast a vote for real change are going to vote for? Throwing your vote away? A vote for the status quo is the definition of throwing your vote away!

  15. Red Phillips Says:

    Ben, what is your agenda? Perhaps you should just state it up front? That the CP is weak and imploding without the State affiliates that left? Or are you a different Ben? If you are the same Ben, Baldwin is on your side. What do you want?

    First of all, Dobson is a Christian as far as any of us know because he publicly professes to be a born again follower of Christ. He is very wrong on the War, but a lot of Christians are wrong on a lot of things. That does not invalidate his faith and thank God for it because none of us are perfect.

    The Christians who are in the hip pocket of the GOP need to be approached with reason and love. Do you really think you are going to convince any of them of the error of their ways by calling them bad names?

    And John, do you really think throwing around terms like ReichsChurch and dropping Nazi references helps your case. It makes you sound like you are either a hyper PC grandstander or a lefty.

    Dobson is a Christian brother who is wrong on the War and wrong to reflexively support the GOP. He should be treated as the Christian brother he is.

  16. Red Phillips Says:

    “It makes you sound like you are either a hyper PC grandstander or a lefty.”

    BTW, the same is true about prattling on about the “racist” Wallace AIP. We get it. You’re not a racist. Now move on.

  17. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    “And John, do you really think throwing around terms like ReichsChurch and dropping Nazi references helps your case. It makes you sound like you are either a hyper PC grandstander or a lefty.”

    Well, since this remark is the first of yours in which I’m actually named, lets make our beginning here. It would seem of the essence for you to grasp from the outset that in coming here I’m not engaged in a kind of sales campaign, something which you would seem to presuppose as apposite, or feel that I should be engaged in a kind of sales campaign. Neither am I the head of marketing for some sect or a member of some self-deceived, quasi-commercial enterprize passing itself off as “Christian” as are so frightfully many. I undertake to express myself here honestly and without the least concern for the approval of others in so doing. Whether you or anyone else might regard me as a “hyper PC grandstander or a lefty” is simply a matter of the most monumental insignificance to me. I’m quite comfortable with myself au naturel.

    “First of all, Dobson is a Christian as far as any of us know because he publicly professes to be a born again follower of Christ. He is very wrong on the War, but a lot of Christians are wrong on a lot of things. That does not invalidate his faith and thank God for it because none of us are perfect.”

    I described an evolution of Dobson above, did I not, a development, perhaps better to call it a regression. Whatever Dobson once may have been he is now purely an ideologue, an anti-Democrat. One defines oneself by the end one serves, it isn’t a question of a self definition or a public claim. We are what we do.

    “The Christians who are in the hip pocket of the GOP need to be approached with reason and love. Do you really think you are going to convince any of them of the error of their ways by calling them bad names?”

    Again, whatever yours may be, mine isn’t a marketing effort. I’m interested solely in the truth. I’ve described these people as their behavior has defined them, I’ve described them fairly and not with some contrived parental motive lurking in the background. One assumes, although with not a little misgiving, that we’re dealing with adults, eh?

    “Dobson is a Christian brother who is wrong on the War and wrong to reflexively support the GOP. He should be treated as the Christian brother he is.”

    Dobson is what Dobson does, and he’s been doing a rather pronounced ReichsChurch of late. Given his position as a public spokesman, his failure to grasp the dimensions of his lapsing into ideology carries with it a much greater moral responsiblity than would be the case otherwise. He merits no special treatment.

  18. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    BTW, the same is true about prattling on about the “racist” Wallace AIP. We get it. You’re not a racist. Now move on.

    Oh, sir, spare us the smokescreen. In identifying itself with the American Independent Party, the CP inherits a history, one about which you would seem rather touchy. Let’s be charitable and say you’ve picked your history rather clumsily. Don’t bame that one on me.

  19. Red Phillips Says:

    “one about which you would seem rather touchy.”

    I’m not touchy about the history of the AIP at all. I’m “touchy” about PC broadsides that seem like they ought to be coming from the SPLC.

    Are you questioning the fate of Dobson’s immortal soul? That is the effect of saying he is no longer a Christian. Dobson has always been political. He was a very early backer of the homeschool movement back when a lot of other Christians thought it was nuts.

  20. Red Phillips Says:

    I meant to add, throwing around ReichsChurch and Nazi references is not boldly telling the truth. It is label mongering. The religious right has zero, absolutely zero, to do with Nazism. It may or may not have certain authoritarian tendencies, but it is most certainly not Nazi or Nazi like.

  21. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    “Are you questioning the fate of Dobson’s immortal soul? That is the effect of saying he is no longer a Christian. Dobson has always been political. He was a very early backer of the homeschool movement back when a lot of other Christians thought it was nuts.”

    The question of the fate of Dobson’s person - it is the person that survives death, not simply the soul or life principle - is very much in play at the moment and will not be known for some time yet. I would most earnestly suspect that you or I will not know his fate with any certainty until we know our own. So there’s time for him. Now if we could only get him out of that oberstgruppenfuehrer uniform he been wearing.

  22. Clark Says:

    ....holy fuck!..constitution party hot air balloons galore!...

    ...the only constitution party cheerleader i personally know is a raving lunatic who believes people engaged in ‘abortion’ should be killed by ‘the state’..

    ...although i don’t profess expertise in ‘christianity,’ as would some goddamned fool/phony, i can’t believe christ Himself would have people killed by ‘the state’ for engaging in ‘abortion’..

    ..the constipation party seems like a mere stinking quibbling offshoot of the stinking republicant party..as does the stinking bob barf wing on the Libertarian Party..

    ...btw, although i won’t be wasting any 4 federal reserve token/gallon gasoline going to ?your stinking republicrat polls this november, if i was forced to vote for someone on the ballot…i vote baldwig…at least he tries to talk a little about ‘the money thing’..(and if he were more knowledgeable about ‘it’ i would waste the gas!).. ;o)

    ...and although some of the cp’ers here appear decently ‘anti-war’..i must say from reading some constipation party fools on other forums, etc.. many cp’ers, in general, seem like miserable goddamned fool warmongers/imperialists..

    ..of course, ‘Libertarians’ have their barfbags and dunder0’s too!.. ;o)

  23. John Lowell Says:

    “The religious right has zero, absolutely zero, to do with Nazism. It may or may not have certain authoritarian tendencies, but it is most certainly not Nazi or Nazi like.”

    One very important foundational principle of National Socialism was ethnic purity. As you almost certainly know, it embarked upon one of the most intense campaigns of ethnic cleansing the world has ever known. The widespread political and financial support given by evangelicals to the concept of a “Greater Israel”, to the growth of the outrageous Israeli settlements on the West Bank, and to the consequent displacement of Palestinians on this land is of a piece with the Nazi forced resettlement of Jews to ghettos in wartime Poland. And there is, of course, their almost unanimous and unquaified backing of a regime whose immoral official policies in support of evesdropping, torture and pre-emptive war leave little to think about when it comes to identifying an historical predecessor. If it looks like a duck and it acts like a duck, trust me, its a duck.

  24. Clark Says:

    LOWELL SURPRISES: The widespread political and financial support given by evangelicals to the concept of a “Greater Israel”, to the growth of the outrageous Israeli settlements on the West Bank, and to the consequent displacement of Palestinians on this land is of a piece with the Nazi forced resettlement of Jews to ghettos in wartime Poland.

    ..you see, i told you.. lowell ain’t all bad!.. ;o)

  25. Red Phillips Says:

    John, conservative Protestant Christians, which is what Dobson is, believe that salvation is based on faith alone, not works. I believe this is the clear teaching of the Bible. So no, Dobson’s soul is not in the balance. He is either a sinner saved by grace based on his faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, or he is not.

  26. John Lowell Says:

    “So no, Dobson’s soul is not in the balance. He is either a sinner saved by grace based on his faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, or he is not.”

    I really don’t wish to get into an exhaustive discussion of the Redemption here, perhaps on some other occasion. Let it suffice to say for now that the consistent teaching of the Church over its long, two thousand year history is that no one may with certainty assume what his status may be in the sight of God and that it is the very essence of arrogance to believe otherwise. What you describe here is a novelty more the consequence of the impact of nominalism on late period neo-scholasticism than anything one might derive from Holy Scripture. It sees the realities from the impoverished perspective of the psychological order, ignoring the more fundamental ontological order in its entirety. I’ll leave you with that; you may wish to chew on it on bit.

  27. John Lowell Says:

    Clark,

    “..you see, i told you.. lowell ain’t all bad!.. ;o)”

    I’m also very good looking, Clark.

  28. Red Phillips Says:

    John, I am aware that that is not the Catholic position, but unfortunately for them, it is the Biblical position. And it is the historic evangelical position. I prefer to “chew on” the plain text of Scripture.

    “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God” (1 John 5: 13)

    What part of “know” is confusing?

  29. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    “I prefer to “chew on” the plain text of Scripture.”

    As I’d mentioned above, it is not my desire to engage in an exhaustive discussion of the Redemption here, but you seem unwilling to accept that. While you’re chewing on the “plain text of Scripture”, ask yourself if you don’t bring preconceived thought-forms to the experience. Tell me that you don’t, that you’re free of these influences, and I’ll tell you you’ve got an argument both with Werner Heisenberg and not just a few respected evangelical theologians, among them, Kuiper. These thought-forms are called presuppositions in the trade and the ones that you are almost certainly bringing with you to any reading of the so-called “plain text of Scripture” are nominalist in character. The experience of reading Scripture isn’t simply a matter of dealing with a kind of object, you know - like reading a stop sign in some detacted way - it is rather an engagement with the text that brings you as person to the affair quite dynamically. So there can be no such thing as “the plain text of Scripture”, there can be only you together with the text. Capisci? The idea of “the plain text of Scripture” is an abstraction.

    I’m going to recommend a book to you. Its Louis Bouyer’s, The Spirit And Forms Of Protestantism. Read it, you’ll benefit enormously from it.

  30. Red Phillips Says:

    I’m not really interested in a long theological debate either. My main concern is with what I consider intemperate language towards the “religious right” by both conservatives who have walked away from that perspective and from those who were never sympathetic to them in the first place. The point of our digression was that I think it is irresponsible to question the fate of Dobson’s soul based on his position on the War.

    There will never be a genuine rightist counter-revolutionary movement in this country that doesn’t include large portions of those who are now GOP backing and war supporting Christian conservatives. The math does not work without them. That is why I think they need to be persuaded instead of berated. They are also due respect as Christian brothers.

  31. John Lowell Says:

    “The point of our digression was that I think it is irresponsible to question the fate of Dobson’s soul based on his position on the War.”

    At a moral level, Dobson has responsibility for the positions he takes, and particularly so in his capacity as a spokesman or leader. If he’s going to endorse and encourage others to endorse concepts ranging from stem-cell research - which he has - to pre-emptive war, even though he is not the one actually implimenting the evil acts themselves, he is, nevertheless, formally complicit in them. To say that such complicity has no important impact on his standing in the sight of God because of some curious belief in the notion of “blessed assurance” is just the most palpably antimonian nonsence imaginable.

    “There will never be a genuine rightist counter-revolutionary movement in this country that doesn’t include large portions of those who are now GOP backing and war supporting Christian conservatives. The math does not work without them.”

    You’ll forgive me, I hope, if I were not to consider promoting a “rightist counter-revolutionary movement” quite as desirable a purpose in life as seeking the form of Christ in the world. Math is simply unimportant in these latter precincts.

  32. Red Phillips Says:

    In light of your earlier PC protestations, then was ever Wallace supporter jeopardizing his immortal soul? Are people who support an ethnic component to Israel on a freight train to Hell? What is to stop a social justice type Christian from condemning everyone to Hell who doesn’t support welfare or the more libertarian inclined Christian from condemning to Hell everyone who does support welfare?

    I sure hope that is not the way it works. If it is, it will certainly be hard to sleep at night while hoping I got it all right.

    For someone opposed to assurance, you sure do seem mighty certain.

  33. John Lowell Says:

    Red,

    “In light of your earlier PC protestations, then was ever Wallace supporter jeopardizing his immortal soul? Are people who support an ethnic component to Israel on a freight train to Hell? What is to stop a social justice type Christian from condemning everyone to Hell who doesn’t support welfare or the more libertarian inclined Christian from condemning to Hell everyone who does support welfare?”

    Now I’ve upset you, and you didn’t notice that I’d confined the field to some rather obvious evil acts: The destruction of human beings in the service of “medical research” and the launching of pre-emptive war upon an unsuspecting nation. I won’t help you make those contentions absurd. And the Wallace business, you see merit in racial segregation? You’ll recall, perhaps, my description of Dobson as having made an ideology of his faith and his devolution into a kind of anti-Democrat. One would hope that with your more than considerable focus upon political correctness here that these same forces haven’t bound you over to a similar slavery. Egad, man, recover your freedom!

    “For someone opposed to assurance, you sure do seem mighty certain.”

    Well, we can be sure that we can’t be sure it would seem. :-)

  34. tito Says:

    Google: “Behind the big news”

Leave a Reply