James Dobson is a crazy old man

When you think of today’s Republican party, what’s the first thing that comes to mind? Some might say “less government regulation”, or “opposition to homosexuality”. One thing is for sure: few will deny the powerful collusion of the religious right in the policies and decisions the party makes. They know how important that base is, and they cater to it. In fact, if you want a perfect example of this, look no further than John McCain, who went from principled and decent to Christian lapdog in just a few short years. It’s a transformation John Stewart doesn’t let anyone forget.

So you would think everything is hunky-dory over at the major headquarters of Right Wingers, but apparently the GOP isn’t doing enough for some. Enter James Dobson, who for the last few days has dedicated his radio show to various speeches he’s written over the years criticizing Republicans for ignoring basic “moral principles” in order to become elected. Here’s the final portion of his speech:

It’s a lack of conviction that there is a boss to the universe and that there are moral standards that we are held to and we need officials who will stand up and represent them. What that conveys to the constituency I’m talking about is that principle does not matter, it’s party over principle. That there are some things that you stand for whether it is popular or politically astute to do so or not. That’s what that pro-moral community stands for.

And yet it seemed to me that what I heard from the Republicans in Indian Wells was we cannot have power if we stand on principle – please don’t take away our power. What good is it to have power if you don’t use it for good?

The Republican Party was born in the crucible of conviction and courage and moral righteousness, that’s where the Republican Party started. It took a stand against slavery in a day that cost six hundred thousand lives in the Civil War. But they knew is was wrong and they took a stand on it, whether win, lose, or draw, that’s God’s business. They took a stand on what was right.

If the party has left that and it is now going to mouth these two things every two years and then go on to something else, I think we need to look for another. And it would be tragic if that happened. I don’t want that to happen. There are many state houses of government where Republicans will suffer if that happens. It will be a disaster for the country, but somebody said “if you do that, you have no voice at all.” I don’t think we have a voice now. I can’t hear the voice.

Ah yes, the old “The Republican Party fought to end slavery” line. Too bad that the party has since done a complete 180 in terms of its political ideology, otherwise he might actually have a point. In any case, it only brings up the fact that as we speak, Republicans are on the wrong side of history concerning gay marriage and civil rights in general. This, I suspect, is due primarily to the GOP courting the most racist, bigoted segment of American society. Being in bed with these people has fundamentally altered the party, and because of this, Republicans run the risk of alienating future voters as they will continue to be seen as the political party for our embarrassingly out of touch grandparents.

Thank you James, for reminding us who really pulls the strings of the Republican party now.

Comments (2)

  • avatar


    Hey Jacob. This isn’t about Dobson though I agree he’s nuts. I actually just listened to the last episode of Real Time with Bill Maher for the 2010 season. In his New Rules segment he was complaining about the Large Hadron Collider saying the experiments sound dangerous or something. I typically like him and his show but why do you think he’s so anti-science. He doesn’t trust inoculations, he hates NASA and the space program and now he is giving CERN a hard time. In light of the amazing discoveries they just made about antimatter I think Maher is being ignorant and should shut up about stuff he doesn’t understand. Just thought I’d share this with you and your readers because it annoys me and I bet it annoys you too, hehe. Cheers!

  • avatar

    David Smith

    Is it just me, or has anybody else heard that not only was Lincoln NOT fighting to end slavery as such, but to destroy the unfair economic advantage that the south held in terms of agriculture, and to widen the markets of the north throughout the country? Oh, and that he was reputedly a closet homosexual? The more things change, the more they stay the same. Is this why they keep summoning Abraham’s shade, rhetorically?

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top