McCain's Opportunity

but do you have any idea how bigoted and stupid what you wrote might look like to someone who's considering voting Republican?  Some people might come to this site to learn, and some people are eminently qualified to teach.  Please reconsider squandering your considerable resources on cutting less experienced Republicans off at the knees when you could be one of the best qualified people out here to make the case for conservatism in a really positive, constructive manner.  Reagan and Buckley certainly wouldn't bar the door to anyone who wants to vote Republican, and they'd be charitably helpful to pointing those who could use some guidance and education on what conservative principles and values are.

I think you have so much to offer - you're intelligent, knowledgeable, and I've read several of your posts in other blogs.  If you could add "tolerant", "reasonable", "patient" and "instructive" to that repertoire, you'd be even more an asset to the GOP than you already are. 

(LOL that's meant for Jon, as opposed to Allen btw!)

of Obama's interpretation of Gospel has "awakened the sleeping giant" of evangelicals in a big way.  Three evangelical friends of mine have become McCain supporters almost overnight - and all because of Dobson. 

We agreed that Dr. Dobson probably cannot openly endorse McCain, as that would go against his principles and Dr. Dobson isn't exactly known to be a flip-flopper.  However, he and Governor Huckabee can mobilize a mighty army to vote against Obama. 

It seems that Obama went off the rails initially by conflating Dr. Dobson with Al Sharpton.  I believe this is what we generally call an apples to oranges comparison.  CitizenLink, which appears to be a professionally produced PAC and information clearinghouse for Christian conservative values, has the videos and speeches here. 

And here is Obama's Call to Renewal keynote address.  He makes a valid point here:

But a sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries between church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters. It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase "under God." I didn't. Having voluntary student prayer groups use school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats. And one can envision certain faith-based programs - targeting ex-offenders or substance abusers - that offer a uniquely powerful way of solving problems.

He seemed to be reeling us in with some good, common sense in that last bit, but in today's context this next bit stretches his credibility a great deal in terms of his own church and pastor:

So we all have some work to do here. But I am hopeful that we can bridge the gaps that exist and overcome the prejudices each of us bring to this debate. And I have faith that millions of believing Americans want that to happen. No matter how religious they may or may not be, people are tired of seeing faith used as a tool of attack. They don't want faith used to belittle or to divide. They're tired of hearing folks deliver more screed than sermon. Because in the end, that's not how they think about faith in their own lives.

Another spin off the rails, especially since his record indicates that he voted for partial birth abortion:

I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family got this one right:

Well, hello Senator. Isn’t it evident that taking of innocent human life is killing, is murder, whether someone believes in faith or whether someone does not believe in faith? Is this not evident to all? He hides behind what he believes is some false notion of religion and yet those notions of religion underlie much of our Western civilization’s law. For example, thou shalt not murder – that’s a religious concept. It comes in the Old Testament, it was affirmed in the New Testament, and it’s a law. Because it’s religious, should it be erased from law? Of course not. There are good reasons why this religious principle works well in secular, civil law for everybody regardless of whether they buy into the religious origin of that law. Thou shalt not steal is another religious precept that makes a pretty good law for everybody. He’s mixing things up here and I hope he’s mistaken, I hope he’s not willful, but I don’t know.

NPR reports:

Michael Cromartie, an evangelical and vice president at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, sees a political signal in Dobson's words. 

"It's the beginning of what we might call the religion wars in the 2008 campaign," he says.

He says Dobson's criticism is unlikely to keep his listeners from voting for Obama. They weren't going to for the Illinois Democrat anyway.

But, Cromartie notes, "It should at least concern the Obama campaign that one of the leading leaders of the religious conservative movement in America, who has a huge and vast mailing list and radio program, has sort of been awakened from his slumber."

And he is now aggressively campaigning against Obama — and perhaps mobilizing the conservative vote.