Comments on: Dear Dr. Dobson http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/ Sometime editor, all-the-time mother, delivering facts, reviews, commentary, and rants. Occasionally in that order. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:21:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Anwyn http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/comment-page-1/#comment-130044 Anwyn Sat, 13 Oct 2007 05:24:40 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/#comment-130044 If that weren't the case, he would've just endorsed a "not Giuliani" nominee and left it at that, at least until *after* the primaries. He gives the lie to his own "not based on electability" rhetoric by refusing to do that--this way he can wait and see who pulls the most after Giuliani. Except ... he's already outright dismissed the likeliest second-runner, in Thompson. So it can't be totally cut and dried--I think enough of the man's integrity to believe he's fooling himself at least a little. Sigh. If that weren’t the case, he would’ve just endorsed a “not Giuliani” nominee and left it at that, at least until *after* the primaries. He gives the lie to his own “not based on electability” rhetoric by refusing to do that–this way he can wait and see who pulls the most after Giuliani.

Except … he’s already outright dismissed the likeliest second-runner, in Thompson. So it can’t be totally cut and dried–I think enough of the man’s integrity to believe he’s fooling himself at least a little.

Sigh.

]]> By: Gullyborg http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/comment-page-1/#comment-130040 Gullyborg Sat, 13 Oct 2007 05:19:18 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/#comment-130040 It's not about values or abortion. It's about power. Dobson wants more of it. He thinks he can bully his way into an advisory role with the GOP nominee by threatening to bail. He may be on to something: Giuliani may be a front runner, but it is with only about 30% of the vote. Most of the other 70% can't agree on a candidate, but they can agree on "not Giuliani." If the field can be narrowed down some before the Iowa caucus and NH primaries are over, then there is a strong chance that one of the "not Giuliani" candidates can coalesce support into a majority and seal the nomination. Dobson is hoping he can help someone do just that, and that someone would (in theory) owe Dobson a favor. However, if Giuliani pulls off the nomination, it will effectively end Dobson's influence on politics. He can't follow through on his threats, because handing the election to Hillary will make him a pariah among conservatives. He is playing chicken for power. It’s not about values or abortion. It’s about power. Dobson wants more of it. He thinks he can bully his way into an advisory role with the GOP nominee by threatening to bail.

He may be on to something: Giuliani may be a front runner, but it is with only about 30% of the vote. Most of the other 70% can’t agree on a candidate, but they can agree on “not Giuliani.” If the field can be narrowed down some before the Iowa caucus and NH primaries are over, then there is a strong chance that one of the “not Giuliani” candidates can coalesce support into a majority and seal the nomination.

Dobson is hoping he can help someone do just that, and that someone would (in theory) owe Dobson a favor.

However, if Giuliani pulls off the nomination, it will effectively end Dobson’s influence on politics. He can’t follow through on his threats, because handing the election to Hillary will make him a pariah among conservatives. He is playing chicken for power.

]]> By: I Think Therefore I Blog http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/comment-page-1/#comment-127881 I Think Therefore I Blog Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:22:18 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/#comment-127881 <strong>Today’s Ten...</strong> Considering the number of blogs I read daily, I’ve been pretty horrid about linking to them. I’ve decided to fix that bad habit with a new semi-regular feature “Today’s Ten”, a list of links that caught my eye on any given... Today’s Ten…

Considering the number of blogs I read daily, I’ve been pretty horrid about linking to them. I’ve decided to fix that bad habit with a new semi-regular feature “Today’s Ten”, a list of links that caught my eye on any given…

]]> By: Anwyn http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/comment-page-1/#comment-123629 Anwyn Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:28:12 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/#comment-123629 What kills me is I know this is aimed at Giuliani--it has to be, because the rest of the field talks and votes pro-life, for the most part. So he's that much bigger a jerk since even by his own stated standard--commitment to sanctity of life--the other candidates are acceptable. But he's gone out of his way to demonize Thompson, and I don't know what he may have said about the other two in the past. And then let's get down to the second tier--he talks a good line against voting based on electability, but he could just endorse a second-tier candidate and say it's about pro-life. But he doesn't. Why? Because second tier is going nowhere in the primary and therefore the only way they become even <em> remotely</em> electable is as a third candidate in the general. All-around self-defeating jackassery. What kills me is I know this is aimed at Giuliani–it has to be, because the rest of the field talks and votes pro-life, for the most part. So he’s that much bigger a jerk since even by his own stated standard–commitment to sanctity of life–the other candidates are acceptable. But he’s gone out of his way to demonize Thompson, and I don’t know what he may have said about the other two in the past. And then let’s get down to the second tier–he talks a good line against voting based on electability, but he could just endorse a second-tier candidate and say it’s about pro-life. But he doesn’t. Why? Because second tier is going nowhere in the primary and therefore the only way they become even remotely electable is as a third candidate in the general.

All-around self-defeating jackassery.

]]> By: Xrlq http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/comment-page-1/#comment-123518 Xrlq Fri, 05 Oct 2007 02:20:58 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/10/04/dear-dr-dobson/#comment-123518 Dobson seems to be betting that by tanking the election in 2008 (or, alternatively, taking the credit for tanking an election that was going to the Democrats anyway), he can get the GOP to come back, begging and pleading, and elect him or his clone President in 2012. Two problems with that theory. First, even if he "wins" that bet, the entire country will move so sharply to the left in the interim that the best a "real" conservative can hope to accomplish afterward is move it back to about where a President Guiliani would have kept it all along. Second, it probably <i>won't</i> work, as special interest groups that align themselves with third parties tend to make themselves irrelevant. We'll still have two parties, one of which will be called the Democrats and the other the Republicans, and they'll both get approximately 50% of the portion of the popular vote that matters - it's just that that portion will no longer include Dobson & Co., who will be as marginalized as the Libertarians are today. And a lot of business-first Republicans will be perfectly happy with that arrangement. Dobson seems to be betting that by tanking the election in 2008 (or, alternatively, taking the credit for tanking an election that was going to the Democrats anyway), he can get the GOP to come back, begging and pleading, and elect him or his clone President in 2012. Two problems with that theory. First, even if he “wins” that bet, the entire country will move so sharply to the left in the interim that the best a “real” conservative can hope to accomplish afterward is move it back to about where a President Guiliani would have kept it all along. Second, it probably won’t work, as special interest groups that align themselves with third parties tend to make themselves irrelevant. We’ll still have two parties, one of which will be called the Democrats and the other the Republicans, and they’ll both get approximately 50% of the portion of the popular vote that matters – it’s just that that portion will no longer include Dobson & Co., who will be as marginalized as the Libertarians are today. And a lot of business-first Republicans will be perfectly happy with that arrangement.

]]>