JAMES DOBSON ANSWERS LIBERALS RE: NAME-CALLING
The Liberal Strategy: Sticks and Stones But No Substance
by James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
In the absence of intellectual arguments, liberals in the media and in politics have increasingly reverted to name calling.
When I was a boy, school children would inevitably begin calling each other names when frustrated or angry.
"You're stupid," one would shout.
"You're dumb," came the reply.
"Well, well, you're so ugly your mother doesn't even love you."
"She does too—and you don't even have a mother."
As tempers flared, the kids searched for even more hurtful names, eventually stumbling into the aura of World War II which had engulfed the globe.
"You're Hitler," was the "baddest" insult one could hurl.
"Well, you're Mussolini." (Italy's Dictator)
"I am not. You're Tojo." (Japan's Prime Minister)
With that, the interchange ended. No one knew any more war criminals. There was nothing to do but fight.
I can't help but remember this foray into childhood when I hear today's rhetoric from liberals in the media and in politics. In the absence of intellectual arguments with which to counter the rational positions put forward by thoughtful conservatives, they have increasingly reverted to name calling. I have good reason to understand how those verbal assaults play out. Never in my 30 years as an author and broadcaster have I been subjected to such viciousness.
"Extremist" is a favorite pejorative when referring to conservatives, and especially Evangelical Christians. It means someone who is dangerous and radically different from all the normal people. If the liberals are especially angry, they string these insults together, such as "radical, right-wing, fundamentalist kooks." Then things go downhill in a hurry. These are some of the recent assaults on me and my colleagues at Focus on the Family:
· Don Imus, of MSNBC, called me "half a nut," "a jerk," "a pinhead" and a private part of human anatomy. Then he said, "I would like to challenge Dr. James Dobson to a fist fight. I will whip his a--." How's that for immature dialogue from a 65-year-old man? Imus' response is straight out of junior high school.
· Two weeks ago, former Vice President Al Gore said in a speech to Move On.Org that FRC President Tony Perkins and I were part of an "aggressive new strain" and a "virulent faction" of fundamentalists, which is the wording one would use to describe disease-carrying viruses and bacteria. We note that Mr. Gore couldn't think of any particular behavior that associated us with germs, but that didn't keep him from making the connection.
· Last week, the leftist religious organization Interfaith Alliance, got down and dirty. One of its Board members, a United Methodist minister named Rev. Bill Kirtin, referred to me and Focus on the Family as "the Gestapo." When questioned about the severity of the comment, he replied, "I said Gestapo and I meant it." Rev. Peter Morales, head of the public policy commission for the Interfaith Alliance, said, referring to us, "these are the actions of an American Taliban, or reactionary religious zealots." Remember that the Gestapo was the Nazi killing machine which murdered millions of Jews, Gypsies, and Poles in cold blood; the Taliban blew up the World Trade Center Building in New York and killed nearly 3000 innocent men, women, and children. According to the Interfaith Alliance, we are as evil as these two of the most murderous political entities in world history. This, mind you, comes from a religious organization that hopes to be taken seriously.
· Last Friday, the rhetoric of murder became more specific. Lewis H. Lapham of Harper's Magazine wrote, "Pastor Dobson apparently endorses political candidates who favor the execution of homosexuals and of doctors who provide abortions. I don't think they're joking." Doesn't such a breath-taking allegation as this demand documentation of some sort? Aren't Lapham and the publishers of Harper's Magazine obligated by journalistic ethics to document such a claim? Apparently not! I'm not a pastor, and almost everything I've ever said publicly is still in the record. Surely, there must be one quotation somewhere in my tapes or books that would validate this claim. The fact is, none exists. Their outrageous accusation is like a hot-headed nine-year-old claiming the other is named "Hitler."
Into this environment of hostile hyperbole several weeks ago came Colorado's United States Senator, Ken Salazar. Focus on the Family ran an ad urging the Senator to support an up or down vote for judicial nominees. That has been the custom from the beginning of the Republic until Democrats began filibustering in 2003 (214 years!). After two months in office, however, he reneged on a campaign promise and quietly changed his position. When called to account, Senator Salazar went on a frothy attack. Instead of explaining his broken promise, he began calling us names. He said I am "un-christian," that I'm trying to hijack Christianity, that I haven't told the truth, that I'm selfish and self-serving, and that Focus on the Family and I picketed Mrs. Salazar's Dairy Queen. We didn't even know it existed.
Finally, Senator Salazar began to run out of ugly words, and he blurted out, Focus on the Family is "the antichrist of the world." Sound familiar? Though Salazar tried weakly to retract the charge, he continued to maintain that we are "un Christian." Where does one go from there?
It should be pointed out that in response to this flurry of angry rhetoric, neither I nor any of my colleagues have referred to Senator Salazar in disrespectful terms. There have been no vicious epithets or reprisals. Likewise, we remained relatively silent in response to the article in the Denver Post that shouted, "Dobson seen as driven, divisive," or Matt Littmin, writing for the Rocky Mountain News in which he said, "Dobson looked like a bully, and an intolerant one at that." Despite these and several dozen other unfair remarks, we stand by the main charge—that the Senator offered a definitive promise to the people of Colorado and then immediately reneged on it. That assertion remains unrefuted to this day. It is either true or false.
Salazar has clearly waffled on one of the most important senatorial votes of our time. His flurry of words about my Christian commitment (which God alone will judge) and the unfounded claim that we picketed his wife's Dairy Queen, have nothing to do with anything. Once again, the liberals have exhausted their intellectual ideas, leaving nothing but ad hominem attacks and empty rhetoric.
So tell us, Senator Salazar, are you going to keep your commitment to the people of Colorado, or are you going to continue calling us names? Those are the questions of the hour.
NOTE: This article may be reproduced in its entirety without permission.
by James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
In the absence of intellectual arguments, liberals in the media and in politics have increasingly reverted to name calling.
When I was a boy, school children would inevitably begin calling each other names when frustrated or angry.
"You're stupid," one would shout.
"You're dumb," came the reply.
"Well, well, you're so ugly your mother doesn't even love you."
"She does too—and you don't even have a mother."
As tempers flared, the kids searched for even more hurtful names, eventually stumbling into the aura of World War II which had engulfed the globe.
"You're Hitler," was the "baddest" insult one could hurl.
"Well, you're Mussolini." (Italy's Dictator)
"I am not. You're Tojo." (Japan's Prime Minister)
With that, the interchange ended. No one knew any more war criminals. There was nothing to do but fight.
I can't help but remember this foray into childhood when I hear today's rhetoric from liberals in the media and in politics. In the absence of intellectual arguments with which to counter the rational positions put forward by thoughtful conservatives, they have increasingly reverted to name calling. I have good reason to understand how those verbal assaults play out. Never in my 30 years as an author and broadcaster have I been subjected to such viciousness.
"Extremist" is a favorite pejorative when referring to conservatives, and especially Evangelical Christians. It means someone who is dangerous and radically different from all the normal people. If the liberals are especially angry, they string these insults together, such as "radical, right-wing, fundamentalist kooks." Then things go downhill in a hurry. These are some of the recent assaults on me and my colleagues at Focus on the Family:
· Don Imus, of MSNBC, called me "half a nut," "a jerk," "a pinhead" and a private part of human anatomy. Then he said, "I would like to challenge Dr. James Dobson to a fist fight. I will whip his a--." How's that for immature dialogue from a 65-year-old man? Imus' response is straight out of junior high school.
· Two weeks ago, former Vice President Al Gore said in a speech to Move On.Org that FRC President Tony Perkins and I were part of an "aggressive new strain" and a "virulent faction" of fundamentalists, which is the wording one would use to describe disease-carrying viruses and bacteria. We note that Mr. Gore couldn't think of any particular behavior that associated us with germs, but that didn't keep him from making the connection.
· Last week, the leftist religious organization Interfaith Alliance, got down and dirty. One of its Board members, a United Methodist minister named Rev. Bill Kirtin, referred to me and Focus on the Family as "the Gestapo." When questioned about the severity of the comment, he replied, "I said Gestapo and I meant it." Rev. Peter Morales, head of the public policy commission for the Interfaith Alliance, said, referring to us, "these are the actions of an American Taliban, or reactionary religious zealots." Remember that the Gestapo was the Nazi killing machine which murdered millions of Jews, Gypsies, and Poles in cold blood; the Taliban blew up the World Trade Center Building in New York and killed nearly 3000 innocent men, women, and children. According to the Interfaith Alliance, we are as evil as these two of the most murderous political entities in world history. This, mind you, comes from a religious organization that hopes to be taken seriously.
· Last Friday, the rhetoric of murder became more specific. Lewis H. Lapham of Harper's Magazine wrote, "Pastor Dobson apparently endorses political candidates who favor the execution of homosexuals and of doctors who provide abortions. I don't think they're joking." Doesn't such a breath-taking allegation as this demand documentation of some sort? Aren't Lapham and the publishers of Harper's Magazine obligated by journalistic ethics to document such a claim? Apparently not! I'm not a pastor, and almost everything I've ever said publicly is still in the record. Surely, there must be one quotation somewhere in my tapes or books that would validate this claim. The fact is, none exists. Their outrageous accusation is like a hot-headed nine-year-old claiming the other is named "Hitler."
Into this environment of hostile hyperbole several weeks ago came Colorado's United States Senator, Ken Salazar. Focus on the Family ran an ad urging the Senator to support an up or down vote for judicial nominees. That has been the custom from the beginning of the Republic until Democrats began filibustering in 2003 (214 years!). After two months in office, however, he reneged on a campaign promise and quietly changed his position. When called to account, Senator Salazar went on a frothy attack. Instead of explaining his broken promise, he began calling us names. He said I am "un-christian," that I'm trying to hijack Christianity, that I haven't told the truth, that I'm selfish and self-serving, and that Focus on the Family and I picketed Mrs. Salazar's Dairy Queen. We didn't even know it existed.
Finally, Senator Salazar began to run out of ugly words, and he blurted out, Focus on the Family is "the antichrist of the world." Sound familiar? Though Salazar tried weakly to retract the charge, he continued to maintain that we are "un Christian." Where does one go from there?
It should be pointed out that in response to this flurry of angry rhetoric, neither I nor any of my colleagues have referred to Senator Salazar in disrespectful terms. There have been no vicious epithets or reprisals. Likewise, we remained relatively silent in response to the article in the Denver Post that shouted, "Dobson seen as driven, divisive," or Matt Littmin, writing for the Rocky Mountain News in which he said, "Dobson looked like a bully, and an intolerant one at that." Despite these and several dozen other unfair remarks, we stand by the main charge—that the Senator offered a definitive promise to the people of Colorado and then immediately reneged on it. That assertion remains unrefuted to this day. It is either true or false.
Salazar has clearly waffled on one of the most important senatorial votes of our time. His flurry of words about my Christian commitment (which God alone will judge) and the unfounded claim that we picketed his wife's Dairy Queen, have nothing to do with anything. Once again, the liberals have exhausted their intellectual ideas, leaving nothing but ad hominem attacks and empty rhetoric.
So tell us, Senator Salazar, are you going to keep your commitment to the people of Colorado, or are you going to continue calling us names? Those are the questions of the hour.
NOTE: This article may be reproduced in its entirety without permission.
posted by Metamora Patter at 5/20/2005 04:59:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home