|
Dobson Denials Echo Saint Peter
Media Matters for America reveals that on the March 8 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, Dobson wrongly accused Harper's Magazine, and contributor Chris Hedges, of "say[ing] the most crazy things" in a May 2005 cover story which reported that Dobson is "in favor of people who want to execute abortionists." Although Dobson implies that the magazine report is false, it is instead Dobson's claim which is false. In fact, Dobson has endorsed two former candidates -- Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) -- who have expressed support for executing "abortionists." Just as Peter wrongly denied ever embracing Jesus, Dobson has wrongly denied ever embracing Terry and Coburn. Media Matters reports: In 2004, Dobson endorsed Coburn in his bid for Oklahoma's open Senate seat. Coburn told the Associated Press on July 10, 2004, "I favor the death penalty for abortionists and other people who take life." Terry Calls for Capital Punishment of Rebellious Teenagers, Too In 1998, Dobson gave a rare letter of support to Terry in his failed Congressional bid in upstate New York. Media Matters notes: According to a September 28, 1998, profile of Terry in The Nation by David Corn, during a campaign speech, Terry reportedly stated, "When I or people like me are running the country, [abortion providers] better flee because we will find you, we will try you, and we will execute you."And as first reported in a 1995 story by this writer published in the journal Front Lines Research (and edited by Talk to Action's Frederick Clarkson), Terry has also called for the stoning to death of rebellious children. In the same article for The Nation cited above, Corn wrote: Then there was a private meeting in 1995 at which he said that striking or cursing a parent is a "capital offense." What did he mean by that? Terry is outraged by the question: "I was quoting the Torah.... Are you asking me do I think that teenage rebels should be stoned today? The answer is no.... I was a rebel teenager." It is unfair, he maintains, to "take a speech, a sermon in a church about the Law of Moses and try to implicate me on a policy level." There is Terry the Bible-believing preacher, and there is Terry the politician with policy proposals. The roles, he claims, are distinct. The remark about rebellious teens, he protests, is unrelated to his attempt to become a lawmaker. Now Dobson has some bags to be carried, too, since he's been caught bearing false witness against a writer who reported accurately on his activities. Dobson Entitled to Benefit of the Doubt Dobson is entitled to the benefit of the doubt concerning his recent statements that he never met convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, never took any money from him, and never knowingly lobbied at Abramoff's request. There's no proof to the contrary, and it would be wrong to cast doubt on his integrity without cause. Max Blumenthal, who has written for The Nation, for Media Matters, and in these pages, about connections between Abramoff and religious right leaders, including Dobson, told reporters on March 8, 2006, "there is no proof - and I doubt there will ever be any proof - that Dobson consciously colluded with Abramoff." Blumenthal has given Dobson the benefit of the doubt. But Dobson has not returned the favor to Blumenthal or other writers who pose questions to which he does not wish to give complete and candid answers. A Focus on the Family web site has attacked writers who advised the Campaign to Defend the Constitution (DefCon) for engaging in a "vicious and misleading campaign" that includes a $200,000 ad in The New York Times, headlined "These Religious Right Leaders Have a Serious Gambling Problem." The DefCon campaign spotlights the work of a number of writers who are exposing how Abramoff paid former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed to induce Dobson and Focus on the Family (with or without their knowledge) to lobby against an Indian casino in Louisiana, to the benefit of another Indian casino that was among Abramoff's gambling industry clients. Focus Action spokesman Gary Schneeberger says it's another smear campaign from the left. But this defense is misleading, since some of the toughest questions have been posed by a reporter for the conservative evangelical World Magazine, whom Focus on the Family has also attacked, without giving complete and candid responses. Further, as World makes clear, Dobson and Focus on the Family have refused to criticize Reed for deliberately misleading them into a lobbying campaign that benefitted one of Abramoff's Indian casino clients by limiting competition among the Louisiana gambling industry. Instead, Dobson and his organization have attacked Abramoff but embraced Reed. Reed's lobbying firm, Century Strategies, received millions of dollars from Abramoff's gambling industry clients, some of which flowed through an elaborate series of cut-outs. Reed is embroiled in the Abramoff scandal and fighting for his political life in a flagging campaign for Lieutenant Governor in Georgia.
Dobson is entitled to the benefit of the doubt when he asserts his innocence, if there's no proof to the contrary. Likewise, writers are entitled to the benefit of the doubt when they ask hardball questions, based on Dobson's own statements and actions. And if Dobson and his group smear their critics as vicious and unfair, then they should hold themselves to a higher standard of decency, consistency, and accuracy.
Dobson Denials Echo Saint Peter | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden)
Dobson Denials Echo Saint Peter | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden)
|
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
print page
