God-o-Meter is going to have to start keeping a tally of conservative Christians coming to Barack Obama’s defense. The latest is former George W. Bush aide Peter Wehner (pictured), who–despite having problems with Obama’s social liberalism–comes out swinging against James Dobson’s attack on Obama’s vision for faith in the public square:
…Obama was doing what people like Dobson have long urged: making the public square more hospitable for people of faith and calling for a halt to their demonization. Obama made his case in ways I found to be respectful and authentic….
But critics of Obama have an obligation to provide a fair and honest critique, and the attacks leveled by Dobson fall terribly short of that standard.
If Christian conservatives want to be taken seriously, they need to make serious arguments and speak with intellectual integrity. In this instance, Dobson didn’t. He has set back his cause and made some of us who are evangelicals and conservatives wince.
It’s yet to be seen whether Obama can appeal to rank and file evangelicals. But he’s doing a bang-up job so far appealing to evangelical elites–unlike, say, John McCain.
8
posted June 29, 2008 at 2:13 am
As Dobson would not know intellectual integrity if he sat on it, it can hardly be expected of him. It is good to see that he is finally getting the respect he deserves, which is none whatsoever.
posted July 1, 2008 at 1:42 am
Actually Dobson’s argument was right on point if you know anything about theology, Obama’s wasn’t. However Dobson could have used a little more tack. If anyone is lacking in intellectual integrity it’s Obama… he reminds me of Gore, always exagerating.
posted July 1, 2008 at 7:17 pm
In regards to the other poster: to say “Actually Dobson’s argument was right on point if you know anything about theology,” is a bit sketchy. Such a comment is presumptuous. Know anything about whose theology? What theology? And further, the presumption is tacky as well in a similar way that Dobson lacks tact. How is Dobson’s argument on point? Explain.