Dobson says 'no way' to McCain candidacy

[Destino]

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53743


A prominent Christian leader whose radio and magazine outreaches are solidly in support of biblically-based marriages – and keeps in touch with millions of constituents daily – says he cannot consider Arizona Sen. John McCain a viable candidate for president.

"Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," said James Dobson, founder of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family as well as the Focus Action cultural action organization set up specifically to provide a platform for informing and rallying constituents.

The two GOP guys getting the most love right now are Giuliani and McCain. I have to laugh at this. McCain isn't conservative enough for the "Christian Conservatives" that fly under the radar but really rule the GOP.... Giuliani makes McCain look like a hard line right winger, he's openly Pro-Choice and supports civil unions for gays.

All you republicans that think these two will win you back the white house. Good luck.

[PokerPacker]

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53743



The two GOP guys getting the most love right now are Giuliani and McCain. I have to laugh at this. McCain isn't conservative enough for the "Christian Conservatives" that fly under the radar but really rule the GOP.... Giuliani makes McCain look like a hard line right winger, he's openly Pro-Choice and supports civil unions for gays.

All you republicans that think these two will win you back the white house. Good luck.
the christian conservatives are under the radar? i thought it was painfully obvious who was in charge.

[JMS]

Yeah you're right Destino. McCain is going to be this guys best buddy when he get aload of Guliani's positions.... Personally I like Guliani and his positions. I just can't bring myself to vote Republican until this current crop of yes men and idiot's are purged from office.


Maybe Guliani will run again in say a decade.

[Johnny Punani]

I like McCain as a person but I have my doubts over him being the President.

[luckydevil]

Dobson opposes Mccain for all the wrong reasons. Mccain is a more hawkish Bush. The thought of him becoming president scares the hell out of me

[Rdskns2000]

Doesn't matter. The democrats will win the presidency in 08.

Guilliani and Mccain will never get the Republican nod and will be making quick exits after the conservatives votes for other people in the primaries. If Mitt Romney can over conservates dislike for mormans- he has a shot. Otherwise the Republican nominee will be someone not even on the radar right now.


The democratic nominee maybe John Edwards or someone else. I think Hillary will implode and already is losing support. Obama will flame out also and will show what a lightwieght he is.

I do think after 8 years of Bush- people will not want another republican in the presidency. There will be enough people that feel that way, in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.

[tizzod]

If wacky Christians think McCain is wrong, then he must be right.

[prophet]

If those two are the choices, the Dems get the WH.

Period.

the CC will push for Brownback

It will be intresting to see what happens.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

If wacky Christians think McCain is wrong, then he must be right.
:laugh:

[AJ_Skins]

Otherwise the Republican nominee will be someone not even on the radar right now.

Beware the Newt...


I do think after 8 years of Bush- people will not want another republican in the presidency. There will be enough people that feel that way, in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.

It depends. The primary deciding factor will be how many people are willing to stick their heads in the sand and chuck national security. The Democrats, if anything, are weakening their position even more now that they have some power. They cannot reconcile their left wing base with anything that even superficially appears to be an interest in protecting the country.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Beware the Newt...

Newt had some marriage issues as well. Not sure if the Christian Right would be able to get past that.

[Zen-like Todd]

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53743



The two GOP guys getting the most love right now are Giuliani and McCain. I have to laugh at this. McCain isn't conservative enough for the "Christian Conservatives" that fly under the radar but really rule the GOP.... Giuliani makes McCain look like a hard line right winger, he's openly Pro-Choice and supports civil unions for gays.

All you republicans that think these two will win you back the white house. Good luck.

I don't really understand the last statement. I'm an independent, but I like Giuliani. To me it's not about winning back the White House for one party or another. It's about finding the right person (or the least crappy) person to lead the country for the next four year. I don't really give a crap if there's a R or a D next to his or her name, and I don't think that Republicans whose views don't match up with McCain or Giuliani are sitting around thinking "gee, these guys'll win me back the White House".

[mboyd784]

Yeah you're right Destino. McCain is going to be this guys best buddy when he get aload of Guliani's positions.... Personally I like Guliani and his positions. I just can't bring myself to vote Republican until this current crop of yes men and idiot's are purged from office.


Maybe Guliani will run again in say a decade.

Guliani had prior knowledge. He should be put under oath and forced to testify before a REAL 9/11 commission. He's also an adulterer and a lousy one at that. There is nothing remotely presidential about him except for name recognition. But...that is enough these days and I think he has shot at it.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Guliani had prior knowledge. He should be put under oath and forced to testify before a REAL 9/11 commission. He's also an adulterer and a lousy one at that. There is nothing remotely presidential about him except for name recognition. But...that is enough these days and I think he has shot at it.
Why do you say Guiliani had prior knowledge?

[jbooma]

The democratic nominee maybe John Edwards or someone else. I think Hillary will implode and already is losing support. Obama will flame out also and will show what a lightwieght he is.

I do think after 8 years of Bush- people will not want another republican in the presidency. There will be enough people that feel that way, in enough states to reach 270 electoral votes.

Bush will have nothing to do with the election. Remember many republicans voted Dem during the last election to prove a point. When it comes to a president election they will be back voting repub.

The problem with the dems is Obama and Hillary are going to cancel each other out.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Bush will have nothing to do with the election. Remember many republicans voted Dem during the last election to prove a point. When it comes to a president election they will be back voting repub.

The problem with the dems is Obama and Hillary are going to cancel each other out.
Well Hillary is 5th on my list after Obama, Edwards, Gore and Biden. I can definitely live with Obama canceling Hillary out if that means Edwards gets it.

[jbooma]

Well Hillary is 5th on my list after Obama, Edwards, Gore and Biden. I can definitely live with Obama canceling Hillary out if that means Edwards gets it.

Edwards is to slimey, he will not win the bid, heck i think he will be like 5th or something

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Edwards is to slimey, he will not win the bid, heck i think he will be like 5th or something
No, I think Edwards is right up there with Obama on the grassroots level, which is a large part of the Dem base, and with the younger voters. I like him. I don't like Hillary.

[Zen-like Todd]

Guliani had prior knowledge. He should be put under oath and forced to testify before a REAL 9/11 commission. He's also an adulterer and a lousy one at that. There is nothing remotely presidential about him except for name recognition. But...that is enough these days and I think he has shot at it.


You're seriously suggesting he had prior knowledge of the attacks? Seriously? I'd just like to make sure I'm clear here.

[PokerPacker]

uh oh, lets not start this agian.

[mboyd784]

Why do you say Guiliani had prior knowledge?

A lot of folks had prior knowledge. Guillani was the mayor and he's shrewd and smart as hell. Politically, he played it perfectly. He surely knew a great deal about what was possible on that day.

Then again, I have no proof, just anecdotal speculation. It's a "WMD/Iraq" type of opinion. :laugh:

[Zen-like Todd]

A lot of folks had prior knowledge. Guillani was the mayor and he's shrewd and smart as hell. Politically, he played it perfectly. He surely knew a great deal about what was possible on that day.

Then again, I have no proof, just anecdotal speculation. It's a "WMD/Iraq" type of opinion. :laugh:


So you're just making it up, essentially? Who else is on your list?

[mboyd784]

So you're just making it up, essentially? Who else is on your list?

All manner of Anti-Semites, Zionists, Terrorists, Neo-Cons, and Lefties. It was a conspiracy of caricatures and stereotypes. Just as you have always suspected, Todd. Stereotypes hate our freedoms.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I don't know why McCain and Guilliani are always talked about as the next Rep. nominees. Look for a governor to join the running and take the Rep. nomination.

BTW, anyone know the last time someone from the Hill moved into the White House? Interesting how almost every elected President in the last 30 years was a governor prior to being elected to the White House..
Bush II--governor
Clinton--governor
Bush I--(Mixed goven't experience)--VP
Reagan--governor
Carter--governor
Ford--House of Representatives--V.P.--President (not elected to either Executive branch position.
Nixon--Senate
Johnson--Senate, V.P.--President (not elected to President)
Kennedy--Senate
Eisenhower--Army General
Truman--Senate

*edit*
Personally it seems to me like the shift happened with Nixon. My guess is that starting with Nixon there was a distrust from within the beltway.

[Zen-like Todd]

All manner of Anti-Semites, Zionists, Terrorists, Neo-Cons, and Lefties. It was a conspiracy of caricatures and stereotypes. Just as you have always suspected, Todd. Stereotypes hate our freedoms.


An answer would suffice. You're the one who opened this can of worms.

[mboyd784]

An answer would suffice. You're the one who opened this can of worms.

Two words...Put Options.

Start from there. You know how to use the internet so make your own list.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Two words...Put Options.

Start from there. You know how to use the internet so make your own list.
We're you good at dodgeball as a kid? Because you are playing debate dodgeball here tonight, I guess that's how you are able to win every debate you're in and maintain your own (ahem) "opinions".

As has been said on this site more times than I can count, "you are entitled to your own opinions, but now your own facts." If you're going to try and claim a governmental conspiracy then you'd probably better pony up some evidence.

"If you can dodge a wrench then you can dodge an argument."
LOL;)

[mboyd784]

We're you good at dodgeball as a kid? Because you are playing debate dodgeball here tonight, I guess that's how you are able to win every debate you're in and maintain your own (ahem) "opinions".

And away we go! Dodgeball? Yup, pretty good...much better at chess, though. Without a doubt, far superior to you, young man.


As has been said on this site more times than I can count, "you are entitled to your own opinions, but now your own facts." If you're going to try and claim a governmental conspiracy then you'd probably better pony up some evidence.

Once again, "conspiracy" is an ugly, colored term. I feel that the offical 9/11 report was a sloppy, underfunded, CYA job. That is my claim and all I want is an investigation so comprehensive that it dwarfs the depth and breadth of something like the Warren Commission or the Iran/Contra hearings. The events of 9/11, honestly, deserve as much. You wont catch me throwing "conspiracy" around lightly. Earlier in this thread, I used it in an ironic and alliterative (dictionary.com) context...because it was appropriate and clever.


"If you can dodge a wrench then you can dodge an argument."
LOL;)

Dodgeball, huh.

This is really more like Zoolander...and I'm Hansel.

You can derelicte my balls, compadre.

[AsburySkinsFan]

And away we go! Dodgeball? Yup, pretty good...much better at chess, though. Without a doubt, far superior to you, young man.

I'm only 6 years younger than you, that doesn't really separate us as much as you might think, and the last person who called me "young man" was my dad. Funny, I don't remember getting your child support check.;) BTW, I could care less about dodgeball or chess, my strong suit is debate but then you know that.



Once again, "conspiracy" is an ugly, colored term. I feel that the offical 9/11 report was a sloppy, underfunded, CYA job. That is my claim and all I want is an investigation so comprehensive that it dwarfs the depth and breadth of something like the Warren Commission or the Iran/Contra hearings. The events of 9/11, honestly, deserve as much. You wont catch me throwing "conspiracy" around lightly. Earlier in this thread, I used it in an ironic and alliterative (dictionary.com) context...because it was appropriate and clever.

Just be sure that if such a report ever did come out and it STILL disagreed with your "opinions" that you wouldn't seek to discredit it as well. However, it seems like you are calling for something that you know will never happen which ends up justifying your belief in a cover-up. This my friend is what is called a "self fulfilling prophecy".



Dodgeball, huh.

This is really more like Zoolander...and I'm Hansel.

You can derelicte my balls, compadre.
Really, is that necessary?

[luckydevil]

Bush will have nothing to do with the election. Remember many republicans voted Dem during the last election to prove a point. When it comes to a president election they will be back voting repub.

The problem with the dems is Obama and Hillary are going to cancel each other out.

Bush will have a lot do with the election or more specifically the Iraq war. The war will bring down the party again in 08. The only chance republicans have is if Hagel wins the nomination.

[Fergasun]

I think Romney would be a good challenger... I'm conservative and I'm willing to overlook the whole gay and abortion issue. I actually agree with his stance on abortion and would take it were I a political candidate... "Personally I don't agree with it, but the country is split and I'm not going to ram it down someone's throat".

No one voting for amnesty for illegals will get the nomination... so it's Romney... and maybe Duncan Hunter. Even though the party will try to get an open borders guy, I see this issue imploding on Republican elites.

[luckydevil]

I think Romney would be a good challenger... I'm conservative and I'm willing to overlook the whole gay and abortion issue. I actually agree with his stance on abortion and would take it were I a political candidate... "Personally I don't agree with it, but the country is split and I'm not going to ram it down someone's throat".

No one voting for amnesty for illegals will get the nomination... so it's Romney... and maybe Duncan Hunter. Even though the party will try to get an open borders guy, I see this issue imploding on Republican elites.

I find Romney's act amusing ( though it seems to be working), he is a liberal republican. It really doesn't matter, because the war will hurt any republican candidate except for Hagel. The republicans are in deep trouble for 08.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I think Romney would be a good challenger... I'm conservative and I'm willing to overlook the whole gay and abortion issue.

Which is it?.... Are you a Conservative or not? because those are NOT Conservative viewpoints.

Romey is no more Conservative than McCain is. Believe me, he was the Governor here for four years.

[Riggo-toni]

The GOP has fallen into the same trap the Dems were in back in the 80s - allowing a fringe element to determine whom they can send into the general election. I would absolutely vote for Giuliani - I've seen firsthand what he's done for NYC, but he'll never get past the Christian Coalition nutjobs. Heck, even Reagan wouldn't have gotten past them if they held the same kind of views/sway in 1980. End result - the GOP primary winner will be someone unacceptable to the general public.

McCain has one of the most conservative voting records in the Senate...and yet he's still not right wing enough for these jackarses.... :doh: Luckydevil is right - my problem with McCain is he is ULTRA hawkish. I like the fact that he's openly opposed his own party on pork spending, and is probably the lone candidate who would work to curtail spending, but his propensity to send in ground troops everywhere there's a fire scares me.

[Midnight Judges]

I think Obama will be our next President. Pretend he's a lightweight all you want, he's the real deal. All the Republican talk show hosts have been smearing Hillary for the last two years but they are just chasing their tails. She will not win the Dem nomination. Not even close.

The Republican leadsership is starting to catch on though. In the past week I've heard two different GOP talk radio show hosts (Jerry Doyle and Monica something or other) saying Obama was for the Iraq war (which is utterly false). When they start bald faced lying about you-you know they are feeling threatened.

Dems have a huge advantage in 2008 because GWB is making the GOP look like a gaggle of idiots. He's doing for the Republican party what Jimmy Carter did for the Democratic party. And then some.

[EersSkins05]

I don't really understand the last statement. I'm an independent, but I like Giuliani. To me it's not about winning back the White House for one party or another. It's about finding the right person (or the least crappy) person to lead the country for the next four year. I don't really give a crap if there's a R or a D next to his or her name, and I don't think that Republicans whose views don't match up with McCain or Giuliani are sitting around thinking "gee, these guys'll win me back the White House".

You don't think that way, but that's the way that primaries are won. And unless Giuliani is running as an independent (with no shot whatsoever of winning the White House), that's the only way he's on the ticket.

As far as the republican primaries are concerned, your opinion as an independent is just as irrelevant as mine as a democrat. The republicans have to elevate Giuliani to the status of a presidential candidate, and its unlikely that they would do that on the basis of a few of his left-leaning beliefs.

[Midnight Judges]

You don't think that way, but that's the way that primaries are won. And unless Giuliani is running as an independent (with no shot whatsoever of winning the White House), that's the only way he's on the ticket.

As far as the republican primaries are concerned, your opinion as an independent is just as irrelevant as mine as a democrat. The republicans have to elevate Giuliani to the status of a presidential candidate, and its unlikely that they would do that on the basis of a few of his left-leaning beliefs.

Maybe we should all register as Republicans and vote for Guilinai.

[EersSkins05]

Maybe we should all register as Republicans and vote for Guilinai.

Nah, he would probably win the general election. lol

While he's the most likeable Republican, I'd still prefer 5 other Dems first.

[Zguy28]

Edwards is to slimey, he will not win the bid, heck i think he will be like 5th or somethingHow so? Other than supporting abortion but claiming to be Baptist?


No, I think Edwards is right up there with Obama on the grassroots level, which is a large part of the Dem base, and with the younger voters. I like him. I don't like Hillary.Personally, I think Edwards could have possibly beat Bush, if the DNC cronies hadn't pushed that "fish out of water" Kerry to the nomination.

Edwards "Two Americas" theme had merit. I particularly liked his plan for tax incentives to move manufacturing plants back to America. If he ever go's genuinely pro-life I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

[Midnight Judges]

Nah, he would probably win the general election. lol

While he's the most likeable Republican, I'd still prefer 5 other Dems first.

Yeah he is the most likable Republican but I would take him over Hillary.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I think Obama will be our next President. Pretend he's a lightweight all you want, he's the real deal. All the Republican talk show hosts have been smearing Hillary for the last two years but they are just chasing their tails. She will not win the Dem nomination. Not even close.

.

The thing is, Hillary's people are gonna rip Obama apart before the primaries begin

If one of those 2 get out of the primary, they will be bloodied

As for the GOP, right now I have no clue who'll get the nomination. By this time in 1999 I was fairly convinced GWB would be the next President

It wouldn't surprise me if Jim Gilmore of all people got the nomination

[War Paint]

There is no way the Democrats win the Whitehouse in 08. They have NO ONE charming or charismatic enough to fool enough women into voting for them.

The Democrats only hope is if Guiliani or McCain doesn't run and the Republicans candidate is a polarizing character like Cheney.

[Midnight Judges]

There is no way the Democrats win the Whitehouse in 08. They have NO ONE charming or charismatic enough to fool enough women into voting for them.

The Democrats only hope is if Guiliani or McCain doesn't run and the Republicans candidate is a polarizing character like Cheney.

"Fool enough Women?!?!?!?!" :doh: So tell me, you think all women are naive or just the ones who don't vote for who you tell them to vote for? :doh:

[jbooma]

Bush will have a lot do with the election or more specifically the Iraq war. The war will bring down the party again in 08. The only chance republicans have is if Hagel wins the nomination.

I disagree 100% remember the dems now have power for a couple of years if everything stays the same then it is a wash.

With the potential of more Supreme Court spots the repubs will be out in full force yet again. Plus if Hillary wins the nod then the dems will have no chance in winning.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Which is it?.... Are you a Conservative or not? because those are NOT Conservative viewpoints.

Romey is no more Conservative than McCain is. Believe me, he was the Governor here for four years.

There are many Conservatives that are fisical Conservatives, this does not mean that they are Social Conservatives. But, then you can't read this.:cool:

[Midnight Judges]

I disagree 100% remember the dems now have power for a couple of years if everything stays the same then it is a wash.

With the potential of more Supreme Court spots the repubs will be out in full force yet again. Plus if Hillary wins the nod then the dems will have no chance in winning.

Question: What does 8 out of 9 supreme court judges get you that 7 out of 9 does not?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Question: What does 8 out of 9 supreme court judges get you that 7 out of 9 does not?

A bigger majority, remember, our culture honors big numbers, and the more you have on your side supposedly the more correct you are. Frankly, that can be pretty dangerous.

[Destino]

Question: What does 8 out of 9 supreme court judges get you that 7 out of 9 does not?
More promises to make ground against abortion that never happen because the GOP needs that issue to win elections.

Next question.

[EersSkins05]

Question: What does 8 out of 9 supreme court judges get you that 7 out of 9 does not?

Security.

It's not as if these justices are spring chickens (with the exception of Roberts.) That 7 of 9 could turn to 4 of 9 within one presidential term.

[Cdowwe]

Wait til its between McCain and Clinton and see who he votes for.

[Midnight Judges]

Wait til its between McCain and Clinton and see who he votes for.

Exactly. He will make nice wth McCain real quick if McCain wins the nomination. Right now he's just trying to throw his political weight around to affect the primary.

[EersSkins05]

It kills me how easily everyone has forgotten the stunts pulled by the Bush campaign against McCain in 2000.

They basically ran the most dispicable smear campaign you ever saw, coming just short of calling McCain a lunatic that had his brain fried in a POW camp.

But when Bush won, McCain had no choice but to buddy up for his own sake. Dobson will have to do the same if McCain is the nomination.

[Fergasun]

Again. The Republican in 2008 will be hard-line on immigration. I can see the elites putting a bunch of "open border" candidate ups, but I don't see the base voting for any of them.

That leaves... Duncan Hunter and Romney? McCain won't get the nod.. McCain-Kennedy. Guliani has created a de-facto sanctuary city. I think Tancredo could really go a long way in screwing "Republicans"... much like Perot did.

We're a really stupid country to have one of these ******* Senators as our President anyway. I don't care if they are liberal on social issues... Bush isn't and what social agenda has he passed? So if he can't do it... wtf.

I don't want to have 20 years of Bush-Clinton rule either.

[wskin44]

He's also an adulterer and a lousy one at that.

Is that what his mistress said? Does poor performance in bed disqualify someone from the presidency? Is there a website with scorecards on this? This is all so complicated.

[AJ_Skins]

Again. The Republican in 2008 will be hard-line on immigration. I can see the elites putting a bunch of "open border" candidate ups, but I don't see the base voting for any of them.

That leaves... Duncan Hunter and Romney? McCain won't get the nod.. McCain-Kennedy. Guliani has created a de-facto sanctuary city. I think Tancredo could really go a long way in screwing "Republicans"... much like Perot did.

Gingrich is not saying whether he'll run or not, but I think he will. This is the statement (http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=2647) from his website (www.newt.org) on immigration. He's for a guest worker program. I can't tell if he's for amnesty or not. Maybe somebody else can decode it:


Protecting American Civilization
Challenge Number Three
Gingrich Communications
Newt Gingrich

We should not worry about people who want to come to the United States to work hard, pay taxes, obey the law, and become Americans. In fact, we should be delighted to have new Americans join our country because historically they have been the source of enormous talent, energy, and courage. From Alexander Hamilton to Andrew Carnegie to Albert Einstein to Henry Kissinger to Arnold Schwarzenegger, people who wanted to improve their lives, and in the process improve the country, have enriched America.

Nor should we be concerned that a substantial number of new Americans are Hispanic. America has a long history of absorbing and blending people of many languages and backgrounds. There have always been non-English newspapers in America and now we have non-English radio and television. I am also not worried that some immigrants come here only to earn money and then go home (Italian immigrants, in particular, did that in the past).

What should worry us is the breakdown of will on the part of America to control the borders and to ensure that new immigrants learn to be American. What should worry us is a breakdown of will to protect America’s unique civilization.

Controlling the Border

No serious nation in the age of terror can afford to have wide-open borders with millions of illegal aliens crossing at will.

But along with making it much harder to sneak in, we need to make it easier for guest workers to enter the country legally and to work here as long as they obey the law. Millions of illegal immigrants are here because Americans are hiring them. They have jobs in your neighborhood and you know it. They may be serving you lunch at a restaurant, washing your car, and mowing your lawn. They are probably working on the construction projects you drive past each day. Keeping these hard-working people illegal makes them vulnerable to criminals and keeps them from playing responsible roles in our communities.

We need a guest worker program to ensure that guest workers pay taxes, get driver’s licenses, buy auto insurance, abide by the law, and that filters out criminals and potential terrorists. The program should not be an automatic qualification for citizenship, though eventual citizenship should be held out as an opportunity.

Patriotic Citizenship

Before we declare immigrants citizens, we need to go back and remember how to turn immigrants into citizens. For much of American history, states ran Americanization programs designed to help immigrants assimilate into American culture. In the last two generations the liberal establishment has undermined and ridiculed American values, American history, and even the idea of American citizenship. Today, the Left wants voting opened to non-citizens, including illegal aliens. The Left regards national identity as irrelevant and patriotic commitment to America as irrelevant. The Left could not be further removed from the thinking of our Founding Fathers.

Dr. John Fonte, America’s leading expert on civic education, explains the Founding Fathers’ thoughts on how to make good citizens:

First, as noted, they had to think about the young. After all, children were not born republican citizens, but would have to be taught how to become citizens. Second, they had to think about immigrants, how best should these newcomers become American citizens? Their answer was clear and unequivocal: immigrants should be assimilated into American ideas and American common culture. Hence, the Founders regularly used words associated with ideas (“principles,” “beliefs”) and words associated with the common civic culture (“habits,” “customs,” “manners,” “language,” “laws,” “our society”).

Fonte noted that George Washington worried about large numbers of immigrants not assimilating. In a letter to John Adams he wrote that “...the policy or advantage of [immigration] taking place in a body (I mean the settling of them in a body) may be much questioned; for, by so doing, they retain the language, habits, and principles (good or bad) which they bring with them. Whereas by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word, soon become one people.”

Alexander Hamilton insisted that “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on the love of country...”

It is clear what the Founding Fathers had in mind. To become an American citizen meant becoming an American in values, culture, and historic understanding. Citizenship was something to be studied and acquired, not merely a piece of paper to be granted. Furthermore, citizenship was exclusive and required renouncing any other allegiance.

Patriotic Education

Our own children—not just immigrants—need a patriotic education which today is denied them by an entrenched education bureaucracy. We cannot win this fight within the education establishment; we need to break out of the establishment so that we can bring pride and patriotism back to our schools.

The very concept of America is under assault. The traditional notion of our country as a union of one people, American peoples, has been assaulted with multicultural, situation ethics, and values neutral model where Western values and American civilization are ignored, minimized or ridiculed. Unless we act to change things, our next generation will grow up with no understanding of core American values. This will destroy America, as we know it, as surely as if a foreign conqueror had overwhelmed us.

It is absolutely necessary to establish a firm foundation of patriotic education upon which further knowledge can be built; otherwise, Americans will lack understanding of American values and how important and great it is to be American. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the chief value of studying the past is “rendering the people the safe, as they are the ultimate, guardians of their own liberty…. [h]istory by apprising them of the past will enable them to [be a] judge of the future.”

It is important to understand what makes America so unique that generations upon generations of diverse peoples immigrated to this great land for freedom and opportunity. If Americans do not appreciate America, and for what she stands, then how could Americans be ready and willing to defend her? As Jefferson noted, Americans need to know where this country came from in order to know where it should go.

It is a sad fact that American students are entering and even graduating college without a proficient understanding of U.S. history. For example, a 2003 survey of seniors of the top 50 colleges and universities conducted by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that more than half of the participants did not know George Washington was the commanding general of the Continental Army during the American Revolution and accepted Brig. Gen. George Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown (32% said Washington, 36% thought it was Ulysses S. Grant, 6% said it was Douglas MacArthur). Historian and Pulitzer price winning author David McCullough draws the logical conclusion to this state of affairs: “If you don’t know what Yorktown was all about, and that Washington was the commander, you don’t know…a lot about American history that you ought to know.”

We must adjust the lens through which we view our nation’s priorities, focusing especially on education. Patriotic education, like a vastly improved math and science education, is a key step we must take to win the future. The House and Senate education committees (as well as the education committees of each state legislature) should establish standing subcommittees on patriotic education that define standards by which patriotic education should be taught. We need new curricula and textbooks that accurately tell the story of how people of all backgrounds struggled to make this country great to be used in schools. The Library of Congress should provide a resource system for American history so as to universally provide access to a world-class information system.

We will work to re-establish patriotic education in the classrooms to reinforce American values in our children. Schools should be required to teach American history; state universities should demand an understanding of American history before students can earn their degrees.

We must challenge the entrenched education bureaucracy that seeks to rewrite and secularize American history.

We must challenge teachers and professors who are radically anti-American.

We must review school textbooks to ensure that students are being taught factually and not through some radical reinterpretation or bias that distorts America and defames our society.

We must rebuild the cultural bond of historic memory that has made America the most exceptional nation in history.

But in all of this, we must not be naïve. Insisting that public schools actually teach American history and American values will provoke a bitter fight with the left, no matter how popular those values are with the American people.

If we lose this struggle in the classrooms we will lose the America that was proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence and defined in our Constitution.

If we do not teach America’s patriotic history to our children then how are they going to learn it? We must make sure that our young people understand America and what it means to be an American. This is a unique country, the Founders were unique people, and the Constitution is a remarkable document. We live in a very magical place called America and we need to reassert this truth again and again.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Wait til its between McCain and Clinton and see who he votes for.

Who knows, he could do what I would be forced to do in that case, which is to abstain from supporting or voting for either candidate.

In fact, if forced to support one of those two, it would be Clinton in my case. At least I'd be secure in the knowledge that I couldn't trust her in any form. I wouldn't be able to be so sure with McCain. Better the enemy you know than the enemy you don't.

[Rdskns2000]

Bush will have nothing to do with the election. Remember many republicans voted Dem during the last election to prove a point. When it comes to a president election they will be back voting repub.

The problem with the dems is Obama and Hillary are going to cancel each other out.


Bush will be a part of Election. Just like Clinton was a part of 2000 and Reagan was a part of 1988.