Thank you James Dobson

You might be able to avoid that by occasionally washing the ball.

If I’m comparing a Granny Smith apple to a McIntosh, I’m not pointing any fingers.

“So dad, did you have a girlfriend named ‘Wendy’ too?”
“No son, that just the US mail abbreviation for Wyoming”.

Dobson’s suggestion presupposes that Dad’s member will be larger. If untrue, the kid may get an early introduction to a lifetime of paternal resentment.

So, your only point was to post a negative drive-by against Obama, even though it was a combination of error and irrelevance.

Thank you.

and great popularity for compensation.

It’s my understandiing that the text of that quote did not originate with Dobson, but with one of the guys there in the reparative therapy trenches with him; specifically Dr. Joseph Nicolosi.

Then there’s the question of whether Nicolosi and Dobson go far enough in their prescriptives. Enter Herman Hayes.

I’m not entirely convinced that this site is 100% serious.

Never mind.

Tom … or is it Deb?

When I read the OP and didn’t see anything to debate I felt free to do so.

Not surprised no one had a problem with the OP though since it provides a chance to bash Conservatives and swoon over your boy.

Why should you be suprised? Conservatives deserve to be bashed and bashed and bashed and James Dobson is exhibit A.

Let’s see, someone could take the position that this hurts Obama as Dobson will excite a sizable population against him or keeps him from making inroads with those of faith or for other reasons, or argue that Dobson is right, or, well lots of alternative points of view.

I don’t see my op as unassailable even if I believe it is correct. If you don’t want to make any of those arguments and instead prefer to post a negative drive-by based on error and irrelevance, well then just so that’s clear.

If you open a thread in a debate Forum and do not find a topic to debate, it is polite to sit on your hands rather than threadshitting.

I actually would have preferred that this thread have been opened in IMHO or the Pit, however, since it was not really a rant it did not need to go to the Pit and since most political threads wind up being moved to GD, I saw no purpose in moving it out to have it sent back.

Since only Dobson (and his factual errors) were being bashed, this is hardly a thread to “bash Conservatives.” As to “swooning,” I have already been called out by posters claiming I was opposing Senator Obama on a couple of occasions so it is unlikely that he is “my boy.” (I do find your choice of language in that sentence to be informative in ways you had not intended.)

And it remains true that your criticiasms were both inaccurate and anachronistic.

Has it occurred to you that when your criticisms of Obama are inaccurate and a blatant display of bias rather than honest debate , they lack any real credibility?

Try sticking to the facts occasionally and that may change.

Today’s HuffingtonPost had an interesting column by Frank Schaeffer. A former evangelical in-the-fold, now changing his outlook on life…I think the headline is hyperbole, but the column is worth the read. Times are changin’ from strange fronts I wouldn’t have expected.

great. a hammer on Dobson

That is an excellent point … when it is valid; which it surely is on occasion.

In many instances my so-called “inacuracies” are reasonable opinions that the vast majority here don’t want to hear.

Tom criticized in very specific detail. You responded with more inaccuracies rather than any reasoned defense. There may be instances of reasonable opinions, but this isn’t one of them.

Er, actually, referring to the person one supports, politically or not, as “my boy” or “my girl” has never meant anything like what you are reading into What the … !!!'s post. Sometimes referring to an adult male as “boy” is not racist or condescending.

OTOH, I admit to being irked when my wife refers to a “girl” in her office. “She’s sixty and hasn’t been a girl since the Johnson administration,” I say, but it falls on deaf ears.