I have a lot of problems with Dr. James Dobson. While I’m sure we agree on many issues, and while I greatly respect some of the work he’s done and continues to do through his organizations, I have to ask, is there a more clumsy, ham-handed, goofy operator when it comes to politics?

I mean, seriously, for a guy with “Dr.” in front of his name, Jimmy D. rarely does much to make himself look all that bright.

Take, for instance, the story this week that Dobson called up U.S. News and told Dan Gilgoff that he didn’t think former U.S. Senator and potential presidential candidate Fred Thompson was a Christian.

Huh?

First, I could almost understand if Dobson gave that kind of an answer if he were explicitly asked “Do you know Fred Thompson to be a Christian?” And, in a moment of recollection or speculation, Dobson were to reply, “I don’t know that he is.” But to call up a reporter with the intent of trying to besmirch the credibility of a candidate who is not even a candidate yet really looks pretty bush leagure.

Second, whether Fred Thompson is a Christian or not should be none of Jim Dobson’s business and has nothing to do with Thompson’s suitability to be President of the United States.

What’s even stranger is that Dobson used this phone call to talk up the virtues of Newt Gingrich — another almost-candidate … who recently admitted to having an extra-marital affair during the Clinton impeachment in 1998. That only begs the question, is Newt Gingrich a Christian? If so, then why was he screwing around on his wife in 1998?

My advice to James Dobson: Please shut up.

I’m a big fan of Ben Stein. I think he’s the kind of conservative that isn’t afraid to talk about the real world, in the sense that he’s not an idealist who pretends that America doesn’t need fixing. He talks about America — warts and all — and doesn’t cater to special interests.

Stein writes in the American Spectator about the current state of the American economy, and I couldn’t agree more:

The average wage of the American worker adjusted for inflation is lower than it was in 1973. The only way that Americans have been able to maintain their standard of living at the middle and lower ends has been to send more family members to work and to draw down savings or go into debt or both …

Here’s what else is new and exciting (or terrible) in money: there is real poverty among the soldiers who fight our wars. There are fist fights to get children into $30,000 a year kindergartens and pre-schools in the right neighborhoods in Manhattan. There are 40 million Americans without health care insurance. There are almost 40 million baby boomers with no savings for retirement. There is a long waiting list for Bentleys at the dealership in Beverly Hills.

There are soldiers’ wives selling blood to buy toys for their kids. There is a man selling non-functioning body armor who threw a $10 million Bat Mitzvah for his daughter.

Go read the whole thing.

I read this post about a couple who gave up a home in the suburbs for a condo in the city. The point the author tries to make is that by changing geography, she has a much more rewarding and fulfilling life. The subtext is that what was holding her back from achieving this life were things, specifically a car and a house.

I think this article and the thinking it represents fails to truly understand the nature of both geography and behavior.

(more…)