Looks like he's positioning himself to be the new spokesman-in-charge for the radical right before poor Rev. Falwell's body gets cold...

Lee, Thanks for introducing me to Dominionism. I had skipped right over this before. This is scary stuff..Sort of fits right in with the Bush/Cheney idea of confronting global domination by Islamofascism', or is it the other way round. I suppose it depends on which words of the Rule of the God you subscribe to 'Allah Akbar' vs 'God is Great' or 'God gave us Dominion'.

Steve - the movement has some roots in Christian Reconstructionism:

The controversy surrounding the Christian Reconstructionist movement can be grouped into three main categories. First, the manifest political agendas of the group spark immediate controversy. Ideas of the group such as the dominance of the church in political affairs openly refute the many popular ideas such as political pluralism which states that many governments are good and healthy. Dominionists on the other hand are in favor of a single kingdom, one ruled in the name of Christ by Christian leaders. Though not openly affiliating himself with the movement but still maintaining many of its beliefs, Pat Robertson who campaigned for the presidency in 1988 is a prime example of the reception of a dominionist political figure in society. Also, pastor John Gimenez has been very active on the political front, organizing rallies in 1980 and 1988 called the "Washington for Jesus" rallies.

The emergence of the televangelists also contributed to the controversy surrounding the Christian Right. Organizations such as Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority presented a front for the group easily attacked by opponents. Pat Robertson's program was no more absent of turmoil than Falwell's.

However, the most controversial issues concerning the Christian Right or Christian Reconstructionism were interior issues. The number of scholars gaining prominence within the movement was increasing rapidly and therefore, the number of ideas and theories was also rising. The confusing fog of the movement became so thick that some would admit that there hasn't even been a movement since 1985. Several of the high ranking scholars even began to battle one another and begin separate organizations. For example, Rushdoony and Gary North disagreed on the fundamental social institution. North believed that the church is primary and therefore should be more disciplined and institutionalized, whereas Rushdoony argued for the institution of the family. There too began a shift away from strict postmillenialism which sparked another controversy. Others disagreed about the topic of theonomy. The movement's pro-life organization Operation Rescue even began to be questioned as to its proper level of activity. In short, the thickness of the controversy is certainly more apparent on the inside than on the exterior.

and this should look familiar to all who closely watch President Bush and the power elite within the Republican Party - "Kingdom Now Theology"

Kingdom Now theology is a theological belief within the Charismatic movement of Protestant Christianity, mainly in the United States.

Kingdom Now proponents believe that God lost control over the world to Satan when Adam and Eve sinned. Since then, the theology goes, God has been trying to reestablish control over the world by seeking a special group of believers. Through these people -- known as "covenant people," "overcomers" or "Joel's army," depending on the source -- social institutions (including governments and laws) would be brought under God's authority. These "covenant people" or "overcomers" are "little gods" -- God's "extension" in the world to regain authority from the devil. The church, under the leadership of "restored" apostles and prophets, therefore must take over the world and put down all opposition to it before Christ can return. Anyone who rebels against the church, along with other "evildoers," must convert or be punished.

Way to create a bogey man.

A movement that doesn't exist, named by person who doesn't agree with the ideals of the non-movement.

Attaching peoples name to the movement. So that you can use the movement to scare other people like Steve.

This non-existent movement is going to decide who the Republican nominee is for President, UP Man, and here you thought that your vote mattered. Tsk tsk.... Sheep don't have a say in the matter.

Conservatives -- true conservatives -- know that the Republican Party has been taken over by a group of Evangelical crusading puppeteers, and in response true conservatives are attempting to mount a third-party bid to push a Bloomberg-led ticket, but the chances of pulling off a third-party success in the election is not good. If the Democratic party moves towards the center there is a very good chance that the conservative split will yield a slam-dunk Democratic win.

There's lots of time for things to change, but that's the way I see it so far. The question now is who the Dominionists will choose as their mini-god - is it Gingrich or Thompson? The Republican pack of ten are toast, is my guess, and I suspect of the ten candidates on the stage earlier this week in Columbia, South Carolina the best any of them can hope for is a Veep seat on the ticket.

Romney could have a chance of getting the VP nod, imho - he has the charismatic smile and hand gestures of a tent revival preacher-man. All he'll have to do is abandon Mormonism and be born-again - but he's shallow enough to say and do anything to get elected. No backbone - all ambition...

Are you following this? Am I going too fast for you?

YES WE MUST FOLLOW DOBSON WE ARE LITTLE SHEEP....

You total and complete fool.

So, evangelicals can't think for themselves? Just insult a large portion of the populace. IDIOT.

So now the LIBERALS are the only ones who KNOW who the TRUE conservatives are?

OH, PLEASE, PLEASE this weak minded one as to who to vote for?

Oh, wait the Tri-lateral commission is sending new orders.

No, it's from the SKULL society they are watching me.

Is that black helicopters coming this way?

Link to comments from Dobson, that show he agrees with the fictions of this Dominionist group.

Did you do any research on this group?

They don't exist.

So, unless you are saying that evangelicals cannot vote, (Which would not surprise me) get a clue.

Google is your friend, U.P. guy. That's 53,200 hits where the words Dominionism and "James Dobson" appear on the same page.

"They don't exist."

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

53,200 hits show one of them that shows Dobson exposing the ideas exposed by Dominionists.

How many of them are of groups or people talking about how Dobson is a Dominionist?

Where is the quote from Dobson, get any? Prove your statement?

Or are you still a liar?

Hey liar Lee,

I found only 15000 site using Dominionists Dobson.

Also, read the little blurb under the first 60, all where preaching hate and how evil the Dominionists are.

Care to prove Dobson is evil?

Just because you give a name, and describe what those people who fall under that name, doesn't mean those people believe what you say they believe.

Lee. thanks for the treatise on the born-again evangelicals. I remember that the main debate in the a late middle ages was the intellectual debate was between reason and faith. Reason won, it was called the 'Age of Reason'. Now in the Bush administration we seem to have returned back to the the 'Age of Faith', and what is worse someone, our secular civil leader Dubya believes every single word written in the New Testament is literally the word of God, and our revered Constitution, the hallmark of our republic, he was quoted as saying, is just 'a God damn piece of paper'. Can it get any worse?

That's an amazing quote from Bush, and not surprising in the least. Look at the Attorney General who, at Bush's bidding, has supported the virtual shredding of the constitution. More recently, Gonzales swore under oath that he couldn't recall critical information concerning the firing of the US attorneys -- swore under oath and lied -- that's the quality of the people we're dealing with here.