So Karl Rove whispered something sweet in James Dobson's ear and made him a believer in Harriet Miers? It must have been a revelation of biblical proportions. But since Dobson won't tell us what it is, we can only guess.
Could Rove have told Dobson that Harriet Miers supports the teaching of intelligent design and the Bible in public schools, as Dobson does? Or could he have offered his assurance that Miers advocates banning gay teachers from public schools, as Dobson does? Perhaps Dobson was informed Miers agrees with him that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is "the most dangerous man in America" and should be impeached, along with all insufficiently right-wing judges, including Sandra Day O'Connor and the entire 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. Or maybe Rove told Dobson that Miers shares his belief that gay marriage will lead to "men marrying donkies" and "the destruction of this nation and many others."
If Miers holds to one of the positions, she would not satisfy Dobson. Only by affirming them all would she win his trust. Dobson has spent over 25 years working to transform America into a clerical authoritarian state more informed by biblical law than the Constitution and he will settle for nothing less. The departure of O'Connor, the Supreme Court's swing vote, was to have brought about the climax of his campaign. Bush would nominate a far-right jurist, the Democrats would be defeated in a rancorous confirmation battle, Roe v. Wade would be reversed, and the wall of separation would crumble. Praise the Lord!
But to the dismay of almost all of Dobson's allies, a corporate lawyer with no record of conservative views who is endorsed by Dallas gay-rights leaders and defended by Barbara Mikulski has scored a date with the Senate Judiciary Committee. Forgive me if I sound credulous, but I have a hard time believing that nice lady who timidly asked Pat Leahy about Vermont's fall foliage is harboring a dark, theocratic agenda. I therefore have an even harder time believing that Dobson is telling the truth about his conversation with Rove.
We need to consider the possibility that Rove revealed nothing to Dobson about Miers, and that Dobson is being disingenuous to obscure an even darker secret than anything Rove could have entrusted him with: his real motives for backing a lame horse.
Here are a few theories about Dobson's motives:
After pressuring Bush into declaring support for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in 2004, Dobson endorsed him for president. That means Dobson told millions of supporters on the over 3000 radio stations that broadcast his show that Bush would deliver the goods: a ban on abortion, gay marriage, etc. During the presidential campaign, Dobson's newly-formed 501 c-4, Focus on the Family Action, used the threat of Kerry victory as fodder to raise $8.8 million dollars in 5 months. When Bush won, FoF Action made the courts its priority, spending a whopping $1.2 million during last spring's Senate filibuster fight.
Dobson was nearly outdone by protege Tony Perkins, who heads the Family Research Council, a Washington-based think tank Dobson founded. Perkins sent out an unrelenting stream of fundraising pitches in advance of Justice Sunday I (an elaborate rally addressed by Dobson at the height of the filibuster fight) and Justice Sunday II (a rally for the confirmation of John Roberts and a generally more right-wing SCOTUS, which was also addressed by Dobson). In one pitch, Perkins specifically asked supporters for contributions upwards of $1000 dollars "to strike a great blow against judicial activism."
America has stopped bracing for that great blow. Indeed, the "Gang of 14" centrist senators averted a crisis with a compromise that torpedoed a number of Dobson's favorite nominees and provoked one his most memorable on-air hissy fits. John Roberts' nomination was a success, but he's no more conservative than the judge he replaced. And now comes Miers. After soliciting millions from his supporters to finance an apocalyptic battle with liberalism and enticing them with visions of an imminent far-right judiciary, Dobson has very little to show.
By condemning Miers, however, Dobson would be treading into nettlesome territory. Any denunciation would sound like a concession of defeat, thus betraying the confidence Dobson inspired in his donors. It would also damage his cozy relationship with the White House, which he will depend on for the next three years, no matter what happens. So Dobson has taken a cue from Rove and declared victory in the midst of defeat. In supporting Miers, Dobson has essentially donned a flight-suit and declared "Mission Accomplished."
Yet unlike Bush, Dobson might have an exit strategy. Consider how he phrased his endorsement of John Roberts during Justice Sunday II: "It looks like John Roberts is, and we think so, a strict constructionist. For now, at least, he looks good." If, during his confirmation hearing, Roberts had convinced Dobson he was the next David Souter, Dobson would have yanked his endorsement. Though Dobson endorsed Miers in less uncertain terms, if her performance before the Judiciary Committee is a complete embarassment, which it likely will be, Dobson can always change his mind.
There is also the chance that Rove twisted Dobson's arm or even blackmailed him into supporting Miers. Perhaps Rove threatened to leak information to the press about a scandal within Focus on the Family. (Not that he has ever done anything like that before). Dobson is a self-help guru at the helm of a $120 million dollar organization. You think he doesn't have something to hide?
Of course, Dobson could always divulge the secret information about Miers which Rove provided him. That would put all my wild and crazy theories to rest. Until then, we must assume that Dobson has violated the commandment against bearing false witness.
And as Dobson knows, lies make Baby Jesus cry.