Nicole Greenfield: In the wake of the Foley scandal, all eyes — both liberal and conservative — turned to James Dobson for the evangelical position. At first, Dobson briefly admitted that Foley did wrong, but was quick to lay the ultimate blame on some of his favorite scapegoats. “As we know, the media and the Democrats saw an opportunity to make much, much, more out of it,” Dobson said, “impugning the morals and character, not only of this disgraced congressman, but the entire Republican Congress — and Christian conservatives, including me.” Left without a resonable reposnse, Dobson resorted to the standard evangelical safety net — the persecution narrative. It turns out the entire Republican Congress, all Christian conservatives, and Dobson himself are the real victims here.

Dobson continues, in a response to a New York Times editorial by Paul Krugman, by applauding Foley for resigning and condemning former President Clinton for staying in office after the Monica Lewinsky affair. So Mark Foley becomes the good guy here, the more respectable man. And perhaps worst of all, following the lead of Internet gossip Matt Drudge and nationally syndicated radio host Michael Savage, Dobson ultimately undermines the seriousness of the scandal: “As it turns out, Mr. Foley has had illicit sex with no one that we know of, and the whole thing turned out to be what some people are now saying was a — sort of a joke by the boy and some of the other pages.” Thankfully, nobody besides Dobson and a few conservative journalists has given any creedence to the idea that the messages were a prank. In the end though, the ridiculousness of Dobson’s reaction makes me wonder why we all keep turning to him as an indicator of evangelical sentiment on controversial issues, both large and small.