Fred vs. Huck: Substance vs. Stupid

By Rick Moran Posted in Comments (72) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

The 40% of Iowans who self identify as Christian conservatives evidently don't get out much. Either that, or they've simply decided to take an early Christmas holiday from reality. Otherwise, I can't understand why so many would have fallen so completely for the flim flam being perpetrated by the least knowledgeable, least prepared, and most backward thinking of all the Republican candidates in the field -and that includes candidates going back to the 1950's.

I am talking about the walking, talking disaster-in-the-making that is Mike Huckabee - former governor of a small, impoverished state, a baptist preacher whose conservative views on social issues make him a perfect candidate for the Leave it to Beaver wing of the GOP, and a man whose thinking is so shallow a warning sign should be plastered on his forehead reading "Absolutely no diving beyond this point."

Now one might think the best way to get our Iowa brethren to abandon this silly love affair with a silly candidate would not accuse them of being dunces. I disagree. Sometimes, you need to throw a bucket of cold water on people to call their attention to erroneous thinking. And I would think they would find that preferable to the buckets of bullsh*t Huckabee has been tossing their way for months.

Kevin Drum is a liberal Democrat but a keen political observer nevertheless. When I find myself in total agreement with someone from the other side, you've got to believe that either some liberal witch has cast a spell on me or we both see the same thing from the empty headed former fatty from Arkansas:

Ross Douthat has more on the fact that Mike Huckabee is basically just making stuff up as he goes along and plainly doesn't have clue about most of the things he's asked about. Economic policy? How about a 30% sales tax? Foreign policy? He likes Tom Friedman and Frank Gaffney, two pop commentators with almost nothing in common. Energy policy? Let's eliminate oil imports by 2017. Immigration policy? Ship everyone back to Mexico. Etc. It's grade school stuff.

And not to beat this into the ground, but what's really astounding about this is that nobody actually seems to care much. But eventually somebody will, because eventually this weird combination of barstool ignorance and internet-email-list credulity is bound to produce a howler of the kind that the press likes to latch onto. There's no telling what it will be, but it's coming, and when it does the Huckabee boomlet will be over.

Drum didn't mention health care. Here are the Huckster's deep thoughts on fulfilling a promise he made yesterday in the debate where he said that by the end of his term as president, all Americans would be covered by health insurance:

I advocate policies that will encourage the private sector to seek innovative ways to bring down costs and improve the free market for health care services. We have to change a system that happily pays $30,000 for a diabetic to have his foot amputated, but won't pay for the shoes that would save his foot.

We can make health care more affordable by reforming medical liability; adopting electronic record keeping; making health insurance more portable from one job to another; expanding health savings accounts to everyone, not just those with high deductibles; and making health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions. We don't need all the government controls that would inevitably come with universal health care. When I'm President, Americans will have more control of their health care options, not less.

Boilerplate mush and about as detailed as a connect-the-dots Santa drawing. Besides, you might note all those nifty tax deductions and tax credits. I wonder how he squares that with his tax policy?

I'd like you to join me at the best "Going Out of Business" sale I can imagine - one held by the Internal Revenue Service. Am I running for president to shut down the federal government? Not exactly. But I am running to completely eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes. And I do mean all - personal federal, corporate federal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment. All our hours filling out forms, all our payments for help with those forms, all our shopping bags filled with disorganized receipts, all our headaches and heartburn from tax stress will vanish. Instead we will have the FairTax, a simple tax based on wealth. When the FairTax becomes law, it will be like waving a magic wand releasing us from pain and unfairness.

The FairTax will replace the Internal Revenue Code with a consumption tax, like the taxes on retail sales forty-five states and the District of Columbia have now. All of us will get a monthly rebate that will reimburse us for taxes on purchases up to the poverty line, so that we're not taxed on necessities. That means people below the poverty line won't be taxed at all. We'll be taxed on what we decide to buy, not what we happen to earn.

Now I'm no economist or policy wonk or anything but how are we going to give poor folk a tax credit to buy health insurance if there's no such animal in Governor Huckabee's brave new Fair Tax world?

Just askin'...

Drum mentioned conservative blogger Ross Douthat who interviewed Huckabee last month and was struck by his unpreparedness for national office:

But when it comes to preparedness, to the hard work of scaling up one's understanding from state-level challenges to national issues that any aspiring candidate needs to do, Huckabee is way out of his depth. This was my sense talking to him, certainly. Set him off on health care or education or what-have-you in the context of Arkansas politics, and he's got enough juice to make you think: Here's a guy who might make a good President. But widen the focus to the nation as a whole, and you're left thinking: Here's a smart guy who hasn't come close to doing his homework. For a charming also-ran with a chance at the Vice-Presidency, that wasn't a problem. For someone leading in Iowa, it is.

You can't help but compare the vapid and depthless "policy" ideas extruded from the Huckabee campaign machine with the meaty, thoughtful, and detailed "white papers" issued by the Thompson campaign.

Take Fred's detailed tax plan that was praised by the Club for Growth and the National Review among other conservative media. In it's 7 points, Thompson lays out a coherent, conservative plan to cut taxes on individuals and businesses. He couples that with a spending plan that envisions widespread and necessary reform of entitlements along with an end to pork barrel projects. It is a demonstration of muscular - some might even say courageous - thinking that makes Huckabee's campaign for class president platform look silly by comparison.

By all that is right and fair in the world, Fred Thompson should have enjoyed that surge that Huckabee experienced over the last month. But then, Fred didn't run around Iowa hinting the Mormonism isn't really a Christian sect in order to pander to the baser instincts of Christian conservatives. Nor does Fred have the ready charm and unctuous delivery of the sermonizing Huckster. Fred is, well, Fred. He heaves his 6'5" frame up to speak and delivers it straight from the shoulder - no gimmicks, few wasted words.

And little inspiration, I'm afraid. While yesterday's debate showed an animated Fred Thompson, even a passionate Fred at times, his claim is on our heads, not our hearts. For some reason, he has not made that personal connection a candidate must make with the voter that marks the difference between a contender and an also-ran. Perhaps he can take these last few weeks before the Caucuses and find a way to reach beyond the intellectual and touch people's emotions. If he can discover a way to do that, he has a chance to surprise the field.

In the meantime, Huckabee's obvious failings as a candidate are lost on the voters in Iowa who may actually agree with a statement signed by Huckabee in 1998 contained in a full page ad in USA Today that declared:

“I affirm the statement on the family issued by the 1998 Southern Baptist Convention.” What was in the family statement from the SBC? “A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.”

The ad wasn’t just a blanket, “we support the SBC statement,” but rather highlighted details. The ad Huckabee signed specifically said of the SBC family statement: “You are right because you called wives to graciously submit to their husband’s sacrificial leadership.”

That's 1998 not 1898, by the way.

Nor do many Iowa supporters of this neophyte on foreign policy care that he wants to drop the economic blockade against Cuba (Or at least he did 3 years ago. Where he'll be on the issue next week is anyone's guess) and talk to the Iranians (a la Obama). It also doesn't seem to matter that the guy granted twice as many pardons and clemencies to state prisoners as his three predecessors combined.

As long as Huckabee is right on their issues, he could be revealed as an empty headed lout and still get their support.

A sad state of affairs, indeed.

I think the field will get leveled in a hurry after Iowa when the "real" elections start. Iowa is a prom queen contest, not a Presidential primary.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I agree with you 100% that Huckabee is not electable. Personally, I would put him below Fred!, Mitt, Giuliani, and McCain (in that order) on my list.

However, I would encourage you to be careful in cricizing the personal religious beliefs of our good friends in Iowa. As a Christian (I suppose I'm an evangelical) I acknowledge and agree with the writings of the Apostle Paul, some of which are referred to in the text above regarding the relationship of a husband and wife. (Yes, I'm married. No, my wife doesn't know I'm writing this).

Having said that, I don't think that discussion belongs in the political discourse. In Huck's defense, I don't get the feeling that's what he wants to talk about. If it is, than I have a real problem with that. I don't think it's fair to him or his supporters to criticize what he did and said in his role as a Baptist minister. However, the reality is that it probably will be by the Dems, if not by us. I don't think this type of affront on Huck is any more appropriate than an affront on Mitt for his chosen religion's teachings.

I guess what I am saying is that although I may be in lock-step with Mr. Huckabee on religious issues, I would much rather see Mitt be the Republican Nominee for President of the United States (I support FRED by the way), because I don't see eye-to-eye with Huck on political issues.

I said in another recent post, would you rather have Mitt or a solid Baptist like Bill Clinton or Jimmie Carter? No contest for me. That said, vote for Fred!

I don't think that discussion [the relationship of a husband and wife] belongs in the political discourse. In Huck's defense, I don't get the feeling that's what he wants to talk about. If it is, than I have a real problem with that. I don't think it's fair to him or his supporters to criticize what he did and said in his role as a Baptist minister.

Huckabee was Governor of Arkansas, supposedly serving men and women of all persuasions, when he said that women should submit to their husbands' leadership. It's bad enough that Huckabee can't seem to understand the need to stop playing pastor/theologian when he holds a government office. It's even worse that Huckabee says women should be subordinate to men while he's in office.

The title of this post made me snort diet coke out of my nose.

---
Spacemonkey

IMAO.US

I think this rant is ludicrous. I am an evangelical Christian living in Grand Rapids. I've been following this race for a long time. I've listened to the candidates during the debates and Huckabee is the most articulate, clear-headed one on the stage.
Honestly, I would support Huckabee, Guiliani, or Thompson. I think all of them have the experience to beat the two leading democratic candidates who are basically an junior senator and someone running off of her husbands name (honestly, who would vote for Hillary if her last name wasn't Clinton?) I'd be happy with any of the top republican candidates over any of the democratic candidates.

Anyway, back to Huckabee. He led Arkansas, which was a state struggling to financial stability. He was elected twice by strong support in a state that hadn't voted for a Govenor in over 50 years. He took on and beat the candidates that the Clintons were supporting and campaigning for.

One thing Ronald Reagan taught us is that the most effective Presidents are ones who can articulate a vision for the country and do it in an authentic way. Reagan changed the heart of this country by speaking directly with them and was able to pass through a lot of things through a heavily democratic congress. Huckabee has that same record.

I am a Christian and you really think that Christians are approaching this guy with no thought? Christians have high standards for their candidates. Christians also desire a candidate who leads with the humble knowledge that they will have to answer to the Lord Jesus one day for their actions while in office. That's a higher standard than even the constitution imposes on them.
Through your article it is clear you do not understand Christians and you haven't even researched the plans Huckabee has clearly articulated throughout this campaign.

Mike

you are so right Mike. I couldn't say it better if I tried.

I don't like the name calling or the some of the straw men attacked here.

However, I would ask you to reconsider your leanings toward Huck.

I think he will get destroyed in the general due to the "parole issues," the fair tax (even Boortz says that its easy to demagogue), the "Quarentine" comments.

I'm a Fred guy myself as I stated above and think he would stand a much better chance of winning.

You'll have to get used to repeatedly reading posts very similar to this if you're going to hang around Redstate very much. I'm not a Huckabee supporter, but I am a Southern Baptist and a Christian. I've noticed that much of the time the consensus regarding Huckabee supporters around here is that they're uninformed-one-issue-voting-socon-evangelicals that are stupidly voting for a Baptist preacher because he's a good guy.

Maybe it's just easy to group people into a pile that you call stupid or uninformed if they don't agree with you. I mean, I like to think of liberals as either uninformed or misguided. It keeps me from thinking that there are that many unpatriotic-baby-killing-anti-religion-power-hungry-socialists out there.

GO FRED!

Just because our brothers and sisters out there are committed Christians doesn't mean they are making good decisions in supporting Huck. If he wins the nod, I will support him, something I cannot do for Rudy, but I disagree he is the best choice to lead the country.

I'm confident he will lose the general.

To answer your question: do you really think that Christians are approaching this guy with no thought?.

Answer, yes and no. We are called to be wise as well as obedient. Supporting Huck is an easy, no brainer solution and it is a cop out for most of those evangelicals who are supporting Huck. So yes, they are thinking, but not on all cylinders. We are called to be both innocent AND shrewd.

Christians can find at least 6 other candidates to choose from that allow them to be obedient - three of those; Fred, Mitt and McCain can win. Huck will not, unless perhaps he's against Obama, but the media will shred him regardless and I suspect he will go down even in that case.

*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk

that women should be subservient to men will never, ever, ever, get elected president in the United States of America. In fact, they won't get elected to anything except perhaps governor of a backwards state like Arkansas.

Huckabee is a lightweight who the Democrats would make mincemeat of in any debate or campaign ad. He is, by himself, a target rich environment.

will believe that women should be in submission to the husband. That does not mean that the man is the dictator. It means that God created woman to be a help meet for the man. To help him accomplish what God has designed. It is a partnership that is led by the man as he follows Christ.

I am sure many of our founding fathers believed the same as they believed in the Bible.

Unless you think a wide majority of Americans read and take the bible literally and 100% accurate then you don't think this will play in a general election. With a population that is majority women where women vote actively and consistently, I don't see how this will play in the general.

I would wager that there is only a small percentage of Bible believers that take that doctrine seriously.

-------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Positivist Pastafarian for the alliteration alone.

You'd win your wager.

There are only a small percentage of Christians who take the doctrine seriously and this is because an even smaller percentage actually understand it.

If there is someone out there who believes this gives him the right to compel obedience and subservience from his wife he is gravely mistaken.

The injunction places far more burden on the man than the woman and if anyone should be complaining about the passage (and I'm not suggesting they do) it should be the man.

*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk

Has changed quite a bit since the 1700s... you wish it weren't so, I know, but there's no putting that genie back in the bottle. Women are equal to men now and they aren't going to accept this subservient stuff. This is just another thing that would kill the Huckster in the general if we were stupid enough to nominate the guy.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

nor does the Bible imply such. Man and woman were created in the image of God. God has given men and women different roles and responsibilities. He is very clear on what these roles and repsonsibilities are throughout the Scriptures.

I agree that the MSM will have a field day with this. I was just suprised to read a comment from someone on Redstate with a negative tone to a Bible truth. I am glad that Gov. Huckabee follows Biblical priniciples though.

While we certainly don't agree on the merits of Huckabee, you are exactly right. That doctrine isn't popular, but it certainly is Biblical.

"backward state like Arkansas"

Rick, seriously--I'm SO not on the Huckabee bandwagon, but can you lay off the Arkansas-bashing? It's so...elitist northern liberal. IOW, a losing strategy. You know, plenty would also say Tennessee is "backward" from that mindset as well. Should I remind you that Fred is from Tennessee?

Is it really necessary to insult everyone from Arkansas? Give them credit for electing him over a Democrat for governor, at least. Jeez. And leave the Arkansas-slamming to those of us from other Southern states, please. At least we've been there and/or have known Arkansans.

And really, lay off the Christian stereotyping. I know you know better. Don't destroy your argument (with which I agree in substance) by cheapening it with stuff like this.

-Beth

I agree with Limited Government's post above. Try not to judge the evangelicals out there too harshly.

You've got some good points here, Rick. However, if you use this 40% number and then find yourself surprised that they are cozying up to Huckabee....this reveals that you don't get out much - at least when it comes to understanding what is important to evangelical voters.

I simplify it greatly to say it this way, but there are a substantial number of them/us (perhaps many more than your 40%) that are less concerned with this world, what will happen with Iran, taxes, recession, etc and are instead vitally concerned with how they will someday be judged in front of God for the actions they take in this life. In the calculus of God-centered voting, a vote for a Pro-abortion Rudy (who wins) is far, far, worse than a vote for an Anti-Abortion Pro-HLA Huck (who loses).

You may find it ludicrous, you find it fantastically stupid, but they/we place more weight on how they/we vote than the actual end result of that vote. The big picture is left in God's hands. The requirement is not to be successful (which we cannot control), but to be faithful (which we can).

Huckabee appeals to this (and I'm sure believes this as well) and in him they find a kindred spirit who speaks their language. They feel they can place their vote with Huck in good conscience (win or lose) and then get back to the business of raising their families, working in their churches and sharing the Gospel.

Though I take the same serious approach to my vote that they do, I do not support Huck at all. I also see him as a disaster in the making and see Fred as the best choice for a committed believer, followed by Mitt (yes, the Mormon). I care less for what he believes that how that belief guides his hand.

This is the reality of life for a committed believer. Rail against it if you wish, but do not discount it, lest you be continually surprised.

*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk

but, I'm not that eloquent.

I believe you read my mind. Right down to the order of my candidate choices.

Go Fred!

I'm with Fred so far, but Huck is second - for many of the reasons you stated (the rest are tied for last place).

Electability is irrelevant to me, core values is the essence of a President.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison

5 by tcgeol

Excellent post! I also believe that Huckabee is tied for the worst nominee we have, but your point stands very well.

a vote for Rudy, who will appoint conservative judges who will be likely to overturn Roe, is a plus. A vote for Mike, who supports HLA which will NEVER get out of the Congress let alone the state legislatures and will wind up the opposition to the point that a nominee more conservative than Souter will never get out of the Senate, is a minus.

So, is it better to elect Rudy who will actually get something accomplished that will reduce abortions and begin to restore the rule of law or is it better to elect Mike who will get nothing accomplished and set the pro-life movement back to 1973?
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I wouldn't think so. I don't know how we get to saying a Pro-Choice candidate will nominate judges that will overturn Roe and a Pro-Life candidate won't.

-------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Positivist Pastafarian for the alliteration alone.

Who knows? He seems to think that Lawrence v Texas (dependent on the very same right to privacy that Roe is) was decided correctly. I wouldn't trust him to nominate anybody to the court. If Bush 41 (a guy I'd trust a heck of a lot more than Huckabee) got tricked into appointing Souter, what kind of mistakes might Huckabee make?

Heck, maybe he'd find some down-on-his-luck murderer/rapist to appoint the the court. That could really turn someone's life around.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman

nominate under the best of circumstances. His only comment so far on the judiciary was his approval of the Lawrence decision which should give us all pause.

Specifically, what I am saying is that because Bubba Jr. is outspoken in his support for the HLA (although he hasn't said which version of it) he will energize the pro-abortion groups who will light a big time fire under the Congressional Dems. This isn't like defunding the war. They can bring the confirmation process to an absolute grinding halt and refuse to confirm (or allow a floor vote on) any nominee who will not agree with Roe or at the very least agree with some stare decisis silliness. Bottom line, they'll shut down the Senate and he'll have to find Souteresque nominees.

And with respect to the "quality" of his potential nominees vs. Rudy's, I'll take Rudy's all day long. Rudy is a "law-and-order" guy, he knows and has worked with many of the current crop of Reagan DoJ folks whose names are prominent in judicial nominations and his advisory commission, headed by Ted Olson and Miguel Estrada are all-star conservative legal folks. In comparison, Mike is a non-starter.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

It forces the States to deal with the issues (which is how it should have been handled all along). Do you really expect Rudy to fight the creative financing vehicles the pro-abortion crowd will construct in order to circumvent the lack of direct federal funds. He won't, because he's not opposed to abortion. Conservative judges are very important, but so is the character of the President, his moral compass, ethics, and behavior.

Rudy was a GREAT mayor of NYC, I lived here before and after he took charge. I think he's the best mayor the city ever had. He was great for NYC, but he's too liberal on too many issues for me to support him for President.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison

Your children won't live long enough to see HLA passed. That is a pipe dream of the first order. Plus, which version of the HLA are we talking about and who is going to enforce what laws? Unless you're planning on passing a federal law against abortion, states will find a way around it because most of the versions of the HLA are very broad.

I'm shocked that you say you want a President with moral compass, ethics and behavior and would even consider voting for a guy who blatantly lies about his actions and blames everybody in sight for pointing out that he's done X. The guy had his hand out big time in Arkansas to the tune of accepting several hundred thousand dollars worth of bribes gifts and he even had the cajones to take the furniture out of the Governor's mansion when he left. Oh yeah, that was a misunderstanding - a $70,000 misunderstanding.

Mike Huckabee is nothing but a snake oil salesman dressed up like Elmer Gantry.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

WTH? No wonder the Dems aren't eating him alive (yet)--he's Bill Clinton!

Beth

and when somebody noticed that the furniture was gone he basicly said "I thought that was a gift!". He gave it back after the issue went to either the AR ethics commission or court, I can't remember which.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

So no blood no foul. The issue was fixed. Nobody is perfect. You are going to have to dig a lot deeper than Wayne Dumond or the furniture if you want to slow down Huckabee. I have not heard any convincing disqualifying argument yet against Huckabee. He's not my guy, but folks, you aren't going to win friends re-running Clinton style attacks on a guy who has already won elections (notice the plural) against the Clinton attack machine.

MOlsen6
Proud supporter of McCain '00 and McCain '08

because he's never run against a Clinton.

Secondly, like or not the guy is fundamentally dishonest. That may not bother you "he's a politician..." but the guy is a clone of Big Bubba. Maybe you're OK with that, but I'm not.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Nope. Don't agree. Who did Mike Huckabee run against again? He defeated Jimmie Lou Fisher, a long-time Clinton accomplice, and she was definitely running with the Clinton Arkansas organization. There was also Bill Bristow, a sacrificial lamb that he slaughtered in EVERY demographic group. Of course, that was after Jim Guy Tucker was convicted in the Whitewater scandal. So no, he didn't run against a Clinton, but he did run against their peeps. A nice data point for the current conversation.

Fundamentally dishonest? I can't agree with that judgment. And no, I don't think that most Republicans would agree at this point either. Maybe after more data, but not now. If you have an axe to grind, and support say FRED or Mitt, then I can see how you might see Huckabee as the source of all evil, but that doesn't make it so. The race is still fluid, and yes, Mike can still win. I don't think he will, but he can, at least theoretically.

MOlsen6
Proud supporter of McCain '00 and McCain '08

I agree with you to a point. I think elsewhere you call yourself an evangelical and from your other writings I know we align pretty much down the page on most issues.

Where we probably diverge is the role that we each believe man should play in acting out what we believe God's will to be.

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but I'll venture that you believe that you need to use your intellect to make the best strategic choice to further the long term goals. Looking at the big picture, you believe that you execute God's will by making the choice that most likely helps achieve the big picture. Hence Rudy.

I look at the same situation and track along with that strategy until I reach the point where I come up against an issue of faith and trust. At that point, I have done the best I can do with my understanding of the situation and I turn the rest over to God.

I cannot vote for a man who is willing to allow Abortion to continue. Yes, electoral calculus says go with Rudy, but my heart says trust in God and be faithful and do not compromise on an issue so fundamental. Hence I will support any other electable pro-life leader. This is no doubt what the world calls foolishness, but I believe it to be the right path to follow.

IMO, Huck's followers are sticking to the trust in God side of things while abdicating the rest of the vetting process. This is irresponsible, akin to the Steward who was given the talent and buried it in fear of losing it instead of at least investing it (using all of their brains) and getting something back for the master.

An analogy would be performing a stock/mutual fund analysis that results in two options to choose from. Both are likely to return results that meet your objectives. One of them may well exceed your ROI but has some social defect (Chinese slave labor, whatever), while the other may deliver a lower ROI, but is socially acceptable to your value system.

*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk

I cannot vote for a man who is willing to allow Abortion to continue.

Bush has done nothing to further HLA and FMA in his 2nd term. All he's done is nominate conservative SCOTUS judges. Rudy says he will do the same thing as Bush. Is his personal view that important to you even though his promised actions will actually go against that personal view?

I rhink Rudy shows a lot of character here, by being willing to do the right thing in spite of his personal view on abortion.

Fred08

==== 13 ====

Bush's first term either.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Come on folks... look at the arguments beyond the theology references, and then consider the Huckster's answer regarding education from yesterday's debate...

First of all, the whole role of [education] is a state issue, it's not really a federal issue, and the worst thing we can do is shift more authority to the federal government.



Then, in the very same answer he demands that every school in America should offer and require music and art classes

...unleash weapons of mass instruction. I'm a passionate, ardent supporter of having music and art in every school for every student at every grade level… Because let me understand you -- make sure you understand why. If we don't develop the right side with the same level of attention as we do the left side, the logical side of the brain, we end up with a bored student.



Don't ya just love the way Huckster throws out the "weapons of mass instruction"? I'm sure he used this literary construct in hundreds of sermons... sermons he won't let us see, since it would reveal that he has plagerized the style of sermonizing and knifeswitched it right on into his political sermonizing.

Draft Fred Thompson

I think the title of this post crosses the line.

--------------------------------------------------------
"I die the King's good servant, and God's first." Saint Thomas More.

like another poster did that Huck plagiarizes his seromns?

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

I'll debate within it and portions of the topic are valid, but I wont recommend it.

*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk

minus the title and delve into the Christian view on patriarchal v matriarchal roles in the family (for which I withold my recommend), nice job pointing out the blaring inconsistencies and doublespeak spewing forth from Huck.

Look, you're never going to completely get rid of abortion. There will always be a NARAL lobby large enough to sustain it, in some form - rape or incest, health of the mother. So, the SoCon's fantasy land where abortion magically disappears is never going to happen.

What can be done is on the grassroots level, which has been slowly happening recently by aggressively promoting adoption programs on the local and state level, while limiting abortion via the ban on partial birth abortion and adopting parental notification. Most importantly, is instilling self-worth and the drive for personal betterment in life. (Teenage athletes, debate team members, those active at church and in the community aren't the ones getting pregnant. Same goes for women putting their careers and themselves ahead of landing a man.)

thearmchairrepublican.blogspot.com

Robertson and so forth. This blog is a bit too brutal because the problem is so minute. The governor will be "HuckAWho?" in about 12 weeks, which is a pretty good run for his 15 minutes and not worth alienating a lot of voters in the process.

Recommended only due to the quality.

I must admit I don't get the surge for the Shuckster. I am a conservative Christian but I don't believe in blind faith if that is indeed what is responsible for the Huck's pole surge. In other words, are those who seem to be jumping on his bandwagon lately doing so merely as a result of encouragement by leaders at local churches to support a professing evangelical minister? If so, these people are derelict in their civic duties and need to exert more effort in the unique and grave responsibility of being a sovereign U.S. citizen.

Church is full of believers and deceivers and in all good conscience choosing a president that would be an upright and strong leader who doesn't compromise or adjust his values out of a sensing of political opportunism is a must for me. Actions reveal what a man truly believes. This requires examining the records of those who seek our votes. If Mike Huckabee is running on the premise of having us believe he is a conservative then his record reveals he is either too spineless to stick to his principals in the face of liberal opposition or he is a dismal hypocrite with no depth to those values he would have us believe he possesses. Taxes, illegal immigration, bureaucracy, education; in all these areas he does someone like John Edwards proud:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316496,00.html

He also has no detailed understanding of foreign policy and is not someone (as Fred said) I could see sitting across the table from our fiercest enemy and doing our nation proud.

Another possible explanation of the surge is an influx of shills by the democrats hoping to get Huck to the general election and then use the 'bigot' card or 'separation of church and state' card against him to give Hillary a fighting chance. Or is it a bunch of fanatic Huck supporters borrowing a page from the tinfoil hats and flooding polls with an American Idol style of voting?

Who knows? All I know is that Fred has the right view of the original intent and purpose of the Constitution, and has the most long-term consistently conservative record of all these pretenders; he has my vote. He also professes to be a Christian, and that may well be, but doesn't use that for political gain. I trust Fred to be a level headed, plain spoken, strong president and I just can't see anyone else in the field distinguishing themselves for posterity as a POTUS. I don't want someone who adapts new positions constantly, like many Republican front runners, and who then take strides to pretend they have always held those positions.

Go get 'em Fred.

Or is it a bunch of fanatic Huck supporters borrowing a page from the tinfoil hats and flooding polls with an American Idol style of voting?

YES. Not just that, but it's definitely there.

Beth

A picture is worth a thousand words:

Stupid can be downright dangerous.

Link

You add a lot to the conversation....8 weeks and that's all you have, what a dipstick.

" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised

Hardly by Rae

[editorial idiocy, excessive ellipses and personal attacks deleted] 8 weeks and that's all you have

Hardly. Nanny Huckabee is my favorite target here on RS!

Ok I get that Fred is substance but why say the Huckster is stupid?

I could think of many other things to call him.

But one I hope I will never call him is Mr. President.

This sinks the Huckster.


We don't need another compassionate conservative. Especially one that releases murderers on society because of how he feels.

Mike Huckabee is flat out not a Reagan Conservative. But don't just take my word for it...

http://www.huckabeefacts.org

I agree with mikegood1, that this is just one big ridiculous rant. I'm sorry, but Rick Moran sounds like a child stomping his feet and whining, "Why aren't Iowans listening to me?! Iowans aren't listening to me, so they must be stupid!" Well, I'll tell you why they are not listening to you (and the rest of the Huck haters). They're not listening to you because the Huck hatred has gotten to be such a cacophonous symphony of noise, that they've totally tuned it and you out. In a nutshell, the Huck hatred is, now, so over the top, that it has become cartoonish, and thus, the Huck haters have made themselves ridiculous--which is one of the reasons why Huck continues to rise in the polls. Newsflash--your brilliant "strategy" is not working. For instance, Iowans hear the Republican establishment and the Huck haters call Huckabee "a liar, a phony, a snake oil salesman, a bigot, and a religious nut job", among other things. But then, in the debates and campaign appearances, Iowans see an intelligent, witty, articulate, urbane, and all-around likeable guy--and then the Huck-haters sound like a bunch of crack pots. If you want Huck to win more primaries than just Iowa, then keep this craziness up. By the way, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

On a side note, I was lunching with some non-evangelical doctors and some other medical students in the hospital cafeteria today, and they all say that they've been extremely impressed with Huck's proposals on preventative health care. Are they all "stupid" too--like the Iowans? Not to mention, my mother has been a teacher for forty years, and she happens to like Huck's ideas on education. Let me guess, she must be "stupid" too--just like the Iowans. Oh, and by the way, calling people "stupid" is not a good way to win friends and influence people--it just makes you sound way immature.

And finally, if you want people to listen to you, try to be more like OZ, and make rational arguments about why you think that your candidate is the best one, and give an honest assessment of Huck's vulnerabilities--but also be honest about his strengths. I am a Huck supporter, but I am more than willing to listen to other's arguments about why their candidate might be better--as long as people try to persuade me and not belittle me--otherwise I'll tune you out, just like the "stupid" Iowa voters are.

Oh, and let's please stop this charade of pretending that Fred's been some saint on the Mormon issue. His campaign manager in South Carolina has a history of anti-Mormon rhetoric. Maybe she's been fired--if she has, then good on Fred--but I'm not aware of her having been fired. I realize that Huck's comment about Mormonism to that NYT reporter was bad form and he was right to apologize. However, there are no saints in politics--only candidates.

Apparently the Huck haters think by talking crap about our candidate and calling us stupid we will say "oh my gosh, you're right. Thanks for calling me stupid, I wasn't aware I was such a moron, I will vote for your guy now".

But hey, desperate times call for desperate measures. Fred is falling, Huck is rising, so they're throwing everything got at him.

But a quick question to you "Fredheads" (who are turning me off to Fred, even though he was my #2 choice for a while, though I see that changing soon if this kind of venom keeps up): when was the last time calling someone stupid in an argument won them over to your side?

Answer that question honestly, and rethink your strategy before it's too late.

I'm a FredHead, but I reject the attacks on fellow Republicans (well except for the faux-"Republicans" who support RP), and always have. I don't think y'all are stupid, nor do I think Huckabee is stupid. I just think he's wrong, and that his supporters and I have a difference of opinion. A difference which I hope to resolve, once you see the light. ;-)

Libs, OTOH--they're stupid. ;-P

Beth

But if "he was my #2 choice for a while, though I see that changing soon if this kind of venom keeps up" has some logic to it, please explain it to me.

Are we going to vote on a leader or on his followers?

The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.

The poster does sound like a child throwing a tantrum.

------------------------------------------------
Eliminate the IRS and all payroll taxes! http://www.fairtax.org

Huckabee is the new McCain,on Redstate.

Borrowing from the Democrat playbook huh? If the voters reject your candidate, its not because the candidate has a message they don't like, its because they're too stupid to know whats good for them?

I think that's what the libs were saying after GWB won in 2004.

I totally disagree with painting all Evangelical Huckabee supporters as stupid. On the other hand, I agree whole heartedly with the analysis of his incredibly shallow policies. Seriously, proposing tax credits and a Fair Tax? What???

I think part of the reputation for Huckabee supporters not making a smart decision in who to support is that almost all Huckabee supporters say they are conservatives. The problem is that Huckabee is economically very liberal and wishy washy on foreign policy at times. If you said you were socially conservative and economically liberal then clearly Huckabee is the candidate for you. But it's hard to see why you would support someone who opposes such a huge amount of what you say you stand for. Why would you do that? I have NEVER heard a decent explanation from a conservative as to why ignoring Huckabee's numerous liberal positions is a good idea.

For example, I'm a Giuliani supporter because foreign policy is my #1 issue, with economic conservatism not far behind. I'm a social moderate who doesn't put much weight on social issues. As you can see, Giuliani is just about the perfect candidate for me.

What does Huckabee have that Fred doesn't except a slightly better communication style borrowed from John Edwards?

that Mike Huckabee might turn out to be a Republican "Jimmy Carter." I prefer the methodical thoughtfulness of a Fred Thompson over the ability to rattle off one liners. I am also leery of candidates who change their positions on important issues in time to run in the next primary.

http://www.theseriouschristian.org/

You're lucky I am not a moderator at Red State or you would just have been banned.

"Huckabee - former governor of a small, impoverished state, a baptist preacher whose conservative views on social issues make him a perfect candidate for the Leave it to Beaver wing of the GOP"

This whole rant is just an anti-Christian diatribe. It is ridiculous attacks like this that is actually driving up Huckabee's numbers.

I am not a Huckabee supporter because of his stance on several issues. But to attack him and Christians for their moral beliefs is outrageous.

A sad state of affairs indeed when tripe like this can be posted and nothing done about it.

moderator at RedState.

And please solve the mystery for us all and quote the article for it's "anti-Christian" sentiments.

A little irreverence never hurt anybody - except a humorless boob like you.

Huck is not by any measure the guy I want carrying the GOP banner, but he doesn't deserve this ...

long ago.

more later on why Huck leads in the Iowa poll and why its not because Evagelicals that elected Reagan and both Bushes and who polled for Mitt and other earlier this year

are not stupid

Hint: One main reason is that Fred, Rudy and McCain haven't spent the time there to get their votes and

haven't wowed them in debates.

more later

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

Even though you don't support my candidate (Huck), I always enjoy reading your posts. :-)

this weekend after dealing with law and the economy the past few weeks, and do a long analysis of Huck, his surge, and the over the top criticism of him. I have problems with Huck, but I am having more problems with some of his critics and especially the critics of his supporters.

god bless

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com

"Apparently the Huck haters think by talking crap about our candidate and calling us stupid we will say "oh my gosh, you're right. Thanks for calling me stupid, I wasn't aware I was such a moron, I will vote for your guy now".

But hey, desperate times call for desperate measures. Fred is falling, Huck is rising, so they're throwing everything got at him.

But a quick question to you "Fredheads" (who are turning me off to Fred, even though he was my #2 choice for a while, though I see that changing soon if this kind of venom keeps up): when was the last time calling someone stupid in an argument won them over to your side?

Answer that question honestly, and rethink your strategy before it's too late."

http://www.hucksarmy.com
Join the Mike Huckabee LinkedIn Group
Join the Houston Area Mike Huckabee Meetup Group

I don't think your stupid for supporting Mike -maybe ignorant:)- but not stupid. My only beef with Huck supporters is that they seem to have come from nowhere. Where was his support several weeks ago. He has always been dynamic. I attribute his rise to more bandwagon type support. Maybe not with all but the majority.

_They're certainly entitled to think that, and they're entitled to full respect for their opinions... but before I can live with other folks I've got to live with myself. The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience.~Harper

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service