Redstate

can I use it?

because I have the answer for you right here on this chart. You weren't paying attention, were you, pscblazer20? If you'd just let me finish, pscblazer20, I'd tell you that it's a pig in a poke. You listenin', pscblazer20.

(That's my best Carvey-as-Perot, with your handle substituted for "Larry.")

Haha not bad yea Larry! Can I finish? Can I finish?

They can use Perot's plan for the economy too seen here! hahaha: http://snltranscripts.jt.org/91/91sperot.phtml

The post was not written to accuse Romney of anything or to analyze Huckabee's tactics. I've been listening to Romney attack Huckabee with characterizations of his record for a few days now, and Team Huckabee hasn't been able to do a thing. It struck me as pathetic, and I think Rollins was brought on to do something about this. If Huckabee wants to win this thing, he needs a professional and national organization, and now that he thinks he has a chance, he looks like he's starting to build one.

If it quakes like a duck, looks like a duck, it is a duck. If you had left Romneys name out, or realized it has been others doing the attack you would have been on solid ground. But you didn't. Even in your last reply, you still did a dig at Romney, accusing him for all of Huckabees self inflicted wounds.
.
_____________________________________________________
American First, Conservative Second, Republican Third

Huckabee's campaign did not know how to deal with it. Huckabee brought in Ed Rollins. I think part of the Rollins hiring was a reaction to Romney's attacks.

I did not attack Romney. I did not issue a personal judgment on his strategy of attacking Huckabee. (At first glance, it's a good strategy for Romney, as it detracts from Romney's possible lack of "core political beliefs." At further glance, though, it could reopen an examination of Romney's conservatism-of-convenience, if that it be.)

I'm looking at this from a campaign perspective, not choosing sides.

I'm looking at this from a campaign perspective, not choosing sides.

That's not how I read it. Upon re-reading in that light I can see where you were going.

Sorry.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

I'm sorry, but given the amount of money the campaign has and has used- that's gotta be a joke.

If you really mean to tell me that Romney's $7 million expenditure on Iowa thus far was all for build rapport and support, and "positive ads" than you're definitely not the "campaign insider" I thought you were ;-)

How many more times are we going to hear you cry over Romneys' $7 million spent in Iowa?

It's his campaign, his strategy and his money. It's his choice to spend it as he sees fit. Get over it.

Jim Tomasik

This ain't over yet.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

You asked, "When did a discussion of past policy and decisions become ceaseless attacks?"

Why not ask Romney? When one of his recent past, assorted, policy positions or decisions are mentioned, some call it a personal attack.

If it is fair to mention Huckabee's past on immigration, is it fair game to discuss one of Romney's various positions on abortion, for example?

I'll make you a deal. If Romney shakes up his campaign team, which is long overdue, I'll ask if he has done so to better respond to Huckabee's attacks.

Are you seriously forwarding the notion that Romney's position on issues such as abortion and the like have not been vetted here and elsewhere? Over-and-over-and-over again? Seriously?

And of course it's fair to bring up Romney's past on these issues. Hardly a day went by over the summer when these weren't talked about, dare I say, ceaselessly. Where were you?

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

LAWL.

Answered to the Romney campaign's satisfaction, but not vetted.

I gave you the example of how he lied when he said as late as the Iowa debate that he chose life when a bill hit his desk.

That apparently wasnt so with regard to the health care bill in which women in his state can get cheap abortions which, from what I read, are partly state funded.

Romney signed the bill instead of vetoing it.

So, if we are use the same anology - if Congress was controlled by Democrats and sent Romney a bad bill, would he sign it as well?

Dont even get me started on gun control and how he refuses to define what an assault weapon is - or if he supports restricting "nonsporting" ammunition.

Romney is just as to the left as huckabee is.. the only difference is that Huckabee is up front about it.

8-months of nearly daily beating of Mitt Romney's liberalism at RedState and elsewhere and you're not satisfied that he's been sufficiently vetted.

Take this as an opportunity, paul. Go for it! Grab the vetting bull by the horns and sing it to the masses. Let's have another couple of months of daily stories about Mitt's socialist, big-government liberalism. Seriously.

Or, don't vote for the guy. Your call.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Don't confuse your guilt with someone trying to manipulate you. I have reconciled my faith in the Lord and my desire to see our sovereignty secure.

I lived most of my life in Southern California and have spent time ministering to children in Mexico, who literally lived in garbage dumps.

I am also adamantly anti-illegal immigration. It doesn't take much study to see how an international border can be secured -- take Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Mike Huckabee has put together a good plan to secure the border and has been endorsed by Jim Gilchrist (founder of the Minutemen Project).

What Mike brings to the debate that will take place with Democrats is a credibility of true compassion for the plight of the poor immigrant (legal and illegal) and their children. How refreshing for Republicans NOT to be called racist, don't you think? And, what a relief it will be to actually get something done -- which no other candidate has a hope of doing in Congress.

If Mike evokes his own personal faith in the Lord to obtain this credibility, I believe it is with sincerity.

First of all Jim Gilchrist is a fruitcake of the first order. He did a great job organizing the Minutemen, but as a policy guy he's got his head so far in his nether region he'll never find reality. Fits right in with The Huckster, though.

I find no relief in not being called racist for wanting to protect our borders and making it as difficult as possible for illegial aliens to survive here. What part of "they have no right to be here" don't you get? Democrats are always going to fall back on name calling and resorting to hurt feelings. Time to man-up and beat them into the ground, not react with "compassion", which will do no more than give them the legislation they want. We've had all the compassion from Government we need for the last six years.

Thanks for your work with the kids in Mexico. Don't let it tarnish your ability to make policy for the US. Those starving Mexican kids are MEXICO's problem not the problem of the US Government. This BS is how socialism succeeds.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I'm beginning to think that people have lost any and all reason.

We totally have become a society of talk show watchers where if there is some sad music track behind a sad sob story, we'll buy anything and everything those selling us something have to offer.

We, as citizens, should be concerned for our neighbors. It's why we're the most charitable nation on Earth. It's also why we as a nation defend countries who have been attacked and why we give our national treasure and blood to help others achieve the blessings we've had for over 230 years.

We as a political party, are constantly having to fight an aggressive and manipulative media working against us and rational views non-stop.

And now, we are being told we should swallow a candidate that is only partially right on two issues (and of course, how he's wrong on those issues will set us back decades if he pushes his amendments plan).

I simply cannot understand how more people cannot see the forest for the trees. If Huckabee is ours at the end, we are going to end up with THEIRS as president.

I thought I was smelling something funny from Redstate's resident Baptist minister.

I cooked some pinto beans the other day in my crockpot. I've never thought about putting crap into it, though.

What's it taste like, mbecker?

What smells worse, the crock or your dead white cat?

Seriously, I can't/won't seriously respond to your points until you tone down your descriptives. You're a smart guy. Why do you have to be so invective?

Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse's Mouth

"Time to man-up and beat them into the ground, not react with 'compassion'..."

LOL

You make my point. I know you meant the Democrats, not the illegal immigrants. But, when will people realize that this kind of vitriol does not help to get our border secure? If I was a liberal reporter or Congressman, you would now be a racist, calling for the murder of innocent Mexicans.

I am also not sure why you find it important to disparage Jim Gilchrist. He is a good man who took action while others just talked (or blogged). I voted for and walk a few precincts for Jim Gilchrist for Congress.

And, what a relief it will be to actually get something done -- which no other candidate has a hope of doing in Congress.

AAAAARGH!

I find it beyond annoying to see this cr*p on a conservative site. Let's all get this straight. None of us should give a damn about getting "something done" unless it is the right/correct thing that is getting done.

It's one of the reasons I haven't yet warmed up to McCain; he wants to just "get things done" and in Washington DC, that often just means giving policy authorship to Ted Kennedy.

And finally, resorting to asserting that "only [my candidate] can do X" with no evidence to support it is ... well, let's just say, silly.

How refreshing for Republicans NOT to be called racist, don't you think?

Are you seriously under the mistaken impression that Huckabee would escape the perennial accusations of racism that always dog every single Republican candidate for President? Do you honestly think the NAACP would fail to do as ordered by their patrons at the DNC and hold back on Huckabee? Do you really think the MSM would not plaster it all over the news when (not if) the NAACP inevitably issues the press release accusing Huckabee of being a closet member of the KKK?

What world do you live in?

Remember just a few months ago the sad and depressing state of affairs when the Republican Party was actually considering nominating a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, anti-gun nut? Resolved as it were that Hillary was inevitable, but if we compromise all we believe and hold dear that "we" might win.

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?"

Win or lose, Mike Huckabee has awakened the party and the people. He has given hope of victory without compromise -- showing that "anyone but Rudy" could win the nomination and beat Hillary/Obama.

He has given hope of victory without compromise...

How can you look at Huckabee's domestic platform and not see a complete (a la GWB) surrender of every, single, solitary small, limited-government Republican principle we held dear prior to, say, 2001?

Ugh.

-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

He has given hope of victory without compromise

His platform is an absolute compromise of everything fiscal and limited government conservatives hold dear. He and Rudy are opposite sides of the same coin.

Personally, I don't even think that Rudy is as bad as Huck. After all, Rudy isn't attacking James Dobson, Pat Robertson, et. al on talk shows or saying that Repubs who don't support abortion are "heartless".

Huckabee is a Baptist Minister and knows what Jesus Christ meant when he spoke of Matthew 25:40 and illegal immigrants. Some translations of the verse are more like: "Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, [even] these least, ye did it unto me."

The question is whether this applies to a government or to individuals. Since governments cannot be save, got to heaven, etc., it's difficult to see how it would apply to these entities.

I posited that Huckabee in part reacted to the attacks from Romney by bringing Rollins on board. I don't think the attacks of others had anything to do with it.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Rollins' is way past it. I think he'll ineffectively spend what money Huck has and ultimately hurt him.

N/T