OT: Huckabee, Ughh

Page 3 of 13  
Jeff wrote:

Yet you are applying a religious test of your own. Because Huckabee is an open person of faith, you are indicating that he is unworthy of holding office and are projecting upon the citizens of Iowa that the only reason they are choosing him is because of religion.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Maybe not the ONLY reason, but religion is definitely a HUGE considertation for them.
This Schneider dude summed things up nicely: (From CNN web page): http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/04/new.hampshire.2008/index.html
----If Huckabee is to win the nomination, CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said he has to broaden his appeal beyond the religious base that fueled his Iowa win. ---"He has to appeal to the non-evangelical Republican voters, to those who do not put religion in first place," Schneider said.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Meet the first family:
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/huckfamily.jpg That is NOT photoshopped.
He reminds me of him:
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/gomer2.jpg
Is that what you want, Mark? Really?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

As opposed to this? <
http://www.zombietime.com/really_truly_hillary_gallery/Hillary55.jpg
Reminds me of: <
http://www.scaredwhitewitches.com/pic5.jpg
Absolutely.
Huckabee isn't my top pick, but looking at the other side's alternatives, he is head and shoulders above that.
In general, winning Iowa doesn't really mean that candidate is going to win the nomination.
What I really want is a true conservative to win, most of the leaders right now fall more into the populist camp than the conservative camp.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Touchι.
LOL. I thoroughly despise Clinton. She's a neo-con.... even worse than that Bilderberger Edwards. Obama is by far the best the dems have. My gut instinct tells me he's a moral man will good intentions. In relative terms, you understand.

"At the other side's alternatives" I'll give you that without the head and shoulders and Obama.

Therein lies the hope for Ron Paul. I think he has as much moral fibre as Huckabee without the disastrous track record. Huck's pardon record tells me something... he wants to be liked a little too much. If you drop party lines, you want a guy that is up to the job of putting your great country back on track. You also want a guy who you can't mess with. McCain is such a guy. You can scare Huck too easily.
As an outsider, and for purely selfish reasons which include ending up with a nice neighbour, I'd pick Paul, Obama, McCain in that order for a myriad of reasons.

The liberal/conservative line is so damned blurry, let's just hope for a guy who can do the job. In a stretch of reality: An Obama/Paul ticket would be as cool as anything. (As opposed to a Paul/Obama, which couldn't get elected) And give the Sec Defence to Wesley Clark, maybe Edwards for AG (mmmmm he worries me with that Bilderberg shit.). Bill Clinton for State? ...and make Christopher Walken head of the CIA. *G*
BTW, I think Obama/Paul would be one helluva team. But who has those kinda gonads, eh?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robatoy wrote:

Why would you think he would be competent for any post? The last decade of his career and subsequent comments surely don't inspire such confidence.

Why?......While having a very successful "sue them till it hurts" career.....his gift is with juries not necessarily the law.... If he could pick voters like he picks juries he might go somewhere President wise but he can't.

Why? His softball take few risks, promise lots, defer anything difficult to succeeding administrations while delivering little and appeasing Muslim's at will administration is no poster boy for successful foreign policy. Rod
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It would be to patch-up of the US image. He has a lot of friends in Europe, he'd be useful shaking hands. Doesn't get to make the hard decisions.

I was more thinking of him going after corrupt contractors and such with the same vigour he used to nail the tobacco companies. He preaches a corporate clean-up.

I think he'd look okay in photo ops but wouldn't be allowed to make decisions. Who else would look on the world stage?
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 02:39:21 -0800 (PST), Robatoy

LOL, kind of like his esteemed colleague Dickie Scruggs.
Frank
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Personally, I'd like to see Bill Richardson at State. His futile run for the nomination maybe nothing more than an angle to land a job such as that. Yeah, that sucks. But the State Department doesn't exactly post that position and accept resumes...
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

While on the subject of appeasing Muslims, just weeks after Osama bin Laden was identified as the mastermind behind the bombing of the Cole:
"The State Department officially released its annual terrorism report just a little more than an hour ago, but unlike last year, there's no extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. A senior State Department official tells CNN the U.S. government made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden and 'personalizing terrorism.'"
-- CNN, 4/30/2001.
--
FF


Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

LOL. As a resident of Arkansas I can tell you that if Ron Paul doesn't have better moral fiber and ethics than Huckabee he would be a bigger disaster than the current administration. As governor The Huck (formally "Widebody" before his gastric bypass) he had a real since of entitlement to all the gifts people wanted to bestow on him. Set up PACs to collect money he used for personal expenses. Constant controversy and questions over his ethical lapses. Average intelligence, gullible and paranoid. Just why did he take the extraordinary step of crushing all of his administrations hard drives at his terms end? He was hiding something. Instead of appointing competent people to important posts he appointed his friends and people he knew from the past because as he said "I know them and I am comfortable with them". In other words he wanted 'Yes Men". He can orate and play guitar a little. I realize no one can predict the future and how events will turn out but I t I believe he would be an absolute disaster as President. Among ALL the candidates Democrat or Republican he is the least qualified and the last I would vote for. I am a political independent and will vote for the person I judge most likely to be able to do the job. Not looking for a "nice guy" or girl, or entertainer but a hard nosed pragmatic manager with intelligence and political skill. my .02
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why do you counter a jaw-dropping photo of the Republican victor with one of the Democratic third-place finisher. It seems to me you could compare maple to maple. (Hey, I fit something relevant to woodworking into this conversation...)
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:19:12 -0700, Mark & Juanita wrote:

Don't know about Jeff, but I'm applying a reality test. Anyone who says the Earth is only 6000 years old has a very tenuous grip on reality.
I don't want someone in office who may well think that a war in the Middle East is a great way to bring on the second coming :-).
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Very few Christians believe that the earth is only 6000 years old and apparently neither does Huckabee .....he does however believe in a creative process if I may quote.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id140255 Huckabee said he has no problem with teaching evolution as a theory in the public schools and he doesn't expect schools to teach creationism.
"We shouldn't indoctrinate kids in school," he said. "I wouldn't want them teaching creationism as if it's the only thing that they should teach."
Also, students should be given credit for having the intelligence to think through various theories for themselves and come to their own conclusions, he said.
He said it was his responsibility to teach his children his beliefs though he could accept that others believe in evolution.
"I believe that there is a God and that he put the process in motion," Huckabee said.
The former Arkansas governor said about the evolution question: "I'm not sure what in the world that has to do with being president of the United States."
Oddly in the creator Vs evolution debate generally the evolutionists are intolerant, wish absolute control of the message and generally ridicule contrary views...surely not a path to great science.....Rod
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 13:45:47 -0800, "Rod & Betty Jo"

That's ridiculous, students aren't there to come to their own conclusions, they're there to learn. There is one, and only one reality and any conclusions in this area need to match said reality. Otherwise, it's about as worthless as letting students reach the conclusion that 2+2=5.

That's all well and good, he can teach whatever he wants to in his home and in his church, but when it comes to school, the kids are going to learn and be expected to understand evolution. If they choose to reject it after the test, that's fine with me. Pathetic, but fine.

I'd say it has a lot to do with it. Having a President who rejects reality in favor of his own religious belief is just asking for trouble. You cannot run a country based on the belief that you can get on your knees and pray and some imaginary friend in the sky will solve all your problems. In a practical world, you have to exercise practical solutions.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:49:07 +0000, Brian Henderson wrote:

How about that? Ten thousand words later we finally got back to the root of the original discussion :-).
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 19:11:37 -0800, Larry Blanchard

Shhhh! You know it won't last! :)
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The individual voter is free to apply such a test, or not, as they choose.
--
FF


Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, it is straightforward. However a lot of people don't realize that 'establishment of religion' is a term of art, more or less an idiomatic expression.
BTW, 'respect for the rule of law' while less obscure, is also a term of art, the proper understanding of which requires more than a mere understanding of the precise meanings of the words themselves.
--
FF





Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote: ...

... I suppose not, this being the first time I've ever heard that claim.
Where is this made known widely and what does the term mean in plain English?
--
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.