| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
Banishing the Huckabee Boogeyman
So now we know.... It will be Barack Obama and John McCain contending head to head in contest to be the president of these united states, and early polling seems to indicate that the vice presidential pick of each gentleman will have a significant influence on how each candidate fares in any number of swing states.
There is a chance, no one knows how great, or how small, that John McCain may decide that the former governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee, may be the person he needs on his ticket to give him the best chance at winning in the currently democratic friendly electoral environment.
There are many, many self described conservatives who have said this would be the last straw, that they would not vote for a McCain/Huckabee ticket. Much of this hostility is rooted in opinions formed of the man, out of the nuggets produced by opposition research in the primaries. Nuggets designed to paint Huckabee in the worst possible light.
Just as we have gone through the process of sifting through the partisan rhetoric to find the areas on which McCain and conservatives can agree, I believe that it is time to start making the case for acceptance of individuals who though not perfectly aligned with our multi-pronged philosophies, may perhaps find themselves on the ticket and in need of our support.
I do not limit this evaluation to Huckabee alone. I would love for someone to make Mitt's case as well, as it is foolish to believe that the entire conservative base is united behind the idea of Mitt for VP, especially in regards to the social conservative wing of the party.
I do not believe in reinventing the wheel. A fairly comprehensive summary of Mike Huckabee's governing philosophy and positions on the issues was written by Joe Carter, a member of his rapid response on line team during the campaign. I am not sure how significant its impact was at the time, but I would like to reintroduce it to the blogosphere for your consideration.
As with most politicians, some of Mike's positions have evolved or been refined over time. Some may define this as a 'flip' but I challenge you to find a 'flop.' Huckabee has never moved back and forth on the same subject multiple times. He has always delievered on his campaign promises and on his word in general. As a result, his supporters feel safe in believing that his current political platform does indeed represent who and what he would be about in the whitehouse, in any capacity.
Please attempt for a few minutes to lay your preconceptions to the side and 'discover' Mike Huckabee for the first time again. I am not asking you to decide if he is a 'conservative' by whatever definition you may use, but rather, to think about if someone with these governing philosophies would be a conservative influence on a president McCain, and ultimately, if a team of these two individuals is more acceptable than a Barack Obama administration.
The article is lengthy, but well worth the read. Thanks for your time, and please be polite in your commentary, even if you forcefully disagree. Here is the link to the original source:
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/004182.html
For the past few months I've been defending Governor Mike Huckabee against an onslaught of attacks on his character, positions, and record. When I worked for the campaign I spent a significant portion of my time clearing up misconceptions for journalists and parrying dishonest accusations made by other campaigns. And here on this blog I've written numerous posts responding to the questions posed by bloggers and rebutting claims made by sundry interest groups.Yet all this time I've failed to make a positive case for why I feel Governor Huckabee to be the most visionary and conservative candidate in the race. I naively assumed that everyone was seeing what I was seeing. Indeed, I'm embarrassed to admit that I failed to recognize that not everyone would have the same familiarity with his policy positions as his former Director of Research.
To rectify this situation I've compiled a list of his most significant policy positions on a range of issues--from tax reform to national security. While all of this information can be found online, I thought it would be useful to cut away the excess verbiage in order to provide as succinct a set of statements as possible. I've also included a prefatory section that explains Governor Huckabee's philosophy of governance.
Although this compilation is not exhaustive, I do believe that it provides a useful outline for anyone who wants to familiarize themselves on Huckabee's true positions on the issues.
Philosophy of Governance
Governor Mike Huckabee: "To me conservative governance means following the "original intent" of the Founding Fathers, it means recognizing that Jefferson won the debate with Hamilton, and that we want very strong, energetic, innovative states, with government both as limited as possible and as close to the people as possible. The states should not usurp functions that can be handled locally, and the federal government should not usurp functions that can be handled by the states. An important part of being a conservative President for me would be strengthening federalism. Conservative governance also means an emphasis on personal responsibility and letting the free market function unencumbered, so that Americans have tremendous opportunity, but not a guaranteed outcome. It means smaller, more efficient government; lower government spending; lower taxes. It means keeping the government out of our lives and letting families keep as much of the money they earn and make as many of their own decisions as possible. It means allowing younger workers to have personal Social Security accounts. It means getting entitlements under control.
I believe that our rights come from God, not from our government; that the people should retain as much power and be left alone as much as possible; that the federal government should not do what can be done at the local or state level; that our government belongs to the people, not the lobbyists and special interests; that government at all levels exists to serve the people and not the other way around; that we must respect the separation of powers and no branch should usurp the authority of another; that my greatest responsibility is to protect the American people from all threats; that the free market, low taxes, and minimal regulation are the keys to economic growth and prosperity; that Americans are owed equal opportunity, but not an equal outcome; that we are a culture of life and recognize that each individual has intrinsic value and worth; that we are only as strong as our families; that we owe a huge debt to those who have given their lives for this country to protect the freedoms and way of life for which they sacrificed.
I would weigh all of my decisions in the context of those principles to assure that I am doing the right thing and not the popular or expedient thing. I will always err on the side of protecting life, strengthening our families, and protecting our citizens and our country from possible threats to their safety."
(Response provided to the American Conservative Union)
Issues and Positions
Tax Reform
-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible
-Make health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. (Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions.)
-Preserve and expand President Bush’s tax cuts
-Eliminate the marriage penalty
-Cut taxes on savings
-Eliminate the Death Tax
-Reduce counterproductively high personal and corporate marginal tax rates.
-Encourage "baby boomers" who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.
-Long-term goal: implementation of the FairTax so that American workers keep their entire paycheck, American businesses can compete on a level-playing field with their foreign competitors, and so that we can brings jobs and investment that are currently parked off-shore back to the United States.
Economy
-Subprime mortgage crisis: begin a second round of negotiations with subprime lenders with an eye toward expansion of the “Hope Now” program.
-Cut burdensome red tape that drives up the cost of products and keeps employers from hiring more workers or raising wages.
-Reduce frivolous lawsuits which drive up costs of products and medical care.
-Institute free trade that is fair to America. We will expect our trading partners to live up to their obligations—everyone must play by fair rules.
-Open new markets for American products.
-Ensure the Federal Reserve adapts a pro-growth, low-inflation policy.
-Veto earmarks and unnecessary discretionary spending
Energy Independence
-Implement a national energy security policy which will end our dependence on Middle Eastern oil within ten years by conserving, exploring, and inventing our way to independence in energy.
-pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.
-Remove red tape that slows innovation, allow the free market to sort out what makes the most sense economically.
-Set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels.
Social Issues
-Support passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life.
-Support passage of a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
-Oppose all embryo-destructive research.
-Veto any pro-abortion legislation, including federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
Education
-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible
-Support the rights of parents to home school their children
-Support states that want to create more charter schools or implement public school choice.
-Allow states to develop their own benchmarks.
-Work towards a clear distinction between the federal role in assisting and empowering states and in usurping the right of states to carry out the education programs for their students
Healthcare
-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.
-Reform medical liability
-Support the adoption of electronic record keeping
-Make health insurance more portable from one job to another
-Expand health savings accounts to include all Americans.
-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.)
-Encourage the states' role as laboratories for new market-based approaches.
Immigration
-Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.
-Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.
-Increase the number of border patrol agents.
-Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.
-Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.
-Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.
-This is not a "touchback" provision. Those who leave this country and apply to return from their home country would go to the back of the line.
-Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.
-Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.
-Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.
-Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don't match the employees' names.
-Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.
-Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.
-End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress' intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.
-Reject Mexico's "matricula consular" card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.
-Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.
-Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).
-Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.
-Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.
-Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.
-Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream.
Judges
-Huckabee's judicial philosophy: "I believes that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a "living Constitution." The meaning of the Constitution cannot be changed by judicial fiat. The powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution come from "We the People," and judges have no right to prohibit the people from passing democratically-enacted laws unless we have explicitly authorized them to do so. Nor can vaguely-worded language in the Constitution be used by judges to give them power over subjects the framers never intended our founding document to address. As such, any interpretation of the Constitution that is based on "evolving standards of decency," penumbras, or any other judicial fiction, is antithetical to the rule of law, and must be forcefully challenged."
-Appoint justices and judges who not only share his judicial philosophy (e.g., Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Samuel Alito), but who also have established themselves within the conservative legal community as faithful adherents of originalism and textualism.
Social Security
-Allow younger workers the option of personal accounts.
-Allow letting people take the money in their account at retirement and buy an annuity.
-Encourage "baby boomers" who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.
-Since some retirees don’t need their Social Security to retire comfortably, offer them the option of a tax-free lump sum for their children or grandchildren to get when they die, which would delay some payments for decades.
National Sovereignty
-Oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty.
-Oppose the U. N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.
-Oppose the North American Union,.
-Oppose the Kyoto Treaty.
Veteran's Affairs
Veterans will be provided the following "Bill of Rights":-The right to a mandatory rather than a discretionary mechanism for funding veterans' health care, to eliminate year-to-year uncertainty that the funds they need will be there for them
-The right to obtain full and clear explanation of all benefits and comprehensive assistance in obtaining those benefits.
-The right to have a claim processed within six months.
-The right to the fullest possible accounting of the fate of POW/MIAs and the right to be designated as POW/MIA.
-The right to access state-of-the-art treatment facilities for traumatic brain injuries.
-The right of National Guard and Reserve personnel called to active service to receive the same benefits as active duty veterans.
-The right of disabled veterans to receive both their military retirement and VA compensation.
-The right of wounded Reserve troops to be treated like their active duty counterparts until their claims have been processed.
-The right of wounded veterans and those who have served in combat theaters to a comprehensive GI bill that provides full tuition, books, fees, and living expenses at any institution to which the veteran is accepted.
National Security
-Increase defense spending to six percent of GDP.
-Build new planes, new armed vehicles, new robotic land and air vehicles, new ships all right here in America.
-Recruit and train thousands of new troops and bring our National Guard and Reserves back home. We must increase the size of the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps by about 92,000 troops within two to three years without lowering enlistment standards.
-Improve the nation's aging infrastructure (roads, bridges, water systems, sewer systems, etc.).
-Active-duty forces should not be used for nation building. We must return to our policy of using other government agencies to build schools, hospitals, roads, sewage treatment plants, water filtration systems, electrical facilities, and legal and banking systems.
-If we are required to undertake a large invasion we must use overwhelming force.
-[The GWOT] -- The Commander-in-Chief has an obligation to clearly communicate to the American people the nature of the war we are fighting, especially the goal of the jihadists: to kill every last one of us, destroy civilization as we know it, and to establish a theocratic caliphate without national borders.
-[The GWOT] -- The United States' biggest challenge in the Arab and Muslim worlds is the lack of a viable moderate alternative to radicalism. Although we cannot export democracy we should nurture moderate forces that present an alternative to the jihadists.
-[The GWOT] -- The goal in the Arab and Muslim worlds will be to calibrate a course between maintaining stability and promoting democracy. We must not act too hastily but we must act. Specifically, we can help by aiding or promoting basic sanitation, health care, education, jobs, a free press, and fair court systems within these areas.
-[The GWOT] -- We must reduce our dependence on foreign oil if we are going to defeat jihadism.
-[The GWOT] -- We must strengthen both our human intelligence resources and our military assets in order to eliminate the current threat.
-[Iraq] -- We should not withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq any faster than General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander there, recommends. Troops must be brought home based on the conditions on the ground, not on artificial timetables.
-[The Kurds] -- We must encourage Turkey to continue to improve life for its Kurds, and we must encourage the Turkish Kurds to address their grievances through the political process, including through the 20 deputies currently representing them in parliament.
-[The Kurds] -- We should be willing to provide the Turks with actionable intelligence to go after the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party) with limited air strikes and commando raids. A even better method would be to train and equip Iraqi Kurds to fight the PKK and rid themselves of this menace.
-[Iran] -- The military option for dealing with Iran should not be taken off the table.
-[Iran] -- Iran is a nation that has to be contained, just as the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. In order to contain Iran, it is essential to win in Iraq. We cannot allow Iran to push its theocracy into Iraq and then expand it further west.
-[Iran] -- We must be as aggressive diplomatically as we have been militarily since 9/11. We must intensify our diplomatic efforts with China, India, Russia, South Korea, and European states and persuade them to put more economic pressure on Iran.
-[Iran] -- Despite the protestations of Congressional Democrats, we should support and continue President Bush's new sanctions against Iran, his decision to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction, and the classifications of al Quds force as a supporter of terrorism. We must also encourage our state and private pension funds to divest themselves of Iran-related assets.
-[Iran] -- Despite the protestations of Russia, we should move forward with the current plan to set up ten missile interceptors in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic to protect Europe from Iranian missiles.
-[Iran] -- We should reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran but only after the Iranians have made concessions that serve to create a less hostile relationship.
-[Iran] -- Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. However, a range of incentives (e.g., trade and economic assistance, full diplomatic relations, and security guarantees) should be offered before moving forward with military action. Before we put our troops at risk in Iran, we should exhaust all diplomatic and economic options.
-[Pakistan] -- On September 12, 2001, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf agreed to sever his relationship with the Taliban and let us fight al Qaeda inside Pakistan. But distracted by Iraq, we have since allowed him to go back on his word. We should pressure him to remain firm in his commitment to us.
-[Pakistan] -- Because the next attack on the U.S. will have been planned in Pakistan, we must go after al Qaeda's safe havens in that country. The threat of an attack on us is far graver than the risk that a quick and limited strike against al Qaeda would bring extremists to power in Pakistan.
-[Pakistan] -- Musharraf has spent far more energy and enthusiasm sidelining the moderate Pakistani forces (like former Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif) than he has in going after religious extremists and terrorists. We must have a "Pakistan policy" rather than just a "Musharraf policy."
-[Pakistan] -- We must use our friendly ties with India to encourage and help it improve its relationship with Pakistan and to push for increased trade and cooperation between the two countries, all to bring greater stability to the South Asian region.


Comments
Mike Huckabee
Thanks for the article.......I really wish everyone would take a long hard look at the Governor's record before passing judgement on the man. I still don't get what some fiscons have against him, while in office he turned a $200mm deficit into a $800mm surplus and cut taxes over 90 times. Are people really that influenced by the smear campaign run by CFG to understand that the tax increase enacted during his term was voter mandated (not to mention - specifically allocated to fixing highways and schools - the results of which were a much improved overall economy)? His Flat Tax idea should be welcomed with open arms by all who purportedly want lower taxes and smaller government.
I realize that many are nervous about his former occupation as Baptist Minister but in 10 1/2 years as Governor there is not one example of Mike Huckabee using his political influence to impose his religious beliefs (or any others) on the people of his state. He said it best..."I wouldn't change the dome on the Capital building with a steeple."
He is truely a man of the people and I suppose that scares many of the "insiders" - that is a shame because only a man OF the people can genuinely be FOR the people.
What's with you guys and Romney?
as it is foolish to believe that the entire conservative base is united behind the idea of Mitt for VP, especially in regards to the social conservative wing of the party
I'm serious. The reason we are stuck with McCain is that the Huck supporters HATE Romney. The minor detail that McCain is far more hostile to social-cons than Romney is does not seem to trouble you people in the least. What's the explanation?
I'm a social-con, and I'll take Romney over Huckabee any day.
Two reasons
To be honest there were two things that concerned me.
1. Mitt had not been consistent on the issues of life and marriage. I know he had evolved to his current position, but it just felt too recent, too politically convenient.
2. This would not have been as big an issue, except that it was completely whitewashed by the conservative media, who chose to elevate him as the pure and true conservative champion. And Mitt, to me, rather dishonestly, allowed them to do it. Through his contrast advertizing, he portrayed himself as 'more conservative' than Mike. The reality is they were equally 'flawed' on different planks. Nobody likes someone that judges a speck without taking the plank from their own eye.
In the meantime, this same media excoriated Mike for his percieved flaws as fiscal conservative! Much of our anger with Mitt can actually be traced back to anger with a biased media. The same problem that Obama has now with Hillary supporters. The MSM was so in the tank for BO that they created an unbridgeable divide between the two camps.
If anyone can be blamed for the outcomes we face now, it is the media, who didn't know how to do their job and do fair, unbiased reporting.
anger with Mitt
Much of our anger with Mitt can actually be traced back to anger with a biased media.
The fact remains that you cut off your nose to spite your face. What you managed to get, in your petulant anger with National Review, was a man who openly despises social conservatives, and all conservatives.
But hey, you sure showed those media guys!
And I agree that the attacks on Huckabee were over the top. That does not justify throwing the race to McCain, of all people.
But why assume it was 'thrown'?
We didn't vote for Mike to spite Mitt, but because we liked Mike, and vice versa for you Mitt supporters I'm sure.
The fact is, it was a split conservative vote, and someone would have had to get out of the race for McCain to be defeated. Everyone wanted Mike to throw himself on the sword, when there was every indication that he could play well in heartland and southern states. If those GOP red states had voted before those winner take all blue states, we'd be looking at a different scenario. But that's all old news and we have to deal with the current reality.
While Mccain does not wear his faith on his sleeve, or come hat in hand to the evangelical want- to- be- kingmakers, I don't blame him. After seeing how they sold their principles down river for political expediency when they refused to support Mike, they deserve to fade away. McCain can get right to the socon base if he embraces Mike, and he probably knows it.
In fact, the fact that he hasn't been as conciliatory to the evangelical big wigs as he could be, indicates that he's probably hoping to use Mike directly in some way as a surrogate to that group, if not as veep.
We can only hope... because he really needs us energized and working if he's going to pull this out.
How odd.
the evangelical big wigs .... the evangelical want- to- be- kingmakers .... McCain can get right to the socon base if he embraces Mike .... they sold their principles down river for political expediency when they refused to support Mike
There are all sorts of strange assumptions going on here, which I've seen before from Huckabee supporters.
For instance, since Dobson did endorse Huck, it seems that he is not a "evangelical big wig". That's a peculiar claim to make, isn't it? Also, you are insistent that all true "evangelical big wigs" should have supported Huckabee. But that is far from being obvious, and you don't explain why you think it. And you seem to take it for granted that "Huck supporter" equals "social conservative", and vice versa.
A lot of Huckabee supporters (who I don't think are identical with social conservatives) seem to have a bit of a persecution complex, and see their guy as being unfairly picked on. He did get a bit of a raw deal, but he was a flawed vessel for a social con message. In many respects he is a social liberal. I'm a social con, and McCain won't get right with me by making Huck his VP.
I wish you guys had thrown that commendable energy behind a Hunter or Tancredo, both genuine social conservatives with greater appeal to the whole party.
Yup, complex indeed
Most of Mike's christian supporters were very, very upset that Dobson waited until his endorsement was too late to do any good to make it. He is one of the kingmakers that lost quite a bit of the trust and respect of his constituents. So yes, he is considered a big-wig that failed us.
If our leaders had endorsed Mike after the values voters debate that he won in October, they could have made a difference then. Instead they split their endorsement between 4 different candidates, trying to 'pick a winner' and became ineffective instead.
And yes.. if one is the defacto leader of a movement that claims to be based in spiritual rather than secular ideologies, how do you explain endorsing a Rudy over a Mike on the question of life and marriage, or even a Mitt with his questionable record. There was a clear sell out of our values and a powerful backlash. Many people withdrew their support from organizations that they felt had betrayed them. Mike was our strongest values candidate in a long time, and they let us down.
Now Mike's base isn't only social conservatives.. in fact most of his supporters are conservative on all three legs, but the values issues hold preeiminence for many of the more religious voters. (myself among them)
He also has a strong grassroots fair tax base, as well as folks who just generally appreciate his common sense approach to government.
Sorry to rant... but I do indeed have a bit of a persecution complex, but feel pretty entitled to it after what we were put through... I have a deep empathy for Hillary supporters actually..lol..they suffered through the demcratic version of it.
Oh... and I've heard many critiques of Mike.. but never that he's a social liberal!! *curious* Do we have the same definition of social in mind? I'm thinking primarily of the values issues, life, traditional marriage, poverty, health etc. Is that what you refer to?
Why assume it was
When the McCain and Huckabee delegates work in collusion to take out Romney in the West Virginia primary, that pretty much speaks for itself.
When it came down to 3 top tier who was your 2nd choice
When all the others dropped out of the race leaving McCain, Romney, and Huckabee; who would you have chosen for your 2nd choice? Even though IL doesn't give us a choice for 2nd; I had picked mine. I had researched all of their records. Huckabee had the most consistent stand on all the moral values important to me; which is why he was my top choice. Romney's words were right; but his record was horrible. McCain's record was the lesser of the two evils. Is it really impossible for people to believe that people are judged by their past preformace when evaluating their future performance? Many of the voters in West Virginia are values voters. What if they thought like I do? Maybe primaries in the future should have people choose a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice before any results come in so no one can acuse others of some sort of "back room deal." This years primary election season was terrible for both parties. Something has to be done to correct it.
I agree..
<!-- /comment-inner, /comment -->
It does speak for itself.
I think it speaks to the strong relationship McCain and his supporters have with Huckabee. Why would they back Romney who blasted them while Huckabee only drew distinctions on issues and did not get into the back and forth name calling that Romney engaged in.
Romney and Socons....
Romney only nominated 9 Republicans in his 36 judical nominees while Gov. of Mass. 2 of these judges were outspoken homosexuals.
Romney has a poor track record with what I think matters most to socons...the courts.
http://TrueRomney.com documents this.
Also I have problems with what Romney did with his disasterous health care plan and have concerns about the next to last economic growth of his state while he was governor there.
It isn't a HATE for Romney...it is a rejection of bad goverment and a poor public leader. That is why I did not support him.
the courts.
The governor in MA picks from a list of lawyers submitted by Democrats, and then has to get the picks past another panel of Democrats before they can be appointed. I'm not sure how you expect to get Bork's through that sort of process.
Agreed, Sandor
I agree. The Huckabee PACs actually took out ads in Arizona media dissuading McCain from considering Romney for VP. Who does that kind of <deleted>? Why not run ads promoting your own guy instead of trying to trash the other one?
The PACs weren't Huckabee's
I was not comfortable with how they did that, but again, the conservative media was railroading Mitt as a VP choice and making claims that he was acceptable to social conservatives. I think they were trying to make a point that all was not the rosiness that they were presenting it as being.
Not True
The Huckabee PAC did not take out any ads against Romney...they were completely unconnected.
TheGovermentIsNotGod PAC is the ones who took the ad out. See: http://www.govnotgod.org/www2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=53
They are the oldest socially conservative PAC in the United States.
There is no way McCain is going to chooses Romney as all these people would tell their people to stay home and wait for a better candidate as they are already queazy about McCain.
hmm. how unconnected?
hmm. how unconnected?
http://www.govnotgod.org/www2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=...
McCain will get more votes per buck with Huck
With Obama’s charisma and money, McCain is going to need help exciting the base, especially in the south were there are many black voters. Huckabee was the candidate that won the most votes in those states.Arkansas has such a Democrat majority that Huckabee’s office door was literally nailed shut when he was voted in as Lt. Gov. to fill the vacancy created by Clinton being elected President. Huckabee has 10 ½ years chief executive experience of working with a Democrat majority while still being able to accomplish major improvements in the state with fiscal responsibility. He still has a 65% approval rating of those who know him best. We need that type of qualification in Washington casting deciding votes.
Huckabee is right. Prevention is cheaper than treatment and educating and training are cheaper than socialization in the long run. Many of us are praying Huckabee’s communication skills will be able to persuade McCain to support the Fair Tax so productivity will no longer be penalized or laziness rewarded.
“We the people” like Mike because he is one of us. He knows what we’re going through. We don't have to worry about how he will stand tomorrow on moral values because of his consistent record on those values.
McCain will have an army of volunteers ready, willing, and able to report for active duty if he chooses Huckabee as his VP. McCain will get more votes per buck with Huck and it’s the votes that win elections.
It Matters Not
Johnny Mac is going to win regardless of who he chooses as his VP. I really,Really want Condoleezza Rice in the spot and if not her then Romney. If it's Huck then so be it.I'm still voting GOP regardless.
Looking ahead to 2012 though. I really want to believe that Condoleezza will be ready to run for the office, with Romney as her VP.
The first Black American President will be a Republican. the First Female President will be a Republican. The First Black Female President will be a Republican and her name will be Condoleezza Rice.
/ Condi, are you recieving my Emails? Just wondering why I still haven't heard from you.
LOL
Poor Condi is so linked to Bush, I don't think she has any more future in politics. she may go back to professorship and guest speaking?
excuse me
You have a problem with Condoleezza Rice or anyone else being 'linked' to George Bush?
I don't.
What are her qualifications?
Other than being a black woman. I don't think anyone would say that she's had a remarkably successful stint at State.
WOW
What are Condoleezza Rices' Qualifications? Seriously,you are on a computer connected to the Internet, and you don't have the faintest idea what the womans qualifications to be the President of America are?
DUDE
As far as her SECSTATE appointment. What exactly did she not accomplish that you think she should have? Sorry but WORLD PEACE will take a bit more time, although Bill Clinton did declare it after his election and before he began dismantling our military resources.
I Don't
But the majority of voters in this current environment do. That's only practical to recognize.
No offense was intended.
McCain Huckabee for the win
Anyone who doesn't want an Obama presidency, please start to look at this as selecting a team that can compete with and beat Obama on all levels. Senator McCain is a fine man, experienced, seasoned, one of the best authorities on foreign policy around. One thing that is not his strongest point is his delivery of a speech and motivation of his base. That's where Huckabee shines!!! He has the best communicaton skills out there, even better than Obama when Obama's not speaking from a tela prompter... He is inspiring, motivating, visionary and he "connects" with his audience in a way that no one else can!! When he speaks, it is right to the hearts of Americans!!! He and McCain share the same basic idealogy and have already proven they work well together. The synergy between them is so great that even media talked about it early on saying they would be a good team!! I read an article on google written in early December when neither McCain nor Huckabee was polling above single digits. The author stated that, even though neither was first tier at the moment, the team for a win for the Republicans would be McCain as president and Huckabee as vp. While at the time, I disagreed (I'm a Huckabee supporter) that article has proven to have been prophetic, I feel. McCain/Huckabee IS INDEED the only team that will be able to go up against Obama and win.....
Who can help in important swing states?
I read another well researched article by The Values Voter. "A number of states have voted with the winner for each of the past eight elections."
Read "As the states swing" to decide who might help McCain best in the "kingmaker" states. http://thevaluesvoter.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!F3D4C1BC1D8B0D91!882.entry
Huckabee will bring votes and an army of workers
I think McCain should pick Huckabee for VP. He will help McCain get republican party base votes AND also votes from the conservative segment of the democrat party.
Huckabee's supporters have formed and maintained a very large national organization - Huck's Army. We are just waiting for McCain's marching orders!