|
cant people figure out what a terrible candidate huckabee is on thier own? especially since mitt has outspent huckabee 100 to 1 in this race. |
|
Hugh, you have gone beyond the pale on this issue.
You are mad with fear that Huckabee can actually win the nomination, and then deny a Republican Presidential victory. You are free and welcome to oppose Huckabee, but the satirical marks border on viciousness. That should be beneath you.
I do not see Huckabee winning the nomination, ergo, I do not panic, believing that any of the "concerns" that you may have will play themselves out, denying Huck the nomination.
I can state that I personally would be happy with Romney over any Democrat - for the record, I prefer Giuliani, but again, Mitt shares so many of our values that supporting him would not be a problem.
Hugh, your ranting and hypocritical "religious test" statements are beginning to greatly grieve a large number of your evangelical supporters, including many who are not Huckabee supporters. As someone involved deeply in 3 major evangelical ministries, I am in a position to solidly state that several evangelical leaders that you consider to be personal friends have made private comments questioning your level of bile directed at Huckabee. One Christian leader in particular whom you know personally is considering telling his staff that he will pull your books from their bookstores.
Your constant "over the top" satirical profiling and in some cases disingenous remarks - as a few of your statements were called by Michael Medved - about a man that Jack Graham and Chuck Swindoll consider a close personal friend is without excuse.
|
|
|
What does Mitt Romney and Joe Coors Jr. have in common? Both are uber-rich: Romney - $201 million; Coors even more. Romney is and Coors was supported by NSM heavyweight Hugh Hewitt. Despite local Republican warnings, Hewitt ferociously supported Coors in 2004 against conservative Bob Schaeffer in Colorado’s Republican Senatorial primary. The beer-magnet Coors beat Schaeffer, but then lost to populist Democrat Ken Salazar. After the defeat, Hugh Hewitt disavowed any connection to the outcome of the election. Sorry, but I’m getting déjà vu. |
|
On the one hand you rail against Huckabee for posing a question which is, arguably, substantively correct. You chastise him for introducing religion into the election. Yet on your show today, you were critical of Huckabee for not releasing transcripts of his sermons. This is the absolutely height of hypocrisy. Huckabee's sermons are presumably about his Baptist faith. If Huckabee's sermons and interpretation of his Baptist theology are relevant for voters to consider, how is Romney's belief in Momonism not?
One final question which I know you will decline to address: why is it wrong for anyone to mention Mitt's Mormonism, but you can commercially capitalize on a book that made Romney's Mormonism the central theme? Mitt just said on your show that bringing a candidate's religion into the political debate is inappropriate -- how does he rationalize his complicity with you in publishing a book about his faith? |
|
|
But I like Rudy, Fred and John more than Mitt. |
|
|
Qh Bliss! To see the arrogant Clinton Crime family running in circles like rats on a sinking ship biting each other madly. Ever since Hillary smacked into THE QUESTION SHE COULDNT ANSWER the campaign has been taking on water and tilting steeply. The chaos on the decks will soon become a run for the lifeboats if She shows further signs of slippage. What justice if the Clintons were left abandoned as their dreams of power slip beneath the waves. They always clung to the idea that most regular people loved them and couldnt wait for eight more years in their tender care. To not even win one primary against someone they have shown they have total contempt for? What sweet Kharma! |
|
If so many of you don't agree with Hugh's perspective -- why do you keep posting and jabbing him?
LOL It is YOU the pseudo-critic who is the laughing stock!
You write and sound like trolls and lib operatives. If you don't agree with Hugh, fine. But cut the personal affronts and post your whiney poo-poo on your own blogs!!!
FWIW -- I agree with HH on 99.9% of his commentary. I read him 2-3 times a day. If I had access to his radio program, I'd probably listen. And if I didn't agree with his perspective -- I sure as heck wouldn't be boosting his hit count by driving-by.
Not my site; I'm not HH's keeper, but I'm tired of reading personal attacks from peons who don't have the guts to post "live" links from anonymous screen names.
|
|
I have seen quite a few here at Townhall. Hugh most definitely included. Some of Hugh's slanders against John McCain have been downright shameful.
But as for Huckabee and Hillary, I am reminded of this certain classic and these two local Arkansas maroons:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg_wc8CjmtE |
|
The latest Strat Vison Poll in IA has it Huck 30 Romney 25, Fred 13.
Strategic Vision has usually been an unfriendly Romney Poll. It may have something to do with their methods. I do not think that they are biased.
I want to see more polls but maybe Huck has peaked and is within reach of Romney's GOTV.
I said maybe. |
|
|
Welcome to the new, interactive media that Hugh has been a big proponent of. If Hugh did not want any opinions about his blog posts, he would disable the comment section. |
|
What happened to Reagan's advice to not criticize your fellow republican? Hugh..you spend more time being critical of republicans than you do democrats. I think you need to sell books, thats why you praise Romney so much. I haven't voted for a democrat in over 30 years but will not vote for Romney, if you knew what I know about Mormonism you wouldn't either, it is stranger than scientology. By the way the Mormons do teach that satan and Jesus were "spirit" brothers.
If it is just Romney's politics you want to talk about, how about his flip/flopping in Mass.? He couldn't have got elected there without acting like a liberal. |
|
|
had a nice suit and some hair gel, I'd think it was Mitt out huntin' some varmints... |
|
Huckabee is making evangelicals and Republicans sound bigots, and closed minded religious nuts, intolerant of other beliefs.
Of course, the Democrats and their minions, the Media, love to see HUCKABEE, on the GOP ticket, He will be the easiest, weakest foe to crush. |
|
|
out on all this slobbering, heavy breathing sillyness. Good Grief, my friend. Huckster is a flatulance in a pan and you're acting like he's smuggling typhoid into the closet. It is getting tiresome and BORING. You're beginning to wear even us hardcore HH loyalists out. C'mon, start posting OTHER stuff, please!! |
|
Huck is using religious bigotry to appeal to Iowa Evangelicals.
It's working.
What does this tell you about Iowa Evangelicals?
It tells me that they're bigots. |
|
|
Is that what Hugh's blog has become? |
|
|
Over the past century, dozens of books have been written documenting the heterodox, polytheistic beliefs of Mormonism. However, it's their ability to look the public square in the face and lie about what they believe that should be of concern to everyone. If they'll lie about their religion, which they esteem so highly, what else are they willing to lie about? |
|
Romney earned his hundreds of millions honestly, through intelligence and hard work. In the process he helped to create tens of thousands of jobs for ordinary Americans. This is an achievement to be applauded, not sneered at. This is one powerful reason why he would make a great president.
Huckabee has shown no understanding of how wealth and jobs are created. He is a typical zero sum liberal who believes that if men like Romney are wealthy, they stole their money from other people. That's the class-warfare populist anthem, and Huckabee sings it like a champ.
As far as spending millions in Mitt's campaign, it must be said that bigotry is a great, oppressive weight that is not easily moved. It requires enormous sums of money and great effort to dislodge it. |
|
Of course if Mitt wins the primary, Hugh's book (with a new last chapter) becomes an instant best-seller all spring and summer. But I don't really think Hugh is motivated by this. He wants to see a Republican win, and he honestly believes Romney's got the best shot at this because Mitt can get all of the the three parts of the GOP behind him and the others running can't.
And Mitt can't win if he loses Iowa and NH. So while Hugh doesn't really believe Huck is a threat to win the nomination, he's got to take Huck out now. And that's the reason behind all of these blogs.
The main reason that Huck is leading Romney right now in Iowa is that he's got a more engaging personality. That's it; the Mormon thing is a side issue. |
|
over and over again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg_wc8CjmtE |
|
[orbcat on December 12, 2007 9:33 PM]"If it is just Romney's politics you want to talk about, how about his flip/flopping in Mass.? He couldn't have got elected there without acting like a liberal."
Rubin, Jennifer. 5 February 2007. "Mitt Romney's Conversion"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp ?idArticle=13222&R=111EFD5
Melissa Kogut, NARAL Pro-Choice
Massachusetts's executive director, says, "It is
conventional wisdom that candidates in
Massachusetts need to be pro-choice to win. He ran
as pro-choice. As he began exploring the run for
president, he changed. No matter where you stand
on this issue, you should question where he
stands."
Romney an abortion chameleon on videotapes
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=54f3c9a0-e082-44f8-94d 6-21110c3c25c5%40s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com
2002 Romney: I'm moderate, with progressive views-- see 0:50 on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbYdATLV6ZE
Romney on Abortion - 2002-- 5:21 long
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
2002 Romneys briefly on abortion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKwVNUz52vo
The Real Romney?-- 5:04 long
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
Mitt Romney on Abortion -- May 27, 2005
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxV-QNXoRIc
Does anyone here know when Romney was last pro-choice? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToQbeBC_fOI
Romney hit hard on MSNBC -Taxes, Flip-flops, & Social Issues
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8bSyAihn18
ABC News on Romney's Flip-flops on Abortion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzZC92IXHyw
Log Cabin Republicans TV Ad supporting the old Romney
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Elx3UWmyAY4
|
|
Thanks for responding directly to my concern. I'm a fairly seasoned "interactive" user (probably longer than some of these trolls are old), but I come here because of my support for Mitt Romney -- not HH. There's so much garbage being posted, it's often difficult to filter to the objective discourse.
It's a lot like Huckabee's tendency to attack the messenger and not the message -- or having to weed out the bigots from the cognizant conservatives ....
I likely have a different opinion of John McC than either you or HH, Joe. I don't recall HH's commentary about him .... but neither opinions can be any more critical than mine! LOL
Thanks -- |
|
|
I ask because I've been a fan of Hewitt's for a long time but do not appreciate the constant shilling for Romney and bashing of Huckabee that has been going on lately on both his blog and radio show. If the fact that I am voicing my displeasure makes me a troll then so be it, I guess. |
|
At the beginning of a famous youtube link that is floating around the net is Huckabee on the Evolution versus Creation debate question
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-BFEhkIujA),
Mr. Huckabee states "...it is interesting that that question would be
asked of a presidential candidate..." then later calls the question "unfair" because it was disguised as a question whether or not he beleived in God or not.
I think he answered the evolution question very well, but he knows that the question that he posed yesterday to the NY Times reporter
is a question that puts information out there about Romney's religion that will not sit well with bigoted americans, Christian or not. It was a baited question, and today Huckabee apologized to Mitt Romney, but was it real?
He knows what he has done, and IT IS interesting that this question should be asked of a presidential candidate, and the question that
Mike Huckabee asked was absolutely unfair if not hypocritical.
|
|
Vennochi, Joan. 26 November 2006. "Romney's dance to the right" _Boston Globe_
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/art icles/2006/11/26/romneys_dance_to_the_right/
But, as a recent opinion piece in Bay Windows, New England's largest publication for lesbian and gay readers, pointed out, "Anyone thinking of supporting Romney's bid for president because of his socially conservative views on gay people should know a few things about the governor."
Among the items writer Susan Ryan-Vollmar notes:
....
During that same campaign, Romney was accused of once describing gay people as "perverse." In response, Romney's campaign vehemently denied that he used the word "perverse" and said that he respected "all people regardless of their race, creed, or sexual orientation."
Massachusetts
Gov. Mitt Romney (R)
Last Updated June 22, 2005
http://nationaljournal.com/pubs/almanac/2006/people/ma/magv .htm
Democrats circulated a news story that Romney, at a church meeting, had called homosexuality "perverse"; he denied using the word but said he opposed all extramarital sex.
Luo, Michael. 8 September 2007. "Romney’s Tone on Gay Rights Is Seen as Shift"
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/us/politics/08romney.html
The Boston Globe published an article quoting several people who said Mr. Romney had delivered an address at a Mormon gathering that year in which he called homosexuality "perverse."
|
|
acf on November 22, 2006 5:10 PM
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2006/11/troubling_evidence_of _social_liberalism_lurking_in_romneys_past.php
Romney has become famous here in MA for saying anything to get his way, no matter what his true feelings might be. His flip flops on the abortion issue are legendary around here, for example. The gay issue, because of its interest to the conservative block of voters desired by a Romney candidacy, has become a ripe target for his crashing rhetoric. Another thing he is fond of doing is make harsh, sarcastic statements, either himself, or through his mouthpieces, then when the inevitible outcry comes, blame it on being 'misunderstood', or the words of someone 'not authorized' to speak for him on this issue. Of course, he has no problem basking in the intended benefit of the barbs.
|
|
|
Keep beating each other up and show the voters that all 3 of you are liberal/socialists while the genuine article, Ron Paul, shows the people what a true conservative, constitutionalist looks like. |
|
It's politicians like Huckabee that caused me to give up on the GOP 3 or 4 years ago.
I would classify Huckabee as a tax-raising, fundamentalist authoritarian – like too many other Republican politicians.
Quite a few Republican office holders will decry the cost of government and the tax burden on the American people - right before they vote to raise are taxes and implement more regulation on business. Talk about hypocrisy!
These same Republicans are also more than willing to use the force and power of government to legislate how we Americans live our private lives, usually along the line of narrow fundamentalist or evangelical dogmas that not even mainline Protestants like myself can support. How about leaving us alone as the Founding Fathers intended?
Limiting economic freedom, limting personal freedom. That is where too many Republican politicians, like Huckabee, are today.
If Huckabee is nominated, it will be an easy win for either Clinton or even Obama in November ’08. After eight years of Bush 43, does over half of America really want a fundamentalist President?
Sign me “Politically Homeless in Houston”
|
|
|
|
I noticed your comment on top. Why did you not contact Hugh privately? If you indeed have such information, wouldn't it be best to share it privately that some are concerned?
What your engaging in here comes awfully close to detraction. |
|
"However, it's their ability to look the public square in the face and lie about what they believe that should be of concern to everyone."
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor, DanSm.
Your accusations are hollow and blatantly untrue. Of course you already know this... |
|
|
HH must be one of these obsessive personalities who, once they get fixated on an issue, it's a 24/7 obsession. Not healthy, actually quite ill. I think Romney is the best candidate despite the illness of some of his other supporters. |
|
THE WINNER was Fred Thompson. Fred came to play. He also had the obvious moment of the day when he took on the officious moderator, refusing to go along with one of those idiotic "raise your hands" questions. Given the hour that the debate took place, a lot of people will probably see only a highlight package of the debate. The unquestioned highlight was Fred slapping down the moderator. Even putting that aside, Fred had his best day of the campaign. He was serious, thoughtful, and authoritative. It was a wonderful day for him.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/0 00/014/470waesg.asp |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUn8GSbUl_4
Because this is a great clip of Fred Thompson doing well at the debate today. |
|
Mike Huckabee’s surging campaign has created a three-way toss-up in Michigan’s Republican Primary. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds Huckabee earning 21% of the vote. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the son of a former Michigan Governor, attracts 20% support while former New York City Mayor is the top choice for 19% of Likely Republican Primary Voters.
winning in IA
winning in SC
winning in MI
Huck a BOOM!!!! |
|
In the race for the Republican Presidential Nomination, Mike Huckabee attracts support from 23% of Likely Republican Primary voters nationwide and Rudy Giuliani earns the vote at 20% support. The frontrunners are followed by Mitt Romney at 14%, Fred Thompson at 10% and John McCain at 8% (see recent daily numbers). Ron Paul currently attracts 6% of Likely Republican Primary voters nationwide.
Huck a BOOM! is a national phenomena... |
|
From Politico on the Mormon "Satan + Jesus" smear:
"Huckabee went on to say that Chafets was telling him “things about the Mormon faith, because he frankly is fairly well-schooled on comparative religions. And so as a part of that conversation, I asked the question, because I had heard that, and I asked it not to create something — I never thought it would make the story.”
Does anyone seriously *believe* this load of bull? Baptist minister plays innocent and dumb while subtly attacking Mormonism. "I don't really know anything, you know, but I heard that..." I can picture the feigned look of innocence and naive curiosity on his face as he asked this "question." Yeah Mike, we're all stupid enough to believe this lame attempt at explaining your calculated hit. What a clown. This guy not only thinks like a Democrat, he campaigns like one too.
Huckabee is a fraud. His joy ride is over. Sorry to shatter your dream, PolitBurro. |
|
|
http://video.aol.com/video/tv-hillbilly-hare/1789259 |
|
|
http://www.jibjab.com/view/98564 |
|
Why can Huck slam Romney, but HH can't slam Huck.
Seems like Huck slammed first. |
|
kmtiernney
Thank you for your question.
Actually, I have tried to contact Hugh - whom I have met several times and have common friends with several times through his office. As of today, I have received no reply.
I would just chalk it up to politics, but Hugh claims to be a Christian, a supporter of YWAM among other ministries and is often quick to bring Al Mohler, John Mark Reynolds, et al on his program. He even was the only radio host to interview Hitchens recently about his new book and provide a Christian theologian for perspective at the same time. Good stuff.
But he is doing severe damage and personal hurt to his listeners of the evangelical faith - and not because he is a blatant Romney supporter. It is his radical and extreme efforts aimed at an evangelical minister who has arguably done far more good than Hugh ever will that is causing the anger. Faculty and students at California Baptist University and Biola University are mad and hurt and will not forget this when Huckabee disappears from the scene, as most of us expect him to do. i will keep silent on the major ministries that are absolutely furious with him.
It is difficult to be a Christian in this liberal media world. Hugh is making it easier to laugh at any evangelical that wants to be involved in politics. it is certainly okay to oppose the policies of any person - but the ridiclue has to stop.
It's Hugh's ego and a definitely heartless mistake.
His Christian beliefs are on the stand now, and I can guarantee if he continues the slander and specious asides again that he will find even his own congregation looking askance at him.
By the way, a pastor acquaintance of Hugh's tonight, before the message at service mentioned to his congregationthat he no longer recommends the Hugh Hewitt show, even casually.
It's started.
|
|
|
they wish. Some of us hardcore HH listeners & readers are tired and bored with the recent single focus stuff. I do not care a whit about either Mitt or Huck's religious beliefs. I am a Mitt & Rudy guy who would like to see friend Hewitt move on to other things more these days. |
|
..it is obvious to me that Hugh's approach is to throw everything and the kitchen sink at getting Mitt elected. There will be plenty of time--months--to mend bridges before the general election. More than anything,Hugh is all about winning elections. He just figures he can clean up afterwards.
Hugh seems like a good guy, but there is something about this approach that seems juvenile. It's almost like our words don't matter. At some point, one would think, an "influencer" would exhaust all his good will and capital. It just seems to me that if you come at the public with guns blazing 24/7, at some point you cease being credible. Oh well, as Old Abe said, you can fool some of the people all the time. |
|
Huck is 35%, Mitt is 21% at the Real Clear Politics average today. Why are the 'folks' not listening to Hugh and National Review. Huck is getting blasted by Drudge too, and he still keeps going up.
Its like Huck has tapped into they yet to be defined needs of this years voters, who don't want to be lectured by their betters about whom to vote for. They know McCain,Rudy and Mitt will just be more of the same, and they want a change from where the GOP has led them in the past decade. All the criticism he gets just propels him forward. He may well be pulled down, but there is a message here the other candidates ignore at their peril. |
|
well. PL+LP, that should shock the stuffin' outta you, Boy-yo!
It does seem kind of adolescent overkill. Most of us here are very fond of Hugh and admire his depth & nimbleness. But, the one-note opera is getting old fast. Boring. Tiring.
I'm not going to belabor it or leave with my(few)toys. But, it really is wearing this ol' Adult type thin. |
|
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAROLYN WASHBURN, DES MOINES REGISTER: I want to take on a new issue. I would like to see a show of hands. How many of you believe global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity?
FRED THOMPSON, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I'm not doing hand shows today.
WASHBURN: No hand shows?
THOMPSON: No hand shows.
WASHBURN: And so does that mean--is that "yes" or "no" for you? Do you believe that global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity?
THOMPSON: Do you want to give me a minute to answer that?
WASHBURN: No.
THOMPSON: Well, then I'm not going to answer it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HUME: And that was the moment in the debate that a focus group conducted by Frank Luntz for us of Iowa Republican voters was thought to be sort of the high moment of the debate. Fred Thompson's approval on the lines that are constantly in motion, measuring the response, went off the charts, practically.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/pundits_o n_the_debate_spending.html |
|
HUME: It is interesting though that the focus group of the Iowan Republican voters, many of whom liked Mitt Romney coming in liked him better coming out and thought he had won. What do you think of that Mort? Does that comport with your take on it?
MORT KONDRACKE, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, "ROLL CALL": My original take was the conventional wisdom--Huckabee goes into this thing in the lead--.
HUME: Nothing happened.
KONDRACKE: --does not stumble, nothing happened, nobody beat him up. He didn't make any mistakes, and therefore his lead continues, the momentum continues.
I was astounded by this focus group that all thought that Romney was presidential. And Romney did fine. He didn't make any mistakes, and he gave his usual spiel about his record. And, as a matter of fact, his pander level was down by comparison to other debates, and so I thought he did credibly well. But I didn't see that this was a game changer.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/pundits_o n_the_debate_spending.html |
|
|
Based on my forty years of living in the West and interacting with numerous Mormons, they are adept at parroting evangelical (biblical) language so as to mislead and deceive their audience, with the goal to secure an unmerited level of acceptance within Christendom. Criticism is most often deflected by redirecting attention away from doctrine and toward "family values." They prey on the naive and religiously illiterate. |
|
A few sources tell me Huckabee's run is strictly as a stalking horse for the Clintons (The Arkansas connection, after all). Bill Richardson is running for the same reason.
I'm (not) surprised that Newsweek and Time won't send their reporters to investigate this. |
|
John McCain is a Baptist.
Hugh Hewitt opposes John McCain.
Therefore, Hugh Hewitt is a vile, anti-Baptist bigot.
According to Hugh, anyone who opposes Romney is an anti-Mormon bigot, so I'm going to give him some of his own medicine here. |
|
In keeping with his pseudo-bigotry rant, Mr. Hewitt is executive producer of the upcoming movie/DVD: Article VI. See http://www.articlevithemovie.com/index.php
Contra Hewitt, Article VI of the Constitution addresses what GOVERNMENT may not require (a religious test) on potential office holders. It was NEVER the Founders' intent to proscribe religion as a basis for the electorate’s evaluation of political candidates. This DVD is a ploy to neutralize the political strength of evangelical Christians. |
|
Securing the border and enforcing the law is the only way we get to keep our rule of law, our representative Republic, and our Constitution. We must elect a President who WILL secure the border and enforce the law. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this will no longer be the United States of America.
The so-called "top tier" will not get out the voters necessary for a GOP win. Increasing turnout is the key. Give people something to vote for. Not just the lesser of two evils. Won't work this time. People are fed up with the inundation of illegal aliens. They would come out in droves for the clear choice of D=amnesty or R=enforcement. They will stay home if they both equal amnesty.
There is a huge majority of American citizens waiting for someone to pledge to uphold the laws and secure the borders, let's not ignore them any more.
http://www.gohunter08.com
|
|
I like Bainbridge's calling hima wowser.
Its apt.
I blog on the question of him as a theocrat over at SPQR.townhall.com |
|
"Over the past century, dozens of books have been written documenting the heterodox, polytheistic beliefs of Mormonism. However, it's their ability to look the public square in the face and lie about what they believe that should be of concern to everyone. If they'll lie about their religion, which they esteem so highly, what else are they willing to lie about?"
"Based on my forty years of living in the West and interacting with numerous Mormons, they are adept at parroting evangelical (biblical) language so as to mislead and deceive their audience, with the goal to secure an unmerited level of acceptance within Christendom. Criticism is most often deflected by redirecting attention away from doctrine and toward 'family values.' They prey on the naive and religiously illiterate."
The miracle of it all, actually, is not merely that we Mormons, in our millions, are (every ONE of us! men, women, children, grandparents!) so cunningly dishonest, but that we manage to find several hundred thousand converts each year who are -- ALL of them! -- just as dishonest as WE are.
(Honestly. Substitute "Catholic" or "Jew" in DanSm's slanders, above, and then ask yourself, frankly: Is this or is this not bigotry?) |
|
|
another reason to disregard Huckleberry's candidacy, today he receives the endorsement of the NEA in New Hampshire. Has this group ever endorsed a "born again" Christian conservative in its history? I smell the Clinton's in this endorsement. This guy clearly is endorsed by the DNC as well. How can he possibly be our guy? Not in this life, Huckleberry!! |
|
If you don't know what a chicken plucker is, you should be near a chicken house when (for example) Tyson trucks roll up at 2 am to snare sleeping chickens and crate them off for processing.
If you want to hear how the Huckster earns the label "border cross-dresser," listen to Laura and Michelle's discussion (and Laura's interview with the Huck): http://hotair.com/archives/2007/12/13/audio-michelle-debun ks-huck-on-the-laura-ingraham-show/
And gaining former-Minuteman groupie Gilchrist's endorsement ain't the feather that most would want to wear in their bonnet. Especially under the circumstances he departed the original Minuteman organization. Unless, of course you want to surround yourself with skinheads and the whites-only crowd while pretending to be anti-illegal immigration.
How long will it be before the Huckster un-crates his agenda to have an ID-card-dispensing foreign consulate in every American city?
There are reasons the Huckster avoids answering direct questions. |
|
Thanks for that sound and mature comment.at 3:06a.m. I totally agree with what you said.
With the advent of early darkness I do not get to hear Hugh's radio show now and so am only now becoming aware of his evangelical bashing. I am not one to support Huckabee right now, but this does us absolutely no good,going into what will be a very MEAN election. As Republicans we should stick to issues only and stop the future fodder for the hostile press.
|
|
Huck and Mitt are two sides of the same coin.
If you want a conservative, vote for Fred. If you want someone with management experience, vote for Rudy.
Instead, we have a junior varsity religious war going on with the evangelicals missing all the easy scoring opportunities because their own science is so dreadful and the Mormons screaming about bigotry when they can't respond to direct questions. What a bunch of losers.
The biggest loser of all is Hugh. You guys want him to post on a different subject? Why? What makes you think he'll be any more balanced then? This endless MittMania makes me think he's unhinged.
Is this bothering you, Elderscapes? Cry me a river. |
|
Matter of fact, I'm gonna drag out my pom poms and brush up on my cartwheel.
I'd try a double back-flip with half-twist pommel horse mount ---- but you seem to have that stunt down pat, Jac!! |
|
"This endless MittMania makes me think he's unhinged."
And the endless ranting, raving, and whining about MittMania on Hugh's site makes you...what exactly?
I find it humorous that the Usual Suspects are here every single day, reading Hugh's stuff and griping about it.
Note: there are lots of other websites on the Internet you can read. It's true!!!
See you tomorrow boys, same time, same place... |
|
I've read some of Hugh's books and I've listened to his show many times. One of the reasons I like him is that I happen to agree with him on most things. One of the reasons that I post on this site is that I like a lot of the topics he brings up. What blows my mind is why some of the people who post here so regularly that they practically live on-site always seem like they're in pain.
Look, this may seem radical to some of you, but if you don't like Hugh, find somebody who you agree with and like and has a site, and post on IT. Life's too short for that much suffering, and my life's too short to be subjected to so much whining.
BTW, GO MITT!! |
|
You see, I view this as attempting to circle the wagons around an Evangelical pastor who is well out of his jurisdiction. Huckabee doesn't deserve political patronage or protection from Evangelicals just because he is a pastor. Its why I like the rules of Catholicism, where those clerics are clerics for life, and laicization is not there for political office. You get too involved with politics as a priest, your excommunicated, plain and simple.
I would say Huckabee is making it harder and harder to be a good Christian in a liberal world. We conservatives don't mind him thanking God for a chance to get his message out. We fault him for saying that his message's popularity is a direct result of divine power. Chrisitanity is not a political message. The majority of Huckabee's principles might be influenced by his beliefs in Christianity, but they are not Christian beliefs and policy. (i.e. social programs, taxes, etc.) With huckabee pressing himself as a "christian leader" when advertising himself, it fits into the stereotype of the politically dogmatic Christian. There are few issues that the Christian faith requires a specific viewpoint on in politics.
We are also concerned with what we perceive to be him playing the religion card against his opponents. As even Huckabee himself now has admitted, he was wrong for doing what he did in the NYT interview. Either out of malice or carelessness, he was wrong. That wrong has consequences.
Nonetheless, I'd like to if possible speak with you via email in regards to how you think "Christianity" is being put on trial here. If you like, you may email me at kmtierney@gmail.com |
|
|
Like I said before, this site has the same strange fascination as a slow motion train wreck. |
|
|
|