Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, December 15, 2007
David Limbaugh :: Townhall.com Columnist
Single-Issue vs. Comprehensive Conservatism
by David Limbaugh
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Since its emergence as a dominant political force in the '80s, the religious right has been a favorite whipping boy of the mainstream media and political left and a sometimes embarrassment to certain conservative elitists. Yet neither group of critics can deny the electoral power Christian conservatives have wielded.

The group's uncompromising commitment to protecting life and defending America's traditional institutions has been instrumental in beating back the left's relentless assault on our culture. Without its grassroots contributions, we'd be seeing a lot more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs and a lot fewer Antonin Scalias.

But this primary campaign season, because of the competing resumes and platforms of various Republican presidential candidates and the complex interplay of religion and politics that has emerged, I am concerned that Christian conservatives could lose sight of the big picture of conservatism, all of whose principles are vitally important for this nation.

In my view, there's no perfect GOP candidate, but all of the viable Republican candidates are immeasurably preferable to their Democratic counterparts, and we should all support the eventual Republican nominee. But not all Christian conservatives agree.

The venerable Dr. James Dobson, for example, has said he couldn't support Rudy Giuliani. Rudy is not my first choice either, but he's a strong, capable leader who will fervently protect our national security. I pray he'll honor his pledge to appoint constitutionalist judges. Rudy is a far safer bet on life than any Democratic candidate.

Next, speculation exists that some evangelicals wouldn't support Mitt Romney because of his Mormonism. While I believe there are greater differences between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity than some assume, I will certainly support Romney if he is nominated. Again, my reservations concern his recent flips on social issues and how they bear on his authenticity. But if Mitt is the man he presents himself to be, he could make an extraordinary president. If not, he'll still be head and shoulders above the unapologetic socialists on the other ticket.

Some Christian conservatives have criticized Fred Thompson for refusing to endorse a federal ban on abortion. I understand the concern but believe a legitimate conservative (and pro-life) case can be made for Fred's position. Thompson is an inveterate advocate of federalism and state's rights, and his view that the abortion issue should be left to the states as before Roe squares with conservative principles.

But I confess, my main anxiety about Christian conservatives is their seeming willingness to turn a blind eye to Christian pastor Mike Huckabee's decidedly liberal instincts and either his acceptance of or desire to pander to politically correct conventional wisdom.

We get mixed signals on his tax policy, with critics saying he was a big taxer in Arkansas and defenders pointing to his support of the Fair Tax. He has exhibited a Jimmy Carteresque naivete on foreign policy issues, suggesting we can solve our problems with other nations solely with better diplomacy -- as if tyrants and terrorist regimes respond to Golden Rule treatment.

He parrots the Democrat propaganda that President Bush did not extend a hand of bipartisanship to Democrats in his first term or since. He has boarded the left's global-warming train. He's an economic populist who seems to favor yet more state involvement in health care. His record on clemencies is troubling. And, he has nanny-state tendencies, from federal smoking bans to advocating a federal clearinghouse to promote the arts in education. Big government conservatism is oxymoronic.

Don't get me wrong. I think Huckabee is a genuine Christian leader and a decent man whom I'll support, if he's nominated. But I think that on many political issues, he sounds a lot more like a liberal theologian and politician than a conservative one.

Liberal ones invariably translate Jesus's heart for the poor as a mandate for massive wealth redistribution, as if state-coerced transfers of other people's money are acts of Christian compassion. There is nothing compassionate about sapping the human spirit to the detriment of all.

Let's remember that Reagan conservatism, from start to finish, is consonant with Christian values. Abortion may well be the most important issue, but it is not the only one.

Christian conservatives must promote other conservative principles, without which this nation would never have flourished, much less been the freest, strongest and noblest nation in world history.

We must redouble our commitment to free enterprise and fierce opposition to statism, which will destroy the spirit and reality of liberty as surely as abortion destroys babies in the womb. We must defend our borders, safeguard our national security, promote the unique American culture, shrink government spending and regulation, and reduce the federal tax burden.

Finally, as Christian conservatives, let's remember that politics is not the only avenue for championing our values and positively affecting the culture.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
David Limbaugh, brother of radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, is an expert in law and politics and author of Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read David Limbaugh's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Mr Limbaugh
I always enjoy your articles. I like Huckabee, but not all of the policies he has been in favor of. I like the fairtax too. Huckabee would be much better than Hillary, that is for sure.

Tool
Neocon tools like David and his bro, Rush use the religious right for their own nefarious dealings, like getting mobs out to vote against their best interest after being dumbed-down (YES. Dumbed-down) via the rightwing noise machine - and yet, we are supposed to believe it's the media and the left that denigrate them? HAH.

They don't believe in it.
The problem with all of the viable GOP candidates, and yes this excludes lunatics like Ron Paul, is that they don't believe in Conservatism. If they understood and believed in the foundations of what conservatives believe and why, then this wouldn't be so much of an issue as every GOP candidate right now is still competing for the "most conservative candidate" prize. Belief in the basic principles of our nation is at the heart of modern conservatism, and that foundation would prohibit a candidate to be choosy about which principles he approves of and which he doesn't. Freedom is something that cannot be compromised for political expedience.

I'm STILL a single issue voter:
I am the Republicans' greatest fantasy as a voter and the Democrats' worst nightmare. I am a pro-life Democrat and I have NEVER voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate in my life. This can be easily explained by the fact that my first opportunity to vote offerred a choice between Jimmy Carter... and Ronald Reagan.

Those who are old enough to remember, have to know that there has been an embarassing shortage of quality Democrats nominated for POTUS in the past 27 years. As a serious, pro-life voter, my only vote has been a protest-vote against my own Party.

I will continue to vote straight Republican ticket until traditional FDR/JFK Democrats reclaim their party from the radical leftists who have taken over the Party and now want to take over the country... which will be never. I am thinking about becoming a Republican. But it appears, at least in this primary season, that Republicans/Evangelicals want to "sit out" in 2008 unless THEIR guy is the nominee.

I hope Republicans and Evangelicals come to their senses before the election passes and Mrs. Bill Clinton becomes PRESIDENT Mrs. Bill Clinton.

Why settle for a RINO liberal
Though the media would love a Huck candidate to chew up, there is a consistent conservative- Fred Thompson. Like everyone, I've watched carefully and considered the views of all the candidates.

Huck is too goodhearted and willing to use my money for hie compassion, plus he is totally clueless on foreign issues and economics. We don't need another "compassionate conservative."

Romney has flipped so many times,we can't know what he really believes, except he really wants to buy the power of POTUS.

Rudy has no morals whatever, Clinton II, and he is not remotely conservative in all issues important- immigration, health care, reducing government, etc. Do we want a re-run of the Clinton years of one scandal after the other?

McCain told us to take a hike on immigration, the gang of 14 and others. So we will.

The "lower tier" simply cannot win at this late date, though a couple are good men.

So,Thompson has not wavered- would secure the borders, stop illegals, use market forces on health care- not big government- has a plan for Social Security, opposes entitlements and redistribution of wealth. There will be Supreme Court and many other judge vacancies; he'd appoint the right ones. I assume his strategy is to let others implode while he quietly builds strength. I hope it works.

played like a fiddle
"Neocon tools like David and his bro, Rush use the religious right for their own nefarious dealings"

I know--he even makes us call him Maha Rushi, can you believe him?

Still love ya
My dear Limbaughs,

The thing you may like to know about many conservatives is that it does not matter how many (R)s you hang behind a candidate's name,

or who you run them against

we will not vote for a liberal.

Your self-congratulatory political expediency is very...embarrassing to watch.

Now think, "Supreme Court, Supreme Court..."

Well written article
I started out as a big Huckabee fan. At first, I saw him as a guy who could really balance out a ticket with Romney/Rudy/McCain at the top. Where they would grab the center independents and moderates, Huckabee could shore up the far Right Evangelicals. Unfortunately, as I have dug deeper into what Huckabee really stands for I no longer think any ticket with Huckabee on it makes sense.

Despite what the media says about being unhappy with the Republican offerings I can say that I would cast a vote without hesitation for Romney or Thompson. I could swallow a vote for Rudy or McCain. I could even tolerate a vote for Huckabee if I had to, if only to make it harder for Obama or Clinton to take the White House.

The Real Huckabee
Mike was desperately hoping he could skate through this without people taking a close look at his record, but it is horrible on immigration, pardons for criminals, reducing the penalties for meth lab dealers, and on taxing and spending.

Among recipients of the 1,033 pardons and commutations Huckabee granted to convicted criminals were 11 murderers.

On top of that “Mr. Health” accepted $40,000 in contributions from the R.J. Reynolds tobacco company to campaign among evangelicals against a national cigarette tax.

The Arkansas Ethics Commission sanctioned Huckabee in five of its 14 probes. The Politico reported Huckabee accepted gifts as if every day were Christmas. A $200 stadium blanket, $250 in dental care, a $600 chainsaw, and a $3,700 pair of cowboy boots were among 300 gratuities Huckabee accepted totaling $130,000.

Like the Clintons loading their moving van with White House antiques, Huckabee tried to claim for himself some $70,000 in furniture donated to the governor's mansion.

Though already married 32 years, wedding registries at Dillard's and Target let friends donate roughly $7,000 in gifts that the Huckabees selected for the home they occupied after departing the governor's mansion.

Liberal in a Preachers Cloak
I liked Huckabee: UNTIL:::::
YIKES:
He is a Liberal in a Preacher's cloak:
We do NOT NEED OR WANT a "preacher in Chief"
Abortions are still legal
God has been thrown out of the Schools
we have a 33% illiteracy rate
this country is being destroyed by illegals
AFTER:::
REAGAN
BUSH I
BUSH II
SSOOOOOOOOOOOOOO the "single issue voters" gave us the Clintoons last time and will do so again:

The hate filled fundamentalists, who are biggots believe that you can legislate "MORALS" while they make excuse after excuse for every one of their ethical lapses: Like the liberals they always have an excuse for criminal condut:
Jimmy Swaggart, Jimmy Baker, the list goes on and on and on: NOW they make excuses for HUCK.
his ethical lapses
his pro illegals
his taxes on everything in sight
his disaster educational program
his hate speech against other religions
etc.

the fundamentalists have driven all of US
Independent Conservatives out of the party:
We happen to be very PRO LIFE



tweaky, most voters are
like you, there is one issue that is fundamentally important to them and that is because they have conviction and clarity on what they believe and why they believe it. Romney lacks this conviction or clarity on ANY MAJOR SOCIAL ISSUE - and that is why I am sure he could never unite the center-right. He has something on his record that offends EVERY TRUE CONSERVATIVE i.e. abortion, definition of marriage, stem cell, immigration, and oooh yes his affiliation with a historically-recently racist and sexist institution (1978????). HE HAS TOO MUCH BAGGAGE TO WIN THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (as Bush would put it).

David - its not either single issue or
overall conservatism. It is CONVICTION AND CLARITY. Americans will support a person who demonstrates conviction and clarity on the MAIN SOCIAL ISSUES even if they disagree with that person - simply because - the person is predictable and trustworthy. Romney lacks the record to convince americans that he is predictable on ANY ONE MAJOR SOCIAL ISSUE....consistency is important and his record as governor lacks that evidence. If Romney is nominated - ask Rush to start preparing for "America held hostage - part 2". The Clintons can unite the center-left and gather 45% of the vote, Romney is incapable of uniting the center-right beyond 35% and 20% of voters will stay home given that choice.

Huckabee video, comentary on TH?
This one is for you, Hugh!

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View &Blog_id=888

I like Thompson too. Duncan is a dreamboat.

Have a nice night! aDNA

National Review has it just right
Finally
someone did the RESEARCH: checked the FACTS
National Review deserves a lot of credit for a detailed examination:

Amazing how much psycho hype the single issue only hate filled cristians can push:
the Fundamentalists need to review its history of FALLEN PREACHERS:

WE DO NOT NEED A "PREACHER IN CHIEF"
Huckabee is a LIBERAL IN A PREACHERS CLOAK

Illegals will destroy this Country
the Iraq war as with all other wars is a point in time:

The destruction and devastation that the Illegals are creating is FOREVER:
the destruction of our culture
the destruction of our freedoms
the destruction of our environment
the destruction of our economy
the waste, fraud and abuse in our social programs
the "ILLEGALS" get more rights than citizens
the Language
the rising illiteracy
the SECURITY: the explosion of vicious crime:

Anyone like Huckabee who has a record of being PRO ILLEGALS needs to become President of Mexico, etc.

Look who supports Huck:
Ed Rollins was one of Reagan's top advisors, and he led Reagan's campaign in 1984 to a landslide victory. He is now Gov Huckabee's National Campaign Chairman. Check it out:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressRelea se&ID=435

Minuteman Project Founder Jim Gilchrist also is supporting Gov Huckabee.

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressRelea se&ID=422





Balance is always the answer
I really don't trust people who say they are conservative, and then turn out to be very liberal in one way or another.

Like the person who is only interested in the economy, but is liberal regarding abortion and drug legalization.

Or the person who is pro-life, but believes in a tax-and-spend approach to poverty and is against the death penalty.

I feel that most conservative positions, taken as a whole are based on common sense and values. When taken one at a time, they may not be so good for our society or our country.

question for B2slim on immigration
B2slim writes: Saturday, December, 15, 2007 2:40 AM
Illegals will destroy this Country


The destruction and devastation that the Illegals are creating is FOREVER:

a. the destruction of our culture

b. the destruction of our freedoms

c. the destruction of our environment

d. the destruction of our economy

e. the waste, fraud and abuse in our social programs

f. the "ILLEGALS" get more rights than citizens

g. the Language

h.the rising illiteracy

i. the SECURITY: the explosion of vicious crime:
---------------------------------------------
B2slim,

can you please elaborate on each of the points you made above (which I have labled a-i) with some documented factual examples and footnotes or links to your sources ?

I see these fears expressed all the time but have yet to see where anyone who has voiced them take the trouble to offer any documentation.

so for that reaosn I am wondering if the situation is really as bad as many people seem to think.


I realze it will take more than one post to answer my question as 2,000 characters couldnt possible do the job adequately .maybe a post labled part one, part two, and maybe even part three?

I know that is a lot to ask, but i really would like to have some facts.

my email is mrcucich at yahoo dot com if you prefer to answer that way.

I may address this issue on my blog, but would like to have the benefit of the underlying and supporting facts which valdiate these fears so many people harbor..


thanks for your time






“River Rising Review” – a shameless plug
Shalom! You are warmly welcomed to add your voice to the live online magazine, “River Rising Review – The Venue for Vision and Values in Our Communities,” hosted by Rabbi DF Eukel. Simply use our forum link at EUKEL dot US.

Be informed and inspired. The editorial energy for “River Rising Review” does not assume that Truth is between the river banks of a godless liberal left and the religious right, as if a progressive center was fair and balanced. What rules and who rules in our homes creates a living landscape legacy. Like a ‘river rising,’ our rhythms, rituals and recitations flow over our neighbors boundaries to reshape the vision and values of our communities. Simply use our forum link at EUKEL dot US.

“River Rising Review” will be relevant. We feature snappy segments from news headlines. Some news is laughable. We laugh. Some news makes us shake our heads in unbelief. We will moan. Some news prepares us to stop, look and listen. We will call to action.

Simply use our forum link at EUKEL dot US.

Well balenced overview.
I look at the 5 isssues that most effect me as an Amercian and as an individual. If a plan has no chance of succeeding or being changed then I don't put weight on it when chosing a candidate. For example Fair Tax.

1) national defense, a strong leader who will take a stand in World Affairs and build the military and fight the WAR on Islamic Extremism.

Well balenced overview 2
Hit wrong key lol

These are five areas I look to the POTUS. All things he can effect. All things that are achievable.

1) War on Extremisim National Defense and Foriegn Policy

2) Lower Taxes

3) Strong Economic foundation

4) Good Moral Values

5) Homeland Security to especially include Closed Borders

I think Sen McCain would make a great VP for Pres Romney.

Huckleberry is a liberal and
support for "Fair Tax" is not a plus. Unless the so-called 22% price drop happens (a miracle) it will be a tax increase for nearly everyone. If you have a lot of medical bills being paid for by insurance it will be a catastrophic increase.

Jeering is not effective
Yes, I understand that the step that comes right before the use of force is mocking and jeering at the people who will not fall into step with The Herd. The caries of BIGOT! HATER! MEANIE! are louder here than they ever were in high school, where Sister spoke firmly against name-calling and taught us that *You Are Stupid* is not an argument.

Unfortunately for you hysterical Men of Desperate Sincerity, this is not high school and many of us no longer care if we are Unpopular; in fact we have been told frequently that standing up for our principles and voting our consciences will make us UNPOPPULAR and we have found out that this is not in fact a death sentence.

I will make up my own mind who to vote for and I will use the criteria that are important to me, and no name-calling, insults, or whining about how mean I am will affect me. So present me with facts and trust me to make use of them. But drop the whole BIGOT! HATER! whine or I will stop listening to you at all.

Rudy vs. Hillary
Can’t we do better than these two?

Giuliani: If I Have A Presidential Mistress, She Will Get Security Too!

Giuliani’s Answer Was ‘Flimsy,’ Says ‘Tough-Talking New Yorker’

Giuliani Defends, Employs Priest Accused of Molesting Teens

“Rudy Soprano” video

Hillary’s Hsu indicted

Weapons Industry Dumps Republicans, Backs Hillary

Hillary, Bush For Open Borders!

“Clinton won’t answer immigration question” video

WATCH VIDEO

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/rudy-vs-hillary


Dumbed down talisman?
No, informed, educated, inspired would be the proper description the Limbaughs give us. Conservative Christians KNOW what they believe, and need to be informed to vote properly. Thank God for the Limbaughs!

I too have studied the candidates...
and Mitt Romney wins the head-to-head match up:

1) Executive experience -- MOSTLY in business, with Bain Capital and the Salt Lake Olympics -- that's a big one for me. Also as a Governor -- not just a Senator with 1 of 100 votes.

2) Lives a moral personal life, and has been married to the same woman -- his high school sweetheart.

3) Has taken a stand against Islamofascism -- in Mass., when the Iotolla Khamheni spoke at Harvard, Mitt Romney as Governor, did NOT order State Police protection - at taxpayer expense - to escort him around. He spoke strongly against treating this oppressive leader as a diplomat.

4) Is in the pro-life camp -- true, a recent convert, but wasn't Ronald Reagan also?

5) Is a gifted speaker -- witness his 12/6 speech -- an inspiring speech that gave me chills, on Freedom of Religion in this country, and how important it was to the founding of this great nation. IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD OR READ THIS SPEECH I URGE YOU TO GO TO Mittromney.com and watch/read it for yourself.

6) Has the right stuff to cut the fat from this bloated federal government, and make our federal government more efficient -- THIS WAS HIS JOB AT BAIN CAPITAL, WHICH MADE HUNDREDS OF COMPANIES PROFITABLE.

7) Has the ability to bring together Democrats and Republicans alike -- like he has in business AND in Government.

8) Is a LEADER -- not just someone who says what the polls show is the thing to say. If you disagree with me on this point, you haven't read or heard his 12/6 speech.

THIS IS THE MOST QUALIFIED, MOST GIFTED CANDIDATE THAT THERE IS ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. DON'T LET HIM SLIP AWAY BY LISTENING TO THE 'FLIP-FLOP' CHARGE PEOPLE. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. I DID, AND THIS IS THE MAN THAT ENCOMPASSES ALL CONSERVATIVE IDEALS THAT MOST OF US ARE LOOKING FOR.

Mom in Wisconsin

Limbaugh's "assault on our culture"
How can you expect to be seen as credible when you ignore the value and culture of half of the American people and claim that conservative culture is the only true American culture? Conservatives do have a unique culture and basic values and you are welcome to them, but they are by no means the only culture and values held by Americans. I think the disdain that conservatives have for liberal theologians is quite interesting. Yes, conservatives think they are right on religion, but it is only hubris not to recognize that the liberal theologians could be a little righter than conservatives.

Also Limbaugh gets caught in a contradiction about conservative beliefs, which basically extol "conventional wisdom" or a Burke says, "the wisdom of the ages," yet he chides Huckelby for "pandering to conventional wisdom."

Tweaky: Why are you still a democrat?
I think it was a conservative think tank which first drew the distinction between FDR and JFK and the modern left leaning democrats, in order to coopt various positions. This was cynical, not sincere.

Democrats were always for the "little guy" and there were lots of little guys in the old days, and against the elites of wealth and power. That distinguished liberals from conservatives until Reagan who introduces "populist conservatism" by changing the definition of elites from wealth and power to college professors and reporters. Reagan and subsequent conservatives claimed that professors and reporters were against the "little guy."

The problem for conservatives is that the "little guy" in America, with a lot of liberal help, grew up to be our current middle class and more. Liberals are still fighting for increased democracy, a bottom up directed America as against the top down authoritarianism of today's conservatives.

If that is your attitude, Tweaky, by all means join the republicans, TODAY.

“USA is living beyond its means”
THE REAL ISSUE!

GAO: “USA is living beyond its means”

All should watch this video!

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/gao-usa-is-living- beyond-its-means

thompson
is the best choice for conservatives. come on conservatives, lets unite around fred and get him elected.

AudiR10...
...I love Townhall,and you are one of the reasons I do.If you go,I go.

EXCELLENT article David

If I had to put on paper, my thoughts concerning the Republican candidates, I couldn't have done ANY better. Can't think of anything I'd need to add, he expressed my thoughts to a tee.

Divided Conservatives
__It is something they cannot put their hands on, they cannot touch it, they cannot see it. What MSM can affect, is people of religious congregations. Human beings they can see, touch, and have an effect on. While the media does not physically touch them, they use their voice to touch passions, and emotions to create a commotion. MSM is unable to affect what they cannot see, or touch, so they need to create an effect on what they know. To draw on their ability to touch, and inflame, passion, while directing it towards their prosperity. The MSM embraces the left as the power to advance their prosperity, and will use their abilities to ensure power of the left. Both the MSM, and the left, effectively tinker with religious passions to create commotion, and advance their singular passion.
_______________________________________________
__The anti-christ working according to its glory. What it can see, touch, and hold in its hand. What can be owned, or possessed, to advance personal prosperity, and continue that prosperity. They cannot wrap their hands around, embrace, the unseen Word of God, as their faith is in the world. So, with clever tactics, they use the weakness of the religious, which is also the strength of religion. The religious will passionately defend their specific church, and its doctrine, as that is the temple from which they profess their faith. Just as the religious will profess their Love of God, and neighbor, according to the Word of God. The weakness, and the strength, of Gods congregation. The temple, and its doctrine, verses, The Word, Bible, God. The left loves to tweak, and play, this seperation, just as humans have done for centuries. Human passion, verses the Passion of God. If you stay seperate, you stay divided.

Proud Liberal writes:
Limbaugh's "assault on our culture"

I think he was referring to the media always slamming the religious right and in most ways he is right about that. But my feelings are, if we should be so ready to give up certain values and hold our noses to pull the lever, why even have any values? If I could get past someone who cares nothing about the sovereignty of our nation (which I can not!) let’s say that person has no values on abortion. Do I hold my nose and vote for him? No! The sad part about all of this is there are so many of these rinos’s running rudy mitt, mcquack, the list is almost endless. If I refuse to vote for a clintoon (and I always will) how can I vote for one of them? I can not and keep ANY dignity about myself. This is not the first time David Limbaugh or others here on TH have asked us to do this, and I want them to know I will still write in my dogs name before I pull the lever for one of these Rino’s! As anyone with any common sense (I hope) will vote their beliefs and values, these people on TH are hopefully just wasting a lot of ink on this subject!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Abortion
Abortion is not the most imperative issue of our times. Frankly, it is rather unimportant. We ought to be looking at quelling Islamic fascism rather than peering to see if a woman has an abortion. Because this country will not survive if allow nutty religious Muslims to take over America.

Let's balance the federal budget, keep taxes low, halt illegal immigration, and put in conservative judges, all the while building a strong national defense.

Once we do that, we can consider increasing the number of LEGAL IMMIGRANTS, provided excellent background checks and their skills. We need less blue collar labor from foreign countries and more skilled jobs like engineers, mathematicians, computer scientists and the like.

Understated
An excellent article, but understated. Limbaugh says: "I am concerned that Christian conservatives could lose sight of the big picture of conservatism..." Could? Let's try "have lost sight." Huckabee's rise is proof.

Or this: "My main anxiety about Christian conservatives is their seeming willingness to turn a blind eye to Christian pastor Mike Huckabee's decidedly liberal instincts and either his acceptance of or desire to pander to politically correct conventional wisdom." Seeming willingness? Again, Huckabee's rise is proof.

Like BJsGuess, I once liked Huckabee quite a bit, until I actually listened hard to what he was saying and researched his political record. Now, he is the only Republican candidate that I probably would not vote for if nominated.

He is NOT a conservative, period. He is pro-life and pro-gun, and then he is a liberal in every other aspect of his political platform: Happy to tax, soft on criminals, soft on immigration, and a big government proponent with virtually no understanding of foreign policy.

I am absolutely amazed that the Christian right supports this guy. He is FORMER pastor who apparently left the church to become a politician -- what a goal, huh? -- and he panders relentlessly and pathetically to Christians. A vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for Hillary or Barack.

Evangelicals "Religious Elite?"
Continuing with the idea of the redefinition of "elite:" Of course to be an "elite" person was for the longest time a good and admired thing in conservative circles; noblesse oblige; "an aristocracy of natural talent" Jefferson and Adams agreed should be in charge of running America.

To claim that professors and journalists are today's elite, as conservatives do, seems very weak and not true or real. We still have old money in this country and the wealth and power of the military industrial complex has not waned in the least; America is still run by powerful commercial interests.

Of course, the argument that conservatives are making is that the professorial and journalist elites are "intellectual elites" who think they know better than the common man, in whom inheres the "wisdom of the ages," which is unavailable to the intellectual elites. This is fundamentally an argument against secular and scientific scholarship and for faith.

In sum, people of faith see themselves as the new elite.

Not voting for the best person?
When speaking of Gov Romney, Moderate mark claims,
"I also believe he is the best one out there but now he has to pander to the radical right, I can't vote for him"

Sometimes the logic of people drive me crazy? Won't vote for who you think is the best person?
isnt that poking out your eye because your nose is running?

I saw reference to a poll on TV news that claimed over 60% of Republican Primary voters had not decided on who they were voting for yet. If that is 60 % of people who will vote (the majority of people WON'T vote)that would mean that the race was completely wide open still.

I would be inerested if anyone in the States caught the news cast (not sure which one because I so rarely catch TV news)or new of a link to a similar poll.

Thanks

Tinsldr2@yahoo.com

Remember that 69% of all statistics are made up on the spot.


Proud Liberal
HUH???

Doc
You have a point however I will hold my nose to vote for a rino because with one of them we might control the SCOTUS.If we lose them we will be in deep doodoo.

Sgt Relic, Truthseeker
After his performance in the recent Iowa debate, I agree that Thompson out did the rest of them handily. There's too much pandering to and fear of the media among the rest of them for my taste.

I liked his views right along, but there has been that concern that Fred simply doesn't have the energy to run a marathon campaign. But I'm reminded of the tortoise and the hare and we all know who won that race.

I'm going with my gut and back Fred.

Arby, truth in the pudding.
__You write, "He is pro-life and pro-gun, and then he is a liberal in every other aspect of his political platform: Happy to tax, soft on criminals, soft on immigration, and a big government proponent..." The congregation can finally stand on their feet, and vote for a candidate who is pro-life, pro-gun, and still get a candidate who will do what they should be personally doing. HELPING THEIR NEIGHBOR! These are the drive-bys, that tithe the mint to their church, and government, and drive right by societies problems. They gave their portion, and now it's not their problem. The Lord weeps, while the congregation sleeps.

Huckabee is a fraud
He doesn't have a theology degree as he has claimed in the past.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59222

He's just another trickster from Hope.

Check out Duncan Hunter!

http://www.gohunter08.com

I prefer DH and Fred.

David
The problem that you and our brother have is that true Christians are finally separating themselves from true conservatives with very little overlap. The core agenda offered by extreme fundamentalist conservatives like you and Rush includes: endless war, ravaged earth, sick, dying and starving children and elderly while greed motivates all. Guess what the facade of compassion you wore is stripped away by your actions following Katrina, Iraq and climate change. Christians now realise you are the "me" generation not the "lefties" (really moderates you scream against. Your piece smacks of panic - rightly I think

union dude writes:
I ask you this question, not to be a smartas*, rather just a question. What makes you think they won’t cave on every one they put up for any public office, IMO a lot like peso george has. If one of the libs in repub clothes gets in, we will probably get what we vote for, a lib! And at best, a middle of the road judge! Not much to look forward to in any case! Just my thoughts.

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Took the words right....
"Despite what the media says about being unhappy with the Republican offerings ... I would cast a vote without hesitation for Romney or Thompson. I could swallow a vote for Rudy or McCain."

Took the words right outa my mouth.

In fact, Romney is the 'most' conservative candidate who also stands the best chance of attracting mushy-middle voters -- and thus would WIN in '08.

There is enormous political value in having a huge, telegenic enthusiastic conservative family (as does Romney) who can stand there on stage and wow the American voter audience.

Such a wholesome personna out-trumps the few foibles of a Romney candidacy.

GO Romney! Go Fred!

union dude
"You have a point however I will hold my nose to vote for a rino because with one of them we might control the SCOTUS."

With Rudy in the White House, I wouldn't count on having a conservative SCOTUS. I wouldn't count on it with Mitt Romney in the White House, either (Romney calls himself a Mormon, but I believe his real religion is political expedience).

Some will point out that both Romney and Giuliani are preferable to Hillary - a point I do not dispute. Still, I hope the Republicans will rally around someone better than these two.

Hal Donahue writes... ravaged earth, gre
" ...true conservatives .. includes: endless war, ravaged earth, sick, dying and starving children and elderly while greed motivates all."????

Methinks you had better check your glasses.

You likely meant to post on DUmmy Underground, or Koz Kooks.nut >

Rational comparisons of issues
Great- finally some writers are analyzing issues, instead of ranting. Thanks Sarah, tinsldr2,Sgt Relic, gay conservative et al.
If everyone will just list the several issues most important and see where your guy falls on each one, we'll weed the candidate crowd down in a hurry. Especially, tinsoldier who lists 5 most important and I'd add to that list- Supreme Court.
I, too, thought Huck might be the one, but now see he's not. Thompson meets all the tests.

You might want to go to the Candidates and Issues matrix at msnbc.msn.com/id/21116732 where you can do what I suggest. All candidates and five or six top issues, rate them yourself and then click on "all users ratings" and see how all look across the board. It's color-coded, green for "I agree", red "oppose", and shades in-between. I ended up all green for Thompson.

On this matrix, I'm not totally satisfied with the way they worded some issues, but it's a pretty good start.

Clutch Cargo
"Methinks you had better check your glasses.

You likely meant to post on DUmmy Underground, or Koz Kooks.nut"

Nope not at all and I suspect most that post here know what I said is correct for the most part that is why so many are so nasty with the name calling etc

Now I will just say adios

Grubby
Great post on Fred and I agree. Slow and steady wins the race and his display the other night, was a classic. Fred's a common sense kinda guy and he'll destroy Hitlery and oBLAHma in the debates.

Too bad Hanoi John ain't running. I always enjoyed his long face and loud whinnies on stage. But constantly calling the narrator "wilbur" was a tad tedious.

hal
the problem with you is you don't think. so mister imperial wazzoo tell us what liberals offer that make them true christians. and you can leave out abortion because killing the innocent is not Christ-like.

Moral relativism
Mr. Limbaugh: Then you say "Let us (Christians) do evil (support a pro-choice murderer for POTUS) that good (fiscal conservativism) may abound."

I disagree. If I can't support a morally acceptable candidate, I will support none.

Yes, I know the argument: Voting for the lesser of two evils is better than not voting at all because not voting "makes it easier for the worst candidate to succeed."

That may be true, but as a Christian I CANNOT give my support to a candidate who supports the legalized murder of human babies.

I do not see how a mind that has been renewed by the Holy Spirit of God could possibly do so.

God is still on the Throne. I will follow my Christian conscience and leave the outcome with Him!

union dude is right
The possibility of regaining control of SCOTUS is the reason I voted for that *compassionate conserative* Jorge.

Limbaugh misses the abortion point
Of course abortion is not the ONLY issue, but it is the *most important* one as it is a matter of fundamental human rights. If you do not have the right to live, you cannot claim you possess any other rights as a human being, because to do so first presumes you are alive.

Christian conservatives (and secular stoic conservatives like myself) believe that human beings have rights per a universal moral law, be it the Laws of Nature or the Laws of God. We believe in equal rights among all such members who have committed no crime, no offense. Abortion kicks that principle to the curb, and so we will vote on that first and foremost, making the abolition of abortion as our #1 aim, because human rights is the principle which we most cherish.

The idea of ever supporting Rudy Giuliani is unconscionable to us. We will not support a man who believes that killing the unborn is a constitutional right or a settled matter. If he can't be bothered to defend the most fundamental human right, the right to live, we can't be bothered to vote for him.

The Intangible
Huckabee will make you laugh. It probably is THE tactic required at this stage to uniting the heart of this Country again.

ModerateMark writes:
Which political party a candidate run for does affect their platform. I believe Romney is pro-choice but atlas he has switch position trying to win the election. Will he be able to enact a moderate agenda while pandering to the radical right? I can't trust him anymore, too bad.

Who are you calling the radical right? Is that anyone who believes in God? If so, that’s a false statement. I for one believe in God, but I do not attend church. I do not attend because I have been burnt out on churches for a long time, and there are many like me. We do not care form, or want a moderate agenda, as you put it. I want my country to be strong and I want it secured, and there are many like me. I want good judges on the bench that will not legislate from the bench, and there are many like me. As seen below, If we can’t have home security first, the rest just won’t matter, and there are many like me. I will never hold my nose as I have in the past, and pull the lever, and there are many like me!
P.S. That is not all Mittary has flip-flopped on:
http://pajamasmedia.com/2007/03/the_man_who_would_be_mitt_f ind.php

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Limbaugh misses the other points too
"Rudy is not my first choice either, but he's a strong, capable leader who will fervently protect our national security."

...When he skips the Iraq Study Group reports and gets his security paid for him while he's committing adultery on public dollars by boinking his girlfriend?

He may fervently protect our national security, but this is a man who has also said that the President can do away with habeas corpus *for U.S. citizens.* I would *never* want such a man as President.

"I pray he'll honor his pledge to appoint constitutionalist judges. Rudy is a far safer bet on life than any Democratic candidate."

For someone who believes habeas corpus can be thrown out, who believes that Justice Ginsburg is one of the great justices, who believes that abortion is a moral evil yet a constitutional right, and believes that Roe v. Wade can be upheld by strict constructionists, I think your hope is mired in delusion. I ordinarily have great respect for what you say, Mr. Limbaugh, but I cannot let this pass. A vote for Rudy is a vote for the continuance of abortion. *I will never vote for such a person.*

But enough on Rudy, on to your other concerns!

Doc
Amen brother! I can communicate with the Almighty w/o the need of a priest! However, a country w/o strong borders and the guts to defend it ain't a country for very long.

Mr. Limbaugh misses the point on Romney
"While I believe there are greater differences between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity than some assume, I will certainly support Romney if he is nominated."

And so would evangelicals, I think. The notion that "all evangelicals are bigots," is both 1.) bigoted, and 2.) promoted by the left-wing media. Some of what Mormonism has said in the past is a bit kooky... that people with darker skin are less worthwhile than people with lighter skin is one instance. Let me ask you this Mr. Limbaugh. If part of my faith was denying the Holocaust ever happened, would you be saying not to question that as it's part of my personal faith, or would you be questioning my sanity and capacity to lead? Faith is a legitimate question, and Romney has dodged the issue much as he has dodged several others in the primaries.

It's not that Romney is necessarily a bad guy, and if nominated, he would get my vote. However, I do not trust him on abortion, or other issues. I get the sense that he's too willing to reverse course whenever the political winds blow. I want someone who is principled, and whose principles coincide with mine.

OK, Marcita, Here's my four
1) Someone who is both smart and honest. The meme "war on terror" is both dishonest propaganda and meaningless, as a number of people have pointed out. "Terror" is a strategy and you can't make war on an abstraction. O'Bama could be the guy from this standpoint.

2) Even more democracy: A key, running narrative in America for 200 years is getting more an more people an effective seat at the table. Democracy is thwarted and distorted in many ways in present day America. We need someone who will make "more democracy" a key presidential effort.
Edwards is strong in this area.

3) Promotion of science and secular knowledge and scholarship. This is definitely a "push back." Conservatives are adamant about replacing knowledge with faith and are attacking public education. You do not teach "the earth is flat" alongside "the earth is shaped like a doorknob" just to provide faith-based balance in public education. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

4) Economic Isolationism. We need someone who won't give up control of our lives to a "process," because there is an extant myth that the process produces utopian results.


Is David an Elitist ?
Interesting. David outlined in a round-a-bout way what it is those he identifies as "conservative elites" - those are the bad guy non social conservatives - are uncomfortable about with the religious Right. He examines priorities, likelihood of success, and consequences of success and failure to draw a "Comprehensive" conclusion.

Does that make David a member of the Elitist club? He isn't a do what feels good at the moment Religious Right Populist.

Limbaugh, Thompson, and abortion
"Some Christian conservatives have criticized Fred Thompson for refusing to endorse a federal ban on abortion. I understand the concern but believe a legitimate conservative (and pro-life) case can be made for Fred's position. Thompson is an inveterate advocate of federalism and state's rights, and his view that the abortion issue should be left to the states as before Roe squares with conservative principles."

The question at the end of the day, though, is which matters more? The structure of government powers or human rights? Many evangelicals (and stoic conservatives like myself) answer that human rights come before questioning how to best form a social contract, and that human rights *must be defended at the national level.* 50 states with 50 different conceptions of human rights is unacceptable if in some you can literally get away with bloody murder.

Nevertheless, Fred would still have my vote because of where the country currently is on abortion. Turning the matter back over to the states *would be a humongous step in progressing forward* because it would mean that in certain areas we could actually stop the infanticide of abortion, even if not in all. Saving some is better than saving none. Be mindful though, that once such a matter was turned back over to the states, we would once again be pushing for abortion to be outlawed at the national level. In so far as you opposed that after the overturn of Roe v. Wade, we would continue to fight you.

However, we also have reason to be skeptical of Thompson. "States rights" is often an attempt to appear moderate and acceptable by Republicans running for office so that social conservatives will simply leave them alone. When it comes down to it though, they tend to not actually care. We want someone who actually gives a damn. As such, Thompson is an acceptable candidate, but there is yet again an issue of trust.

G'morning Guns
I lost TH at 7 pm again last night you?
Also, I think many people do need to stop thinking about voting for some one who claims to be religious, and start looking at there past record! Heck even billary goes to Church, well at least IT goes and tries to talk and act like them, just to pander a vote from them, to bad they can not see the insult of that!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

A single issue proponent is...
like giving the government your old, crumpled up dollar in exchange for that shiny new nickel.

Finally...
So where does that leave social conservatives like myself? We cannot and will never support Giuliani. We would stay home by the millions if someone we find so contemptible earns the nomination.

Romney and Thompson we both distrust. We could vote for them, but we'd always have that doubt in the back of our minds.

...and so we finally come to Huckabee. Social conservatives see him, and we say "Aha! Here is someone I *can* trust!" Of course, Huckabee has been slammed on everything from illegal immigration, to his clemencies, to taxation.

Well, in so far as abortion is the #1 priority of social conservatives, and we can't trust anyone else or find anyone else who isn't anathema to what we want to see in public policy, Huckabee becomes our man. The question then, is he a 1-issue candidate for us? The answer to that is, perhaps surprisingly to some, no.

(To be continued)

GunnyG
I second that. It's nice to go to church every now and then, but I think that God keeps an open line for all of His believers.

The gubment lost its guts a long time ago, and as always it will be up to the American people to fight for our rights and freedoms.

http://www.gohunter08.com

Doc
I was unable to post last night and notified TYH this AM. So far, so good.

It's unbelievable how stupid people are in that they believe the yammerings of a politicians w/o examining their past record. Actions ALWAYS speak louder than words.

Fred/Hunter 08.

Republican unity
Limbaugh is correct that Republican division will guarantee a far left Democrat president in 08. I have looked at Huckabee's record and positions (see his website) and have decided he is not the best candidate and is not prepared to be an effective president. BUT, if he is the Republican candidate I will support him and vote for him because he would be far better than any of the Democrat candidates. And I would support whichever candidate the Republicans choose because any of them is far better than any of the Democrat candidates.

This may be the most important election of our time. Election of a Democrat president to unite with the Democrat congress will drive the US into deep socialism and PC secularism (with all that that entails). Republicans AND independents (I am one) UNITE!

On Huckabee
With Huckabee, social conservatives see the following:

- Someone who grew up poor (we tend to be more blue collar folks, and we like someone who has humble roots)
- Someone who doesn't have ties to big business (which means Democrats can't use their socialist rhetoric about being corporate supremacists against us)
- Someone who is a populist (social conservatives actually like populism by and large -- we vote Republican because we can tolerate its economically libertarian leanings in so far as it advances social conservatism -- we will not tolerate social liberalism though)

Say what? Social conservatives like populism? How? Why?!

Many social conservatives see free trade as a disaster. Keep in mind, you have blue collar folks who are losing their jobs left and right overseas... and who are these blue collar folks? Social conservatives.

We do not want handouts. We are not socialists. We believe in personal responsibility, including providing for oneself. However, we also don't believe that government should be actively involved in undermining the welfare of the masses with free trade.

We also do not get the obsession with cutting taxes. We see Huckabee and we see someone who stands for balancing budgets. We think that if fiscal conservatives actually were principled, they'd be complaining about cutting spending and getting the country's balance book in the black before they care about cutting taxes. But often times they don't, and so we think of them as more caring about their own pocketbooks than actually being principled.

David Seems Confused
He starts "Since its emergence as a dominant political force in the '80s, the religious right has been a favorite whipping boy of the mainstream media and political left and a sometimes embarrassment to certain conservative elitists."

Insisting anyone who criticizes the RR is a leftist or elitist is called poisoning the well.

Then his embarrassed criticism: "...I am concerned that Christian conservatives could lose sight of the big picture of conservatism...."

Seems David drank from his own well, so is he a leftist or elitist?

The crux of his confusion is this: "Abortion may well be the most important issue, but it is not the only one." And immediately in next paragraph: "Christian conservatives must promote other conservative principles...."

Values are not principles. Values derive from principles.

David does recognize this: "We must redouble our commitment to free enterprise and fierce opposition to statism...."

Indeed, that is where the conservative intellectual movement began back in the 30s with Mises and Hayek, Individualists taking a stand for liberty against Statism. It wasn't until the later 40s that New Conservatives came along, like Buckley, promoting virtue, even that was at the expense of liberty.

I think David ignores another type of religious conservatism. Both types are religiously conservative, of course. The one he ignores is politically conservative in favoring government limited to protection of liberty. The one he identifies with is politically liberal in dependence on big government promotion of virtue.

It was a fusion of the first with more skeptical conservatives like Mises and Hayek and others that made the conservative movement strong. The rise of the second has weakened it to the point we see now in all the bickering over religion by liberal Republican candidates.

Coastal Conservative
And it's coming to a head. I just read that the US delegation in Bali is okaying the gloBULL BS Owl Gore is dishing out! They ratify that crap, it's time to fight.

Proud Liberal Oxymorons part 1:
Oxymoronic statement # 1: "How can you expect to be seen as credible when you ignore the value and culture of half of the American people"

The other "half" you refer to has no common values (morals) and no single culture (i.e. multiculturalism) and are just thousands of splinter groups seeking rights that only apply to them and vote for politicians that are wishy-washy enough to vote for their little piece of deviancy.


Onymoronic statement #2 "liberal theologians?" 'nuf said.

Oxymoronic statement #3" "people of faith see themselves as the new elite."

The faithful have carried on the same faith since at least the birth of Christ, (probably since the first human became self-aware of his surroundings (a conscience) as parablized by the Genesis reference that Adam and Eve suddenly realized they were naked. These values are not "new".



Proud Liberal writes:
." Conservatives are adamant about replacing knowledge with faith and are attacking public education. You do not teach "the earth is flat" alongside "the earth is shaped like a doorknob" just to provide faith-based balance in public education. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

Spoken like a true lib! No one said “replace” and then you move on to say you can not teach the two side by side? Who says? You? And Why not? Funny how libs are all about free this and that until it comes to the subject of God. How do you think it’s fair to spend my tax money, with yours, and then tell me it’s wrong for the school to teach both? And still the left screams about vouchers! So they want to smack my faith in the face and then tell me I still have to help pay for it. Yea that sounds like "freedom for all"
P.S. IMO if it was a “big bang” God did it!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)



Proud Liberal Oxymorons part 2:
Oxymoronic statement #4: "professionals and journalists elites are "intellectual elites" who think they know better than the common man, in whom inheres the "wisdom of the ages," which is unavailable to the intellectual elites. This is fundamentally an argument against secular and scientific scholarship and for faith.

Hhmmm. Let's see now. Modern elites blame man for gloval warming, but are against the only technology that can provide enough sustainable and continuous energy to replace fossil fuels (i.e. nuclear power)

The journalists condemn water-boarding, wire-tapping international phone calls to terrorist nations, etc, and then blame the same government for not stopping 9/11 and other terrorist attacks.

They excuse teachers from their miserable performance in government run schools saying it is the breakdown of the family, broken homes and children of teenage parents that are at fault, but insist on declaring pornography as "freedom of speech", condoms for all high-school students, preventing even the mention of abstinence first birth control, portray adulterers and promiscuity among teens and over represent gays in prime-time television shows as "normal", then complain about the rise in AIDS and other STD's and blame the government for it.

These elites spew oxymoronic statements all the time.

GunnyG + Don
__With both of you I am in agreement. On the abortion issue I hear Fred, as a man with knowledge of community, state, and national boundries, and where the line is drawn. The people, with the hand, holding the arm of the umbrella. The protection of the umbrella, (Constitution) sitting atop the arm,(United States), protecting, the people,(Community) the hand of government. As they walk, each person has individual needs, and desires, for their lives, and situations that advance their prosperity. At all times protected by the umbrella which must have a unified attachement, allowing all to hold the umbrella. Held without impeding others protection, while giving all equal opportunity. Left politics wants to create seperate, individual, umbrellas colored according to individual passions. To dismiss the unity of "One nation, under God", that is the strength of our Republic.

...and so...
And so we see Huckabee who comes in balancing budgets, is right on abortion, and will protect the 2nd amendment (yet again something Giuliani won't do). We like this greatly.

Was he wrong to grant clemencies? Yes, *but he admits he was wrong.* Other politicians will usually stutter and stammer, trying to come up with a defense for the indefensible. Huckabee doesn't. He's honest, and that's a virtue we social conservatives prize.

Is he wrong on illegal immigration? We think not. As Huckabee himself has pointed out, the sins of the father are not the sins of the child. We believe in personal responsibility. That means we believe in taking responsibility for what one has done oneself, and not holding people accountable who haven't been participants. Huckabee supports closing the border off, and deporting illegal immigrants, but at the same time he has a compassionate element and is able to differentiate between a criminal party who knowingly breaks a law, and a child who is simply taken along for the ride.

Is he a bigot? Once again, we think not. Huck is someone who has been prodded and harassed to no end about Romney's mormonism by a media salivating for a story, and the moment *he asks an innocent question based on a rumor that's heard* he's immediately cast into a light claiming him to be yet another nasty, bigoted evangelical. It's a tired and false cliche, and we're sick of it, and loathe the media for stooping to that level just so they can have a headline.

In Huckabee we see a man who will stand for what is right and just. That is why we support him.

The top tier candidates...
at least Rudy and Mitt are and have been touted for a long time as being capable of beating Hillary. I just don't think that is the case. They are both way left of most Conservatives and while they might attract some middle of the road voters, I believe they will loose too much of the base to win. As for Huckabee, who IMO is the Republican Jimmy Carter, with his record of raising taxes and being soft on illegals, and no reasonable responses to questions on foreign policy will not be able to defeat any of the Dems.

Looks like Fred is the best bet for Conservatives and he is not my first choice but would be acceptable. I really like what I know of Duncan Hunter but am beginning to think that a vote for him in the Primaries might insure that either Rudy or Mitt get the nomination.

Bad Presidents
Yes, a Democrat in the White House would not be good for our great nation; but a RINO would not be much better!

We have had lousy presidents before (read Bill Clinton) but while they did a lot of damage, they did not destroy the nation or the world.

A Democrat victory in 2008 will have an erosive effect on many of our best institutions but, as it now stands, a Republican victory will have much the same effect.

Much as I hate to see it happen, I firmly believe a Democrat victory in 2008 may be just what the Republican Party needs. The damage done in the four years following the 2008 election could be undone in the four years following the 2012 election if the Republican Party would give conservatives some candidates in 2012 who will champion our social and fiscal conservative values.

Who Would Make the Best President?
We concern ourselves with who would best represent our values or interests, or who has the best chance of beating Rodham or Husein, when we really should vote for who would best perform their duties to defend the Constitution (their oath of office). The first and foremost duty as defined is "provide for the common defense". There was a reason why the Iranian hostages were released the minute Reagan replaced Carter. We need a POTUS that will strike fear into our enemies, not negotiate with them Huck is the weakest on this issue. All the other issues are moot if there is no country left to defend.

The Fred seems most likely to do what needs to be done but deliberately and after due consideration not to mention that his conservative values do mesh well with the RR.

Since our constitution demands no religious test for office, then Mormonism should not even be considered and would not prevent me from supporting the Mitt.

When you look up RINO in the dictionary, they show a picture of Rudy. Cheating on your wives while using taxpayer funded security details sounds too much like a certain Arkansas governor having the state troopers delivering hookers to his hotel room. Can Christian conservatives really support four first ex-ladies?

lonestarblues
"I think David ignores another type of religious conservatism. Both types are religiously conservative, of course. The one he ignores is politically conservative in favoring government limited to protection of liberty. The one he identifies with is politically liberal in dependence on big government promotion of virtue."

I think you're absolutely right. The paragraph following that I couldn't disagree more on how the party *ought* to position itself, but I think you nailed this on the head.

As a social conservative of the second variety, who wants government also promoting virtue, I can still say I'd support Ron Paul were he nominated, because even though he wouldn't promote virtue, he'd at least be a defender of human rights. What I find downright disgusting though are the folks in the party who demand we don't even do that so we can suck up to some people with whom we have nothing in common and no respect for.

Guns
I use to be all about Fred, until I found out he help author the Mcquack, finemegold, kill freedom of speech bill. He has since said he regrets that, and I could be ok with that but, then I found this, and it broke my heart on Fred!

http://conservativesagainstfred.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/fr ed-thompsons-anti-gun-senate-record/

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Oxymoronic redeaux:
Only the liberal elites can come up with school policies like: We enforce zero tolerance policies for anyone who is not tolerant of everything and everyone else.

Universal tolerance is the hallmark of a society that stands for nothing, and I want a POTUS that will take a stand, even if I don't agree with it, rather than one who won't take one because it might offend part of their constituency. We can't have everything (where would be put it?).

Doc & Flash
Doc: You're advocating "selective epistemology." Public Education should be confined to convention. Private schools certainly can teach religion.

Flash: You're confirming that you, at least, favor authoritarianism over democracy. You should write to Bush and ask him to quit talking about spreading democracy when what he wants to spread is power based representative government.

Another example...
Of Huckabee's genuine commitment to socially conservative principle:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6440961/

It's a story from 2004. Well before he had any presidential ambitions.

tweaky
I commend you for standing up for your pro life beliefs. If we do not respect life at its inception is it a lie to say that we respect ANY life--it is only that we respect our own pride and that's it.
My mom (and she would be 91 years old if she was still alive) was a steadfast democrat her whole life UNTIL she realized the party had been hijacked and then she voted republican. The days of REAL democrats are gone for good, I'm afraid, and have been replaced with socialists.
Thank you for being steadfast in your pro life convictions--the pendulum will swing back and everything those freakish feminists fought for will be for naught....LIFE IS SACRED!

Romney buying election for $20 BILLION
Romney's company, Bain, has just bought Clear Channel Communications (Rush, Hannity, etc) for $20 Billion: http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/05/19/lee_bai n_team_will_buy_clear_channel/

Doc:
Free Ramos and Compean. I bet Bush does it at midnight of his last day in office the little chicken sh!t.

Doc
Can't get to that link through the firewall. If you can copy and send as an attachment to:

libsmustdie@gmail.com

I'd appreciate it. He has, to my knowledge, never advocated gun-grabbery, as RINO Rudy has, he's still the best of the bunch. None of them are gonna be perfect but he is the most Reaganesque of them. If he brings on Hunter to keep him honest, we're golden.

Education is the Liberals' Abortion
Conservatives say that abortion is simply wrong, that you have a hard and fast and unchanging value that abortion is wrong.

Teaching that you can't get to heaven unless you believe in Jesus is also wrong. This is an absolutely hard and fast and unchanging value based on accepted world wide convention about how we know the world.

Surely you can understand this because of your familiarity with hard and fast values.

And Doc: If you think the government isn't taking my tax dollars for things I don't agree with you are sadly mistaken. I want my money back from the S&L bandits. I don't want my tax dollars bailing out wall street when it loses money on packaging risk.

Proud Liberal writes:
Public Education should be confined to convention.

IMO God is the norm, so once again I ask, who decided that, without asking MY opinion? Also I ask, since I HAVE (remember my tax money too) too help fund it, who takes away my right to have a say what is right or wrong to teach it in school? More than fair questions, IMHO

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Proud Liberal
While we're at it, I want MY money back from Social SUCkurity that FDR foisted on us AND my money back from the failed War on Poverty LBJ started to pander to the masses.

Proud Liberal
While we're at it, I want MY money back from Social SUCkurity that FDR foisted on us AND my money back from the failed War on Poverty LBJ started to pander to the masses.

GunnyG
Hey Guns...

Check your Yahoo email.

Cheers! -Primus54

Doc: Very fair questions
And they get to the heart of what is or should be the characteristics of a democracy and how it should work and is there a danger in excess democracy, etc.

I think conservatives ought to be conflicted in looking at these questions. As I understand it the Founding Fathers were much afraid of "the mob" or in other words the common man getting too much political power because of transient passions, different agendas from the elites, etc., so they constructed a Constitution which insured that the common man couldn't exercise much political power. And, I certainly agree that the masses or the mob can be a threat.

So, we usually defer to educated people, such as lawyers and doctors and make laws that I, for instance, can't hang up a shingle and start treating people, since I'm not a doctor. We defer to educated people.

Well, there are educated people in the education industry, but conservatives are challenging them and conservatives want to have the power and make the decisions, which is eerily like the mob or the masses making the decisions.

But, contrarily, if you take either democracy or representative government someone like yourself and someone like myself gets to contest in the marketplace or public arena for what we want. Sometimes we win. Sometimes we lose.

If you, Doc, had the political power as one individual then no one could take away your right to dictate that God should be taught in public schools. So, the question is whether you want to deny liberals the right to contest in the marketplace of public decision.

the flash writes:
Are you kidding? I bet he does not do it at ALL.
Of course now if you commit any of these crimes instead of doing your job as a law enforcment officer, you might get one!

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/general/ view.bg?articleid=1050376

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Primus54
Can you resend to:

libsmustdie@gmail.com

yahoo account isn't working well over here.

I'm an economic conservative, too, but..
It seems a lot of times those who tout themselves to be economic conservatives really just forward the interests of big business. For example, with free trade - it's great in theory, BUT only if there is a level playing field. If we have free trade with China, for example, but our manufacturers have to worry about EPA regulations and OSHA standards, and the Chinese government subsidizes their manufacturers - that is not a level playing field. The solution is not to get rid of OSHA or EPA, either, though there may be some areas where there is too much regulation. We do want to keep our workers safe and our environment clean, within reasonable standards. However, we have to figure out ways to create level playing fields before entering into free trade agreements. Otherwise, the American worker gets screwed, not because he doesn't work hard enough or isn't productive enough, but because of regulations that he cannot control.

One thing I like about both Duncan Hunter and Mike Huckabee - they both address this issue, though Hunter has a lot more saavy. It's too bad he is not getting more traction, he is a great candidate on the issues.

I will vote for the GOP candidate regardless of who he is, because I am a conservative, but I do wish our candidates did a better job looking out for the working class. The way to do that is not to create more social welfare programs, which just keeps people in dependency. It's to make sure there is a level playing field and to get rid of corporate welfare.

Single-Issue vs. Comprehensive Conservat
Mr. Limbaugh: Taking your comments along with the title of your column, it appears that "Comprehensive Conservatism," in your mind, is made up of all the secular and fiscal elements of conservatism while setting aside social, religious and moral conservatism.

What is "comprehensive" about that? In my mind, "Comprehensive Conservatism" would encompass all of the conservative values YOU profess to embrace; fiscal, social, moral, religious, etc.

You ask us to set aside all but the secular aspects of conservatism just to elect a Republican. Do you really feel justified in calling THAT "Comprehensive Conservatism?"

Proud Liberal writes:
Very fair answers!

First time I have ever had a Liberal answer in a sensible way. And actually, I do not want the government teaching my children about God because like most things they do, they would prolly screw it up too. I just took my youngest out of public school,(last one thank God) not because of this, but because I could get NO help from her teachers as far as why she was failing in every single class. I ask for a meeting one time and 3 out of 7 of the teachers showed up! Now that I have yanked her and she is in a private school, it’s all A’s and B’s and she is actually learning! They have no teacher’s union there, huh, I wonder if this has anything to do with it?

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

GunnyG
Done!

Primus54
Thx. Your answer is on the way.


All
heading to chow and watch.

Ya get a chance, check the #1 blog on TH (although Brian is gaining on me at #4--kudos) for an open letter the UN and MY letter to the Senate.

Too Many Candidates
It appears the candidate who gets 30% of the vote will win. That leaves 70% of the vote disappointed.

If we don't get behind Fred Thompson we will get the liberal Huckabee who will govern like Hillary light.

Or we'll get Guey who will loose to Hillary because of his pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, fascist gun control stances.

Fred Thompson is the ONLY well rounded conservative in the race. Its time to dump the rest or have America slide decidedly to the left.

Campaign Designed by OSHA
Mike Huckabee out of desperation politics is taking many extreme positions in order to put several niches together to try to win the nomination with about 25 % of the primary vote.

1. First he embraced the so called Fair Tax which gave him some money and organization to beat out Brownback. It also gave him some cover on his lousy tax record.

2. He overplayed the religion card. That got him the votes of the religion only crowd.

3. Now he is attacking Bush on the War and sounding like Obama on foreign policy.


Try running as Pat Robertson on the so called Fair Tax, as the anti Bush, while being clueless on the next steps in foreign policy.

As Romney emerges as the candidate who can pull the Party together (the anti Huck), Huck's collage of positions become a giant liability in both the primary and the general.

Please keep your issues alive
The republican party sold its soul to the Buffet Christian right to achieve political power. They tried to legislate your religious values into law as pay back. In the process they alienated the voters they need to stay in power.

True Republicans have witnessed the shambles fundamentalist evangelical buffet Christians have made of the party and no longer care what you people want.

True Republicans will go back to their fiscal conservative roots and you can come along if you chose, or not.

Are you Kosher?


Single-Issue Voting
In a general way, Republicans stand for conservative values while the liberalism of Democrats is socialistic.

It is interesting to me that a Republican who will only vote for a Pro-Life candidate is often disparagingly described as a bigoted, intolerant "single-issue" voter while a Democrat who will only vote for a Pro-Abortion candidate is considered the soul of tolerance.

I will not vote for any candidate, Republican or Democrat, who supports the mass murder of unborn children commonly labeled the woman's "right to choose."

I guess that makes me a "single issue voter."

Now Mr. Limbaugh advises me to set that issue aside and vote for a candidate who, although he supports so-called "abortion rights," will oppose the Democrats' efforts to rob me blind through taxation.

Somehow I see the murder of innocent life as a far greater crime and blemish on our national honor than high taxes, immoral as they may be.

The embryonic baby is a human being. Can I choose a scoundrel who supports a woman's "right" to murder her child to be the leader of our country? Could such a person possess other qualities that would somehow make him/her acceptable? I think not!

God forbid!

Don
I am starting to think that "Comprehensive Conservatism," means pulling a nose holding lever too TH! And I am NOT going there, however I will write in Max's name (my dog) instead of doing the above. I say Libs make better Libs than Lib RINO's do! IMO!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Don writes:
I will not vote for any candidate, Republican or Democrat, who supports the mass murder of unborn children commonly labeled the woman's "right to choose."

Plain and WELL stated, I’ll second that!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

David Limbaugh let me down.
Apparently David Limbaugh has jumped on the fake conservative band wagon. How dissappointing.

When Giuliani seemed to be doing good these guys said nothing, and still say very little, even though Giuliani is a flaming liberal. Then when Huckabee is doing good, they come out and try to use their media influence against him. Well, they have lost all credit with me, and I will listen to good and true conservatives insted of them.

I am sorry but if abortion is not one of the most important issues if not the most important issue to you then do not try to insult me by telling me that you are conservative. Also almost none of the republican canndiates take the militant homosexual agneda seriously except for Huckabee, Tancredo or Hunter. Therefore a true conservative's only choices are Huckabee, Tancredo or Hunter.

If being a conservative means that you are pro-choice and pro-homosexual agenda then I have no interest in being one. Thankful this is not the definition of a conservative but rather of a flaming liberal.

POLITICAL BAGGAGE

.....It is common knowledge that the MSM wants a Democrat in the Whitehouse ...so they will attack whatever Republican is nominated ...the top tier Republican candidates that have the most baggage and hence give the most ammo to the MSM are: Giuliani, Romney and Huckabee ...

.....Fred Thompson carries the least ammount of baggage and would present an elusive target to the MSM ...plus he is the only true Conservative with a chance at the nomination .....COLOSSUS


hey Doc, I do not trust your 11:15 link
__I went to your conservativesagainstfred link, read it, and read many of the comments added. Then I went searching other articles, opinions, links, etc., they put up. While I might agree with many of their positions I find underlying links that scream liberal, social agenda. When looking at Freds past voting record one needs to remember the piece of legislation sites put up to backup their argument, may contain more, or less, of what the headlines say. Look at the way the left has been using needed legislation to pay off their base, with earmarks, and last minute amendments. There are many faces our representation hides behind, and I don't want a possible Ron Paul face even close to the presidents office.

A word about the anti-government people.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with some small government issues, but much more important than that is rather or not government is good.

Now I'm sorry but some of these anti-government people are starting to sound to me like anarchists. People. There must be some laws to maintain order. And we do not enforce the ones that we have. Is banning smoking really something that you want to fight against? Even when I smoked I perfered to go outside. Why should I upset someone else's stomach with my smoking? I had plenty of right to smoke outside. You see sometimes special rights cross the basic rights of others. And whats this talk about removing transfats? The grosery store still sells crisco. Go get yourself some, if you insist. And what about lightbulbs? Why be so offended by low energy light bulbs? They save you money on your power bill and last longer.

It just seems like most of these people got billygoat syndrome. And are getting all nitpicky over these small issues rather than facing the big issues that we face today. To me it is clear that being pro-life, and against the militant homosexual agenda are the most important issues we face today.

That is why I'm voting Huckabee.

Tennessee boy
Tancredo and Hunter are nowhere to be seen in the polls. Personally I would hope that women would think that abortion should not be a means of birth control. Being gay is something that someone does not choose, even Dick Cheney and his wife know that little fact.

I Am
a social christian conservative, (I could be called a born again christian, an evangelical, a fundamentalist) in my personal life I am a christian first. I also live in and The United States of America as a citizen, it is because of the USA I am allowed to be so free and practice my faith openly. In other words next to my personal faith, stands the best interest of my nation, I can share my faith, however, I must not project my faith on others. Faith is a personal decision, not subject to outside coercion.

I am a member of the church of my choice (with guidance from the Almighty), and when it's time to elect elders or a pastor I do, based on the belief that they will best serve the Lord and further His ministry on earth.

I am a member of the Republican Party, on election day I vote for whom I believe will best serve the Nation and her citizens. I am not voting for my spiritual leaders!

Just because I am a Christian, doesn't mean that I will vote for a Christian to represent me in government.

These are the Republican candidates in the order that I support them; Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and last and in my opinion least is Mike Huckabee. Both my opinion of leadership ability and electability enter into the order I just listed.

In November of '08 we will know who our new president will be, as an optimist I believe that even if none of the above is the POTUS elect, I will still be living in the Greatest Nation on Earth.

1 abortion issue voters.
__I despise, and reject, the use of abortion as a birth control method, or un-wanted pregnancy disposal tool. There are, and have been, many cases where abortions are legitimate, an emergency, and the mothers life at stake. I believe this is a citizens right of life, and taking measures for their continued life. Was this not the circumstance of roe v wade, which brought about legislation to recognize this need. I believe, with Fred fighting for this to be a state issue, that he is opening the door for us to fix what liberal judges have destroyed. This issue has become a platform for the left to pound their soap boxes, and rally their irresponsible base. Those so caught up in self passion they want to live the real reality with no limitations. There is always a fix around the corner so they can go at it b@!!s to the walls without consequence.

Do we only vote for Christians?
"Just because I am a Christian, doesn't mean that I will vote for a Christian to represent me in government."

As a Christian I agree completely with that statement. But murder is not exclusively a "Christian" or even a "religious issue.

Civilized people have long recognized the arbitrary taking of human life (murder) as a crime. Most of our citizens (Christians as well has non-Christians) traditionally support the punishment of those who commit murder, up to and including, capital punishment.

This is a moral position that is generally accepted by all. Decent people (Christians and non-Christians) will not elect leaders who condone or support murder.

Legalizing murder by calling it by another name ("a woman's right to choose") does not really change the nature of the act. An innocent human life is arbitrarily taken by another human being.

My choice for POTUS does not have to be a Christian but he must have high moral standards, and certainly must NOT condone or support in any way the murder of innocent, unborn human lives.

Stoic Patriot
"As a social conservative of the second variety, who wants government also promoting virtue, I can still say I'd support Ron Paul were he nominated, because even though he wouldn't promote virtue, he'd at least be a defender of human rights."

Then perhaps you are of the first type. For defending individual rights is, imo, the first virtue. With the rights--life, liberty, property, conscience, speech, etc--preserved you are then free to promote virtue in the public square, from park to town hall, and vote what you value in the polling place. It is, after all, with religious liberty that religious has thrived. When government meddles with virtue, it only muddies the water.

TNboy
"Don't get me wrong, I agree with some small government issues, but much more important than that is rather or not government is good."

What is good but what is just. How can government be just if it goes beyond protecting individual rights?

From Bastiat, _The Law_:

"Law is justice.

"It is false to say that it may oppress man's person or plunder his property even for a philanthropic end, for its function is to protect both person and property.

"And let it not be said that it can at least be philanthropic, provided it abstains from all oppression and all plunder; for that is self-contradictory. The law cannot fail to act on our persons or our property; if it does not guarantee them, it violates personal liberty and the right to property by the mere fact that it acts, by the mere fact that it exists.

"Law is justice.

"This is something clear, simple, perfectly defined and delimited, accessible to every intelligence, visible to every eye, for justice is a fixed, immutable, unalterable quantity that admits of neither more nor less.

"If you go beyond this, and make the law religious, fraternal, egalitarian, philanthropic, industrial, literary, or artistic, you will be immediately lost in vagueness and uncertainty, on unknown territory, in a utopia imposed by force or, worse still, amidst the multitude of utopias struggling to gain possession of the law and to impose themselves upon you; for fraternity and philanthropy have no fixed limits, like justice. Where will you draw the line? Where will the law draw the line?"

you again "Now I'm sorry but some of these anti-government people are starting to sound to me like anarchists. People. There must be some laws to maintain order."

Anarchy is not chaos, it is rule of law without government.

Fred Thhompson
is the true conservative and has the record to prove it. He voted against abortion each time it was brought up in any bill. He has the National Right to Life endorsement, and also another endorsement from another Right to Life group.
He has many important endorsement that no one hears about. The msm is afraid of him, and won't give him air time. He has an excellent Immigration policy, and is very knowledgeable on oh so many fronts. He is also a Christian, but doesn't use it to win votes.He is an honorable man.

Huckabee is a democrat that is trying to pass himself off as a Republican. I can't think of anything he did right on as governor. He constantly brags about all he did for Arkansas, but he almost broke this poor southern state,and left them in debt, and the Republican party in shambles.

Abortion
Its pretty darn bad when we arguing about abortion with about half the country which is about killing babies. Do any of these killers think they would still be here arguing if their Mom had destroyed their embryo. Idiots! and just plain advocates of killing the defenseless. I do not look upon these people even as people but dirt. Scum of the earth.

nanna
"Fred Thhompson is the true conservative and has the record to prove it."

I like Thompson, and I voted for him when he ran for the Senate in '94. However, thus far he has run a rather inept campaign. Would he make a good president? I think so. Can he be elected? Well -- he's going to have to do better than he has so far.

Scrooge.
I saw a Christmas Carol play the other day, and the story of Scrooge kind of made me think of the way that so many of the fake conservatives are talking and acting. They have abandoned the noble pro-life cause, they have gone soft on the issues of the family and pro-family causes, and it seems they have been taking up a greed is good mentality.

I hope and pray that they turn their lives around like Scrooge did in a Christmas Carol.

Skip this if you've read it before from
me. Short version.

A pregnant Iraqi woman on the first day of American bombing can't get home from the streets in time and is hit squarely by a bomb killing her and her child.

1. Are both deaths murder?
2. Was her child murdered and she was "collateral damage?"
3. Were both deaths collateral damage?

If you think that murdering a child in a woman's womb is murder any time any place for any reason the United States murdered that child.

If you think the death of the child was collateral damage you are a relativist. No better than a liberal.

Higene writes: Saturday, December, 1
Higene writes: Saturday, December, 15, 2007 2:41 PM
To Paul
You have never given a satisfactory answer for the dilemma of a 12 year old girl pregnant from being raped by her father.

Abortion or no abortion?

------------------------------
I'm not Paul, but I will still comment on this question.

Even if a case could be made to justify abortion in such a situation (it cannot be made), that would have little connection to the reality of the mass murder of innocent human lives being daily perpetrated by the abortion industry with the aid and support of many of our elected leaders.

The abortion debate is not about 12 year old girls who are pregnant due to rape by their fathers: It is about a woman's so-called "right" to murder her unborn child for any reason or for no reason at all.

These "what about?" "special cases" are just red herrings dragged across the path to confuse and mislead people. The reality is simply mass murder of innocent babies.

HIGENE
Tell it to the kid. Was it the kids fault.
I am sick of being PC. Killing babies is whatit is, killing babies. No equivocation can ever make it right.

You are only in denial and fooling yourself.


here we go again
Proud Liberal (is that like a proud Nazi?): "If you think the death of the child was collateral damage you are a relativist."

Not at all. Even a proud liberal would no doubt wince yet tolerate the carpet bombing of Nazi Germany in World War II. How many Germans died who had nothing to do with the military industrial complex?

Moral objectivity doesn't require a deed to be morally right or wrong to the same extent in every possible context. It needs only to be consistently applied, because objective morals are based on principled grounds, not on the whims or personal opinions of individuals.

Skip this if you've read it before from
Proud Liberal writes: Saturday, December, 15, 2007 2:43 PM
"Skip this if you've read it before from
me. Short version.

A pregnant Iraqi woman on the first day of American bombing can't get home from the streets in time and is hit squarely by a bomb killing her and her child.

1. Are both deaths murder?
2. Was her child murdered and she was "collateral damage?"
3. Were both deaths collateral damage?

If you think that murdering a child in a woman's womb is murder any time any place for any reason the United States murdered that child.

If you think the death of the child was collateral damage you are a relativist. No better than a liberal."

======================================
This gets into a completely different argument: Namely, the morality (or immorality) of war.

Neither the woman or her unborn baby were targeted so it cannot be classified as murder. Abortion targets a particular human being and ends his/her life deliberately.

Your example is more like that of a pregnant woman being killed in an auto accident. Someone may be charged with manslaughter, but certainly not with first degree premeditated murder.

That's what abortion is (morally): first degree premeditated murder. Unfortunately, our elected leaders have made it legal in almost all cases.

What a sad commentary on modern American culture!

Jesus was not a liberal
David Limbaugh: "Liberal ones invariably translate Jesus's heart for the poor as a mandate for massive wealth redistribution, as if state-coerced transfers of other people's money are acts of Christian compassion. There is nothing compassionate about sapping the human spirit to the detriment of all."

Hear hear!!

Don
Can you admit the abortion issue is a little more complex?

First of all it does impinge upon a hierarchy of values that conservatives hold, i.e., there are conflicts.

1. Conservatives value individual freedom and liberty, it would appear. But you are completely comfortable denying a woman who wants to have an abortion the freedom to do so. Or, if you wish you deny her the freedom to commit murder. Or, if you wish you deny her the ability to have a willing physician help her commit murder. You would also deny pro-rights supporters to make abortion legal. What ever fence you sit on, Don, you put individual freedom and liberty below your personal idea of morality. And you are quite willing to use the conservative villified State to enforce your personal morality; thus, in your mind government is bad except when you can bend it to your own personal morality and use the government's police power to achieve your own ends.

2. You value life in the abstract, not as it actually is and is actually lived. You are quite willing to let the chips fall where they may in the lottery of life and perhaps are among the group of conservatives who say that God purposely creates the inequality of position in life and does so on an individual basis (See Edmund Burke)

3. You think your work is done when you prevent an abortion and absolve yourself of any of the consequences that follow from your work and yet you say that you "take responsibility" for your life and actions, unlike liberals.

The question is not the immorality or
morality of war, Don. The argument about targeting is sophistry because the argument of tageting is really an argument of knowledge.

If you drop a bomb you mean to cause some damage. You don't just drop a bomb for the hell of it. Either you are comfortable with the fact that someone you aren't aware of, don't know about, don't know personally might be killed when you drop that bomb or you are not comfortable with that. If someone dies it is not an accident other than that particular person dies.

You can comfort yourself that the chances are very small that someone will die and continue to think of yourself as a good fellow. And the chances are likewise small on the second straight day of bombing, and the 20th day of bombing. But the chances are large that on one of those twenty days someone will die. It won't be an accident. You just won't know about it.

Secondly, if God says thou shalt not kill (or more recently murder) no government can morally override God an any basis, including national security.

3. Going back to my last post, you seem to focus on the "mass murder of children." Does this mean that numbers count for you and that there is a number somewhere which is small enough for you not to be worried about?

Expound Truth writes:
hey Doc, I do not trust your 11:15 link

thats ok because there may be many libs who go there and post, you may be right about that but, i don't see them printing lies about his votes, as that would be slander i am sure. heck i wish they were NOT true, it is the only reason i turned away from Fred and went with Tancredo because as you might have guessed, the border and guns are first with me and we can fix the rest!

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)



Proud Liberal writes:
Proud Liberal writes: Saturday, December, 15, 2007 3:18 PM
Don
Can you admit the abortion issue is a little more complex?

Hogwash! I didn't write the documents that shaped our national character. I didn't write the laws that govern our social behavior. My personal moral opinions are not the issue at all. Our founding fathers established a society based on respect for human life and certain God-given, inalienable rights. Our laws, in general, have been built upon that foundation. I do not intend to get dragged into a debate about the morality of war. The fact is that our laws recognize war and distinguish the casualties of war from those of premeditated murder. Our laws also recognize culpability in some accidents involving the death of someone. A charge of negligent manslaughter may be brought against an individual in such cases, but NOT a charge of premeditated murder. As a conservative I do value individual freedom but I also understand the limits that must be placed upon personal freedom when the exercise of freedom infringes upon the constitutional rights of others. Thus I support laws that make premeditated murder a punishable crime because murder violates the inalienable, God-given right of the victim to life. Having said that, I also would like to see the laws applied consistently. If a woman has the right to kill an innocent unborn child for any reason, then I should have the right to kill my neighbor for any reason. The abortion debate has made a bad joke of our legal system. A man can be charged with a double murder if he murders a pregnant woman and her unborn child: that's two murders. But that same woman is deemed to have the legal right to kill that same innocent unborn baby. That is not right, and I will not support any political candidate who is not committed to end that tragic business. Of course I would make the abortion clinic illegal, just as other killing for hire is already against the law.


Shared Values of Political Expediency
If the Romniacs and Mitt's Missionaries say the shared values are political expediency - ALL american voters would get it and then decide whether or not to vote for him. Moral values would require a level of conviction and clarity that seems to be missing based on Romney's record as governor (his main executive experience platform). Hey - have you noticed Romney's sincere change of heart happened around election time - most of the time. If republicans define political expediency as a shared moral value - then Romney is our man. However, Republicans need to remember that should he become president - political expediency will be his guiding light when deciding social policy - values for sale is a good slogan for Romney's campaign - Social conservatives know better than that!


I Always liked Tancredo, Doc
__Lived in Colorado for awhile, and saw up close and personal what Tancredo fights for with this immigration issue. The metro-Denver area is a central hub for the undocumented as they expand across the U.S. Businesses that employ them, and landlords that house them, love the profit that occurs with their presence. It's killing the taxpayers there, and the cost of living is negating the middle class. Government social services are stretched to the limits, and even those Americans deserving assistance are affected. The public education system is also stressed by the children of the undocumented. I once questioned a school district about the expense of teaching English to these children, under the NCLB regulations. I'm told they adjust accordingly to meet the requirements. They do not have the time to help each one individually, so they fudge the reports to maintain federal support, and slide the children through.

Antisocialist
You're trying to create a bridge between the Transcendental Moral Code and Profane History. The only bridge possible, however, is flawed, sinful human beings.The question is, when the eschaton comes will the carpet bombing of Nazi Germany have any effect upon the eternal judgment of the human beings involved.

Expound Truth writes:
4:19 PM

I really do not think they fully understand once they (employers, landlords and politicians) break the system, that no amount of tax increase will fix the problem. They think they are getting something for very little, but when it’s broke it will be broke if the bigger customer base (us) can not afford to buy from them! In fact I would go as far to say if the save act does not cut off the jobs and they finally give up and go back to their homeland, there could very well end up being one dammm big tea party. And I don’t think the people will be wanting to drink tea. IMO

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Proud Liberal writes:
"And you are quite willing to use the conservative villified State to enforce your personal morality; thus, in your mind government is bad except when you can bend it to your own personal morality and use the government's police power to achieve your own ends."

No... I'm think the rule of law is an excellent and necessary principle. I certainly think laws against murdering innocent victims are good laws and should be enforced across the board. I expect kind of thing from government whether liberals or conservatives are in power. But maybe that's asking too much of liberals??

Do you think it is wrong for governments to outlaw murder and use police power to prevent it or, in case it is not prevented, to bring the murderer to justice?

I can't believe that you really want to live in a society that is not regulated by laws that protect the innocent and punish murderers.

But maybe I'm wrong about you...

Higene writes: Saturday, December, 1
Higene writes: Saturday, December, 15, 2007 2:41 PM
To Paul
You have never given a satisfactory answer for the dilemma of a 12 year old girl pregnant from being raped by her father.

Abortion or no abortion?

=================================
Execute the father. Love and care for the baby.

for Stoic Patriot
Stoic Patriot writes: "social conservatives actually like populism by and large -- we vote Republican because we can tolerate its economically libertarian leanings in so far as it advances social conservatism"

I see.
In that case, remember the deal you social conservatives made with us fiscal conservatives in the 1970s, to form a broad political coalition?

THE DEAL IS OFF.
You're on your own from now on.

We "economic libertarians" don't want to be "tolerated" by you. And we don't want free trade to be trashed by you.

We believe just as fervently in OUR principles as you do in pro-life.

And we're not going to vote for Huckabee just to make you feel good.

Take your Huckabee and go form a third party.

Former Single Issue Voter
Yep, that was me, and I am still proud of it.

However, I have learned that there is more than just one issue that is important to our country.

Twenty years ago, our country seemed more durable to me. We had come through the radical '60s and '70s, and survived the "malaise" of Jimmuh Carter, but emerged with Ronald Reagan as President. Yes, it seemed like things just got better and better.

But now I see that the country can be torn apart and it is more important than ever to elect politicians that are on our side.

We have creeps from every direction that seem to be rooting for the decline of the United States, and we need a President who is on the side of keeping the country intact and prosperous.

There are many so-called conservatives who are betting against the American Dollar, right along with George Soros, and they are just as guilty as the activist Left and the Islamic Terrorists for the decline of the American economy.

Whoever we elect should be authentically patriotic, conservative, and must have the huevos to stand up to all forces that seek to tear down the nation, from both within and without.

About tax cutting
Stoic Patriot doesn't see why other conservatives are adamant about tax-cutting. Politicians will spend every dollar that they can get their hands on, and will always want more, so they borrow it. When conservatives try to even hold the line on a particular spending item, and liberals want to raise it, the libs always claim necessary spending is being cut off.

Remind yourself of the most recent bond issue in your town. The politicians always say that if they don't get the increase, they'll have to cut police and fire, never the frivolous stuff.

Some folks don't know the difference in the "deficit" and the national debt. In really simple terms, the deficit is the legislative over-spending annually. They're using a credit card and the balance on the card piles up as the national debt. Like the Visa on which one only makes minimum payments, that balance will be passed to our grandchildren, for foolish purchases today.

So, we strongly back cutting spending, just like you do at home when you have maxed the credit card. And one way to force the politicians to do it is lower taxes, keeping your money in your pocket to spend however you think best.

Further, though, lower taxes nationally actually bring more revenue into the government, as is the case this year. When private enterprise and individuals can keep their earnings and invest in new inventory, products, equipment etc., tax revenue grows. The private entity thereby earns more sales and pays more taxes at the lower rate. Both Kennedy and Reagan knew this and demanded lower tax rates, making the economy boom.

Mostly, Stoic Patriot, we just think we earn the money and it should be ours to spend as we think best, not Washington politicians. So while Huck wants to do good, he would use our money- not his. His compassion overrules his economic sense.

That's just it, Doc...
...they've allowed the system to be broken! The Republic rule that guided America for over 200 years. An employer does not place full faith in an employee unless that employees actions, past, and present, are beneficial to the company. Heck, the American company, Republic, is blinded to the actions of their employees, and could care less, as long as they have theirs. The newest generations have been blinded from birth, and have no idea of what a Republic is, or their responsibility to it. The left in the making! Unarmed, and bleating like sheep, as they following their shepherd to the shearing.

We Are Both Right And Wrong
Sarah writes:
Saturday, December, 15, 2007 4:10 PM
Shared Values of Political Expediency
---
A Spicy Answer:
You information that follows is correct and incorrect.

"Moral values would require a level of conviction and clarity..." is correct
"...that seems to be missing based on Romney's record as governor ..." is incorrect
"... (his main executive experience platform). Hey - have you noticed Romney's sincere change of heart happened around election time ..." is incorrect
"... - most of the time. If republicans define political expediency as a shared moral value ..." incorrect
"... - then Romney is our man." is correct

Mass and National Pro-Live organizations recognize that Mitt Romney held a pro-live position as Gov. of MASS.

MITT ROMNEY'S ABORTION HISTORY
http://e-spirituality.townhall.com/g/293921b5-ad12-48f6-9ca 8-38ecee06cd83

It's the philosophy, stupid
WAYFARER is right. If a candidate's worldview is consistently conservative, (as properly defined), he will be right on the issues.

As for Huckabee, his 20th century, seeker friendly, evangelical theology has not much resemblence to the Baptist, Congregational, and Presbyterian churches of the 18th century that led in the throwing off of that tyrant King George III.

But then, who reads history anymore?

PS: King G referred to the revolution as the "Presbyterian revolt".

PS2: He wasn't talking about 20th century Presbyterians.

I'll say
Close the border and then we can talk about the rest!

http://judicialwatch.org/blog/islamic-terrorists-arrested- u-s-mexico-border

G'nite all

Free Ramos and Compean
If we can’t have HOME SECURITY first, the rest just won’t matter!
Tancredo/Hunter 2008!
http://teamtancredo.org/home/
Tom’s best quote: I fully and completely support the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
http://www.gohunter08.com
Hunter’s best quote: Move away from the Ted Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party. (Jun 2007)

Doc
Hillary and the Dems love you guys. If one your imperfect GOP candidates get nominated and wins; chances are they will have bring in conservative Republicans into congress. They could at least hold ther CIC's feet to the fire and address some issues that are of mutual concern(national security, illegal immigration).

I see this election, at worst, of being of the Stalin/Brezhnev choice or the Hitler/Mussolini choice. So, if the GOPer isn't pure enough you'd prefer and endure a draconian Stalinist regime. History condemns your type. Many Germans probably stayed home and allowed Hitler to win with a plurality.

But, hey suit yourself! You're probably the type who gave your vote to Ross Perot. The Clintons probably like you more than Yellow Dog Democrats.

Left wing media cowards-all.

The left win media cowards have been beating up on Christians for decades. It is a 24-t cottage liberal industry.

They never EVER,EVER beat up on Jews or Muslims.
The JDL will eat their lunch if they pick on the Jews and some Muslims will just flat out KILL them. The cowards in the media know Christians won't raise a finger to harm them.


reply to Higene
You know as well as I what a true conservative will say: make the kid have the kid! Why not wreck two lives rather than just one?

So gambling is now patriotic?
"Rudy is a far safer bet on life than any Democratic candidate."

Stress on the word, "bet"!


I'll throw in the HIghest Court...
You can get gambler's remorse for 4 years, but Supreme Justices are appointed for life.

Soooooo, do you want to be responsible for Guiliani's or Romney's promises, clear into your grandchildren's life?

Voting is a sacred responsibility. Should 3 Supremes die or retire during President George Bush's remaining year (pray pray pray!) then I would go for the "lesser of two weevils" argument, put forward in the article being discussed. But sentencing my children to a radical left Supreme Court with my own vote is more than I can conscience.

Here I stand.

Thompson
Fred Thompson is probably the best conservatives can hope for at this juncture. I have been supporting Duncan Hunter since he announced. If conservatives splinter their votes amnong Tancredo, Thompson, Hunter, Paul and Romney, we will likely end up with Mikey Huckster or Regularization Rudy. It's time for conservatives to consolidate behind Fred Thompson if we want to have any chance to secure our country. He is the best of the top tier, I hope he chooses Hunter for VP, it would be a dynamite ticket.

reply to SteveL
Welcome to another lesson from Political Realism 101: Today our subject is "coalition politics" and my example is the supposed deal between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives. Coalitions are based in part on shared interests and in part on shared principles. If the two elements collide, principles generally lose.

Social conservatives aren't just tolerant of "populism," at bottom they simply ARE "populists." As such, they have no problem with a big, interventionist government as long as it's intervening in areas they prefer.

Fiscal conservatives are the smaller, weaker member of that supposed coalition. They can thus be discarded by the dominant partner. So that's what happened to your guys, SteveL. They got dumped because their support is no longer needed.

As the veterans say to the rookies in professional football, "Welcome to the NFL."

Take a wooden nickle, baby!
Oh yeah...

Nest ch: Wooden Nickle Supreme Ct
Lots of promises being made...

Next Ch: wooden nickle Supreme Ct
He said he would appoint strict consructionalists, so I voted for him, all evidence to the contrary.

romneyrecord on YouTube

Guiliani

Don, I'll simplify abortion
for you. Heartbeat means alive, no heartbeat means dead - now what a person decides to do with that heart beat is what makes them pro-life or pro-abortion. In the past 2 years nothing major scientifically has made Governor Romney change his mind so often - except, shared values of political expediency. If we are honest about that then voters can decide......

Expoundtruth - Colorado is a
good example of what happens to rich republicans who can't get evangelicals/christians to vote for them. Remember Pete Coors - evangelicals/christians did not like that his money was made selling alcohol so they decided to stay home. We got a democratic governor. Romniacs are making a big miscalculation but sooner or later they will find out......hey with Reid leading the senate and Romney leading the executive branch - social conservatives can be assured that their values will be implemented consistently.

Tell me sweet little lies
You can get gambler's remorse for 4 years, but Supreme Justices are appointed for life.

Soooooo, do you want to be responsible for Guiliani's or Romney's promises, clear into your grandchildren's life?

Voting is a sacred responsibility. Should 3 Supremes die or retire during President George Bush's remaining year (pray pray pray!) then I would go for the "lesser of two weevils" argument, put forward in the article being discussed. But sentencing my children to a radical left Supreme Court with my own vote is more than I can conscience.

Here I stand.

At the risk of repeating myself
I've posted this before and I'll post it again.

Any time I hear/read about some kind of modified conservative, such "fiscal" conservative, "social" conservative, or "compassionate" conservative, my antennae go up. And nearly always it pays off, because nearly always the 'modified' conservative turns out to be some kind of RINO, weenie, or both.

There was even a column right here on TH a few months ago advocating for "big government" conservatism.

Puke.

There is only one kind of true conservative:

Small government, as in the minimum necessary.

Minimally regulated economy.

Strong national defense, per the "common defense" clause of the Constitution.

Strict border enforement.

Uphold the right of individuals to keep and bear arms.

True freedom of speech, as in no political correctness, which is a bogus concept in a representative republic anyway.

Low taxes.

Originalist, non-activist judiciary.

Anything else is a step onto a slippery slope.

Virginia Patriot- Thompson
I had the same problem- I really liked Hunter, and Tancredo, but they just don't have a prayer and we need to focus on those that do.

I finally came down to Huckabee or Thompson, but having learned so much more now about Mike- he's just not a conservative, and ignorant on some of the most important issues. And the few questions about Fred's convictions are insignificant.

So- Thompson with Hunter VP- let's go, gang!

Falling into Thompson's arms
It could happen here, too.

But I will go with Huckabee, because I believe he will respect his constituency, and has a basic conservatism to his governing record.

Cannot say that for Mitt Romney--romneyrecord on YouTube

Guiliani would justify Bill Clinton's escapades. Period. Bill would love that. And I do not take his word for what he will be in the future.