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
Monday, December 10, 2007
Douglas MacKinnon :: Townhall.com Columnist
Huckabee -- The Ultimate Liberal Plant
by Douglas MacKinnon
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



If you are the eventual Democratic nominee for President in 2008, who would you like to run against? Answer: A Republican you can beat.

Chris Matthews, of MSNBC, recently asked, “Why is the liberal media giving Huckabee a free ride?” Could the answer be as obvious as the liberal media thinks that they have war-gamed this election better than conservatives? Did they look at the Republican field and try to ascertain who would be the weakest “non-fringe” candidate?

That most of the mainstream media is going to be in the bag for the Democratic nominee, is beyond question. As that is certainly the case, a method to their literal madness would be in order.

Why is the liberal National Education Association of New Hampshire coming out for Hillary Clinton on the Democratic side and Mike Huckabee on the Republican side? What are they seeing in the former Arkansas governor that a number of Republicans are missing?

Some conservatives and Evangelicals have said that they are supporting Huckabee because he’s a “law and order” candidate or a “good” Christian. Really?

It’s difficult to be a “law and order” candidate when the grieving mother of an innocent young woman who was brutally raped and murdered, comes out against you. A mother whose daughter was killed by a man safely locked-up in prison for a previous rape until then Governor Huckabee sent the rapist a personal note of encouragement and endorsed his parole.

Tragically, another mother of a daughter alleged to have been killed by the man Huckabee helped free from prison, just had this to say: “He (Huckabee) closed a blind eye to a really dangerous man and doesn’t care because he thinks he’s invincible.”

Maybe Huckabee thinks he’s “invincible” because he has literally inferred that God wants him to win. “It’s the same power,” he said of his sudden rise in the polls, “That helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves of bread feed a crowd of 5,000 people.” Okay.

There have been reports that Huckabee recently told a Pastor that God speaks to him. In recounting all of this to an Evangelical friend of mine, the friend responded, “The tiny man who runs Iran and wants to wipe the United States and Israel off the face of the earth, also says God speaks to him. No Christian should use the Lord as a cheap campaign gimmick.”

If Huckabee is using God as a “gimmick,” this is not the first time. Should any voter care to see it, one only has to type “Huckabee – God – 2004 Republican Governors Association” into the search engine of their choice and see Huckabee – long before Rudy – take an “unexpected” phone call at the podium. His call was from “God,” and in the world of Mike Huckabee, “God” was reduced to a partisan hack.

There are many people in and out of government – myself included – who honestly believe that the 2008 presidential election will be the most important of our lifetimes. Terrorism, illegal immigration and energy dependence on hostile foreign nations, being just a few of the reasons why.

The liberals are desperate to take the White House back and desperate to start their global “The United States is evil” appeasement campaign. Many of these same liberals think Huckabee would make an outstanding Republican nominee.

Why?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official and author of the forthcoming novel, The Apocalypse Directive.

Be the first to read Douglas MacKinnon's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Huckabee Is A Fraud
Huckabee is no conservative. He is a Christian of the Sojourner/Jim Wallis ilk. The only thing I admire him for is losing all that weight.

Douglas
Huckabee is your best option. No matter what, the GOP will be defeated next November. America is tired of you cons. Bush has hurt the GOP for generations.

Also, lets look at the choices:

John McCain (Who I as a liberal like somewhat)has burned to many bridges. Plus age is up against him also

Fred Thompson looks like he is in a catatonic state most of the time

Rudy is yuck. Why any sane thinking American would vote for this man is beyond me. If he is the GOP nomineee, your party will NEVER be able to talk about being the defender of traditional moral values. Then again, David Vitter, Larry Craig, Newt Gingrich,etc really don't help either....

Romney is the definition of a flip flopper. Plus, sadly too many people are obsessed over his Morman religion

Ron Paul found a nice niche audience. He has used his 14 minutes up very effectively. 1 more minute left to go.

Duncan Hunter needs to find some new suits

Tom Tancredo makes David Duke look like the Chairman of the NAACP

My Advice: You say you hate government so follow your own advice. Get lost.




Ralph
I know you like us to think that her inevitableness is a shoe-in for president but most of us here at townhall think that that would be a disaster. She would crush Huckabee in the general election unlike Mitt. We don't you spread you defeatism somewhere else.

Who else you expect from the list?
The pack of the candidates is pathetic. Out of that, Huckabee is the "most" sincere in his politics and religion.

Don't play this "liberal plant" mantra. You think that the conservative folks are so stupid. I hate this kind of pathetic argument.

does'nt matter
it does not matter that the MSM are pitching for Huckabee....

It is now clear that a very substantial # of evangelicals consider a MORMON candidate as not worthy of voting for. This will result in a very substantial # of MORMONS (conservative voters) as not voting for a "CHRISTIAN" who lets everybody know his faith is KAPICH. And everybody elses is NOT (Huckabee).

The REPUBLICANS and conservatives were able to squeak by with both these groups in the past but by losing 1 or the other ,,, the game is up.

Be it Mitt or Huckabee,,, they will not have full support from the traditional conservative base that they both will NEED to win.

Does'nt matter

And on Drudge today:
Huckabee wanted to put AIDS patients in isolation.

MSM LIKES HIM
Governor of Arkansas
No more needs to be said.

Vote for Duncan Hunter
Tom Tancredo
or even Ron Paul.


Mitt is THE Choice
Mitt is the best candidate to win the presidency and I am shocked that conservatives are turning their backs to one of the most successful businessman in America! He will do the same for our country that he did for countless businesses like Domino's, Staples, The Sports Authority, as well as the Olympics, and the State of Mass. He will take DC and turn it on its head and put our country on the right path all while NOT taking a salary!! For those of you that say he is a flip flopper I strongly disagree. Since he has become Governnor (2003) he has not flipped on issues EXCEPT to our side of the aisle. What is wrong with that?? I know being over here in Iraq that many military members are voting for Mitt as our next Commander-in-Chief. Huckabee is not a strong candidate as was Dole not a strong candidate in '96 even though I still voted for him because he was our pick. Huckabee is too liberal in MANY areas...conservatives need to wake up!!

Mispercieved
After looking at the IA, NH and SC MD polls it is obvious from the results that most people who are supporting Huck are totally unaware of his record. His current support is the emotional bandwagon that we saw in June for Fred.

The media are dividing the conservative vote. They puffed Fred and then cut him down to the teens. When it looked like Fred might beat Rudy they cut him down.

Now they are puffing Huck but he will drop back into the teens. They are hoping to block Romney from a slingshot win and hand the nomination to Rudy. They have done everything that they can to manipulate this election for Rudy.

I know that Cornpone and other Huck posters genuinely support him due to abortion and other issues. However, Huck is not going to get the nomination. He does not have the money nor the organization and the minute the press knows that Huck and Fred have Romney blocked they will collapse Huck to boost Rudy.

Have you noticed that as Huck drops in the RAS Poll, Rudy is rising? That is not by coincidence.

Huck killed Fred. The press used the month of puffing Huck to raise him in the polls to force Romney into making the speech. Romney made the speech and it back fired on the press.

Huck is a good pastor. He was a lousy governor. He is a smooth talker and good debater.

It does not matter what his head to heads are. The voters do not know the positions Huck has taken. They are the result of the press puffing him.

His support for the fair tax and positioning as Pastor in Chief will guarantee the he will destroy the Rep Party if he gets the nomination.

Mormons would vote for Huckabee
I am LDS and I like Mitt Romney a great deal. I hope he gets the nomination, but let me make it very clear, I will vote for ANY Republican nominee over any of the Democratic field.

This election is way too important to fiddle away over percieved biases.

I hope the evangelicals feel the same way.

Outstanding article!
Tax Hike Mike isn't for us. He's a big government liberal with some pseudo-conservative positions.

Huck the "budget balancer" HA!
CornPo above says that Huck's a fiscal conservative because he produced balanced budgets . . . funny thing is that the AR state constitution requires a balanced budget each year, or else the Governement would shut down.

When faced with a budget problem, Huck didn't/couldn't/wouldn't cut the budget, but would raise taxes to make sure the buget was balance.

Over the next few weeks Huckabee is going to be "outed" as the radical Theocrat (with a penchant for religious nepotism) that he is.

http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/2007/12/10/huclemency-th eocraticus-the-definition-of-a-new-political-species-huckab ee-granted-clemency-to-brutual-murderer-glen-green-on-word- of-his-minister/

"HuClemency theocraticus" is what I've started to call him.


HUckleberry may win Iowa
but it is really irrelevant. That will be the only primary he wins. He is a liberal from the Democrat wing of the Republican Party. McShame is a must win in NH or he is out also. Once McShame and the Huckster drop out I think a lot of those votes will go back to Fred. Most of Huck's votes will be split between Rudy and Romeny, the other liberals.

Mike Huckabee: How to fix Washington

W.
"If Huckabee is using God as a 'gimmick.'"

This also brings to mind another phony -- i.e., George W. Bush. Big Govt. Bit Spending RINO. If you want 4 more years towards catastropphic financial incontinence, go ahead and pull the lever for another evangelical who talks the talk but who is using it as cover for personal political ambitions.

Honestly
The man wants to do away with the IRS No problems there. You know most Americans don't have the biggest problem with his "liberal" issues. And I love how the Neo Nazi I mean Neo Con (whoops wrong group, both are pro preemptive war no wait thats not the Neo Nazis just the REAL NAZIs.) Acts like they need to throw the Christians out. you know prior to Roe Vs Wade both parties were Christian based, so stuff like abortion was never an issue, cause both sides hated it.
And when Rudy Julie-Annie is Running hes the biggest Liberal around even if hes running against Al Gore. He and Hillery are Twins.
My #1 choice Ron Paul.
Restore The Balance of Powers, Restore State Rights, Restore My Rights, Get rid of wasteful government crap. Get out of Iraq.
My #2 choice Mike Huckabee
He agrees about canning a lot of do nothing departments and returning education to the states. And he agrees Iraq was bad Policy and we cant go around smacking people.
My choice #3 Duncan Hunter
At least hes for fixing china and the border and doesn't want to be in Iraq forever.

The recurrent theme seems to be
taxes and how Huck raised them.
The only man running with a clear, consistant record of opposing taxes and especially pork barrel spending is McCain.

It amazes me how some dismiss him as too old, his mother is 95 and would run rings around most people 30 years younger. To survive what he and others did in the Hanoi Hilton tells me all I need to know about how tough the guy is and the fact that his companions in that excercise support him to a man tells me all I need to know about his character.

The other candidtes get stories written every day about this flip or that flop..read any about McCain lately?

You haven't and you won't because he is consistant on those issues that the others wobble on.

The reason McCain is called a "maverick" is because he doesn't subscribe to the "go along to get along" BS of DC, he looks out for the country as a whole and will do so as POTUS, much to the dismay of our enemies foreign and domestic.


The MSM does not fear "Huckelberry"
because they think he is beatable.

However, they do fear Mr. Mitt and Mr. Rudy!

I would like either candidate to debate the Shrillster. Mr. Mitt would definately out class her, and would be infinately better looking!

Rudy can out-scrap her, and show who is the real New Yorker and who is the wanna-be.

Both Rudy and Mitt may have changed positions over time, but the Shrillster changes positions faster than she changes her stockings!


Only chance to win
I am a Giuliani supporter, so one can take this with a grain of salt. However, the only two people that have any chance of winning the presidency for the GOP are Giuliani and McCain. Yes, both have positions I am not that fond of, but I will take two thirds of a loaf over the heel of a loaf of bread.


Thompson has some great ideas; too bad he isn't more energetic.

If Huckabee or Romney get the nomination, the GOP will lose by 10-12% at least. I myself will vote libertarian and not Republican for the first time since I voted for Reagan in 1980.

Dont forget Ron Paul on taxes
Hes got a 100% record.

WHO TO BELIEVE?
Dear Douglas,
It's clear from this article you are not an objective columnist.

Look, if this is the most important election in recent history, perhaps it would be better if you and other reporters to provide the people with the facts, not your fantasies.

I've been following Mike Huckabee since his first debate. I like what I see and hear from him. I have familiarized myself with his positions and his history.

I have found the best information comes from Mike's website and his personal appearances. But, he is a politician. I don't know if he is bending the truth or not.

I need to find an objective reporter I can trust with the truth to let me know if I am making a mistake or not. Clearly, after your article, I'll cross you off my list of possible "real" reporters.

I've already crossed of Krauthammer after his deceptions last week. I've crossed off FOX in it's entirety. And, I remember how the mainstream media has falsified information in the past. After the last debate CNN got chucked.

The only person I have found to be really objective so far is Jim Pinkerton of Newsday.

It's important to identify these objective people now. We'll need someone reliable come the general election especially if Hillary gets the nod.

Calling all posters. If you have found some media personality you can trust, please post a name and a link.

Thanks,
Bob

Seawolf- my objections to McCain
are:

1) He continues to badmouth Donald Rumsfeld, long after the man stepped down. While it is OK to disagree with Rummy or critique his policies, trashing someone on your team is unacceptable.

2) This brings me to my next point. While running down Rummy, McCain has not said a peep against the Senior Blowhard from Massa-two-chits, and instead works with the extreme Leftie to come up with pro-illegal legislation.

3) McCain helped author McCain Feingold, which guarantees that only bazillionaires can run for office.

4) McCain is out of touch with the Republican base. While running after the approval of the Lefties in the MSM, McCain pointedly ignored invitations to appear on conservative radio talk shows. Why does he not know that he needs Republicans to vote for him before he can win the Republican nomination? This is a lack of judgement that is distressing, and if he were president, one would wonder if he would ever listen to conservatives?

Ron Paul is a Trojan Horse
Don't waste your time voting for the man: he is this year's version of Ross Perot.

A vote for Paul/Perot is a vote for the Shrillster.

Mt. Rose: BINGO! Spot On!
.

Gay Conservative
I presume you are able to vote for McCain or Giuliani but not Huckabee or Romney because Huck and Mitt profess to be Christians. Too bad. Every president since JFK, including Reagan, professed to Chistianity. Didn't really seem to make much difference with respect to Gays. Apparently you see a difference between Mitt and McCain. Do their voting records support your concerns, or their words? Just curious.

Huckabee the Nice
While I get chills & fever at the thought of a televangelist becoming President of the United States, I felt admiration for Huckabee when he said that bit about this country being better than to punish children for what their parents did. That may be the key, right there, if liberals like Huckabee (and I'm not saying they do, just picking up on the theme of this article). I suspect that a lot of us are sickened by the Republican rhetoric of hate (arrest immigrants, round them up, deny them emergency medical care, break up families, throw their kids out of school, truck them to the border and dump them, etc). I grew up in a racially segregated world and am very, very familiar with the attitudes and language of hate---and it sounds to me as if for many right-wing folks, the Mexican immigrant has become The New N*****; hate speech is now passed off as patriotism. And Huckabee refused to play that game when he said "we are better than that".

Thanks Anne
and I have one more thing for my list.

McCain is a war hero, but the fact that he was tortured prevents him from being objective about our treatment of terrorists.

I think that waterboarding is like giving a glorified "swirlie," and people are making too much of a big deal about it.

McCain needs to stop equating our methods of interrogation with the truly horrendous treatment he suffered under the Viet Cong Commies.

RJBJr: Who to Believe?
RJBJr writes: Monday, December, 10, 2007 7:48 AM
"WHO TO BELIEVE?
Dear Douglas,
It's clear from this article you are not an objective columnist."
**********************************************

Dear RJ

In case you haven't noticed, Townhall is a place for opinion pieces, not news articles.

If you are looking for unbiased articles, try Wikipedia.

Why is Huckabee surging?
I understand you don't like Huckabee but these sort of ridiculous conspiracy theories don't help further discussion in the least. Huckabee is surging because he's a fresh face and voice consider my blog entry this morning

http://myrandomthoughts.townhall.com/g/fc9524fe-3fb2-44e2-8 42a-2b9d74314223

and Frank Rich's column which was surprisingly similar.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/opinion/09rich.html?_r=2& ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin





lilly- excuse me for pointing this out
lilly writes: Monday, December, 10, 2007 8:28 AM
Huckabee the Nice
While I get chills & fever at the thought of a televangelist becoming President of the United States, I felt admiration for Huckabee when he said that bit about this country being better than to punish children for what their parents did.
********************************************

Lilly- let me know if I am mistaken, but don't you call yourself "pro-choice?"

Isn't abortion punishing children for what their parents did?

The difference being, babies in the womb are not merely denied education: they are denied the chance to live.

Huckabee
I couldn't agree more with Mackinnon. Governor Huckabee's appeal is so limited that while he might well earn the Republican nomination he would utterly crash and burn in the general election. His rise in the polls has been so sudden and the media's pretended enthusiasm for him so surprising that one can only assume that the left is targeting him as the most beatable of top-tier Republicans. Rudy is too tough; McCain is too respected; and Mitt is too smart for any of the Democrats now in the race. Unfortunately for conservatives, the media has it right. While Huckabee might harness the Evangelical side of our movement, he would leave the rest of us with grave concerns. The so-called moderate middle that includes moderate Republicans and Democrats and who normally are very fluid in who they support, would either flee to a third-party candidate, sit out the election, or, in some cases, hold their noses and vote for Hillary. Let's not throw this election way with Huckabee --any of the other three would be a more sensible pick.

Romney can win
It is clear from these posters - the consensus is that Hucky cannot beat Hilly. I think Mitt can pound her in debates and has no moral baggage or scandals, made his money honestly, and has actually run stuff, like businesses, the Olympics, and a large, liberal state. Let's put bigotry away and back a winner.

Millie the Dogg
Military Lovin' Dogg writes: Monday, December, 10, 2007 8:32 AM
'McKinnon says:
"That most of the mainstream media is going to be in the bag for the Democratic nominee, is beyond question."
Only for a paranoid schizo like yourself Dougie...'
**********************************************

If his statement isn't right, please name me ONE serious anchor or commentator on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, or CNN who will support a Republican candidate.

If you want me to take you seriously, you will discuss the issues instead of calling names. If you just want to call names, then we can have open season on you.

Then we will see who is the pathetic loser.

Great article
If evangelicals/conseratives are so stupid ( gulliable )that they can't see how they are being played by the MSM, and REFUSE to take their blinders off, then they will deserve exactly what they get. Another Jorge Busch.

Gay Conservative
You gays have to admit that Mitt is easy on the eyes!!!

DocJ- I'm with you
While I relish the image of the Shrillster being pounded, however, I think that Mitt would do so in an ever-so gentlemanly way.

The media is NOT giving Huck a free ride
It was only a couple months ago that folks right here on TH were furious that in the debates, the media was quizzing GOP candidates like Huckabee about their positions on Darwin's theory of evolution.

This week, the Associated Press broke the story about Huckabee's statements in 1992 about quarantining folks who are HIV positive.

And one has to wonder how much the right-wing Christian evangelicals who are now moving to support Huckabee take their direction from the Eastern liberal media anyway. They aren't the demographic who watches Olbermann on MSNBC, believe me.

So this whole notion that Huckabee's rise is due to some kind of media cabal is laughable. Huckabee didn't get a lot of media attention for the same reason that Hunter doesn't or Brownback didn't--they were considered to be also-rans, with little chance of winning the GOP nomination, and so what was the point in doing stories about them.

Now that Huck has broken out, he's getting more media attention. Both positive and negative.

for Jerry
Jerry writes: "If evangelicals/conseratives are so stupid ( gulliable )that they can't see how they are being played by the MSM"

Oh, brother. Give me a break.

Do you really think the Christian evangelicals even bother listening to the MSM? They consider Chris Matthews, Olbermann, the New York Times, etc., to be their political enemies.

These are folks who think that Fox News is too liberal for them.

They aren't backing Huckabee because of what the MSM said. If anything, they are backing Huckabee in spite of what the MSM has been saying for months--that only Romney or Rudy can beat Hillary. That's been the message from most segments of the MSM, and the Christian evangelicals have rejected it and are going with Huckabee.

SteveL
Like I said -- They'll deserve what they get! Ignorance is obviously bliss.

MLD
You sure speak allot of CRAP for a MILITARY REJECT. Couldnt pass a AIR FORCE PT TEST which by the way does push-ups on their knees. What ya do break a knee-cap. WAAAAA WAAAA



A Liberal? What are you smoking?
Mike Huckabee is no more liberal than Glenn Beck. How do you think? Social questions - concervative. Taxation - conservative. Immigration - realisitic and conservative.

Where is he liberal?

Warmongers are up in arms because Mr. Huckabee dares to entertain the thought that some of the practices used in US war detention centers are morally suspect, at best.

Huckabee - the clear choice for thinking, concervative men and women.

Huckabee - not a Wall Street/Pentagon hack.

MacKinnon article - hit piece by a worried neo-con warmonger.

And I must say
I don't personally know any evangelicals, so I can't claim to know how they tick, but they do seem to be focused on the wrong things. There has to be more to this election than abortion and what religion you are--at least there is for me.

People should remember that Jorge Busch ran as a *compassionate conserative*. Yeah. And where did that get us?

The MSM may not fear Huckabee....
but just remember that Goliath didn't fear little David either. The bigger they are the harder they fall. I like Mike. And I like ANY Republican candidate over ANY Democratic candidate. United we stand, divided we fall.

Liberal plant? No, liberal.
If there were a 'liberal plant' it would make sense that it would be someone from the far right of the party who moderates and liberals would all shy away from. By getting someone more moderate (lighter on the hard-line rhetoric on immigration, Iran, etc.) the Republicans are actually finding someone in Huckabee that might be able to defeat a Democrat.

Mountain Rose
Honestly cant you realize its the PRIMARY! Hillery isn't going to win the republican primary. SHES NOT EVEN RUNNING. There is no such thing as throwing away your vote in a primary. Oh because then we elect someone who cant beat Hillery? So wait Mr Romney who polls around 10-13% is so much better then Mr Paul who polls 7-8%.

You know what settling for the most electable guy gets us? GERALD FORD 1976!
You know what voting for the guy who we like gets us? RONALD REAGAN 1980!
How about for once we pick the best man. Not the rich guy Rmoney who can spend with Hitlery. Or Hitlery's clone Rudy Mussolini who if he wears a dress again might confuse enough democrats into thinking he is Hitlery.
Lets pick Barry Goldwater. Cause Im sick of us nominating Richard Nixon!

Not a conspiracy
Some people seem to take their (well placed) mistrust of the media to an illogical level. Nobody's backing Huckabee as part of some conspiracy to give Hillary an easy ride. As mentioned by someone else above, he was previously getting little or no attention because he was languishing in also-ran status in the polls. With some good debate performances and straw poll success, he's risen in the polls and is now getting more scrutiny.

As for him being "conservative" or not, I suppose that depends on your definitions. What I do know is that he has proved NOT to be in favor of limited government. His record is one of raising taxes and increasing government spending and intrusion into the lives of individuals and families.

I support free market capitalism and individual choice. That means cutting taxes, cutting spending, free trade, education choice, personal accounts for Social Security, and health care reform that transforms our system from employer-based to individual- and market-based. In each of those areas, the candidate with the free market platform is Rudy Giuliani.

Visceral Republicans
MacKinnon jumps onto the vituperative band wagon. I can just see the spittle flying as he writes his column. It drips with disdain. He is not alone, however. He joins the growing list of supposed Republicans who show more passion in denouncing Mike Huckabee than they do in denouncing democrats. I have a few questions of my own, Mr. MacKinnon. Why are the Republican commentators so viscerally oppossed to Mike Huckabee. It's not just the policy differences I'm referring to, it is the willingness to recur to the worst forms of fabrication and dissimulation that can only boil up from the loins. I see two reasons for this teeth-gritting hatred: one, because he has become a threat to their pet candidate and, two, because he represents a brand of Christian faith that they despise. When all the muck-raking and mud-slinging is done, Huckabee will stand up for what he is -- a solid conservative Republican. Thankfully, for all your distortion of his record, the electorate is as tired of you loud-mouthed pundits as I am.

Extremes
People apparently feel deeply about the candidates, because they're given to ridiculous extremes of expression about them.

Huckabee is not a "liberal." He's a George W. Bush clone; a Christian, social conservative who believes in using big government to solve social problems.

Rudy Giuliani is not a "Hitlery clone." Rudy is honest; Hillary is dishonest. Rudy is fiscally conservative; Hillary has never seen a spending bill she doesn't like. Rudy believes in limited government; Hillary is a closet Socialist. Rudy is an ordinary politician; Hillary is a deeply corrupt sociopath.

Ron Paul is, however, loony.

(Unrelated to this thread, please visit my political blog, "Plumb Bob Blog: Squaring the Culture," at http://www.plumbbobblog.com. Thanks.)

MikeB
You bring up an excellent point, and there is another point I would add to it. If you are supporting Romney for his financial support, consider that Ron Paul is on target to raise over $15 million (a somewhat conservative estimate) this quarter which puts him on par with the best the Republican field can offer and in the general ballpark of the fundraising of the Democrats. This is without the mainstream fundraising of the Republican party. He has proven that he can raise financial support.

Note that this also does not count the incredible outpouring of time, energy, and resources into volunteer efforts around the country for which he has not had to pay anything. While most candidates have to hire someone to hold up campaign signs, Ron Paul has thousands of volunteers willing to driving hundreds of miles to stand up in the rain holding signs for free. In effect, each dollar in his campaign goes much farther than his competitors making his campaign finances that much more impressive.

Most people do not trust the polls to be accurate, and when you look at every other metric for measuring support, Ron Paul is looking far stronger than the media would have you believe. It is certainly too early to say that Ron Paul is going win, but we certainly should not be counting him out -- especially when not even a single vote has been cast.

No More Liberals
If the Republicans want to hand Hillary or Obama a fifty-state landslide all they have to do is nominate a liberal ex-governor of Arkansas that spends his time yelling about Christ. I've voted Republican in every election since Nixon-McGovern but a party stupid enough to inflict Huckster-Bee on this country will not get my vote. Nor many others. Watching this sanctimonious bug-eyed Baptist mouth off about religion makes me cringe. There are so many real, important political issues we should be hitting the Dems over the head with but we're wasting our time on this nonsense. I've watched the California Republican Party go from a competitive player to total irrelevance because it has been taken over by the God and Gun loonies. Going national with this idiocy at the top of the agenda will turn this country into a one-party state.

PlumbBob
Amen Brother.

John Galt
"I support free market capitalism and individual choice. That means cutting taxes, cutting spending, free trade, education choice, personal accounts for Social Security, and health care reform that transforms our system from employer-based to individual- and market-based. In each of those areas, the candidate with the free market platform is Rudy Giuliani."

By your criteria, Ron Paul is an even better candidate. He wants to remove restrictive government regulations. He wants to remove sanctions that keep us from opening new markets. He wants to phase out Social Security entirely so that we can all make our own retirement decisions. He wants to reform the health care system to return power to individuals and their
doctors -- not pharmaceutical companies and HMOs.

If free market capitalism and individual choice is your aim, you cannot ask for better than Ron Paul.

Thanks for the article Mr MacKinnon!
Every time I start to edge away from Huckabee a bit someone like you writes a disparaging article about him, painting another distorted picture of him, his record, and his beliefs. Of course he has made some wrong decisions. You haven't??? Where is the perfect candidate in this race? Would you feel better if I voted for a city mayor who marched in the annual NYC gay parade? Or someone who believes in abortion?

News Flash:
There isn't a Republican on the ticket that the Democratic contenders CAN'T beat. It's just that in a pool of shamelessly flipflopping panderers and nutjobs, Huck might just be one of the easiest.

PlumbBob
"People apparently feel deeply about the candidates, because they're given to ridiculous extremes of expression about them."

"Ron Paul is, however, loony."

Isn't that just a little ironic. Are you saying that everything Ron Paul says is loony? I've got to tell you that every candidate has at least one issue that I think someone would consider "loony". To label someone as completely loony is certainly "extreme" especially when you do not back up your assertion with even a single fact.

The Rest of the Story
Mr. MacKinnon’s misrepresentation of Huckabee’s pardon of Wayne DuMond betrays a profound ignorance of what goes on down here. If he had followed the Arkansas press he would know: 1) the only physical evidence against DuMond was a spot of specimen on a garment that was only tested for blood type, which proved to be O+, the most common; 2) the alleged victim had impaired veracity due to the fact that she is distantly related to Bill Clinton and thus has far less credibility than Juanita Broaddrick; 3) the alleged victim’s father is a local big shot, which is why DuMond got a much heavier sentence than others who committed the same crime; 4) the sheriff of the county, a Democrat, was a crook and may have been responsible for DuMond’s mulition, possibly at the behest of the victim’s father--he kept DuMonds testes in a jar on his desk, most likely as a trophy; and 5) the critics of the DuMond pardon down here are Clinton partisans who think Juanita Broaddrick is a liar. DuMond had shown no sign that he would become a murderer, and there was no report that prison psychiatrists found that he had obessessive violent fantasies. It is possible that the murders were the result of misplaced aggression as a result of DuMond’s mutilation.

The way the DuMond case was reported made the pardon an issue of equal justice under the law and a blow against the corrupt clinonite culture. By failing to give the details Mr. MacKinnon is implicitly rejecting the ideal of equal justice under the law and implicitly endorsing the Clintons. DuMond was given a lengthy sentence because of whom his victim was (if the crime occurred at all), not because of what he had done. Had he done this to a woman without influence he would have been free in around eight years and he would have started murdering sooner. Of course, if the sheriff and prosecutor there in Missouri are Democrats it’s possible that he was framed for the murders.

PlumbBob
Are you from New York Or New Jersey?
Do you Remember the Abner Louima Incident or the Amadou Diallo incident. The man lies like nobody else. Trust me have you see the BS hes pulled in the city. I have never seen anyone with as little morals as that man. Rudy Just cut off a lot of Dinkins programs. If your not a New Yorker, then ASK a New Yorker what happened in their city. Ask about the banning of Ferrets. Him committing the homeless people. Straight out Nazi stuff. Racial profiling. Check your facts not Rudy's facts.

re: Khomar
I love Ron Paul's stands on many issues, but in Congress he has opposed free trade agreements, individual choice in education, and Social Security reform. Yes, I know he opposed them on principle because he thought that the reforms were still too government-centric, but he has all too often opposed measures that were dramatic improvements simply because they weren't perfect. I need someone who gets results, not just rhetoric.

The other problem with Dr. Paul is that his foreign policy is naive at best. He is correct again to an extent -- we ARE too extended around the world with military involvement and foreign aid, but isolationism is not the right course of action.

for Mountain Rose
I like opinions, but opinions based on analysis of the facts. When writers like this cherrypick what facts they want to use, that's not opinion, it's trivial propaganda.

We can have differences of opinion even given the whole truth.

I won't waste my time reading the opinions of people who willfully hide information.

I reverse my position on Giuliani vs Huc

As one of those people who feel enforcement of our immigration laws is the most important domestic issue facing the United States:

I have been thinking, if it's a choice between Huckabee and Giuliani then let it be Giuliani.

But I believe I was wrong. Check out Roy Beck's analysis of the immigration position of the candidates.

Both Giuliani and Huckabee get a "bad" grade for their past actions.

But Huckabee now has a strong pro-enforcement stance, while Guiliani's current stance on immigration is not much better than that of John McCain.

So, if it is to be one of these two, let it be Huckabee.

http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop 1.html

re: RJBJr
What specific information about Huckabee has the author "willfully hid[den]"?

John Galt
"we ARE too extended around the world with military involvement and foreign aid, but isolationism is not the right course of action."

Ron Paul is not an isolationist. He stands for a non-intervention strategy where military force and presence is used as a last resort. He wants us to be actively involved in trade and diplomacy with other nations.

Further, it should be pointed out that the accusation that Ron Paul would not have gotten involved in World War II is bogus. The fact is that such decisions ultimately are the responsibility of congress not the President. This is all that Ron Paul is saying: he will not as President get us involved militarily in the world, but if the congress declares war on another nation, he will work to fight and win the war as quickly and decisively as possible.

Maybe PlumbBob's Not but I Am
"Are you saying that everything Ron Paul says is loony?" asks Khomar.

He is a looney. Watching his whiney, bug-eyed, quaking visage as he blames 9/11 on the US and advocates turning the Middle East over to the Islamonazis; or listening to his ridiculous conspiracy theories; or contemplating his policies to dismantle the government and end Social Security looney is the word that springs naturally to mind.

Mike B
If your not a New Yorker, then ASK a New Yorker what happened in their city.

I've asked plenty of New Yorkers what happened to their city...and I saw it with my own eyes. It went from a crime-ridden, near bankrupt, chaotic mess to a livable, dynamic, well-run city. Many homeless people belong in insane asylums because they are psychotic. A couple of instances of police excess have to be weighed against thousands of instances of criminal excess against peaceful citizens that were occuring every day. Its legitimate to be against Giuliani because you dont like some position he holds but to say he didnt take a broken New York City and fix it is just WRONG.

skep41
Consider this scenario: I have two sons: Jed and James. Jed is playing with his trains minding his own business when James comes over and starts taking his track apart. At this point, Jed hits James as hard as he can. Which boy has done wrong? They both have. James should not have been messing where he does not belong, and Jed should not have hit his brother.

Can we really say that we are in no way responsible for what happened on 9/11? Can we say that our actions in the Middle East have been completely honorable, honest, and forthright? Remember, we helped bring Saddam Hussein to power. We armed and empowered Osama bin Laden and Al Queda. To say that our actions in the region had NO effect on the events that led up to 9/11 is being dishonest.

I don't fall in with those who blame America for everything. I believe we are the greatest nation in the world, BUT I also recognize that we are also not perfect. Sometimes our mistakes come with serious consequences. Is it loony to examine yourself once in a while to ensure that you are not responsible in some way when someone lashes out at you in anger? Is it possible that we helped fuel that hatred by our actions? It certainly wouldn't be the first time for me personally. We all often contribute to problems even if the final result is not "deserved".

As for conspiracies, is a conspiracy theory crazy if it is true. There IS a NAFTA superhighway. Canada openly admits their participation in building it, and the legislature in Texas has been actively working against it. There IS an organization called the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) that is working toward a North American Union just like that of the European Union. The former president of Mexico Fox has been in numerous interviews lately where he admits that that is the long term goal between the leaders of Mexico, the United States, and Canada. If you do your own research, it will confirm this as all true.

Chuck & the Air Force PT test
I know this is off-topic, but I must defend my service.

The Air Force does not--repeat, does not--perform pushups with knees touching the ground! The AF push-up is the same as the Army push-up. And no, the standard is not lower for women either. I don't know where you got your information, but try a little fact-checking beore you post. You won't seem like such a buffoon.

BTW, we also do sit-ups and a timed mile-and-a-half run.

Cheers

skep41
Crime went down under Dinkins term first. A lot of reason were why crime in NYC went down.
1. The crack epidemic ended. This happened while Dinkin was Mayor (Dinkins was a total idiot by the way.)
2. Crime went down nation wide.
Bill Clinton claimed credit for this to.
3. Roe v Wade was now in effect for over 18 years.
All those inner city minority kids with single poor parents? DEAD. New York City
2003 New York City.
84,903 Reported Abortions
41,643 African American Abortions
28,410 Hispanic American Abortions
70,053 total Minority Abortions for Racially Profiled groups.
Would they all become criminals? No! would some have yes. Poverty breeds crime. Not race!
4. Times Square Church.
This church totally revolutionized Times Square years before Rudy became mayor. If you were there you would have seen the number of bums pimps and Crack heads who turned their lives around. David Wilkerson In my humble Opinion turned Times Square around.
5. Only Manhattan cleaned up under Rudy. Much of the city is still cleaning up.
6. The Harlem Black Churches, and Neighborhood watches. You can not underestimate the effect they have had on Harlem.

THATS why NYC turned around.

In the end Yes Rudy helped. But the city was to huge of a problem for any one man to turn around. Hes not a Miracle worker. He encouraged business's to move to NYC. But they moved because crime went down. If Rudy ran a relay race with 100 people on his team. If they won he would claim all the credit.

skep41
you contradict yourself in your post..you say "no more liberals", infer that Mike Huckabee is one, state that the "God & Guns" crowd has ruined California when it is run by the fiscal conservative/socially liberal Swarzennegger. Since when are the God and Guns crowd liberals? And since when has the Governater been part of the God and Guns crowd in Kalifornia? You make no sense and as for the electibility of Baptists... this country elected Baptists to be two of the last five presidents (for better or worse) and all of the past five presidents were professed to be of the Christian faith...so don't go acting like Christian candidates have sprouted two heads of something.

bwa-hahahahahahah
I love your desperation, imbecile.
You guys raised the monster, you claimed it and now you are afraid of your own Frankenstein

Ark Ashamed of Bill
"alleged victim"?

I think in a murder case the one thing that doesn't need alleged before it is the victim. I think we are pretty sure who the murder victim is.

I know you want to cast doubt on the guilt of the man, but you can't throw "alleged" before every word. First, the victim is known, not "alleged". Second, after a conviction, you can drop "alleged". As far as the law is concerned, the facts are established, not "alleged" any longer.

Huck's Appeal
I believe their is a simple, staightforward reason for Huckabee's rise. He has a very appealing and authentic nature. Whether he will become the Republican nominee will depend on how well he convinces enough voters that he is the best candidate, and not whether the MSM, the Republican machine, or the conservative right are for or against him.

Right now, most primary voters do not know enough about his positions to decide. This will work itself out as the campaign moves forward. I have reservations about some of his positions, and will probably keep my support with Duncan Hunter, whose positions are very much in line with mine. It's too bad Duncan soesn't have Mike's charisma!

To Robert
AHAHHAAHA
Im sure it didnt hurt the sale of shoes in NYC.
But then we have to credit Jerry Seinfield. He was also in NYC while crime was decreasing. Maybe all the gangs stayed home to watch Seinfield.

Or Maybe Rudy Ripped off his shirt to show hes superman and flew around beating up bad guys and homeless people. With his Super Strength! Faster then 41 speeding Bullets hitting a Minority suspect! More Powerful then the Dirty Air at the 911 site that has permanently harmed many of the rescue workers! Able to leap over awkward questions in a single lie! ITS SUPER RUDY!

One more blow against Paul
AQs if Ron Paula didn't have enough going against him, he now picks up Robert's endorsement. Talk about the death knell for a movement.

Of course, Lilly's endorsement of Huckabee decided that one for me once and for all.

Maybe that is how I will decide my vote. Sit here and watch who the nutters and frauds and libs endorse. Whoever is left without an endorsement gets my vote.

huckabees pardon
if he joined the long list of those taken in by jailhouse conversions one must ask how else can he be fooled. Finding redemption for past sins is laudible. That in itself is no ticket to freedom. Huck obviously believed the fraud would lead a civilized life, obviously his be;lief that religious redemption blinded him to reality. Wanting to believe the rapist found redemption,imho only qualified him for helping others in prison

Typo
First line should start:

As if Ron Paul didn't...

Sorry for the typos.

Huckabee can’t win!
A vote for Huck is a vote for:

A warm welcome to all illegal border crossers
A new direction for the GOP - Cross-dressing, baby killing, philandering, same-sex
Growing the Tax and Spend Government
Immediate release of all criminals after they claim to be “saved”
Religious fanaticism (huck is getting nuttier every day)
The election of Hillary or Rudy and then hello to Instacare Abortion Clinics

danabar
So what bastion of republicanism do you support? *cough*
If you say Romney or Thompson im going to laugh.

andrews
I find this "guilty by association" mindset in regard to Ron Paul a little strange. The question should be who the candidate endorses not who endorses the candidate (unless you have a strong association with that person). I find it rather amazing the wide range of people who have expressed support for the Ron Paul. He is attracting the rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, prostitutes and fundamentalist Christians. Is it such a terrible thing that he is bringing people together for a common cause? When did unity in our country become a bad thing?

huckabee
it seems that huckabee has glommed onto the religious conserv base as his ticket to the white house. Based on the previous political track record of arkansas govs he seems not the exception but just a continuing trend of out of contact and corrupt govs from that state. It would be far more comforting if he bucked the trend rather than be a person guided by emotion rather than principle

Robert
"...but I do find him "entertaining" for his honesty."

I find him refreshing.

I have been lied to by politicians ever since I can remember. I cannot think of another time when I actually had the opportunity to elect someone who is entirely honest about his intentions and beliefs -- and amazingly, I agree with 95% of what he espouses. If we really want change in America, what is so terrible about choosing truth for once?

Khomar
Actually, that was more for my amusement than anything else. I would not support Ron Paula solely on his foreign policy and his either antisemtism or poor judgment in making (or allowing to be made in his name) statements that could be construed as antisemitic. His seeming endorsement of conspiracy theories (whether he means it or is just a poor speaker) also turns me off.

I own a dog-eared, beaten copy of "The Case For Gold" I bought in the mid-80's and read over and over, and I have been agreeing with Rep. Paul on many domestic issues for a long time. However, having heard him speak on foreign issues, I could not vote for him in the primary.

If, by some incredible quirk, he wins the primary, yes I would vote for him in the general election, as I would for whoever the republican nominee is. but I somehow doubt I will ever have to worry about that, no matter how often the Paul supporters tell me he is going to win the primary.

I hate Mike Huckabee
I am at a loss on how Huckabee is doing as well as he is. I have believed that evangelical Christianity has being destroying conservatism for a while and this just might prove it to me. If evangelicals can't put down thier jesus goggles and vote for someone who would best represent the freedoms of this nation like ROMNEY, then screw them! I am so mad, Huck is an anti-mormon, uneducated, tax-hiking, immigration amnesty supporting IDIOT!

Typo
Sorry. My wife's name is "Paula", so the "a" keeps accidentally finding its way onto Ron Paul's name. Sorry.

Khomar
Man My grandparents are voting for Ron Paul. And they voted against every Republican since Reagan. I really think he can take the old people vote from Hillery. My grandparents really relate to him. Military Service Worked his way up, honorable profession. I mean Honesty still means something to most Americans. People LIKE IKE, and Ron reminds alot of people of IKE. Anti Military Industrial complex (which pays my bills) For good values and a strong America. Hes really resonating with older people. Huckabee is resonating with a lot of people that Paul is resonating with. People who don't want whats in the Rudy McRomney Republican package. Someone who says I'm for things that you might be for even if my party is not.
Id compare Current Politics to Mcdonalds but at least Mcdonalds has 7 choices not 2.
You want the chicken or the fish?
Do you have anything else?
No.

RJBJr
Here is the most even-handed assessment of the race that I have seen to date.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/opinion/09rich.html?_r=2& ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Frank Rich? Who'da thought it?

jack
saying huck is anti mormon you wouldn't be a mormon would you?

If God willing
Huck is a Christian leader. A Christian nation needs a Christian leader; note, I am using the word “moral” here, but a “Christian” leader, for if anyone thinks he is moral in his heart and soul then he is not a Christian. A Christian is one who knows he is fallible and that’s why he needs Christ’s righteousness to “deem” him moral & perfect. If Huck is a ‘gimmick” pretending to be a Christian then he has to answer to our Creator much more than his electorate, so don’t you worry. Further, your accusation that ‘Huck somehow is the reason for a killer’s rape’ is a sign of desperation, an attempt to tarnish this good man’s image; its not working Doug!

Rove thought he could use the Christians as standard “ditto-heads”; to dance to his tunes whenever, wherever, and however he wishes. Pity him, for he knows not that a born-again mind works in accordance to percepts of Christ (Matthew 5,6, & 7) and not according to some imaginary judaeo-christian values; that’s why they boldly defy the conservative kingmakers (the all powerful Rush, Sean and Laura) and reject Romney and his cult.

Huck is a servant of Christ, and he is not ashamed of that fact. He has very little baggage that contradicts the Christian principles compared to the rest of the GOP candidates, so why shouldn’t he be the president? If God willing, of course.

Huck more conservative
Tancredo, Hunter, and Huckabee should be the top tier, they are conservative across the board. Huckabee will be the toughest to beat. No one answers as straight as him and no one comes off looking better.

baseballdoc
Well the point is Mormons claim they are Christians, so all Christians should vote Romney. But they all support Romney because he is a Mormon. You do know Point with out Counter Point is Propaganda. And whats with the COLOSSUS thing. Ego problems?

AF Major
Just busting MLD B#LLS. He is always spewing crap about the MILITARY and he couldnt hack it in the Air Force. I was a First Sgt on a NATO base in the 70's and 80's and I had all the MILITARY on board. The AF were the most slackers and IM sorry but that was my problem. In the AF you guys have it easier than the Army when it came to PT TEST and back then if you couldnt do the correct push-up then you could drop to your knees and continue on. I didnt make the rules they just didnt like doing PT the way we did, but when it came to them doing their PT TEST the ones I had all MAXED THE AF PT TEST.

comparisons to G.W, Clinton
G.W. Bush was also an evangelical; Bill Clinton was also a governor of Arkansas. When I see Huckabee, I make those comparisons, and I really wonder about him.

I'm a Christian, and consider myself evangelical, but I also agree with Martin Luther that it's better to be ruled by a wise pagan than a Christian fool. I am not calling Huckabee a fool, but I do wonder what, besides his faith, he has to recommend himself?

Romney is a heavy weight in terms of achievement as well as showing, in his personal life, adherence to fundamental moral principles. Both Rudy and McCain have shown leadership and courage in tough times, though they are not aligned with myself on several of the issues. Duncan Hunter I agree with almost 100% on the issues, and he is my 1st choice in the primary, with Romney my 2nd choice right now.

I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for Huckabee, or Ron Paul or Tancredo, for that matter, against Hillary - however, I do think evangelicals have to look at more than a person's church attendance to determine whether or not he would be a good leader. Character does matter, but while it is necessary, it is not sufficient.

MSM dictates all the lead canidates
Let's face it - among Romney, Guliani, Huckabee, and McCain you won't find a single reliable Conservative candidate. That's exactly why the MSM pushes them off on everyone else. Even the "New Media" is playing into their game - acting as apologists for their own flawed candidates that they feel "at least can win against Hillary."

That's also a major factor as to why Fred Thompson is NOT covered by the MSM - he's actually a Conservative and they are terrified of him. They're also allergic to Duncan Hunter. On the other hand, Thompson isn't very animated and Hunter has a low profile, so neither of them make for great ratings.

It is the job of Republican Primary Voters to educate THEMSELVES about the candidates and not fall into the trap thinking in or in immediate response to the MSM's box. Find the candidate who defines the platform - and that platform better be something other than "he looks like he can beat Hillary" or you'll lose.

Answers
Khomar--
Bin Laden tagged along with Gulbuldin Hecmatyar in afghanistan, an anti-Western Saudi-supported guerrilla who was and is part of the Taliban.
Saddam Hussien was supported and allied with the Soviets from Day 1 as were all radical anti-Western Arab regimes and movements.
The Islamic radicals are at war with us because our consumerist culture and especially our attitude towards women is seen by them as a lure to corrupt their youth from the principles of Islam.

CC- The Governator was able to bypass the Republican primaries by running in a primary election, becoming the only Republican to win statewide office in years. The God and Gun nuts and the state Republican Party didnt support his four initiatives that would have changed the face of this state in a conservative direction so he was forced to move left to remain politically viable. The vast majority of Middle Class people are very turned off by the extreme Social conservatives and will vote for the Democrats if they are forced to.

MikeB-- Giuliani's 'Broken Windows' tough enforcement of petty lifestyle crimes was the beginning of the decline in crime. Crime flourished under Dinkins and did not go down. Rudy cut crime, taxes, welfare rolls, public employee rolls and managed the city that was considered unmanagable. He has a solid record of doing REAL conservative things that none of the other candidates can hold a candle to.

People that think Christians
all think, act, and vote the same are just as guilty of hyperbole as those that think that all black people, Mexicans, and women think, act, and vote the same.

Sure, Christians would more likely vote for a candidate that supports the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, but as many have said - there are many other important issues that must be addressed.

The first of which is integrity - after all the scandals, lies, and partisan bickering, the American people by and large will demand a candidate that they believe what is coming out of their mouth.

Despite what some posts above - Christians have brains AND faith.

skep41
Rudy took over NYC in 1994
Dinkins in 1990
Year Population Crime Index Violent
1989 17,950,000 1,129,638 203,042
1990 17,990,455 1,144,874 212,458
1991 18,058,000 1,127,651 210,184
1992 18,119,000 1,061,489 203,311
1993 18,197,000 1,010,176 195,352
1994 18,169,000 921,278 175,433
1995 18,136,000 827,025 152,683

Are you still going to say And I Quote
"Crime flourished under Dinkins and did not go down."
January 1, 1990 – December 31, 1993
actually the only year crime went up under Dinkins was his first year in office.

If Fred would
get on every conservative radio talk show and Sunday morning show possible as Huckabee has he would be doing a lot better.

It's basically free publicity broadcast to literally millions of Conservative people - elegant in its simplicity.

MLD
What a cop out is that the best you got. You ran and havent stopped running. I have my DEGREE and there is nothing better. So now I take it you will start bashing the POOR since you think they are all a bunch of golden WARRIORS. So much for LIBS and the poor huh. Also for the 30% IQ hell that is about 29.5% more than you got. THANK YOU for caring about GUNNY and I though, we didnt think you cared since we know you just love SUPPORTING the POOR and PRISONERS so much.

MikeB
As a relative of several police officers, I would point out that there are many ways you can cook the books.

Having memories of NYC under Dinkins and under Giuliani, I have to say that those numbers do not match well with memories and anecdotal evidence of NYC in those years.

Not saying Dinkins leaned on the police to under-report, but I know that another big east coast city did have pressure to under-report in the same time span, so it is possible.

Also, since you forgot to mention it, where did you get the numbers you provided?

chuck and MLD
Chuck, I understand that the fitness standards used to be lower for the AF than they are currently. About 5 years ago, when it became apparent that deployments were becoming a way of life and not just a remote possibility, the AF leadership noticed that a lot of our troops were having trouble physically keeping up with the folks from our sister services. Hence the fitness standards and the way fitness is measured was changed. The result has been a much fitter service and its not uncommon to see the AF gyms packed with folks waiting in line to use the equipment; also folks are running all over the base at all times of day. Let me tell you it has been refreshing. These days I believe the average Airman is on par with the average Soldier in terms of fitness (probably not with the average Marine, though ;) ). Having been Army enlisted for 13 years prior to earning my AF commission 12 years ago, I think I'm qualified to make this comparison. For the statistical purists out there, I apologize for not having the actual data. Anyway, Chuck, thanks for clarifying.

As for MLD, your statement about recruiting from the poorest of the poor and from prisons is completely unfounded, incorrect, and, frankly, libelous. An apology is in order.

Debate: Romney v. Hillary
Hillary would wipe the floor with Mitt. He appears to be the most unprepared of all the candidates in debates as he searches for the right non-answer. Although in the clips I have seen him in the 'Ask Mitt Anything' town hall talks he appears to do well.

If anybody would put a thumping on Hillary in a debate it would be Huckabee. Let's see... we have the straight talking guy v. the woman that has never met an extemporaneous question she could or would answer.

Which would you choose?

McCain would do it too, but he would appear mean (and enjoying it).

Fear of Huckabee
I don't know who is more afraid of Mike Huckabee's candidacy: liberals or conservatives??

As an independent conservative I am disheartened to see week after week CONSERVATIVES attacking Mike Huckabee. He has been a Republican govenor in a heavily weighted Democratic state and had to work with a large democrat majority. He worked with the legislature (finding common ground and sometimes *GASP* raised taxes to fix the problems in Arkansas).

What amazes me is the Conservatives that howl about Huckabee and then support Guiliani.

What's up with that??

Military Hatin' Dogg and Robert
Guys, your moral indignation about the "horrors" of waterboarding prove only one point, namely that you are incompetent on issues of national security.

MLD, bseides your outright lies that we hung japanese officers *specifically* for waterboarding our troops (in fact, the only japanese hung specifically for this were ones who used it on a civilian with no evidence of culpability in sedition).

Furthermore, the waterboarding technique used by the japanese involved the direct inhalation of water into the lungs. It is strongly asserted that the modern form does not. Robert, you mentioned the SS performing this practice. They actually did drown the person in question. There was absolutely no "simulation" about it. Now, to be honest, it doesn't matter to me. For people like the two of you to take the side of human debris like Khalid Sheihk Muhammad is appauling.

I'm of the opinion that the debate of whether or not it is torture is irrelevant. The people being subjected to it are neither POWs or hapless civilians. Secondly, we are not torturing people in order to impose our political will (via intimidation) on someone else. We are using these aggressive tactics (and if you want to call them torture, then fine) in order to save peoples lives.

Mountain Rose was exactly right. If the two of you are two philosophically weak to support the use of torture to extract information from the most vile form of mass-murderers on the planet, then you richly deserve to be ignored by people who really do want to protect this country. These people have no right to keep information of imminent terrorist attacks to themselves. Oh and one more thing: please stop pretending like you actually care about this country.


Fear of Huckabee
I don't know who is more afraid of Mike Huckabee's candidacy: liberals or conservatives??

As an independent conservative I am disheartened to see week after week CONSERVATIVES attacking Mike Huckabee. He has been a Republican govenor in a heavily weighted Democratic state and had to work with a large democrat majority. He worked with the legislature (finding common ground and sometimes *GASP* raised taxes to fix the problems in Arkansas).

What amazes me is the Conservatives that howl about Huckabee and then support Guiliani.

What's up with that??

MikeB
You can throw all the statistics you want at this. New York under Dinkins and Giuliani were two different worlds. Anybody who was there will tell you that. Dinkins was an incompetent Liberal loser.

Andrews
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycrime.htm
thats where I got them from, their source is
"Source: FBI, Uniform Crime Reports"
Thats why I included Violent crimes which are hard to under report. Though definitely 1990-1993 were terrible years for crime and Dinkins did nothing. My point is many things started stopping crime around 1990. Dinkins and Koch were 2 of the worst mayors Ive ever seen. Even if crime is going down the crime index was massive, over double what it is today, In fact almost triple. But nation wide crime began to go down. That Rudy Guliani claims he was responsible for bringing massive crime in a city of 18 million (probably includes daytime residents) is quite the over exaggeration.

MikeB
If Ron Paul can take Democrat(ick) votes away from the Shillster, then let him go run as a Democrat(ick).

HUNTER 2008


Securing the border and enforcing the law is the only way we get to keep our rule of law, our representative Republic, and our Constitution. We must elect a President who WILL secure the border and enforce the law. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this will no longer be the United States of America.

The so-called "top tier" will not get out the voters necessary for a GOP win. Increasing turnout is the key. Give people something to vote for. Not just the lesser of two evils. Won't work this time. People are fed up with the inundation of illegal aliens. They would come out in droves for the clear choice of D=amnesty or R=enforcement. They will stay home if they both equal amnesty.

There is a huge majority of American citizens waiting for someone to pledge to uphold the laws and secure the borders, let's not ignore them any more.

http://www.gohunter08.com

Skep41
How long did you live in New York? Andrews has first hand information. So do I, yes the city got much better, but blindly stating that Rudy was the cause of all the change discounts all the evidence. The Sheer fact that crime went down while the Idiot Dinkins was in office and it went down nation wide (Chicago also during the same time becoming much safer) proves that there was something besides a though on crime mayor. Rudy wants you to believe it was all him. He wants you to imagine him as superman with out a hideous comb over. Hes not.

Red-y For 2008
I can attack Huckabee because his track record of governance is fairly liberal and he hasnt taken any conservative stans until it occured to him to run for the presidency.
Giuliani, on the other hand, put conservative principles into practice time and time again under the most adverse circumstances and vocally defended his positions in the national media which was attacking him.
Giuliani has given many speeches espousing conservative principles, an excellent one recentlt to the Heritage Foundation. He has consistently, and very believable advocated conservative governance. He doesnt have to explain away past liberal positions. His positions on abortion and his recognition that deporting twenty million people from a country with 5% unemployment would be an economic and social disaster might bug some Republicans but he has never tried to obfuscate or lie about them, which makes him a lot more honest than Huckabee or Romney.

MikeB
I had family and business in NYC that took me there often. The difference was palpable.

Mountain Rose
Um your not making any sense. This is the PRIMARY. SHE CANT WIN THE GOP PRIMARY. Please use some logic. If we wanted to get Mr electable thats actually Mccain so all you pro elect ability guys should stop and get behind him, he always beats Hillery.

Also
Not only crime went down. He fought the Unions and made real cuts. He slashed welfare rolls, which expanded under every other mayor. When the publicly-funded Brooklyn Museum displayed vile, bigoted anti-Christian art he took a high-profile public position opposing it. Which of these other 'true conservatives' took any positions like that?

Skep41
Were not denying that change happened, But you making the blanket statement that it was all due to Rudy is just crazy. Yes NYC benefited from some of his reforms, but other were obviously wacky. and considering the nationwide trend where cities like Chicago became massively safer also how can you pin success on one man? Thats like blaming Failure in Vietnam on Westmorland. Theres a lot that goes into everything.

AF MAJOR
DONT hold your breath if you are expecting and apology from MLD, your branch of service(AF) threw him out because he couldnt hack it, what a joke huh. He makes excuses about his service related injuries all the time. Hell I bet he wasnt even in the AF. But as a LIB he will come up with another WHOPPER of a LIE when everyone on here catches on to his BS.

Skep 41
I agree he definitely cut welfare roles. Thats something Rudy did that was with in a mayors power. Personally I the Union thing doesn't speak to me. But he did fight unions. And I do remember the Brooklyn art incident. If you take out the massive racial profiling (by the way Im white)and the Kerik incident and the incident with wives 2 and 3 and the jaywalkign and ferret banning, and the 911 command center, and the police fire radios. He wasnt a bad mayor, he was better then Koch and Dinkins. But he acts like hes superman. He acts like he stopped the towers from falling and cleaned up NYC on his own. Yes he got more cops on the streets. But it wasnt just him. But when you consider most of America doesnt have a crime rate over 6,000 his techniques are to heavy handed.

Huckabee Pardons 1,033
The press is reporting that Huckabee pardoned or commuted the sentences of 1,033 criminals during the 10.5 years that he was in office. These seems pretty high. How does it compare to other Republican governors?

thradio
if huck and others are so busy pardoning various criminals I have to wonder what is wrong with the legal system. If judges and lawyers using various laws to determine sentencing practices I for one wonder how those such as huck who in her previous life was a minister understands the law to the degree he alone could determine these 1000 plus criminals should have their sentences reduced or over turned.

THRadio
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0065.htm
seems Ronald Reagan holds the record for California with over 500 in 8 years.

MikeB
Rudy, like all these guys, is running for President, an enterprise that is only taken on by people with enormous egos. I dont think he did all this stuff by himself and, of course, he made mistakes.He did, however, loudly champion the conservative positions that made these sucesses possible. I think that it is unfair to call him a liberal (unless being for keeping first trimester abortions legal defines someone as a liberal). He took conservative positions and did conservative things-- more than either Huckabee or Romney. A whole lot more. If you believe that conservative governance can work to solve the problems created by too much government than what he did in NYC is a good example to hold up. He also doesnt have this weird religious baggage that Romney and Huckabee are taking on and believe me, once you get outside the evangelical community these issues are a big turn-off to the moderates and independants that you need to be elected President.

Arkansas conspiracy
The rise of Huckabee is not a media conspiracy. It's Hillary ready to make a deal with an old buddy from home! In all seriousness the smarmy lily-lipped preacher will do the bidding of his masters and sound "genuine" and "christian" doing it. Check out this Foreign Affairs article covering his speech at CSIS on Iran.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/14335/

He is now among the annointed candidates, so be careful.

Also his "flat tax" is a idea more socialist than conservative, and will result in higher taxes than we now pay. don't fall for Huckabee's mellifluously delivered falsities. Stand your ground conservatives vote for Paul, or if you are somewhat neoconned and prowar Romney will be at least capable of adjusting his positions according to the will of his constituency, perhaps the best we can hope for.

Media brownout notwithstanding it seems Paul's star is still rising keep your eye on him and jump aboard if/when you realize his popularity has reached critical mass despite remaing below MSM radar.

@wildwest
Huck pardoned 1000s not because he understood the law but because he is a Christian and has Christ’s percepts deep rooted in his heart since the time he was born-again; so what is wrong with that? Judaeo-Law cannot change anyone’s heart and mind, but forgiveness and repentance can. If that forgiveness was taken for granted by that one criminal who continued to remain unrepentant after release, then it is not the fault of Huck, it is just that reprobate was designed as such to be justified in hell, rather; as fat as Huck, he behaved simply true to his Christian convictions, that’s all.

BTW, what is this “previous life”… did you mean former occupation? For a moment I thought you were talking about some new-age reincarnation or something that sort! lol.

Giuliani= amnesty

Just like on abortion, Rudy is no flip flopper on immigration policy.

He has always been for amnesty, and he still openly acknowledges he supports amnesty ("path to citizenship" for illegal aliens)

Huckabee now claims he opposes amnesty.


So does anyone trust him? Of course not. They guy is an open-borders wacko.

But who cares, because he couldn't beat Hillary Clinton in a million years.

What if it is Obama vs Huckabee? That would be fantastic. In that case Lou Dobbs will be our next President.

Born Again
There are a lot of convicts who claim to be born again as it helps them get paroled. Because of Huck's particular religious world view he pardons a lot of criminals who then commit more crime. THAT IS NOT COMPASSION.

He also is weak on illegal immigration. THAT COSTS US Citizens money. That is not compassion. Compassion is working with other countries to improve the economy for both countries.

Huck does not understand economics and is misguided in his compassion.

Who is he---
A small rhyme here: Huckster, Huckster, Huckabee-
Just a Harry Reid Wannabee.

Our choices are so bad that I just wish that Hunter and Tancredo had a real chance. But as has been said, it looks like the RNC dissed them both. Why, I don't know, but unless some great independent (maybe a Hunter or Lou Dobbs) can declare as an independent candiddate,. The two main fields of front runners are bad news.
As I have stated in other messages, we receive a lot of good info from the right wing Middle America News. Once a month it arrives and gives very good updates on illegals, both political parties, and it doesn't give any slack to the wimps and takers on capitol hill...An excellent right wing paper...












Americans For Better Immigration
Another poster pointed me to http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_go p1.html regarding the immigration policies and history of the GOP candidates (I think to slam Huckabee). At this site each candidate is rated abysmal, bad, poor, fair, good, or excellent.

I did a little analysis and assigned points to each rating (1 to 6). Here is the tally;
Tancredo - 96
Hunter - 89
Thompson - 80
Huckabee - 75
Paul - 73
Romney - 71
McCain - 49

Not too many surprises, but to those that have called Huckabee 'open borders' might want to consider this prior to making their comments.

tamil
pardoning rapists to prey upon society is not christian charity. If criminals need only to tell the gullible that they found jesus while spending time at the big house and that was a get out of jail free pass, they would all take that route and the prisons would sit empty. Good old huck took an oath to uphold the laws of his state and his work at a former minister doesn't translate to legal authority. Criminals like addicts are notorious for telling those aroubnd them how they have repented their former lives. The old saw about knowing how criminals and addicts are lying is that they move their lips is well documented. Christian charity doesn't call for those convicted of heinous crimes to be set loose to prey upon society. Law abiding citizens rely on the govt for proterction. Obviously good old huck doesn't understand his responsibilities and was complicit in those released committing additional crimes. That those crimes include addional murder should cause huck to loose sleep for his careless behavior

bot_feeder
Huckabee supports charging a fine to illegal aliens and then PUTTING THEM AT THE BACK OF THE LINE.

bot_feeder 2
That ain't Amnesty Jack!

Dumond was a total tragedy
But if Dumond met the requirements for parole (only made possible because of the commutation granted by Huckabee's predecessor) and the parole board released him, isn't the majority of the responsibility on that board?

Huckabee admits to supporting the parole, but regrets it tremendously - as we all do, after the fact, when we make decisions that cause harm.

Huckabee's note indicating that he desired Dumond's release was part of a denial of commutation because Huckabee believed Dumond should be supervised.

Who says Huckabee is getting "free ride"
Holy Cow, no offense, but how lame a statement. A liberal plant can't have already beaten the Clinton campaign machine thrice. He is getting hashed in the media. Every article is a character assassination. The thing is every point made has already been used against him from his earlier campaigns. Furthermore since when, I repeat, since when has the Right Wing Media ever given a damn what is said in the Huffington Post, NY Times, LA Times? You call them liars and biased one minute, and quote their partisan balogna the next. Townhall is a bunch of emotional knee jerk political junkies with a pulse of the nearest right wing political junkie and not the pulse of America.

Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, and yes Mike Huckabee would improve the United states. Just report on issues...not the Enquirer.

Robert
The Constitution says that we can't "torture" terrorists captured abroad (and this is specifically addressed in the BOR)? I did't realize they were POWs? They represent a nation that signed the Geneva Conventions? And what national army are they part of? It's "SSish" (as you call it) to only "torture" people who wish to attack innocent civilians for political purposes?

Again, you have no right to withold information of an impending terorist attack. Nor do you have a right to be free of torture if you are witholding such information? The claim that Mr. Muhammad would have sang like a canary if they had followed a more "sensitive" course of interrogation is refuted by the fact that those steps are always taken before such methods are authorized. Let me put it another way: What proof do you have that the CIA simply skipped standard interrogation methods and went straight to the more severe methods?

Now, I beleive that standard interrogation methods should be the rule in the overwhelming number of cases, but no one who is determined to fight a group of people who play by absolutely no rules is going to rule out torture. Any politician who claims that they would do so should be roundly rejected by the American people.




gabriel grossman
to infer the clinton's give a rat's rear end concerning anything that occurs in arkansas don't pass the small terst. After leaving for wash the missus clinton reportedly stated there was nothing that could ever bring her back to arkansas. Her feminists buddies also welcomed her back from the excile of the boondocks and back into the power center of america, the east coast

This article is right on the money!
Glad to see someone articulate what is going on in the liberal media---and the way that Christian Conservatives are playing right into their hands. Why don't conservatives WAKE UP and realize that Huckabee just can't win against Hillary! If you are a true conservative, you will vote for Mitt Romney. He's the only candidate with true conservative values, experience, intelligence and yes....financial backing.... to go the distance! It took me a while to realize this, but I get it now... Better late than never!

MLD
"Defend the torture all you want - but just be sure to temper your outrage when you find out some of our boys have undergone the same procedure..."

_______________________________________________

If "our boys" ever start mass-murdering innocent men, women, and children to advance a degenerate political/religious philosophy, then I'll gladly cheer on anyone who tortures them in order to prevent it. Call me a dreamer, but somehow I just don't see that happening.

MLD
Thanks for the information. I stand corrected--to a degree.

Crime: you said that the military recruits "out of prison." None of the recruits were currently serving time in prison. Moreover, only 12% of the recruits were given waivers for felonies. That's 12% of 12% or roughly 1.5%. This hardly constitutes "recruiting out of prison." Additionally, these stats are for the Army. The other services have substantially lower rates.

From the NY times: "The military automatically excludes people who have committed certain crimes. They include drug traffickers, recruits who have more than one felony on their record or people who have committed sexually violent crimes. A felony is defined as a crime that carries a sentence of a year or more in prison.

Bill Carr, the under secretary of military personnel policy, said the military granted waivers selectively and scrutinized a recruit’s full record, the nature of the crime, when it was committed, the degree of rehabilitation and references from teachers, employers, coaches and clergy members.

In many cases, Mr. Carr said, the applicant may have committed the crime at a young age and then stayed out of trouble.

“If the community backs them, we are willing to take a hard look,” Mr. Carr said, referring to the waiver process, which includes checks of local, state and federal records."

More follows.




Huck Supports the FairTax
Which is just about the only thing about him that even brought him into consideration for me.

But I have watched several clips of him on You Tube, and I have checked out his website. And I'm liking him more.

When asked in one of the debates about the veracity of the creation story (did it take six days) he admitted he didn't know; he only knew that God did the creating. That is a major admission for someone who describes himself as a "born again" Christian. I generally equate "born again" with "fundamentalist," which to me means a literal interpretation of the Bible. That doesn't work for me, and is generally a deal-breaker.

Huck has also repeatedly stated that he supports strong enforcement of the boarder. Now whether this is a recent conversion, I couldn't say, but he is currently on the record as being for stricter immigration enforcement.

As to his raising taxes, one must keep that in context; he was governing a state with an overwhelmingly democratic legislature. The infrastructure reportedly needed improvements, and several social services needed attention. I favor doing those things with local or state monies, not federal monies, so I could argue that he made the best deal he could get and still serve his constituents.

I have not decided who I might vote for. Ron Paul would be at the top of my list except for his position on the war. He also needs to realize that one can't flip a switch and change a culture. Next would be Rudy, but he's against the FairTax and has in the past favored gun control. Then I guess Romney, but he too is against the FairTax, and not that I care a whit about his religion, he's just a little too crisp for me. I find Huck's wit and straight shooting approach very appealing.

So, until the Libertarians get on the right side of the WOT, I guess I'm going to have to settle for whoever the GOP settles on.

Huck is Not a Plant
I don't see any roots growing out Hucks feet or leaves for that matter -- although he is a bit green on global warming.

On the other hand, Huck does has grass-roots support.

Seriously, he is a populist, religious fundamentalist. Huckabee could have been of either party, but for the hostility of Democrats to religion on your shirtsleeve, developed in the last 30 years.

Now I don't mind religion in the public square -- that partly explains Huckabee's rise -- Huckabee makes people feel good about being open about their religious faith.

In the old days that was not a problem -- Americans took it for granted that religion was part of the life and breath of the public square.

Today, everywhere there are signs that God in the public square is endangered.

Many Democrats don't feel that danger as much as a sizable chunk of Republicans do.

Huckabee answers that concern.

But on closer inspection, there are many issues where Huckabee's record is problematic or downright unacceptable.

There are also issues of honesty and integrity that have yet to be fully explored.

Haymakers are coming Huckabee's way.

Can Huckabee take a punch or does he have a glass jaw -- the next two or three weeks will tell.




for Khomar
Khomar writes: "Ron Paul is not an isolationist. He stands for a non-intervention strategy where military force and presence is used as a last resort. He wants us to be actively involved in trade and diplomacy with other nations."

That's not what is commonly meant by an "isolationist." Look up that word in your dictionary: An isolationist is someone who wants to eschew *alliances* with other nations.

What does Ron Paul plan to do about NATO, and the U.S. commitment to use military force to defend any NATO member that is threatened? How does Ron Paul plan to get other nations to cooperate with us in fighting terrorism, if he tells those nations that he won't defend *them* with U.S. military force? Would Ron Paul use military force to defend Japan or South Korea from a North Korean missile attack?

Ron Paul said at the latest debate that as President, he would even make friends with Chavez in Venezuela. How would our other friends in Latin America, who feel threatened by Chavez, think about that?

Ron Paul doesn't think we need to worry about Iran. But the Sunni Arab regimes in the Middle East do. And some of them, like Egypt, Bahrain and Dubai, have been U.S. allies for many years. What would President Paul tell them all: "Sorry, guys, you're on your own from now on, good luck with Iran, good bye"?

Ron Paul simply fails to understand that the United States, as the major world power, has vital interests in the world beyond its 12 mile limit that it has to defend by military force if necessary. And that makes him an isolationist.

for Khomar
Khomar writes: "Consider this scenario: I have two sons: Jed and James. Jed is playing with his trains minding his own business when James comes over and starts taking his track apart. At this point, Jed hits James as hard as he can. Which boy has done wrong? They both have. James should not have been messing where he does not belong, and Jed should not have hit his brother."

Your scenario sucks:
If Jed and James are grown adults, then the ONLY one that the law would charge with a felony is Jed. Assault is a felony. Vandalism is not. Jed committed assault. James only committed vandalism.

And that's what is wrong with your attempts to rationalize 9-11. In order to give any part of the responsibility to the U.S., you have to find some way to establish that the U.S. did things as morally abhorrent as what al-Qaeda did on 9-11.

And that just isn't the case.

It also fails to explain the other times when peoples had sufficient provocation and still didn't resort to mass murder: Where are all the Tibetan terrorists seeking vengeance for the Chinese occupation of Tibet? Why hasn't the Dalai Lama urged terrorism? Why didn't Mahatma Gandhi become a terrorist and lead the Indian people in bloody revolt against the British colonialists?

Lots of people have grievances. But not all of them respond with violence; and even those who do resort to violence, don't respond with the mass murder of civilians. They confine their resistance to attacks on military targets.

A civilian jetliner with women and children aboard is not a military target.


MLD part 2
Recruiting the poor: You probably have a point there, at least as f