Mike Huckabee and the “Shiite Republicans” Updated
posted at 12:00 pm on January 10, 2008 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Yesterday in Allah’s post about the Baptist who’s not endorsing Huckabee, I updated with a link to this article that summarizes conservative issues with Mike Huckabee’s tenure as Arkansas governor. The author, David J. Sanders, lists several specific things that Huckabee did that irritated the state’s Republicans, to the point that the Democrats increased their power during Huckabee’s tenure.
In 2000, Huckabee insisted on controlling the state party’s separate Victory Committee, but the committee’s finances were so poorly handled that a Federal Election Commission investigation resulted in the largest fine ever handed down by the FEC to a state party. That same year Republican Rep. Jay Dickey lost the 4th District seat he’d held for eight years.
In 2001, when conservative Republican lawmakers opposed a higher sales taxes and fees the governor supported, he began calling them “Shiites.” Huckabee’s positions on fiscal policy became indistinguishable from Democrats’ positions. A year later, he openly campaigned against a ballot initiative to remove the sales tax on food and medicine. While he and Rockefeller won re-election in 2002, Sen. Tim Hutchinson didn’t.
In 2003, Huckabee not only begged lawmakers for new taxes to make up a budget shortfall, but he rebuffed conservatives’ (Republicans and a couple of Democrats) plan to cover the shortfall by tapping one-time money and cutting pork. In 2004, President Bush won re-election, but Huckabee campaigned for some Democrats - even some who had Republican opponents - and Republicans lost state legislative seats for the first time since 1990.
In 2005, a term-limited Huckabee frustrated conservatives when he pushed a bill to give in-state college tuition and scholarships to the children of illegal immigrants. The next year, Democrats swept Republicans in every race for statewide constitutional office and Republicans lost legislative seats for the second consecutive election cycle.
Curious about the lack of specifics in the paragraph about Huckabee campaigning with some Democrats, I followed up with Sanders to get some names. And he provided one and is hunting for more.
As for a race in which Huckabee worked to defeat a Republican, there was a legislative race in Mountain Home, Arkansas, where Huckabee helped Democrat Benny Magness in his race against Republican Shawn Womack. Womack won.
Campaigning for the other party is bad enough, but it’s the “Shiite Republicans” moniker that disturbs me more. He started using it in 2001 and continued using it afterward. It’s the kind of attack that conservatives regularly get from the likes of the Daily Kos and other leftists who gleefully refer to conservatives and particularly Christian conservatives as the “Taliban wing” of the GOP or “America’s Taliban.” It’s a smear, and one that no Republican should lob at others and particularly not at conservatives, who are the base of the party.
I wondered if there was evidence outside Sanders’ article for Huckabee’s smear. There is. Here’s an article from December mentioning it.
There’s a species of Republican true believers right here in Arkansas who’ve always suspected his bona fides as an honest-to-goodness fiscal conservative and social reactionary. They’re largely to be found up in the hills, which tend to be Republican territory in any Southern state because of complicated historical, ethnic, economic and geological reasons having to do with soil, slavery and the plantation system. Back when he was a feisty, hefty pol instead of a walking –– no, running –– advertisement for weight loss, Brother Huckabee used to fondly refer to such critics as Shi’ite Republicans.
That author is joining Huckabee’s smear to pile on fiscal conservatives like the Club for Growth, whom Huckabee calls the “Club for Greed.”
Does Huckabee ever talk about any Democrat group or faction with similar insults? If he has, I haven’t heard it.
These smears get to the root of the problem I have with Huckabee. Instinctively, he is not a conservative. He’ll say conservative things in order to win approval from some part of the party’s base, but when push comes to shove he instinctively goes for the non-conservative side of the argument. I’m not just talking about calling Republicans “Shiites,” a quote that’s sure to get played over and over again if he’s the nominee, or about his raising taxes rather than cutting spending as the Arkansas “Shiite Republicans” wanted him to do, but about his swift shifts on issues like Gitmo and using the leftish “bunker mentality” slam on the Bush administration. It’s tiresome enough to get hit with this kind of rhetoric from the left. Conservatives don’t need one on our own side who is just as likely as they are to smear us.
Some may lob the exact same criticism at Romney, that he says conservative things just to court the conservative vote. There may be some truth to that, but has Romney gone out of his way to smear conservatives as “Shiites?” He didn’t run in 1994 on a platform of Reagan-Bush conservatism, granted, but I haven’t seen any evidence that Romney or any of the other candidates save McCain has gone out of his way to smear conservatives. And instinctively, Romney seems to tack more toward conservative ideas than away from them when he has the latitude. The opposite is the case with respect to Huckabee. The pattern I’m getting from him is that on social issues he’ll tack right, but on everything else he’ll tack left.
Add it all up. Huckabee campaigned with Democrats and hurt the Arkansas GOP, which hurt conservatism in that state. He smeared Arkansas Republicans as “Shiite Republicans.” He raised taxes rather than cut spending when confronted with that choice. He pushed a bill to grant in-state tuition to illegal aliens. He would close Gitmo and move the terrorists there to US soil, which is the same position that the ACLU promotes. He’s an Obama supporter’s choice to make trouble for other GOP candidates in the Michigan primary.
The guy may be nice and he may be a good, humorous speaker, but as far as I can tell he’s no conservative.
Update: David Sanders emails with more Democrats that Huckabee assisted.
In 2002, Rep. Bobby Glover, D, over Rep. Randy Minton, R, in a state senate race.
In 2000, He campaigned for Barbara Horn, D, in a Dem. primary against Dennis Young, D, and Spencer Plumlee, R, dropped out because Huck didn’t support him.
Huckabee says he wants to change the Republican party. Running with Democrats isn’t the way to do that.
Update: Dan Riehl looks at the possible roots of “Shiite Republican” slurs.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4]
Exactly. Any group has its share of ignorance; why should evangelicals be different (I say that as one, myself)?
Frozen Tex on January 10, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Huck’s reliance on his “Christian Leader” creds is a reason for concern.
WHY does it matter that Huck is a Christian? Is there something missing in the constitution that only a “Christian Leader” can provide for America? If so, what is missing?
Pleaser enlighten us.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Okay. I’m reading. Not loosing any touchiness over it though.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:18 PM
OOOoohhhh….Low Blow, Wise golden. VERY low blow.
Are you accusing me of being an atheist?
I have equal faith in what you’d call God the Father, one point on your triangular-shaped union. I simply call God, “God”, Ruler of the Universe, creator and knower of all directing all things.
You continue to amaze me. You accuse non-Evangelical conservatives of splitting the party, saying Evangelicals have not changed, but implying the rest of us have.
Uh-uh. Evangelicals for decades have been willing to not let their religious issues NEED to take top spot in the party. Sorry if that made you guys feel like second-class republican citizens for years, but it DID maintain unity.
Now, Evangelicals are DEMANDING their issues take top priority. MUCH more so than ever before. To me, this translates as a massive attitudinal shift (read “change”) among Evangelicals in their tolerance for the rest of us. To the point where you yourself have threatened to walk from the party.
It’s not us non-Evangelical republicans who are forcing this split.
Go ahead and walk, already. Fine. We’ll all have to live with liberal domination for a very, very long time.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:23 PM
Not at all
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Do you understand what you read?
Huck is running as a “Christian Leader”. Just WHAT does that have to do with upholding the constitution?
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
You’ve mis-understood what I said.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:25 PM
OK, my apologies. Please re-explain.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
I’m asking, do you know who the ruler of the world is?
Do you? It’s a very simple answere. I answered a question for you. Can you answere this one?
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:26 PM
I thought I did.
The answer was “God”.
Was this the answer you’re looking for?
If you’re driving at something, please, get to it.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:28 PM
Ben Bernanke?
phronesis on January 10, 2008 at 6:29 PM
No. It’s satan. satan rules the world. We are aliens. That’s true in Islam, Judaism and Christianity.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:29 PM
Satan will use what God has made to tear us apart. That’s my point.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:30 PM
Huck is the Idiot Leader. He smiles for them, he plays his bass for them, he winks at them, he says “Christian” to them, he lies to them, he promises them welfare benefits and THE IDIOTS BELIEVE. Why? Because they are idiots, of course.
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Pleaser enlighten us.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:18 PM
2008 and the world is in a terrible state of upheaval….islamic terrorists waging global war threatening to detonate nukes in American and European cities….liberals helping them in every way they can….liberals and so called conservatives attacking our sovereignty at every opportunity….morally bankrupt child rapists and murderers running wild…the MSM controlled by far left liberals and saudi muslim nazi terrorists….constant attacks on Christianity.
Yes I want a president who is a true Christian and will be able to respond to God’s calls and will be influenced by Him. I don’t want a morally bankrupt president who is controlled by the same republican so called conservative establishment that’s flushing this country down the toilet!
HaraldHardrada on January 10, 2008 at 6:33 PM
Oy.
Wise Golden, is God more powerful than “Satan”?
Also, please reference for me where in Old Testment (Torah is only the first 5 books of Moses, we call the entire Old Testament “Tanakh”) where Satan is mentioned? At least one, maybe two passages, will do.
I think this may be where your religion and my religion differ. For us, God is the all-powerful creator. Nothing, not even “Satan” rules over the Creator of the Universe.
But, I’ll play along. IF, as you say, SATAN is the ruler of the world, I’m still waiting for the “crux” of your point. Please. Enlighten me further.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:34 PM
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
What is it men cannot be made to believe!
-Thomas Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, April 22, 1786. (on the British regarding America, but quoted here for its universal appeal.)
Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
OK, missed your earlier point while I was typing.
I’m not sold. What you’re saying to me is that Satan is ruling you Evangelicals and making you demand to take precedence or you’ll split the republican party.
Now there’s an interesting twist.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
Shirotayama (funny, I would have thought Japanese, not Jewish… shows what I know…), Wise Golden is talking about Satan, with his reference to “The Ruler of the World.”
As far as Evangelicals needing our values on top, I doubt any of the GOP candidates are pro-choice (Guiliani is iffy, though…), which is the biggie. Gay marriage would be second place, and frankly I, and a lot of other Christians would put greater importance on foreign affairs, defanse and security than on that. There are other, more conservative candidates than Huck that are pro-life, so there is some other reason to fall for him. If it’s because he places himself as the “Most-Christian-Jesus-Candidate”, then that’s just identity politics, and not in the best interests of either the party, or the country.
Frozen Tex on January 10, 2008 at 6:38 PM
Wrong. He/she is going to say “Satan is the ruler of this world”.
That gives them the rational to accept or reject whatever they want and still claim to be in line with God’s teachings.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:39 PM
HA!
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:40 PM
I love the link to Dan Rheil… it ends in “huckabees-shiit.html”
About sums it up.
Lehosh on January 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
George Soros rules the world.
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
Wise,
How can you say that in light of this.
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, - Matthew 28:19
shick on January 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM
So you agree with Wise Golden?
phronesis on January 10, 2008 at 6:42 PM
Actually I was probably being unfair to Satan there.
phronesis on January 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Tex,
Nice to meet ya. You say “I, and a lot of other Christians would put greater importance on foreign affairs, defanse and security than on that. There are other, more conservative candidates than Huck that are pro-life, so there is some other reason to fall for him. If it’s because he places himself as the “Most-Christian-Jesus-Candidate”, then that’s just identity politics, and not in the best interests of either the party, or the country.”
I agree with you 100000%. I simply wish all faithful christians thought so too.
As for the Japanese bit…I actually DO have strong Japanese connections in my history. Just not bloodline ones. My handle here is a nickname one of my Japanese language sensei (teachers) gave me when I was studying the language there many, many moons ago.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Not over the Universe. He’s a prisioner on Earth and he controls it and influences it. God will end that at some point when God is ready. But Earth is satans domain.
The Tora is actually the first 5 books of the old testement, called in Christianity, the first Canon of the bible. Most Protistants use this along with the new Testement as their book. Most Catholics use the first canon, along with a second canon and the new testement as their Bible. The second canon to the old testement is used by some Jewish sects. The mention of satan gaining dominion would be found in Genesis — the first book in both the Jewish faith as well as the Christian faith.
But, God is definately more powerful. He gives satan dominion over the Earth — I don’t know why.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:45 PM
phronesis on January 10, 2008 at 6:42 PM
In a manner of speaking. Well you know if you spell Soros backward…oops…never mind.
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:46 PM
I have been discussing this with Sanders and so far he has only been able to give two races where Huckabee supported a Democrat running against a Republican for state office and neither one of them was in 2004 as his article states. According the Sanders, Huckabee supported Democrat Barry Magness who was defeated by Republican Shawn Womack in a 1998 state representative race. In addition, Huckabee supported Democrat Bobby Glover who defeated Republican Randy Minton in a 2002 state senate race. He also said that Huckabee supported Democrat Barbara Horn in a 2000 Democratic primary bid over fellow Democrat Dennis Young and because of this no Republican ran. He says that he has several calls in but has yet to produce a 2004 race where Huckabee supported Democrats over Republicans.
Let’s start with this 1998 race. Both candidates in this race now support Huckabee for President. State Sen. Shawn Womack, the Republican who Huckabee supposedly opposed, said in regards to Huckabee running for President, “I had the privilege of serving for eight years in the legislature during the Huckabee administration. Anyone who saw his leadership during the Hurricane Katrina relief effort had to be impressed by the way he was able to organize the resources of the state to provide relief and comfort to the tens of thousands of evacuees.” http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressRelease&ID=344
Barry Womack, an Arkansas entrepreneur and President of Womack Oil Company, the Democrat who Huckabee supported is a contributor to Huckabee for President. Huckabee appointed him as a board member of the Arkansas Department of Corrections where he is now the Chairman.
Now let’s look at the other race from 2002. The Republican who Huckabee opposed is former state representative and former director of the Eagle Forum of Arkansas Randy Minton. Minton is a long time very outspoken Huckabee critic. You probably have seen his name, along with Betsy Hagan, in various places speaking out against Huckabee and how he is not a “true Republican.” http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Huckabee_Best_11.30
On the other hand, Sen. Bobby Glover, the Democrat who Huckabee supported, is a long time ally of Huckabee’s within the Arkansas Legislature. Glover and Huckabee often worked through compromise legislation across the party aisle to get important measures passed in a Democrat controlled legislature, particularly on educational reforms. Glover has been quoted various places including the New York Times, defending Huckabee’s Arkansas record. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/us/politics/02huckabee.html
Hopefully this put some perspective on Sanders claims. We will see if he is able to produce a race from 2004, but two occurrences of this in over a decade long period is pretty weak support so far.
justinok on January 10, 2008 at 6:47 PM
The crux of my point is simply this: If you were satan and you wanted to really mess things up, what would be a good way of doing that? Maybe causing devision within the Republican Party of the world’s only real super-power? That would be a great place to start.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:47 PM
Coolio. Nice ta meetcha!
Frozen Tex on January 10, 2008 at 6:49 PM
A quote from another blog I was reading simultaneously:
Coincidence???
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Wow! You’re majical. You can predict what I’m going to say even after I’ve said it!
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:50 PM
So now we have “True Christians”? Who decides they are “True”? You? Tell me….WHO on this forum are “True” Christians?
Bwahahaha!!!
Exactly why Huck should be eliminated from the race. Who called him to be the one who divines God calls? Not me. Not the constitution. As a matter of fact, the constitution forbids a religious test. And considering Huck’s lying manipulative ways, he isn’t listening to God and ergo is not to be trusted to lead all of America as the Pastor in Chief.
So, Huck is the standard for morality? He was a morally bankrupt governor for crying out loud! He used his connections to God to release a guy who went on to murder an innocent gal in Missouri.
But, I suppose you could say that…
A) There are no innocents
B) Hey, God wanted her dead.
C) He was saved, he just backslid.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:51 PM
Wise Golden, you said “The second canon to the old testement is used by some Jewish sects.”
What “sects” are you talking about?
To my knowledge, among the main branches of Judaism in the Western world…meaning Orthodox (Hasidic does not equal orthodox, they’re an offshoot), Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist, to my knowledge ALL of them incorporate the ENTIRE old testament into the faith. And I just informed you you’re spelling the “first canon” as you call it, incorrectly in Hebrew. Spelling in English is “Torah”. Please remember the “H” at the end, otherwise you’re using the word “tora” which means “tiger” in Japanese and was a code for “attack” in the Japanese Imperial Navy. Sorry to be nitpicky, but I’m trying to impart to you a wee bit of cross-cultural education.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:51 PM
What if Huck is the anti-Christ???
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 6:51 PM
blockquote>phronesis on January 10, 2008 at 6:42 PM
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM
Something you’ll learn about me, I don’t read ahead. I answer as I get them.
But you aren’t hard to read. I been surrounded by your type of thinking for many years.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 6:53 PM
At this rate, I’m gonna have to say that your religious views about Satan and my religious views about Satan don’t line up 100%. So until I can snarf up some time to re-read Genesis at home and look for references to Satan, I’m going to have to politely disagree with your thoughts on this.
If you can find a few specific passages, it’ll help.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:55 PM
Sorry — I’m typing too fast and not proofing enough.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Yeah, but that was an easy one. “Ruler of this World” is one of the old nick-names for Satan. Lucifer. Beelzebub. Old Scratch. The Devil. etc, etc.
Frozen Tex on January 10, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Tex,
What region of Texas do ya live in?
I spent a LOT of time in the DFW area earlier in my life, and in the Austin and McAllen areas, too. Really like the Dallas area a lot.
Gotta run, folks. The wife’s yellin’ at me with a line off the honeydew list. It was an enjoyable debate today.
Laters. Sumo-man OUT.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:57 PM
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 6:34 PM
and wisegolden
God gave Adam dominion over the earth..he sinned and lost it and satan became ruler of this earth.. Jesus Christ came and gave dominion to man in Christ..with faith in Jesus Christ man overcomes satan therefore satan does not rule the earth technically.
HaraldHardrada on January 10, 2008 at 6:58 PM
You sound like a real cowboy. Is this town big enough for the both of us? You want me to leave town? I hate to subject such a high level thinker like yourself to someone like me.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:58 PM
Fair enough. I’d rather you talk to your own religious leader on the matter. I’m just making sure that you don’t think that I’m calling you an atheist, or equating your faith to something less than mine.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 7:00 PM
Here’s a quote from Nostradamus:
He and his kindred pushed high in the realm,
Pardon given to the race which denies Christ.
19
The true flame will devour the lady
Who will want to put the Innocent Ones to the fire.
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 7:00 PM
None. I was born in Ft Worth, but lived most of my life in western and northern Canada, with a brief spell in Oklahoma, next door to Lawton. Currently residing in the frozen wasteland (I kid, a little) known as Yellowknife, NT.
Frozen Tex on January 10, 2008 at 7:01 PM
OK, I sneaked back to the laptop for a really fast reply, then I really gotta scoot.
Wise Golden: Much appreciated.
Tex: Brrrrrrrr….
‘Night.
Shirotayama on January 10, 2008 at 7:03 PM
csdeven: The wayne dumond story is a non issue IMO. Huckabee received tens of thousands of requests for pardons and did not pardon the vast majority of them. Huckabee administration executed many criminals. The weak wayne dumond bit is the best argument you got against him which essentially says to me and many others Huckabee is by far the most scandal free of all candidates running
HaraldHardrada on January 10, 2008 at 7:05 PM
Harald — he already knew you were going to say that. He’s been surrounded by your type of thinking for many years.
I, on the other hand, enjoyed your comments. It was nice to have at least one guy in the trench with me.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 7:09 PM
You’re a brave man! The last time I said anything positive about Huckabee I had three people call me a troll and request for me to be banned!
HaraldHardrada on January 10, 2008 at 7:12 PM
There IS something good about Huckabee. He could’ve had his name start with a different letter and the bee would’ve been scared.
Igor R. on January 10, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I have been discussing this with Sanders and so far he has only been able to give two races where Huckabee supported a Democrat running against a Republican for state office and neither one of them was in 2004 as his article states. According the Sanders, Huckabee supported Democrat Barry Magness who was defeated by Republican Shawn Womack in a 1998 state representative race. In addition, Huckabee supported Democrat Bobby Glover who defeated Republican Randy Minton in a 2002 state senate race. He also said that Huckabee supported Democrat Barbara Horn in a 2000 Democratic primary bid over fellow Democrat Dennis Young and because of this no Republican ran. He says that he has several calls in but has yet to produce a 2004 race where Huckabee supported Democrats over Republicans.
Let’s start with this 1998 race. Both candidates in this race now support Huckabee for President. State Sen. Shawn Womack, the Republican who Huckabee supposedly opposed, said in regards to Huckabee running for President, “I had the privilege of serving for eight years in the legislature during the Huckabee administration. Anyone who saw his leadership during the Hurricane Katrina relief effort had to be impressed by the way he was able to organize the resources of the state to provide relief and comfort to the tens of thousands of evacuees.” http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressRelease&ID=344
Barry Womack, an Arkansas entrepreneur and President of Womack Oil Company, the Democrat who Huckabee supported is a contributor to Huckabee for President. Huckabee appointed him as a board member of the Arkansas Department of Corrections where he is now the Chairman.
Now let’s look at the other race from 2002. The Republican who Huckabee opposed is former state representative and former director of the Eagle Forum of Arkansas Randy Minton. Minton is a long time very outspoken Huckabee critic. You probably have seen his name, along with Betsy Hagan, in various places speaking out against Huckabee and how he is not a “true Republican.” http://www.mittromney.com/News/Press-Releases/Huckabee_Best_11.30
On the other hand, Sen. Bobby Glover, the Democrat who Huckabee supported, is a long time ally of Huckabee’s within the Arkansas Legislature. Glover and Huckabee often worked through compromise legislation across the party aisle to get important measures passed in a Democrat controlled legislature, particularly on educational reforms. Glover has been quoted various places including the New York Times, defending Huckabee’s Arkansas record. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/us/politics/02huckabee.html
Hopefully this put some perspective on Sanders claims. We will see if he is able to produce a race from 2004, but two occurrences of this in over a decade long period is pretty weak support so far.
justinok on January 10, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Wise Golden,
Let me go over a list of your redefined words.
Conservatives can consistently raise taxes, be big government, slander others and appoint others that do the same.
Vulgarity is something that offends you.
Christians can be compelled to not spread the gospel.
You are confused about many things.
shick on January 10, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Another redefinition. Ignorant simply means that you do not know. It is not an insult.
shick on January 10, 2008 at 7:25 PM
You sound like a real cowboy. Is this town big enough for the both of us? You want me to leave town? I hate to subject such a high level thinker like yourself to someone like me.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 6:58 PM
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 7:30 PM
Are you saying it’s scary to be called a troll and have someone say you should be banned? Doesn’t take much for ya does it!
By the way, who wanted you banned?
The Ritz on January 10, 2008 at 7:34 PM
I disagree. And not because the guy was released, but because WHY Huck pushed for his release. He completely cast out his obligation to the citizens of AK and used his status as a “Christian Leader” to decide the guy wasn’t a threat to anyone. He uses poor judgment and doesn’t do as the savior commanded. Huck has a constitutional obligation to govern as a secularist. He did not.
Mk 12:17
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 7:36 PM
Wrong again. How soon would atheist commenters here vote a minister into office if they knew he was a consistent Ronald Reagan Conservative? In a heart beat! (If they didn’t have an atheist Ronald Reagan conservative competing of course) :)
The same goes with me and mormons. They have serious theological flaws (and that could influence their politics). I would be more inclined to vote for Romney if he were more conservative.
Well said. After all my criticism, you deserve to be complimented when you are correct.
shick on January 10, 2008 at 7:38 PM
I see that the open registration has really changed the flavor of the comments at HA. I can’t wait to read some of the responses to AP’s next blog concerning religion vs. atheism:)
dawgyear on January 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM
dawgyear,
LOL but I don’t think it’ll change that much.
shick on January 10, 2008 at 7:44 PM
Why are you still bothering with me then? I don’t want to fight with you, but your typing ugly things (in the basement of your mommys home — I suspect.) Everyone gets to have an opinion as long as its the same as yours, right? Otherwise, your just being bothered by small minds. You talk like Romney.
Wise Golden on January 10, 2008 at 7:48 PM
Yeah, things are gonna get awful boring around here if Fred gets out.
csdeven on January 10, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Please vote for the republican candidate that you like the least.
Mcguyver on January 10, 2008 at 7:54 PM
Guilty as charged. But the Shuckster is no conservative, he’s just a lying charlatan. That being said, if it comes down to him vs Clintobamination, I vote for the stinky preacher boy.
peski on January 10, 2008 at 7:56 PM
For His own glory to be revealed.
Could be but division is not always bad. It can draw the line between differing viewpoints where one wasn’t before. In those cases it is a blessing.
Satan is the father of lies and never reveals himself with horns and a pitchfork.
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve. - 2 Corinthians 11:14-15
I like this quote from the deceased pastor Donald Barnhouse:
if Satan really were to take over a city, the following would happen: the bars would close, no alcohol would be sold; there would be happy marriages and well-behaved children, no crime-and everyone would be in churches on Sunday where Christ is not preached.
Christ as Lord and master and not simply my best friend.
shick on January 10, 2008 at 7:57 PM
Wow, Huckabee hammered. But only about 500 votes.
peski on January 10, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Huckabee is not a conservative.
I haven’t heard or read his theological views, but I doubt that he is even an evangelical (even if he is a Baptist). However, the term “evangelical” has been abused and bandied about that it is hard to define, so if he is or isn’t … heh.
The word “christian” has also been misused to point that it, too, is meaningless. Asking if someone is a “true christian” is pretty much an exercise in futility.
Because of the connotations surrounding the word “christian”, I prefer simply to call myself a follower of Jesus Christ. And a true follower at that.
Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father but by me. Pretty intolerant. But either He is right or He is wrong.
davidk on January 10, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Do you think Mike Huckabee would obliged to be McCain’s running mate?
http://www.mccainhuckabee08.blogspot.com
Mcguyver on January 11, 2008 at 10:01 AM
Heck, that’s an easy one. It’s because Mormons worship Satan as brother to Jesus of course. Haven’t you been paying attention to Huckabee’s speeches?
This is why Huckabee needs elected, because Mitt is a Devil-worshiper. But its not about religion… somehow.
gekkobear on January 11, 2008 at 12:31 PM
That is sooo DARN FUNNY! If only….
Shelby on September 25, 2008 at 10:34 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4]