Huckabee: Diabetes bigger threat than terrorism? Update: Governor Huckabee responds

posted at 12:28 pm on May 8, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

See update below for Governor Huckabee’s response.

Mike Huckabee offered a strange analysis of national priorities at a conference on diabetes in Washington. He told the audience that diabetes presents a bigger threat to Americans than terrorism, which is both true and utterly pointless at the same time. He also underscored the suspicion which Republican primary voters had about his nanny-state tendencies (via JWF):

An advocate for better health since his diabetes diagnosis five years ago, Mike Huckabee warned Wednesday that the illness may pose a greater threat than terrorism to the United States.

Nearly 59 million Americans are at risk for type 2 diabetes. The former Arkansas governor said the epidemic would be “the lead story” across the country if tens of millions were in danger of terrorist attacks.

“The greatest challenge to America may not be something from without, it may be something from within,” Huckabee said. “It’s our own unhealthy habits.”

Huckabee, who made an unsuccessful run for the Republican presidential nomination this year, was the keynote speaker at a conference on diabetes.

About two-thirds of Americans are overweight, a major diabetes risk factor. According to a Gallup survey released Wednesday, 24 percent of adults have been diagnosed with diabetes or are at risk for the disease.

I’m not about to dispute the fact that diabetes is a terrible disease. The First Mate had diabetes for over forty years until she got a pancreas transplant in 2005. It blinded her, caused kidney disease which led to three kidney transplants, and gave her degenerative neuropathy which plagues her to this day. We live with the consequences of it every day.

Millions of Americans suffer from diabetes in one form or another, which makes Huckabee’s terrorism comparison technically correct. However, diabetes control isn’t a primary responsibility of the federal government. National security is. And while diabetes is a manageable disease, terrorism isn’t. No tolerable level of terrorism exists for any nation.

The federal government has a Constitutional responsibility to protect us from attack, terrorist or otherwise. The people themselves have responsibility for managing illnesses and maintaining their health. Huckabee forgot the distinction at times during the campaign, sounding more like a nanny-state politician bent on imposing health-related mandates at the federal level, and it sounds like he still hasn’t learned the difference.

Update: I received an e-mail from Governor Huckabee at 4 pm CT today with the following response:

Ed,

There will be 50 million Americans with diabetes by the year 2025 at the current rate. I didn’t say diabetes was “worse than terrorism” and did not at all suggest or even imply that the federal government was the one who needed to fix it…quite the opposite! The point of my remarks was that it required LIFESTYLE changes of individuals and in fact I specifically stated that government can’t force people to make healthier choices. It has to be done over a generation as we change the culture from one of disease to health.

Mike Huckabee

I’ve interviewed Gov Huckabee on a few occasions and have found him intelligent, honest, and refreshing.  I think, though, that this demonstrates why conducting rhetorical comparisons between anything and terrorism is problematic.  When put in those terms, it implies that some kind of action should be taken by the government.  Otherwise, why use terrorism at all?  Why not compare diabetes to alcohol addiction, AIDS, high-school dropout rates, etc?  As I noted in the first paragraph, the comparison would be apt statistically, but the implication goes much farther than what I think he honestly intended.

However, as the governor notes in his response, diabetes does require action by individuals to lower the risks for the disease, including better diet, more exercise, and a move away from high-sugar foods.   And of all people in political life, the governor has the best standing to make that point — and that’s a point all of us can and should support.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

redrock on May 8, 2008 at 6:29 PM

So classy. Why don’t you post garbage like that over there.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:31 PM

This is not Europe, the President is not the Father figure, he is not King. He doesn’t set the tone for the country, he doesn’t have that power. At best he sets the tone for his party.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Wrong. Billy Jeff (BJ) Clinton set the tone for a whole generation of young people who honestly believe that oral sex is not sex because the President of the United States said, “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky!”

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:34 PM

Red Pill is funny.. and classy.

redrock on May 8, 2008 at 6:36 PM

I don’t think it’s the eeevil censors of free speech at work. I went through a couple of hours the other day where none of my comments posted.

misterpeasea on May 8, 2008 at 6:24 PM

Thanks for the comment. I understand monitoring the posts. It’s their house. They make the rules. They can do what they want. I happen to think there’s a little too much cursing going on here of late. Hint, hint. But, I thought about what I posted and really I don’t see why it would not be allowed through. We’ll have to wait and see if it’s just a delay thing. It’s a bit of a disadvantage in a debate having to wait. The other person gets away unnacountable… rats!! lol..

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:37 PM

And that honorable man that you call a “stupid, Bible-hustling pimp” strongly supports Israel.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:30 PM

If he was truly honorable, then he wouldn’t have been McCain’s waterboy. His attacks on Romney and Mormonism were disgusting.
As far as Israel is concerned, I think that is a red herring, here. RINOs only muddy the waters and allow party division, ehich allows real Anti-Israel phonies like Obama to get into power.

Oh, and f**k you.

TexasJew on May 8, 2008 at 6:40 PM

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:34 PM

Did he change your behavior or views? How many of these kids were just looking for excuses…so happened to used a convenient excuse? These same kids would of used someone else to excuse their behavior if Clinton was never caught.

Note, I never claimed that the President has zero influence…but the fact of the matter is, he doesn’t set the tone. He has very little influence over the average person. Case in point, do you redefine your standards every 8 years, based on who is elected?

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 6:40 PM

I’ve noticed that if I ever put a link to something on CNN.com my comment doesn’t post.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:27 PM

Yeah, I had a CNN link it it.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:41 PM

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:37 PM

I’ve gotten in the habit of forming my comment here and previewing it here, but then I cut and paste it into a word processor. I let the word processor do spell check for me, and then copy the fixed text back into this window and post. If the post doesn’t show up in a minute or two, I can go back to the word processor and haven’t lost my work. I then look for any links or words that might be considered objectionable. For some reason, cnn.com is considered objectionable. Some words are considered objectionable. That’s why you’ll see some people put other characters in words. One example: when Elton John endorsed Hillary Clinton, Ed amusingly put a tag line on it that said “The b1tch is back”. His version had an “i” not a “1″. I tried to quote him in my comment, but my comment would not go through until I changed the spelling of that word.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:45 PM

So may I take it that since the Oracle has the Global Warming bigger threat than terrorism gig, the Huckster is going after the Diabetes bigger threat than terrorism gig?

MB4 on May 8, 2008 at 5:16 PM

Yep, that’s my take on it. Politicians rarely “promote a healthy lifestyle” and rarely “promote” anything except themselves. Huck sounds like he wants to make war on diabetes and raise a federal bureaucracy to do so. In other words, this is just his way to promote a national health care system, the ultimate nanny state.

No thanks Huck, I don’t like continuously paying for things I seldom use and waiting in line for those things when I do need them. We must alway remember how our government took one of the finest school systems on the planet and turned it into an expensive hell-hole with no solutions in sight. That’s what government does best when it invades the private sector.

Maxx on May 8, 2008 at 6:47 PM

This is not Europe, the President is not the Father figure, he is not King. He doesn’t set the tone for the country, he doesn’t have that power. At best he sets the tone for his party.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Huh? Sure he does. He most definitely can, put it that way. For instance, the President’s State of the Union speech sets the tone for rest of his term and for the country, good or bad. An uplifting speech after a tradegy can set the tone for a nation.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:49 PM

For some reason, cnn.com is considered objectionable. Some words are considered objectionable.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:45 PM

I’ve posted CNN links before and didn’t post any objectionable words, it would have to be a disagreement over content, anyways, I’m not going to worry about it.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:54 PM

Hey Ed, why’d you take the last line out of the Huckster’s response, thankfully I just happen to have a copy,

And to my faithful worshipers apacalyps, Saint Olaf, Red Pill and al-Ozarka, no worries about 2008, like a certain someone else I shall come again,

Toodles,

-Mike Huckabee

P.S. Did you know Mitt Romney is a greedy rich fatcat Mormon who thinks Jesus and Satan are brothers?

doubleplusundead on May 8, 2008 at 7:00 PM

An uplifting speech after a tradegy can set the tone for a nation.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:49 PM

Exactly. Almost everyone in America was glad to have George W. Bush as our President on September 11, 2001.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:01 PM

It’s ironic but if you look at the side by side pictures of Huck at the front of this post, you will see that Huck looked healthier when he had more weight.

Maxx on May 8, 2008 at 7:01 PM

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:49 PM

The President holds little influence how you run your daily affairs. He certainly sets the agenda for the federal government, but that doesn’t mean Congress will follow in lock step, or even his own agencies will support him.

He has some power, but he isn’t King, nor is he my Dad. And by no means do I ever look to the President to be my moral leader…if you are waiting to be validated by your beliefs based on who is elected tells more about your own insecurities in your beliefs than anything else.

When the President tries to rule outside of his responsibilities should concern you, because it opens the door to tyranny and lack of personal responsibility. What is the President’s role? It certainly not what I am eating.

Again, do you change your morality based on who is in office? If so, then you need to get out, because most people are a bit more stable.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:08 PM

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Really? You waited for what President Bush said to rally around fellow Americans?

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:11 PM

doubleplusundead on May 8, 2008 at 7:00 PM

Mike Huckabee asked the question, “Do Mormons believe that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?”

Mitt Romney never answered the question.

Mike Huckabee later looked Mitt Romney straight in the eye and apologized to him for asking the question.

The answer to the question, though, is in fact “Yes”.

I’m not trying to pick a fight with LDS/Mormons, let’s just be honest about the subject. I only bring it up because of the “P.S.” in doubleplusundead’s comment.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Really? You waited for what President Bush said to rally around fellow Americans?

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:11 PM

No, but that doesn’t mean that the President didn’t help set the tone and lift up the people of this nation.

Carter deflated the hearts of people in this country with his “malaise”.

Reagan lifted us out of that.

True students of leadership know that everything rises and falls on leadership.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:20 PM

Huckabee reads HotAir? Cool!

Mr Huckabee,

Since you’re campaigning for McCain, please have him read HotAir, Michelle Malkin, PowerLine, and Pajamas Media in general. Thank you, and good luck. You’ll need it.

Southerngent

SouthernGent on May 8, 2008 at 7:21 PM

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Mike asked the question to score points among the anti-mormon crowd. Its a classic question among the anti-mormon crowd that is meant to inflame the casual Christian…that distorts what Mormons actually believe. He asked the question in public, but after the damage was done and the score was made, he then privately apologized to Romney…yep real classy.

Mitt shouldn’t have to answer the question, because it doesn’t matter. His views on taxes, the border, and foreign affairs however do matter a great deal. But Mike and ilk played the religious card to score political points. Like I said classy.

“I’m not trying to pick a fight with LDS/Mormons, let’s just be honest about the subject…” is translated to mean…”bring it on”…but what can I expect from someone who worships Huck and is mad that he wasn’t validated.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:26 PM

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:26 PM

props bro

Tacitus on May 8, 2008 at 7:28 PM

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:20 PM

Influence sure, is my “Father”, my moral leader? Absolutely not.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:29 PM

Huckabee reads HotAir? Cool!
SouthernGent on May 8, 2008 at 7:21 PM

Yeah, it is pretty cool, isn’t it?

Do you think McCain would email Ed directly?
Do you think McCain would do an interview with Ed?

I think not.

But Mike Huckabee has. Pretty darn cool.

Mike, thanks for caring about “we the people”.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:31 PM

Influence sure, is my “Father”, my moral leader? Absolutely not.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:29 PM

When you were growing up, if you had a good father, yes.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:33 PM

“I’m not trying to pick a fight with LDS/Mormons, let’s just be honest about the subject…” is translated to mean…”bring it on”…but what can I expect from someone who worships Huck and is mad that he wasn’t validated.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:26 PM

To the contrary, I meant what I said.
You mistranslate me.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:35 PM

Signing off…

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:37 PM

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:33 PM

If I didn’t have a good father, the President would still be far removed as the guiding light on my morality.

Again, do you base your standards and how you conduct your affairs based on who is in office and what their speech writers wrote and how well they carried the speech on TV? Your problem is you want to be validated for your religion and have taken it personally that people didn’t worship the ground Huck walks on that you are willing to give power to the President that doesn’t belong to him. You might want to pick a different hero to base your morality on.

Conservative Voice on May 8, 2008 at 7:48 PM

this demonstrates why conducting rhetorical comparisons between anything and terrorism is problematic.

Perhaps it was an honest mistake. But some comparisons are cheap and need to be called out.

The money we’re putting into Iraq, we could be putting into public education and health care. The money we’re putting into Iraq, we could be putting into free beer for the poor.

Take your pick. It’s easy to play.

petefrt on May 8, 2008 at 9:10 PM

I didn’t read the thread, but the biggest cause of diabetes is the computer. Push away, take a walk, go to the gym. Get away from your computer.

Seriously.

Connie on May 8, 2008 at 9:37 PM

Right on doubleplusundead (interesting name), Texas Jew, Conservative Voice and the rest of you.

ToRedPill,apocalyse: It is wonderful to live a moral life, (which I hope all conservatives are trying to do) but what about all those people who do so and are not evangelicals, but Jews, other Protestants and for darn sure the people that you judge as non Christians (the Mormons) feel about your continuing to go on and on about the huckster who wants only to bring a theocracy to the Presidency and exclude everyone else? It’s interesting your fellow traveler st o, who has had a personal revelation that the huckster would be president, isn’t around. Huckamonster was in the tank for mccain and stayed in to make sure Romney couldn’t get the votes, not the other way around.

Heard O’reilly interview mccain and I feel sick – this is what we have to look forward to.

Bambi on May 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM

the biggest cause of diabetes is the computer

I read in some medical magazine a week or so ago that the majority of obese people don’t have diabetes and the weight gain is a symptom rather than a cause. That a diabetic has to have a genetic propensity.

sloopy on May 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:41 PM

That must be it. My posts had CNN links. Hot Air automatically blocks posts with CNN links.

Me likey.

misterpeasea on May 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM

sloopy on May 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM

It is true that not all obese people are diabetic and yes, genetics plays a role, but it is the lack of exercise that is causing the increase.

Adult onset diabetes can be prevented or at least fought successfully.

What is more tragic is juvenile diabetes. I have a niece who was diagnosed when she was very young. She’d gone into sudden convulsions during a family vacation. She’s had a really tough life. She got married and was told that she probably shouldn’t have children, but she really wanted a baby. She went almost completely blind after the baby was born and her husband eventually left her.

Connie on May 8, 2008 at 10:09 PM

Right on doubleplusundead (interesting name)

Came from reading World War Z and 1984 at the same time.

doubleplusundead on May 8, 2008 at 10:44 PM

Ya got me with World War Z. Sure you didn’t mean 2? Or I guess it’s about the last war in the universe, right?

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 12:37 AM

and did not at all suggest or even imply that the federal government was the one who needed to fix it…quite the opposite!

He is either completely full of crap or he has no convictions whatsoever.

Huckabee told Lance Armstrong the government should ban smoking in all workplaces because it was bad for them. He said this in the last 12 months.

He would have the government do something about diabetes too but doesn’t like when people point out what a huge Nanny Stater he is at heart.

Mike Hukabee even said he got into politics so he could change society in a way he could not as a preacher.

EJDolbow on May 9, 2008 at 12:54 AM

Nope, WWZ is about a pandemic zombie outbreak. Its actually pretty good. I can also recommend Zombie Survival Guide, written by the same guy. Its like a survivalist sat down and wrote out a how-to on surviving a Zombie outbreak.

doubleplusundead on May 9, 2008 at 12:57 AM

Here you go, here’s a link to the publisher’s site for World War Z.

doubleplusundead on May 9, 2008 at 1:02 AM

Thanks for the link. It kind of sounds like a grown up Ender’s Game. Could we kind of relate the zombies to the modern day muslims and how we can never let our guard down?

I like Baldacci’s books – interesting spy type,CIA etc., and Daniel Slva more middle east thingys. Well in fiction that is.
Getting late! Catch you on another thread.

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 1:40 AM

Buying a home you can afford requires responsible action by individuals, but the government is more than happy to bail out people who made bad decisions. Do we know how Huckabee felels about that? I still think he intends for the government to be involved in lifestyle choices.

ctmom on May 9, 2008 at 7:31 AM

Heard O’Reilly interview McCain and I feel sick – this is what we have to look forward to.
Bambi on May 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM

Agreed Bambi… Read this.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/05/09/the_republican_partys_real_problem_in_a_nutshell

I’m included in the “tired of getting back stabbed” by the GOP category. Can’t vote for a Liberal, find myself voting against the Democrat rather than for the Republican! I have donated thousands to the GOP over the years; not a dime over the past (3) years. Turning their backs on Conservatives has been their undoing; too stupid to realize this, and McCain is a prime example.

Keemo on May 9, 2008 at 8:48 AM

With all of the money Mitt spent on his campaign, he could have afforded another month. He quit because he wants to be VP.

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 5:19 PM

And I’d argue that Huck stayed in because he wants to be McCain’s VP. He had only gotten noticed about a month before and needed a few protest wins to look like VP material.

Again, Hillary will tear up her party if she stays in. That’s what Mitt prevented. Huck wasn’t a serious enough candidate to tear up the party, so him staying in was just a good SNL gag.

You frighten me a little.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 5:48 PM

If this thread is any indication, you frighten easily.

Who was your candidate? Hillary?

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM

Right. I don’t like McCain and Huck, so I must be a Hillary supporter!!

I get that you don’t know where I live, but I spoke of the primaries coming to my area in the past tense. Hillary’s still in the race. Obviously I could have voted for her if I chose to.

Esthier on May 9, 2008 at 9:42 AM

Thanks Keemo, I’ll read all of it when I get to work. Can’t get Hotair at work, but can open Townhall. Not sure why one is blocked and the isn’t.
But this I know, we can thank the huckmonster for staying in.
He and mccain were kissey face and just loved each other.

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 9:47 AM

Wrong. Billy Jeff (BJ) Clinton set the tone for a whole generation of young people who honestly believe that oral sex is not sex because the President of the United States said, “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky!”

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 6:34 PM

Kids believed that anyway. They didn’t need a president’s lie a wagging finger as more “proof.”

An uplifting speech after a tradegy can set the tone for a nation.

apacalyps on May 8, 2008 at 6:49 PM

Sure, after a tragedy a good president really can unite the country… for a couple months max. But that’s about it. Bush has never been able to recreate those first months after 9/11 and never will be able to, not even if we’re hit again.

The next president might be able to, but only if we’re attacked again.

It’s hardly a big power.

Mike Huckabee asked the question, “Do Mormons believe that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?”

Red Pill on May 8, 2008 at 7:13 PM

Right. He asked it in person, knowing full well the answer. He did it as a political cheap trick meant to demonize Mormons and Romney in general, all the while playing up his background as a preacher.

It was disgusting identity politics, and the truth is that Romney likely lost in many states because of his religion. He might have lost anyway, but it was a huge factor.

Esthier on May 9, 2008 at 9:57 AM

Most of you guys are libertarians not conservatives.

Your freedom arguments do not take into account the fundamentalist christians freedom to live in a moral society

PrezHussein on May 8, 2008 at 2:07 PM

That was, I think, the most frightening comment I have ever read on HA.

shibumiglass on May 9, 2008 at 10:10 AM

Be it weight, election, or respect Huck is the true “Biggest Loser”

TheSitRep on May 9, 2008 at 10:16 AM

It really does not matter what your beef is with Huck, because each candidate for the (R) nomination had his own baggage. The fact is, Huck would have been our nominee if we were living in that time when conservatives were the driving force behind the party. Now we seem to have no place in the race and we are left with 2 uber-liberals and one RINO as our choices. Oh how this nation has fallen and most of you are bending over and taking it like good little sheep.

Vaporman87 on May 9, 2008 at 10:18 AM

Yeah, yeah, everybody thinks they’re the real conservatives.

And victims.

James on May 9, 2008 at 10:22 AM

Most of you guys are libertarians not conservatives.

Your freedom arguments do not take into account the fundamentalist christians freedom to live in a moral society

PrezHussein on May 8, 2008 at 2:07 PM

Conservative and Libertarian are not mutually exclusive terms.

One can be a:
Libertarian Conservative
Libertarian liberal
Libertarian Anarchist
One can also be a “Conservative Libertarian Atheist Moralist”
The scariest thing I can think of is a liberal democrat believer.

TheSitRep on May 9, 2008 at 10:25 AM

Re: Huckabee’s response.

The government CAN force people to make choices. Even if, and perhaps especially, when they are dressed up as “healthy” choices, the “caring” of government can only succeed in putting chains on liberty.

Mike Huckabee’s approach rings the warning bells, because our greatest challenge is not “unhealthy habits.” It’s erosion of freedom.

If he wants to influence individuals’ behavior with regard to lifestyle choices, that’s admirable. All he has to do is dial down the rhetoric.

Diabetes – 24% of adults diagnosed or at risk? – is alarming enough, if true. But hyperbolic use of comparisons with “threats without” can only open him up to criticism and tune-out.

RushBaby on May 9, 2008 at 11:05 AM

But this I know, we can thank the huckmonster for staying in.
He and mccain were kissey face and just loved each other.

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 9:47 AM

Funny, I recall seeing pictures of McCain and Romney, not McCain and Huckabee, laughing it up together on an airplane recently.

Romney, not Huckabee, is the one kissing McCain’s butt.

Huckabee is out helping true conservatives get elected. Check out the company Huckabee is keeping at huckpac.com.

You claim Huckabee and McVain were kissey face and just loved each other. I say Romney and McVain are sitting in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n-g.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 11:08 AM

TheSitRep on May 9, 2008 at 10:16 AM

Says you….

…stop projecting.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 11:10 AM

I think if Huck and Hillary had their way, you would need a permit to buy cheese balls.

Maxx on May 9, 2008 at 11:11 AM

Huck would have been our nominee if we were living in that time when conservatives were the driving force behind the party.

Vaporman87 on May 9, 2008 at 10:18 AM

Conservatives are still the driving force behind the party. The problem this time around was that three primary candidates split the conservatives into three factions: Huckabee, Romney, and Thompson.

Florida was handed to McCain by Democrats.

I believe Washington state was stolen.

Before we knew it, McCain was pronounced the “Presumptive nominee”, well before he reached the 1191 mark.

Slimy politics and slimy media.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Oh my gosh! This thing is still going.

Lets end it now.

I shall summarize:

Huckabee sucks.

All the evangelicals who voted for him (who else would?) also suck.

TOPIC CLOSED!!!!!!!!!!

Roger Waters on May 9, 2008 at 11:29 AM

Can you imagine Reagan saying, “Diabetes poses a bigger threat to the average American than Communists.”

No.

Try not to be a jackass, Huck. Our soldiers our fighting real terrorists at this moment.

silverfox on May 8, 2008 at 12:58 PM

Bingo

Huck is diminishing the war on terror which is a war on involuntary death being fought to the death by volunteers Huck has suceeded in diminishing himself. Huck would be a democrat if that party wasn’t atheist/new age. Come to think, so would most of the neo’s running the GOP who like the democrats have never seen an illegal replacement worker they didn’t love

entagor on May 9, 2008 at 11:51 AM

While you schmucks demonize the BEST candidates and advocates of conservatism, you eliminate any chance of having anyone but an establishment elitist as a candidate.

Al-Ozarka on May 8, 2008 at 1:23 PM

I’ve been called a schmuck among other things.

Al-Ozarka on May 8, 2008 at 2:14 PM

entagor on May 9, 2008 at 11:59 AM

I say Romney and McVain are sitting in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n-g.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 11:08 AM

At this point, it’s call “supporting the party.”

Esthier on May 9, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Esthier on May 9, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Provided that the Republican nominee does not pick a Democrat as their VP running mate…

I will support the party’s nominee once it is official (i.e., after the nomination is made official at the convention)

I expect the same of you.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Its a tough call, as McCain is more Democrat than Republican. I will support him if and only if he picks a VP who is a conservative.

There are three legs of conservative:
1. Social: traditional family values
2. Economic: smaller government, low taxes and fiscal responsibility
3. Foreign Policy: Border responsibility, keeping us safe, keeping the UN from trumping our Constitution, avoiding treaties that is not in our interest, stands up to our enemies.

As far as the role of President, as defined by the Constitution, his number one responsibility is #3, with #2 close behind. #1, which is your issue, is nice for the President to have, but he has little power to really make a difference. This is because the responsibility for #1 isn’t the President’s, its Parents and the People, and if a law needs to be written, the responsibility belongs to Congress.

This is why I could not support Huck, nor do I consider him to be a conservative. He has mastered one leg, #1, which is great, as a priest…not as President.

More likely I will end up voting third party for the first time. I am conservative first, if a Democrat runs as a conservative I will support him. So in short John McCain does not have my vote, yet.

Its all about roles, and it seems people are too quick to give responsibility to the President that doesn’t belong to him.

Conservative Voice on May 9, 2008 at 2:06 PM

This is the paraphrased version of my original post that didn’t make it through the filters the first time.

Next, other than irrelevant debate info, please provide a shred of evidence that the media was rooting for Mitt. It is frankly a preposterous suggestion. McCain, yes. Mitt, no.

Buy Danish on May 8, 2008 at 4:35 PM

These are the debates I sited with the lop-sided speaking times Danish. The MSNBC Republican Debate was from Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton on January 24, 2008. It was moderate by Brian Williams and Tim Russert and on television. In that debate Romney had 21:11 minutes of speaking time, Huckabee 12:11 min. The other debate was for the remaining Republican candidates: Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, and Mitt Romney, in Simi Valley, California on January 30th, 2008. Romney was given 17 questions. Huckabee 11. Here’s a snippet from the CNN debate.

COOPER: Governor Huckabee, what makes you qualified on economic issues, on the military?

HUCKABEE: Well, first of all, let me say — a while ago, you said you were going to shower me with questions, and I think then you turned the spigot off, so I want to make sure I get a little time in here to get some time. … And I want to make sure everybody understands, this isn’t a two-man race. There’s another guy who would like to stay down here on the far right of the stage.

By the time these two debates came around it, was blatently obvious the media was forcing McCain and Romney onto us as the only candidates that we had to choose from. Any unbiased observer could see that. As far as the Republican establishment; Rush, Beck, Hannity, Ingraham, Drudge, Coulter, Fox News, and many more, were for Romney and against Huckabee.

So there’s the “shred of evidence” you demanded, Danish. I could provide more too, y’know, more links, history, etc, but after you claimed it was “preposterous” to even suggest the media and Republican elite weren’t favouring Mitt on the Republican side (at least until they realized he couldn’t win) I think I’ll pass on that. We can agree to disagree. Thanks.

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM

Your evidence is a quote of your preferred candidate using his time in the debate whining about not getting enough time in the debate?

James on May 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Conservative Voice on May 9, 2008 at 2:06 PM

I want the same things you want (and not just #1). I strongly encourage you to go back and read what Huckabee said at CPAC. Better yet, watch it here.

He is the things you want, you just don’t realize it.

Many people, including myself, took a while to realize how good Huckabee really is. If my state’s primary had been in January I would have voted for Fred Thompson because I didn’t like Mike Huckabee giving the liberals any ground in calling Bush’s foreign policy “arrogant”.

People are willing to forgive any “sin” from Romney’s past as Governor of MA, but those same people aren’t willing to forgive any “sin” from Huckabee’s past as Governor of Arkansas.

People have said all sorts of nasty things about Huckabee, but when you get to know the man, as Ed has, you realize that he is “intelligent, honest, and refreshing”. There is very good reason why someone who spent a lot more time with Ronald Reagan than any of you have, said the following:

“Governor Huckabee has probably inspired me as much as Ronald Reagan did. I’ve looked a long time to find a candidate like that…A lot of people walk around talking about the Reagan days and the next Reagan. I was with the old Reagan and I can promise you that this man comes as close as anyone to filling those shoes.”

Source

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 3:47 PM

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM

apacalyps is right.

I cite as additional evidence that both McCain and Romney were no-shows at the debate on February 2nd (while both Huckabee and Paul showed up) and McCain backed out of the debate on February 28th (oh, that’s right, CNN cancelled the debate and McCain held a barbeque with the CNN folks).

I know many of you don’t want to hear this, but the fact that Huckabee did not receive the support of any of the big power players is why people won’t be able to give anyone but God the credit when Huckabee wins.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 3:47 PM

First, the lawyers and the tax greedy government came for the tobacco users…and won. More taxes collected.

Second, they came for the American worker and allowed millions from a third world country to invade the borders and job markets. More taxes to cover health, housing, welfare, and infrastructure.

Third, the health nazis decided to go after those, they deemed, as needing guidance/management with diseases or predilection toward certain diseases. Socialized medicine and control of services offered must be the answer. More taxes in the offing.

Gotta hand it to Huck though, poor guy needs a job so he’ll step up and add another layer to the already bloated argument. A little tick at the back of my head feels that a huge government tax is on the way. He’s just trying to grab a piece of the pie.

24K lady on May 9, 2008 at 3:49 PM

24K lady on May 9, 2008 at 3:49 PM

How big a piece of our huge government is the Internal Revenue Service?

Huckabee wants to abolish the IRS. Can you concede that if he is successful in doing so, that will reduce the size of our bloated government?

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 4:02 PM

And, Huck’s promises were just that, or wishful thinking. He can no more abolish the IRS (on his own) than pigs can fly. To do anything that revolutionary, he’d have to control the House, Senate, and more than a couple members of the Supreme Court….it just ain’t gonna happen. But, then, he’s not alone. The only two that stand a chance in the next administration of getting things they want done are Shrillery or Messiah.

24K lady on May 9, 2008 at 4:11 PM

Just as some were shocked there was gambling going on in Casablanca, I am shocked to read hurtful things on this website about Mike Huckabee. Some people on this site are just simply conservative versions of the hateful people on the Huffington Post or Daily Kos. People, Romney lost its over, he went nowhere….move on.

arizonateacher on May 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 3:47 PM

Then how do you explain his playing the class envy card whenever he could during his campaign? That by itself makes him not a conservative. I am willing to forgive his big government attitude if he can explain his conversion story, but I’m not all that convinced that he would be sincere because he engaged in class envy politics. Fact of the matter is, he is a populist who happens to be a strong social conservative. Reagan never played the class envy card, so anyone who claims Mike = Reagan makes me think they don’t know Reagan.

Conservative Voice on May 9, 2008 at 4:15 PM

Right on doubleplusundead (interesting name), Texas Jew, Conservative Voice and the rest of you.

Bambi on May 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM

Ha ha ha.. in otherwords, whoever disagrees with apacalyps, I wuv you… you’re so predictable Bambi.

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 6:01 PM

arizonateacher on May 9, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Thank you for promoting civility on HotAir.

Some people on this site are just simply conservative versions of the hateful people on the Huffington Post or Daily Kos.

Some of them could easily be trolls who really do belong at the Huffington Post or Daily Kos.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with Mike Huckabee on the issues. However, at times the ad hominem attacks on him and those who prefer him have been vicious, spiteful, and hateful. I expect that behavior from the left. I expect better from the right.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 7:59 PM

Conservative Voice on May 9, 2008 at 4:15 PM

Give a link to Huckabee’s own words (not you or anyone else telling us what Huckabee said) and I will address it.

I think someone who spent a significant amount of time with Reagan (Ed Rollins) has a more credible position from which to compare Huckabee to Reagan. How much time did you spend with Reagan?

For what it’s worth (and it isn’t much), I played “Hail to the Chief” to President Ronald Reagan once (honestly I did), but that’s the closest I ever came to him.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 8:04 PM

Florida was handed to McCain by Democrats.
I believe Washington state was stolen.
Before we knew it, McCain was pronounced the “Presumptive nominee”, well before he reached the 1191 mark.

Slimy politics and slimy media.

Red Pill on May 9, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Dead on target Red Pill…

Keemo on May 9, 2008 at 8:11 PM

Hey apocalypse – good to see you spew the same rhetoric too. It’s funny your friend arizona doesn’t realize that the
huckmonster is out too. Some of us have to go to work and so can’t just post all the time, but you know I’m around and reading.

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 10:08 PM

Red Pill, were you paying attention at all? He was constantly playing the class envy card against Romney.
Here is just one example
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/11/26/huckabee-my-critics-get-rich-expense-people-who-dont-know-if-they-

Conservative Voice on May 9, 2008 at 10:31 PM

Hey apocalypse – good to see you spew the same rhetoric too.

Bambi on May 9, 2008 at 10:08 PM

Bam Bam, you’re the one who is attacking me, not the other way around. Listen, I understand you’re still upset with me because I won’t let Mormon’s get by with statements like “I’m a Christian.” But unfortunately, I’m one of those people who hasn’t been hoodwinked into believing that Mormonism is something that it is not. Look, I’m not anti-Catholic, I’m not anti-Mormon, I’m not anti-Jehovah Witness. I am for truth and against error. Period. If something’s true, I’m for it. If something’s false, I’m against it. And it doesn’t matter where it comes from. If it’s false I’m against it. If it comes from my mother, if it comes from my sister, from someone who led me to the Lord, if it comes from my Pastor, I am not anti-Mormon, I’m anti-Catholic, or anti-Baptists, or anti-Luthern, okay. I’m just simply for truth and against error. End of story. And I think that’s the attitude we should always keep on everything, okay, what is truth. The fact that y’know, someone believes something, okay, that’s great, well, listen to him, but, don’t ever get into this mess of saying I believe anything anybody says, even, especially me okay. Check it out. Search the Scriptures, see if those things are so. I think what worries me about you Bambi is you fail to see it’s not out of hate or even dislike when I state that Mormons are in very real danger of missing the covering of Christ’s blood, it’s out of love. I can only pray that will change one day.

apacalyps on May 9, 2008 at 11:58 PM

Thank you Apacalpys for the post above proving, once again, that the Huckster variety evangelists are moronic, bigoted, and certainly not “christian”. If Jesus were here, he would be embarrassed to have somebody as stupid and judgemental as you pretending to be a follower of him.

You dudes are pr*cks.

amen and amen

Roger Waters on May 10, 2008 at 1:58 AM

You know apacalyps it isn’t up to you to tell me what I am. But
come on, we’ve been through all this before and it hasn’t changed my mind and it certainly hasn’t changed yours, so we’ll just agree to meet at Jesus’s feet and let him decide, since I think we both believe that. You know I quoted an article in another post that quotes the head of the evangelical group who states they are not getting the baptisms because they are considered mean. I’m out of town so I don’t have it with me (but quoted in a newspaper from a national paper) but when I go back, I’ll give you the quote and where it can be found. All I’m saying that you need to step back and realize how you come across to everyone who doesn’t happen to be an evangelical. I don’t think you meant to say that you are anti everybody above, was that just a slip? Then imagine how everyone else feels about putting a hucka in as President and what that would mean for everyone who isn’t an evangelical? Appreciate your concern but we need men and women who love all men (women) to run our country.

Bambi on May 10, 2008 at 9:58 AM

You know apacalyps it isn’t up to you to tell me what I am. But come on, we’ve been through all this before and it hasn’t changed my mind and it certainly hasn’t changed yours,

Bambi on May 10, 2008 at 9:58 AM

Bambi, I don’t care what you believe, okay. Believe whatever you want. If you want to be a Mormon, I don’t recommend it, but it’s a free country that’s your right. Have fun. I only brought it up because you seem like you’re still angry with me from the Mormon debates .. lol.. always with your childish remarks. As I’ve said before, believe whatever you want. I objection when Mormons identify themselves as Christians because Mormonism is not Christianity. They are mutually exclusive terms. That’s when I will speak up.

so we’ll just agree to meet at Jesus’s feet and let Him decide, since I think we both believe that.

Oh, we’ll meet Jesus one day. Yes, ma’am. You can be sure of that! Just remember though, the Jesus I’m talking about and the jesus you are talking about are completely two different people. Let’s be clear on that. And you better make sure you’re right, cuz the greatest faith in someone false is NOT gonna be faith that saves you. A false messiah, a false jesus, does not bridge the chasm between God and man, only the Jesus of the Bible does that. The real Jesus.

you need to step back and realize how you come across to everyone who doesn’t happen to be an evangelical.

You are a silly women.

All through the Bible God calls people fools, brutish, simple, perverse, scorners, wicked, etc. For instance in Mathew 12:34, Jesus called the Pharisees, “O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” Jesus pronounces eight “woes” on the scribes (or lawyers) and Pharisees in this chapter (23:13-16,23,25,27,29). Seven times He calls them “hypocrites” and five times He says that they are “blind”. He calls each a “child of hell” and says that they are like “white sepulchres… full of dead man’s bones, and of all uncleannes” (Matthew 23:27), and also “full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (23:28).

The Bible also states, “Some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire.” Jude 22-23

Who are them? What fire you ask? The vast majority of people who will die today are entering Hell.

Appreciate your concern but we need men and women who love all men (women) to run our country.

I agree, but I the other advice you give is deadly. No point in us carrying on in this discussion. I’d have better luck arguing with a signpost. Have a nice day.

apacalyps on May 10, 2008 at 4:22 PM

Not so fast! I think you made my point – God does the calling, God does the judging. Not you. So I agree have a nice day. My advice deadly? Hmm.
Signed: The Signpost

Bambi on May 10, 2008 at 5:26 PM

Quote from Apacalyps:

“You are a silly women”

Dude, women is plural..woman is singular. You didnt know that because you obviously are a punk who has never had a date (I mean with a woman) and so you dont know how to address them. Admit it, dude. You are a 36 year old virgin living in the basement of your psycho parents who are as dumb as you.

I clicked the link you posted above called “entering hell”. That was great! Right out of a comic book! There is no way you went to college (I mean an accredited college not the made-up B.S. colleges that are not even recognized or accreditd in the academic community. You know, like the college that the “Dr.” (note the quotations markes) Walter Martin. Are you a liar like him too?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA!!!!!

What a jackass!!!

HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HAH A HA HA HAH A HA HA!!!!!!

Roger Waters on May 10, 2008 at 9:35 PM

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA!!!!!

HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HAH A HA HA HAH A HA HA!!!!!!

Roger Waters on May 10, 2008 at 9:35 PM

Can you say “stalker?”

apacalyps on May 10, 2008 at 10:39 PM

sure can.

and here is how you spell it:

A-P-A-C-A-L-P-S

You are constantly stalking these poor mormons and you are making the rest of us sick.

go away

THANKS!!!

Roger Waters on May 11, 2008 at 1:59 AM

Let’s ask Huck how many diabetics died on Sept. 11th, 2001.

Maybe he can get all radical Islamists to eat copious amounts of pure junk food.

electric-rascal on May 11, 2008 at 2:54 AM

and here is how you spell it:

A-P-A-C-A-L-P-S

Roger Waters on May 11, 2008 at 1:59 AM

What a sad little man you are. EVERY time you post, it’s hateful and venomous. I don’t know why I’m even responding to you everybody always says, “don’t feed the monkey, don’t feed the monkey!” But, I couldn’t resist pointing out that you attack me for making a spelling mistake, yet, in your very next post you end up making one yourself.

It’s apacalyps with a Y.

Sad.

apacalyps on May 11, 2008 at 1:03 PM

Not at all. I did that on purpose as you are not worthy of the letter “y”.

Trust me, a guy who trolls the internet attacking one form of christianity because he is more inclined toward a different form of christianity cannot offend me. You guys are exactly like those various forms of Islam all thinking they are the correct form. People like you give religion a bad name…but you are two simple-minded so see that.

Feed the monkey? Nah. I think you are spanking the monkey.

Oh yeah…and I think you are going to be like one of those silly cartoon dudes falling down and screaming in hell. AAAAIIIGGHHH!!!

Roger Waters on May 11, 2008 at 11:47 PM

ooops two = too… I type these fast as I have a life (unlike you)

Roger Waters on May 11, 2008 at 11:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3