Report: Huckabee tops McCain’s VP shortlist?

posted at 2:15 pm on May 12, 2008 by Allahpundit

Just this morning, Bob Novak quoted Christian bigwig Michael Farris as saying, “I understand he is not under consideration.” Said Huck himself just two short months ago, “We have been given every signal that is not going to be considered.” And yet:

Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and defeated contender for the GOP presidential nomination, is currently at the top of John McCain’s short list for a running mate. At least that’s the word from a top McCain fundraiser and longtime Republican moneyman who has spoken to McCain’s inner circle. The fundraiser is less than thrilled with the idea of Huckabee as the vice presidential nominee, and many economic conservatives—turned off by the populist tone of Huckabee’s campaign and his tax record as governor—are likely to share that marked lack of enthusiasm…

Let me add that a top Republican political strategist told me about a month ago that he also believed Huckabee to be the leading veep contender.

What’s changed in two months? For starters, remember that “Anyone but Mitt” campaign by Paul Weyrich and a bunch of other evangelical leaders? McCain can’t help but be jittery at seeing the Christian base taking a keen interest in his VP pick, especially with stories about their remorse for not having backed Huck in the primary circulating. Another thought: Romney’s always been touted as the logical pick for VP because of his fundraising prowess, to help close the money gap with Obama, but revisit this post from early March about Huckabee’s media savvy. By one estimate, the free coverage he received from the likes of Scarborough, Colbert, and the rest of the talk show circuit was worth $125 million in paid ads, more than Mitt could ever raise (especially with McCain accepting public financing). Having not one but two media darlings on the GOP ticket might convince the press to go merely hip-deep into the tank for Obama instead of face-first, like they’re planning. Finally, now that Barry O’s the nominee, McCain has both a worry and an opportunity that he wouldn’t have had opposite Hillary: Turnout among black voters in the south is sure to be huge this year, which, coupled with a weak turnout among southern evangelicals, could be lethal by putting red states in play. Adding a prominent Christian to the ticket solves that problem and frees McCain up to focus on the battlegrounds instead of fighting a rearguard action to preserve his base. Adding Huckabee specifically to the ticket, with his blue-collar populist rhetoric, holds an extra advantage in giving him a shot at Hillary’s base of working-class Democrats in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

All of which is to say, while Hot Air readers might not like this idea, I can understand why Team Maverick might. Exit question: Who else will be joining me now in writing in Hillary this year?


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 4 5 8

It’s just a fact….deal with it.

The fast disappearing “middle class” (who Hussein O considers rich)is now poor.

Inflation and outsourcing has killed them.

Wealth is determined by how long can you support yourself if you fall ill and stop making money.

Fact..the democrats have become the party of the rich.

Why would the rich support socialism you ask?

Simple..socialism breeds stupidity and kills ambition.

Less competition.

Let it sink in.

SaintOlaf on May 12, 2008 at 4:10 PM

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20233

Preliminary Estimates of Weighted Average Poverty Thresholds for 2007

1 Person (under 65)…….$10,787

Minimum wage = $6.55 (starting in July)

$6.55 x 40 hours/week x 52 wk/year = $13,624

I can do maff, and I even went to a government school!

2 People (under 65)…….$13,542

3 People (under 65)…….$16,537

These average poverty thresholds were derived by increasing the 2006 weighted average thresholds by a factor of 1.028482 which reflects the percent change in the average annual Consumer Price Index between 2006 and 2007. These estimates may differ by a few dollars from the thresholds that will be published in the final report on the 2007 poverty population.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 12, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Wealth is determined by how long can you support yourself if you fall ill and stop making money.

Huh. That’s certainly a…unique…definition.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

Everybody gets the same opportunity to move up and down the scale, provided that the government doesn’t put obstacles in the way.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:08 PM

Also, a lot depends on one’s parents and the education they can provide.

dedalus on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

I hope Allah is just trollin’ with this speculative essay on political fiction

.

just doing his job which is creating page views and comments

he knows this audience well

windansea on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

No way i would vote

al on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

“Sorry, my friend. I prefer the church have it’s own building.” Limerick.

Dude…it does. And it’s filled with American citizens with the right to VOTE for those who best represent their values.

But…I reckon you would prefer to have secularist beliefs imposed on them?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM

“So you’re reduced to doubting the faith of others now, based on your own narrow definition?”

No, I’m just realistic.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM

Wealth is determined by how long can you support yourself if you fall ill and stop making money personal responsibility.

Fixed.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM

Huh. That’s certainly a…unique…definition.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

I just started reading this thread (I start from the end, weird, huh?). Gotta say, that is an excellent definition of wealth. I never say it in those words exactly, but in a practical sense, it means the same thing, and is exactly how I assess my own.

JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM

The premise for your entire comment is wrong; only 14% of the United States falls below the poverty line.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Your concept of poverty is ridiculous.

Minimum wage is poverty level?

what is that 18k a year?

Give me a break. You couldn’t live on 18k a year in Haiti.

$50-$75k a year is poverty level.

If you don’t make 100k a year in Los Angeles you can’t pay rent unless you live in south central.

Do the math.

The cheapest place(not in a ghetto) is probably around $2k a month…you need three times your house/rent expenses to be able to eat and pay bills etc. that’s $6k a month…$72k a year is poverty level!

SaintOlaf on May 12, 2008 at 3:37 PM

You make a common mistake, and that is people assume all situations are like their own. Their religion is peaceful so Islam must be, They live in an area where it takes a minimum of 72K a year to live comfortably, and you assume we all do. The truth is there are some nice areas of the country where 72K a year has you living very well, but don’t go spreading that around, we like our privacy, and no I won’t tell you where I live.

DFCtomm on May 12, 2008 at 4:17 PM

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM

They can vote how they like, just as I can. I will offer up this piece of red meat to you, I would rather live under the tyranny of taxation then the tyranny of the holy. If being a conservative Republican means that I have to embrace evangelical ways then I’ll drop the Republican part of that in a heartbeat.

Limerick on May 12, 2008 at 4:19 PM

DFCtomm on May 12, 2008 at 4:17 PM

15 years ago, I was making $12K as a graduate student in Shreveport, Louisiana. That was a comfortable living.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 12, 2008 at 4:20 PM

JiangxiDad on May 12, 2008 at 4:16 PM

As a practical definition, perhaps. I guess I’m just old school. I see wealth as how much you have versus how much you owe. If the former is more than the latter, you may not be wealthy, but you’ve got wealth.

Then again, I hated economics.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:20 PM

“I’m sure Arkansas under Huck was paradise. With all the pardoning of rapists, tax hikes, etc., how could it be any less?”

Do a LITTLE research, Dude. Think for yourself. Quit allowing the posers at Club for Growth do the thinking for you.

Huckabee’s actions as Governor regarding the issues you entail intricacies within the framework of politics in the state that you couldn’t even begin to understand.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:21 PM

Also, a lot depends on one’s parents and the education they can provide.

dedalus on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

A lot depends on luck, and other factors too. Even political leadership!

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:22 PM

“They can vote how they like, just as I can. I will offer up this piece of red meat to you, I would rather live under the tyranny of taxation then the tyranny of the holy. If being a conservative Republican means that I have to embrace evangelical ways then I’ll drop the Republican part of that in a heartbeat.” Limerick

Likewise…if the GOP embraces atheism, count me OUT!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:23 PM

I was going to abstain, but if Huckabee’s on, I’ll vote Democrat.

Tzetzes on May 12, 2008 at 4:23 PM

“They can vote how they like, just as I can. I will offer up this piece of red meat to you, I would rather live under the tyranny of taxation then the tyranny of the holy. If being a conservative Republican means that I have to embrace evangelical ways then I’ll drop the Republican part of that in a heartbeat.” Limerick

That just about proves I am right in doubting your “second group”ness.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM

A lot depends on luck, and other factors too. Even political leadership!

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:22 PM

Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good. I’m sure you know from starting your own business that timing is hugely important.

dedalus on May 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM

$200k a year is not rich.

$200k a year is what the average family should be making to be somewhat comfortable….unfortunately 85% of America does not make that.

I can’t square this circle. If 85% of American’s made 200k a year, 200k a year would not buy what it does now. It would in fact, buy what 85% of Americans can buy right now with the number that sits in it’s place.

Spirit of 1776 on May 12, 2008 at 4:26 PM

Nooooooo

kirkill on May 12, 2008 at 4:26 PM

No one in the “second group” would want secularism to reign in the GOP.

Nobody.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:05 PM

Politics and religion do not mix. Those in the second group who do not get that should spend some time in careful prayer.

Huh. That’s certainly a…unique…definition.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:13 PM

It’s a convenient definition.

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:27 PM

Huckabee will be subbing for Scarborough during Tuesday night’s election coverage on A-Mess-NBC. I always liked Huck but sitting in the same studio with Olby brings up the “judgment” question!

johnny dollar on May 12, 2008 at 4:29 PM

I am a Christian. I am an American Voter.

They mix JUST FINE!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:31 PM

But…I reckon you would prefer to have secularist beliefs imposed on them?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM

What about a political party that doesn’t impose ANY beliefs on anyone?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:32 PM

I’m voting for McCain because he isn’t Barack or Hillary, but if he names the Huckster, forget it. I’ll do a write in for Romney and say screw it. I will never ever vote for a ticket that has Huckabee on it.

McCain has worked to secure his Independents and the left of center Dems. A Huck VP would be pandering to the far far far right. Perhaps he should be concentrating on securing plain ol’ garden variety smaller government, lower taxes Republicans like me.

Pal2Pal on May 12, 2008 at 4:33 PM

“What about a political party that doesn’t impose ANY beliefs on anyone?”

Then Huckabee’s your man.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:34 PM

Then Huckabee’s your man.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:34 PM

Doubt it.

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:35 PM

McCain+Huckleberry —> 57 state blowout for Imam Obama.

Annar on May 12, 2008 at 4:35 PM

Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good. I’m sure you know from starting your own business that timing is hugely important.

dedalus on May 12, 2008 at 4:25 PM

I heartily agree. Funny thing though, when I look back on things, there is a pretty fair amount of evidence that luck and good timing were things I prepared for and invited into my life.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:36 PM

McCain + Anybody = a 57 state blowout for liberalism.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Al-Ozarka, sorry, I guess I’m just one of those “Shiite Republicans” who doesn’t think withholding taxpayer funded government benefits from non-citizens is either unChristian or unAmerican.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Huckabee will be subbing for Scarborough during Tuesday night’s election coverage on A-Mess-NBC. I always liked Huck but sitting in the same studio with Olby brings up the “judgment” question!

johnny dollar on May 12, 2008 at 4:29 PM

If I were Huck, I’d either make sure I don’t get into a two-shot with Olbermann unless I’m either looking angry or seriously challenging his latest loopy pronouncement. If not, pictures of a happy Mike Huckabee sitting next to a smiling Keith Olbermann will have gone global by midnight on Tuesday and will be thrown back in McCain’s face if he even mentions Huck as a possible VP nominee.

jon1979 on May 12, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Laura,

You must also be one of those cut-throat Republicans who would punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:39 PM

There’s no laws in this place! ANYTHING goes! It’s THUNDERDOME!!!

apacalyps on May 12, 2008 at 4:40 PM

Laura, you do realize, don’t you, that Huckabee was playing a hand dealt to him by an illegal-immigration friendly Federal government?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:40 PM

You must also be one of those cut-throat Republicans who would punish children for the crimes of their parents.

You know, that soundbite sounded schmaltzy coming out of Huckabee’s mouth during the debates.

It doesn’t look any better in this venue.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

You must also be one of those cut-throat Republicans who would punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:39 PM

You truly are a Huck supporter.

And what about children whose parents moved them into Arkansas from another state while they were in high school? Why “punish” them?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

amerpundit on May 12, 2008 at 2:44 PM

Precisely to the point of the matter.

1380 was my SAT score. What was yours?

Dude, why would you boast of that? You invite every reader who has scored higher to look at that comment in contempt because of your attempt to use it as a point of comparison with Slu.

Spirit of 1776 on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

Al-Ozarka, sorry, I guess I’m just one of those “Shiite Republicans” who doesn’t think withholding taxpayer funded government benefits from non-citizens is either unChristian or unAmerican.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I agree 100% with that statement.

Oh, and if Huckachuck is McCain’s VP pick, I probably would write-in Hillary.

I’m surprised Allah didn’t post the “Game Over” clip from Aliens on this thread…. maybe that’s being saved in case Huckabee really does get the nod from McCain. :p

Nineball on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

But…I reckon you would prefer to have secularist beliefs imposed on them?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:14 PM

Religious freedom is a secular tenet, you are the one imposing beliefs on people and showing yourself to be a bigot. Your perspective speaks exactly to the argument against Huckabee, keep up the good work.

dmann on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

You must also be one of those cut-throat Republicans who would punish children for the crimes of their parents.

No, I’m one of those people who say that the nation they are citizens of should be responsible for them.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:41 PM

You know who I’d like to see as VEEP? A republican…in the REAL sense of the word

spacekicker on May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM

“You know, that soundbite sounded schmaltzy coming out of Huckabee’s mouth during the debates.” Slublog

Too bad for you that it is true.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Dude, why would you boast of that? You invite every reader who has scored higher to look at that comment in contempt because of your attempt to use it as a point of comparison with Slu.

I think it’s because I made an SAT-related joke.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:43 PM

Exit question: Who else will be joining me now in writing in Hillary this year?

If this happens….I just might. If faced with McShamnesty/Huckster, I’d definitely go write-in….the question is who. You made a good case for our girl, but it would force me to fight the temptation to WRITE IN FREDDDDDD/Mitt as VP.

malan89 on May 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM

“No, I’m one of those people who say that the nation they are citizens of should be responsible for them.” Laura

And whatr if that nation doesn’t give a rat’s ass?

Then my statement stands true.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM

Laura, you do realize, don’t you, that Huckabee was playing a hand dealt to him by an illegal-immigration friendly Federal government?

New Mexico has stepped up to the table and played that hand a whole lot better recently; so has Manassas, VA. Huckabee chose, as usual, the softheaded, liberal, big government route; that or he lacked the moral courage to do what they did when he could have. Furthermore, he griped about ICE raids, so when the feds did act, he whined about it. Not exactly an endorsement of his judgment.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM

Too bad for you that it is true.
Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Is it, now? If a parent breaks the law, and the family is forced to suffer as a result, that’s the fault of the parent. Actions have consequences, and sometimes those consequences will extend to others.

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:45 PM

And whatr if that nation doesn’t give a rat’s ass?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:44 PM

Then it’s still not our problem.

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:46 PM

“…you are the one imposing beliefs on people and showing yourself to be a bigot.”

LOL! How so, Dmann? How have I imposed any beliefs on anyone?

And…how am I a bigot? Because I don’t want atheists running my government? So…is Allah a bigot because he doesn’t want a preacher running his government?

Come on! You sound just like a defeated leftist with your “bigotry” accusations.

LOL!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

And whatr if that nation doesn’t give a rat’s ass?

Then my statement stands true.

Ozarka: Is there EVER a time, in your view, when a person is NOT entitled to the forcible transfer of wealth from other people via government? When, exactly, are people obliged to obey the law and support themselves?

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

I will NOT vote for a McShamnesty/Huckster ticket.

Sorry.

Darksean on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

I want to know if McCain reads Drudge, and which blog sites McCain’s staff reference each day to sense the public pulse. Is McCain so foolish as to truly believe the MSM?

In reality, I would not be surprised to find that more Americans vote AGAINST Huckabee who wants to legislate his morality than there are Americans who would vote AGAINST Romney who sticks to his own guns but won’t take aim at others unless they are terrorists or varmints. There’s a lot of ruckus either way, there.

What’s wrong with McCain’s camp, bludgeoning us all with old carp, digging through the graves of past candidates who didn’t make it? Dead fish stink. Jealosy will unhinge which ever constituency gets passed over for another to be “the pick”.

Colin Powell swore off elected office when he departed. But it surely would be NICE to hear McCain’s staff noising Powell’s name as topping the VP shortlist. Let Powell choose to decline or accept the honorable offer.

Why not keep Forbes’ name afloat? Or, McCain could entertain choosing a most well read and published scholar of government, NOT an elected official.

But this religious VP Socialist Populist Huckster, NEVER!

Talk about McCain being out of touch. Right now, the Evangelical movement is experiencing its own volatility. Even if they were a solid block, there are many conservatives whom the Evangelicals offend with self-righteous static Biblical literalist bearings that leave no acceptable route beside their one way only. So does McCain mean to absolutely exterminate conservatives to get even with our refusal of his amnesty program?!

This POTUS campaign has already squeezed the life breath out of us all in knock down drag out camper debates. It is as though we each bear our own cross, dragging ourselves to Golgotha’s Election Booth. PLEASE don’t hang us next to Huckabee, PLEASE, GOD!

maverick muse on May 12, 2008 at 4:48 PM

Watch it Allah. That option only exists for those of you in deep blue states, where your vote doesn’t really matter anyway. We don’t want to convince anyone in battleground states that this is a viable option, because it is not [[JUDGES]].

tommylotto on May 12, 2008 at 3:06 PM

AMEN!!!

The Supreme Court nominations/confirmations of the next President will impact us for decades.

Red Pill on May 12, 2008 at 3:11 PM

Let’s see… McCain snubs the base on immigration, taxes, Gitmo, ManBearPig, and he has slammed Alito for “wearing his conservatism on his sleeve”… quick question:

What on Earth makes you think that McCain will appoint conservative judges?!?? His record and his rhetoric both suggest he will be completely unreliable in this regard.

ErikTheRed on May 12, 2008 at 4:48 PM

“Then it’s still not our problem.” Laura

A child…brilliant, accomplished, promising…still living IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…at his/her parents’ hand…is NOT OUR PROBLEM?

Yes, you ARE a cut-throat Republican who would punish a child for the sins of his/her parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:49 PM

“Then it’s still not our problem.” Laura

No, that was me.

A child…brilliant, accomplished, promising…still living IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…at his/her parents’ hand…is NOT OUR PROBLEM?

Yes, you ARE a cut-throat Republican who would punish a child for the sins of his/her parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:49 PM

And what about the children who are “punished” because one of their parents moved to another state during their high school years? They wouldn’t be able to qualify for in-state tuition either, but at least their parents aren’t breaking the law.

Why support the law breakers first?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

Better the secularists than the evangelicals.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 3:29 PM

I begrudge no one their faith, and by faith, i mean the deliberate choice to believe in some thing that’s voracity is unknowable. That said, I find it sad that you would rather have those who equate mythology with truth, over those who equate fact with truth, as deciders of whom will serve in government.
On a more positive note, I understand that the Goreacle is looking for a few good men.

Haldol on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

A child…brilliant, accomplished, promising…still living IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…at his/her parents’ hand…is NOT OUR PROBLEM?

No, it’s not. Nation of laws and not of men and all that. Such policies provide incentives for further law-breaking. Are we to allow those who commit crimes to use their children as a legal shield?

Slublog on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

How have I imposed any beliefs on anyone?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

To suggest that religion and politics mix well a pretty big imposition.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

“Then it’s still not our problem.” Laura

Actually, Esthier wrote that but I agree, so let it stand. Sloppy of you, though.

I do not agree for my daughter, who has done nothing wrong, to be punished for the sins of the political elite in Mexico and the export of fully 10% of Mexico’s poorest, illiterate citizens to our country so we can support them. Why should she be economically punished so a wealthy, oil-rich country can avoid political reform?

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

“Ozarka: Is there EVER a time, in your view, when a person is NOT entitled to the forcible transfer of wealth from other people via government? When, exactly, are people obliged to obey the law and support themselves?” Laura

WTF does that have to do with anything?

I GUARANTEE you that the whole purpose behind Huckabee’s proposed legislation to fund the education of children of illegal aliens who were promising students was to in fact CREATE a person capable of obeying the law and supporting her/himself!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

Perfect! I’d hate McCain to pick a Conservative, thereby sacrificing that candidate from future participation. I’d rather see a combination like McCain/Huckabee, McCain/Hagel, McCain/Powell, McCain/Rice, McCain/Arnold, McCain/Lieberman so that we can destroy the future ambitions of 2 ‘moderates’ in a single shot.
infidelpride on May 12, 2008 at 2:26 PM

That has a certain logic to it, and I and most conservatives I know are more than willing to help out in the destruction. Add McCain/Crist to the pile: Crist hearts Arnold and McCain.

Nichevo on May 12, 2008 at 4:53 PM

A child…brilliant, accomplished, promising…still living IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA…at his/her parents’ hand…is NOT OUR PROBLEM?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:49 PM

And since when are someone’s children our problem? I don’t even understand your rationale here? Are you advocating free college tuition in this country?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:53 PM

“I do not agree for my daughter, who has done nothing wrong, to be punished for the sins of the political elite in Mexico and the export of fully 10% of Mexico’s poorest, illiterate citizens to our country so we can support them. Why should she be economically punished so a wealthy, oil-rich country can avoid political reform?”

Then you shouldn’t have voted for George Bush or those congressmen/Senators you elected.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:54 PM

“Ozarka: Is there EVER a time, in your view, when a person is NOT entitled to the forcible transfer of wealth from other people via government? When, exactly, are people obliged to obey the law and support themselves?” Laura

WTF does that have to do with anything?

I want to know when it’s okay for government to NOT step in and save people from their own bad decisions. Is it ever okay?

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:54 PM

I will NOT vote for a McShamnesty/Huckster ticket.

Sorry.

Darksean on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

I agree, but, I won’t be sorry.

cjs1943 on May 12, 2008 at 4:54 PM

I heartily agree. Funny thing though, when I look back on things, there is a pretty fair amount of evidence that luck and good timing were things I prepared for and invited into my life.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Yes, luck is the residue of design.

dedalus on May 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM

During that time, I was tranformed from a lazy student into a driven and ambitious citizen. I look back on my poverty — with pride.

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 4:08 PM

Always loved you RB, but now even more than ever, hugs,

Entelechy on May 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM

“And since when are someone’s children our problem?

Dude, take a look at your government! How could you even ASK such a stupid question?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM

Then you shouldn’t have voted for George Bush or those congressmen/Senators you elected.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:54 PM

Bobby Jindal (now replaced with Steve Scalise) and David Vitter are all correct on illegal immigration. I’m proud of those votes. As for Bush, well, live and learn, eh? fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice…

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM

“Serenity Now!”

apacalyps on May 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM

The independents will decide this election. Internalize it!

Entelechy on May 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM

I GUARANTEE you that the whole purpose behind Huckabee’s proposed legislation to fund the education of children of illegal aliens who were promising students was to in fact CREATE a person capable of obeying the law and supporting her/himself!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:52 PM

Wouldn’t that make him their FATHER?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM

Laura,

You must also be one of those cut-throat Republicans who would punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:39 PM

Its the parents that have caused the problems for their kids. Get a grip on reality.

cjs1943 on May 12, 2008 at 4:57 PM

Huckaboom III?

apacalyps on May 12, 2008 at 4:57 PM

Dude, take a look at your government! How could you even ASK such a stupid question?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM

Sorry, do you need a government to raise your children, or are you capable of doing so on your own?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:58 PM

Question: What is the LATEST possible date McCain can announce his running mate? I will make my decision then.

kcd on May 12, 2008 at 4:59 PM

Al-Ozarka, are you sure you even want to vote Republican? Sounds more and more like you’d be more comfortable with Obama as your guy.

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 4:59 PM

“I want to know when it’s okay for government to NOT step in and save people from their own bad decisions. Is it ever okay?”

Laura (got it right this time)

Who’s talking about saving people from their own bad decisions?

Well…Republicans in congress as well as in the Whitehouse think it’s just fine to rescue those who crawled out on a limb to offer loans to the unqualified.

Why not avert potential problems in your state that is swamped with illegals because of bad federal policies by attempting to give kids a good head-start on their adult lives?

Sounds more helpful than paying off companies that loaned good at terrible risks, don’t it?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:00 PM

Hit that line. Hit that line. Keep on going.
Take that ball right down the field.
Give a cheer. Rah! Rah!
Never fear. Rah! Rah!
Arkansas will never yield.
GooooOOOO Huckabee!!

apacalyps on May 12, 2008 at 5:01 PM

Sounds more helpful than paying off companies that loaned good at terrible risks, don’t it?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:00 PM

And both sound like horrible nanny state issues that don’t belong in the Republican party.

Just because one is worse, it doesn’t make the other OK.

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 5:01 PM

There is not a single scenario that I can think of where I would feel compelled to vote with the Obama-Nation. McCain-Huckabee, McCain-Chavez, McCain-Sadr, whatever. I would vote for anything against the feeling in Chris Matthew’s leg.

BohicaTwentyTwo on May 12, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Who’s talking about saving people from their own bad decisions?

You are, by saying that Americans are responsible for educating nationals of other countries who came here in defiance of our laws. Since we’re going to be raped anyway, we should just lay back and enjoy it?

Attrition through enforcement averts those potential problems far better than enabling more of the same. As for the mortgage bailout, I’m of the ‘suck it up’ view along with Michelle Malkin, but one poor decision by Congress doesn’t mean I’m obliged to condone others.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM

“Al-Ozarka, are you sure you even want to vote Republican? Sounds more and more like you’d be more comfortable with Obama as your guy.” Esthier

Because I am grossly disappointed in the liberal Republicans we have in charge of things today, that means I’d rather vote for Obama?

That’s logical.

And for the record…NO…I DON”T want to vote Republican at this point because I don’t believe there is a single individual in the GOP leadership that values conservastism.

Our current “presumptive” nominee proves it.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM

Religious freedom is a secular tenet….do you have any idea what that means, do you have any idea what Freedom of Religious practice means?

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles…

Because I don’t want atheists running my government

Seems to fit the definition….

So…is Allah a bigot because he doesn’t want a preacher running his government?

If that is his sole calculus, yes he would qualify to join your little club.

dmann on May 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM

Perfect nest, for socialist egg.

Entelechy on May 12, 2008 at 5:05 PM

“by saying that Americans are responsible for educating nationals of other countries who came here in defiance of our laws…”

Laura, please stop misrepresenting what I said.

I said that Huckabee, becuase of the problems dealt to him by insane federal policy, HAD to do something to insure that the CHILDREN of those who came to ARKANSAS illegally…and who will…because of federal policy…REAMAIN in this country…felt it PRUDENT to give them a chance to succeed as productive adults.

But you, it seems, would rather throw the innocent kids under the bus.

Cut-throat Republicans who’d punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Exit question: Who else will be joining me now in writing in Hillary this year?

Glitch in the Matrix…

apacalyps on May 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM

4:48 Erik,
McCain did not SLAM Alito. McCain admitted that as far as McCain was concerned, Alito wore his conservatism in the open. McCain prefers keeping his own under wraps since his liberal friends who are not conservative are offended by conservatism. McCain maintains bipartisan politics his own way. McCain wants to walk the tight-rope for the circus applause. He’s under the GOP tent, though he prevents the doorman and ticket master to collect their wages, forcing them to provide all free performances. The public can buy a ticket if they like, or just walk on in and take any seat, no reservations. That’s how McCain goes, he’s looking for the loudest applause any way it can be had. But he does not HATE Alito. For all we know, McCain is jealous of Alito for having the guts to wear conservatism on his sleeve. So long as McCain does not attempt to legislate that conservatism may NOT be worn on the sleeve, he’s not fallen off the tight-rope.

maverick muse on May 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM

“A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles…”

Then, my friend, we all qualify as bigots.

I am intolerant of MANY opinions and lifestyles, aren’t you?

Or do you heart pedophiles?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:08 PM

Personally I think the damned government has WAY overstepped it boundaries. Bailouts, welfare, social services, illegals taking over the workforce, etc. It will take a revolution to put our government back in it’s place and I am so afraid our country will die waiting for our people to to take action. It’s sad. All the work, blood sweat and tears our forefathers put into our nation, only to see it decay while people who have better things to do turn a blind eye to what our ELECTED officials are doing.

The masses will look around one day, as elderly, and see their grandchildren living under a government that tells them where they can go to school, what professions they will train for, where they will live, what they eat, etc. etc. All, of course, in the best interest of the country. We had better wake up people! : (

kcd on May 12, 2008 at 5:10 PM

But you, it seems, would rather throw the innocent kids under the bus.

Like New Mexico and Manassas, VA are doing? They’re wrong from enforcing the law? Huckabee, as governor, had NO CHANCE to promote and espouse similar policies in AR? He was a helpless victim of federal inaction? I’m not buying. The reality is he made the choice to support the lawbreakers instead of the taxpayers.

As for your emotional blackmail wrt to throwing innocent children off the bus; it’s not working because you’re dead wrong. And as a politically active Christian, you should read Social Justice, For The Glory of Government because you and the Huckster are really barking up the wrong tree when you get government to do what the church should be doing.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 5:11 PM

HELL NO.

I would vote for Ron Paul before I vote for Goober.

Sekhmet on May 12, 2008 at 5:15 PM

Because I am grossly disappointed in the liberal Republicans we have in charge of things today, that means I’d rather vote for Obama?

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:03 PM

No, because you’d rather support socialism than the rule of law.

But you, it seems, would rather throw the innocent kids under the bus.

Cut-throat Republicans who’d punish children for the crimes of their parents.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Again, I’d love a response this time if possible, most kids who move from one state to another have no say in the matter, but all of them are denied this extra money that Huck wants to give to illegal aliens.

Why are people who have broken the law being treated better than American citizens?

How is that fair? Aren’t those kids innocent as well?

Esthier on May 12, 2008 at 5:16 PM

Laura…the church ISN’T doing it. And it takes NOTHING form ANY American citizen…on the contrary…educating the INNOCENT child of an illegal very well could reap benefits.

Admit it. Your compassion is surely wanting in this matter.

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:19 PM

when you get government to do what the church should be doing.

Laura on May 12, 2008 at 5:11 PM

Amen, sister Laura! I have always belived if the churches were doing what they SHOULD be doing, there would be no need for social services! Think about it. If a poor fellow, his wife and 3 kids walked into a 5,000 member church one Sunday morning, attended services, then spoke to the pastor about losing his job. Are you gonna believe for one minute that there is not one person in that church who could not provide this fellow with a job?

I am a Christian but I rarely go to church. Most of the churchs members cannot look beyond their own pew. I know some churches do a lot of good but giving money to support ministries overseas is all well and good, but don’t overlook the kid down the street that goes hungry most nights.

kcd on May 12, 2008 at 5:21 PM

“No, because you’d rather support socialism than the rule of law.”

What “rule of law”? The rule that is enforced by the federal government?

Give me a break!

“Again, I’d love a response this time if possible, most kids who move from one state to another have no say in the matter, but all of them are denied this extra money that Huck wants to give to illegal aliens”

I work in the Arkansas Community College segment…I know for a FACt that PLENTY of relocated kids are getting federal and state-aid to go to school. Our school, Ozarka College, is teeming with the children of American migrants.

Get a clue!

Al-Ozarka on May 12, 2008 at 5:22 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 8