New Huckabee book rips Mitt, Fred, evangelical leaders, pretty much everyone; Update: Romney camp fires back
posted at 12:04 pm on November 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
A desperately needed fix of campaign drama during this post-election interregnum detox. Just give me a little hit of score-settling to get me through the day, bro. Just one hit.
Ah, that’s the stuff:
Mitt Romney, Huckabee’s principal rival in Iowa, comes in for the roughest treatment. Huckabee writes that the former Massachusetts governor’s record was “anything but conservative until he changed the light bulbs in his chandelier in time to run for president.” He notes that Romney declined to make a phone call of congratulations after Huckabee beat the oddsmakers to win the Iowa caucuses, “which we took as a sign of total disrespect.” He mocks Romney for suggesting, during one debate, more investment in high-yield stocks as a solution to economic woes. “Let them eat stocks!” Huckabee jokes…
He calls out Pat Robertson, the Virginia-based televangelist, and Dr. Bob Jones III, chancellor of Bob Jones University in South Carolina, for endorsing Rudy Giuliani and Romney, respectively. He also has words for the Texas-based Rev. John Hagee, who endorsed the more moderate John McCain in the primaries, as someone who was drawn to the eventual Republican nominee because of the lure of power. Huckabee speaks to Hagee by phone before the McCain endorsement, while the former Arkansas governor is preparing for a spot on Saturday Night Live. “I asked if he had prayed about this and believed this was what the Lord wanted him to do,” Huckabee writes of his conversation with Hagee. “I didn’t get a straight answer.” Months later, McCain rejected Hagee’s endorsement because of controversial remarks the pastor had made about biblical interpretations.
In a chapter titled “Faux-Cons: Worse than Liberalism,” Huckabee identifies what he calls the “real threat” to the Republican Party: “libertarianism masked as conservatism.” He is not so much concerned with the libertarian candidate Ron Paul’s Republican supporters as he is with a strain of mainstream fiscal conservative thought that demands ideological purity, seeing any tax increase as apostasy and leaving little room for government-driven solutions to people’s problems.
Kudos to Time for a choice selection of representative quotes: Waging low-grade class warfare by sneering at Romney’s wealth and appealing to evangelicals to vote along religious lines is Huck to a T. As is the bit about “government-driven solutions,” of course — this is a guy who once endorsed a federal ban on smoking in workplaces, remember — although that’s qualified by the fact that he’s been a loud and, for most conservatives, righteous opponent of the bailout. Whether that’s because he knows an unpopular issue when he sees one or because an extraordinary intervention in extraordinary circumstances crossed some sort of statist threshold in his mind that ordinary interventions in ordinary circumstances wouldn’t, only he knows. We’ll learn more circa 2010, I imagine.
InstaGlenn will interview him later this week; I eagerly await their exchange on the merits of libertarianism. Exit question: In a Huck/Palin primary showdown, who escapes with the lion’s share of the Christian vote? Don’t answer too hastily. Guilt is, potentially, a factor here.
Update: Another hit on the drama pipe. Mmmmm yeah.
Asked to respond, Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said Huckabee was acting small.
“This type of pettiness is beneath Mike Huckabee,” Fehrnstrom. “If we’re going to move the party forward, we need to offer more than personal recriminations. Unfortunately, in this book, Mike Huckabee is consumed with presumed slights, and he seems more interested in settling scores than in bringing people together.”
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: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 Next »
Maybe “weapons of mass cornology” then?
lol
csdeven on November 17, 2008 at 8:52 PM
csdeven on November 17, 2008 at 8:52 PM
I don’t really want to get into the whole Prop 8 debate…oh, nevermind.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 8:55 PM
So far we are advancing into the south at a very efficient pace, we are pushing deeper into Faux-Con land… keep radio contact soldiers. Man, this is unbelievable… it’s worse than Liberalism. C’mon. Move it. Move it. Move it. Let’s do this!! LET’S GO!!!
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 8:57 PM
F*** Huck. HE is one of the reasons that we got stuck with Romney in the first place. He pulled a Ross Perot and screwed us out of a candidate that could actually handle economic issues and was willing to actual take on Obama instead of take on the high road.
Here’s what I mean.
cannonball on November 17, 2008 at 8:59 PM
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 8:57 PM
Oh, so the SOUTH is Faux-Con land! Makes sense, that’s where the Huckster managed to be competitive. Not enough serious vote researchers, I suppose.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 8:59 PM
cannonball on November 17, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Ross Perot was right about most of what he said, especially on NAFTA. However that’s neither here nor there. We WEREN’T stuck with Romney, we were stuck with McCain. That was the problem.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:00 PM
The tent, the tent, the tent is on fire…
We don’t need no water let the mother plumper burn…
Burn mother plumper… burn.
spmat on November 17, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Thank you!
Sadly, the minority is right. *Sigh* Sure glad you showed up. You got any more friends?
Yep. A great place for finding neo-cons and phony Christians. And again, I agree with the sheer sadness of that reality. Thank you.
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Well, I know how this thread is going to end.
Saved you some time, AP.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 9:21 PM
I meant SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:24 PM
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:24 PM
Yeah, Huck scored a lot of the vote in California. /sarc
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Sounds like Huck’s kind of feller….
Langford promises ‘Atlantic City is going to soar’; Public ceremony marks beginning of second term as mayor
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 9:30 PM
Is he for raising taxes, and against proof of legal immigration status to get a driver’s license? If so they are two peas in a pod.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:32 PM
That was a typo obviously. I meant, “Go get em’ Huck! Thank you. Oh, and by the way,.. that what awesome what Huck said when he said, “(Romney) was “anything but conservative until he changed the light bulbs in his chandelier in time to run for president.” That was awesome! Totally awesome! All right, Hamilton!
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:32 PM
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:32 PM
It was even more awesome how Huck was totally for open-borders the first few debates until he realized it was hurting him politically, then suddenly he was an enforcement hawk. But yeah, Mitt is the flip-flopper.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Tsk, tsk, Huckster. Gambling!
You’re just mad because they knew you were crazy and your record speaks for itself. Mad and crazy, hah! Doh!
What’s the matter with these people? Huckabee has a discoverable and irrefutable record that goes against their supposed values.
I have a theory. The time machine in Terror From the Year 5000 was invented several years ago. Instead of reaching into the future, it reached into a mental asylum in the 1950s, where Thorazine and straight jackets were the norm. The monsters were released into the Republican Party and nobody bothers with Geiger counters.
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 9:44 PM
Oh..
So the thread is troll bait because finally people are commenting who are not sold out huck haters?
It’s not so nice to be on the other side of a ‘roast’ is it? Ad hominem attacks will never win a debate. We are accused of existing in an echo chamber if we support Mike Huckabee. You don’t think Hot Air is an echo chamber for your world view?
This IS a big tent party. Until we all stop trying to kick each other out of it. We’ll never win again.
Huckabee has a base.. and we’re not going to be silent about our support. The righty blogosphere just needs to get used to it.
If you want to be flippant and dismissive we can be too. When you’re ready for a serious conversation we’ll be here.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM
You.. you.. you remember when Huck was running for President? That was awesome! Oh! You.. you remember when he was on TV during the NBC and CNN televised Republican debates, and he was supposed to get some time to speak, and, uh, there was all these liberal commentators, that, like, uh, kept asking Romney and McCain questions, and they’d say, like, “We’ll ask you some questions Governor Huckabee and give you equal time to speak”, and, uh, everyone knew that they were lying? That was, um, a hoax, right? [pause] O-kay.. remember.. you remember when Huck wrote a book with a chapter titled “Faux-Cons: Worse than Liberalism?” That was a pretty awesome book. You.. you remember that?
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:48 PM
I can’t stomach Hannity (ego with his opening all about him making himself more than he is). Hannity says he has been in radio for 22 years (Rush 20 years) dream on Hannity, you are no Rush. I know Levin and Rush say they are friends with him, but please….. Then we have to hear about “picking on poor little Hannity”. I can’t stand the guy or O’Reilly either. Then there is the Freedom Tour, which was a great idea and I support the troups whole heartedly, but how many times can you roll out the same people and get people to spend money for it. It’s lame. That’s what is wrong with the Conservatives. Same old lame stale things. I’m sick of Hannity – he depresses me. Rush and Levin at least keep you informed instead of telling you about themselves.
At any rate – I heard that Huckabee was going to be on Hannity today (eventually) and I wanted to see if Hannity had the guts to challenge him on the Romney thing. Of course not. I can’t listen to Hannity, he drives me nuts.
Fox was foolish enough to give a slot to Huckabee, I think on Saturday night (I’ve never watched Fox on the weekends – football rules), so I suppose Hannity has to cream puff Huckabee.
Fox is turning left on us a little bit.
suzyk on November 17, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 9:47 PM
You are posting here, and I am posting here. Proof positive this is not an echo chamber. Go to the Huck’s Army forum and you’ll see an echo chamber.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:50 PM
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Remember that time Huckabee denied his own public record and called Romney a liar for mentioning it? Remember that time Huck was too classy to show the deceptive negative ad he made against Romney, then showed it to the national press knowing they would give it lots of free airplay? You know, the time he exposed himself as either a total idiot or a complete hypocrite? That time? Man that was awesome!
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Then there was that time Huck lied about getting a degree, using this degree to place himself as an expert on religion, when actually he dropped out of Bible college before earning a degree? That was so awesome! Or that time that despite all this knowledge he obtained about religion, he had to ask a reporter about the tenets of Mormonism to clear it up for himself? So many memories with Huckabee.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 9:56 PM
He just can’t get over the fact that someone does better financially than him. Being covetous is against one of the ten commandments.
If you wanted a family man look at Mitt’s family, his beautiful wife, his handsome intelligent sons and their wives and adorable children.
Good Kids, good people, smart, good looking with hair and (oh my gosh a Mormon) religious.
Hucks a creep and it’s not because of his religion, but in spite of his religion.
I resent the fact that you call everyone who doesn’t like him anti religious.
Bambi on November 17, 2008 at 10:02 PM
I help moderate the Hucks Army forum.. there are plenty of internal debates on Huck’s take on some of the issues. Many are not comfortable with the way he deals with Romney, some are atheists, or on board because of Fair Tax and get uncomfortable if we have overly religious threads.Many did not want him to try for veep while others worked passionately for that cause.
But we are Huck’s army because we believe in the man and what he stands for. A house divided against itself will not stand. Huck is where he is because his supporters are fiercly loyal.. and very informed. We know all about the record that so many here despise.. and its a record we are proud to support. We are not blind to his faults, but we believe the pros far outweigh the cons when it comes to the direction he could help take this country.
The problem for those who oppose Huckabee, is not Huckabee.. but the fact that there are enough people out there exactly like him,and willing to support him, that he becomes a ‘problem’ that can’t easily be dismissed.He’s no Alan Keys to be humored, laughed at and dismissed.
We don’t allow blatant ad hominem attacks on Huck on the site, but respectful dissent and debate is always welcome.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:03 PM
You may allow dissent on the best course for Huckabee to take, but not dissent on his countless virtues.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:05 PM
If the hominem fits… Accusing people of hate is the tactic of liberals. The Huckster’s record is loathsome and contemptible.
What is this Huckabee cult thing? Is he the Republican version of The One?
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 10:06 PM
No, Obama could actually (sadly) get elected. Huck could only win the presidency of a handful of southern states. Since no such position exists, there isn’t much of a political future for Huck outside his region.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:08 PM
I strongly question the grasp on reality of anyone who asserts, with sincerity, that Huckabee is a conservative politician.
Huckabee garnered support in the primaries by being the “Jesus candidate” that all good born-again Christians were informed by their pastors to support. Former-pastor Huck worked the church circuit for his own political gain, setting himself up to be the Christians’ choice candidate — all the while engaging in despicable and un-Christian attacks against Romney. I understand the political value of attack ads, and in attacking your most dangerous opponent, but Huckabee did so under the Christian banner. He prostituted the church and the image of Christianity for his own personal gain.
I am a life-long, old-school evangelical Christian (and supporter of Fred’s federalist ideas) who watched with disgust as Huckabee, with feigned words of populism, made merchandise of many other proclaimed-evangelical Christians.
Huckabee is a mere shade of a man — the fat band geek who grew up into a pissy beta male — who claims Christ as his homeboy but refuses to forgive those who trespass against him.
I hope he gets the entirety of his rewards in this life.
Harpazo on November 17, 2008 at 10:15 PM
Yes. Their chant is “Huckahu Akbar”.
/sarc
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 10:16 PM
That would be cornholeolgy.
hahaha
csdeven on November 17, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Huckabee is a religious bigot. He played the “Christian leader” card just like Obama played the racist card.
Despicable bigot!
csdeven on November 17, 2008 at 10:19 PM
The same determination to ignore facts is sadly present in some on the right. I never thought it about much, but I guess it’s human nature. Some people fall for personality in a way that escapes me. The only thing saving the Huckster from well deserved obscurity is his gig on Fox News. I watch it a lot less than I used to.
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Hardly.. we’ve had vigorous debates about the damage his willingness to hold a grudge can do to his cause among other things.
And we are no more a cult that the conservatives who admire Ronald Reagan. He is practically the god of conservatives.
He is just the best communicator of our version of what successful conservatism could look like. He’s what I would be if I was a republican politician.. a *gasp’ compassionate conservative with an eye on the middle class reality as opposed to ideological purity.
Only pragmatic conservatism will stem the oncoming tide of radical liberalism. SmallER governemnt doesn’t mean ZERO government.Reducing government to the point that the weakest of the weak suffer while we turn a blind eye, just isn’t going to cut it any more.
You guys don’t get it.. it’s not Huckabee.. it’s his MESSAGE.If any other conservative with his communication ability and authenticity had arrived on the scene with his message, from tax reform to the preservation of cultural
values, they would have been just as successful.
He was just the right messenger and the right time with his message. Palin’s appeal.. very much for the same reason, just reinforces that this type of conservatism is what we’re looking for right now.
If the GOP wants to hold onto voters like me, they have to give Huckabee republicanism a shot.. with or without him as the face of the movement.
My preference is the original messenger, as opposed to immitations that may arise. Already Eric Cantor is parroting’ I’m a conservative, but i’m not mad about it!” Huck 101.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Heh, I need to drink a margarita and ignore him more.
HuckaCthulhu Akbar!
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 10:23 PM
You’re Huckabee. That explains everything.
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 10:25 PM
You.. you.. you remember when “Weyrich essentially confessed that he and the other leaders should have backed Huckabee, a candidate who shared their values more fully than any other candidate in a generation?” That was a pretty awesome. You.. you remember that?
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:22 PM
You would be corrupt?
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM
apacalyps on November 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM
Yes, I remember when Weyrich traded in his credibility for popularity with his inner circle by spewing that garbage about how great Huckabee is. I also remember who he endorsed when it counted. THAT, my friend, was awesome!
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:33 PM
Beh.. not gonna dignify your ‘corrupt’ nonsense with a reply.
Did my homework on every charge… (all brought by disgruntled dems)and found satisfactory answers for em all.I can copy and paste from our truth squad files if you’d like *sweetly*
You lot of course.. wouldn’t see the truth it it bit you in the heinie.. your derangement is so deep.
*sad*
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:38 PM
Funny how that no-good Romney managed to avoid such charges while in the Democrat stronghold of Massachusetts. I guess he was too popular among the Democrats there for them to try something like that. /sarc
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:40 PM
More so, actually.
We call that candidate “Sarah Palin.”
sulla on November 17, 2008 at 10:40 PM
I’m still trying to find information on those ethics charges filed against Governor Reagan during his time in California…
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:41 PM
sulla on November 17, 2008 at 10:40 PM
She may be authentic but she’s not in it to stick it to that rich slimy religious minority who looks more like the guy who laid you off for incompetence than the guy who goofs around when you’re supposed to be working!
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Apparently, the Cato Institute agreed with you.
I checked the 2008 version, but unfortunately they do not include Alaska or Louisiana in their report card.
Y-not on November 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM
That’s called the conviction of the Holy Spirit bra.When you sell out your principles for a seat at the ‘electable’s table, it can bug your conscience.
They all knew.. on the ONE issue that should have been a priority for socons, they endorsed people with less than perfect records instead of the one who lived and breathed the platform. Wouldn’t matter if THEY weren’t the ones climing life and marriage were the touchstones for how socons should vote.
Hypocrites, they deserve every blow that rained down on them when their grassroots abandoned them as lonely generals without an army, and supported Mike instead.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:44 PM
Y-not on November 17, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Be prepared to have the messenger attacked, and not the message.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:45 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:44 PM
Huckabee lives in a state where its politically expedient to be pro-life. That alone doesn’t impress me. What had he accomplished on the issue during his 10.5 years as governor?
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:46 PM
EXACTLY. Romney didn’t have the door nailed shut on him when he got into office. (literally) after all he came in promising to do more for gay rights that Ted Kennedy.
Did you REALLY just open that door? LOLOLOL
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Nah, they’ll continue to ignore the message. This is the second time I posted that link to Cato on this thread.
Y-not on November 17, 2008 at 10:48 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:47 PM
No, Romney, in 1994 when running for senate (and losing) said he would be better for gay rights than Ted Kennedy. If you watch the rest of the clip, the context is that Ted would go for extreme rights that would never pass. Romney would be more pragmatic on the issue. When he ran for governor and won, he made no such promise. He was, however, attacked by the liberal press there from day one.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:48 PM
I’d also like to point out, though it will fall on deaf ears, Romney was the only candidate whom during the primaries was attacked by advertisements from pro-abortion and gay rights groups. I don’t know why, since you think they would have nothing to worry about with Romney in charge.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 10:51 PM
She was as successful as she was WITH our support.
Head to head with Huck it’ll be a no brainer. Mike has a much deeper expreience and knowlege base, and is a much better communicator. She was a substitute.. not a replacement for the complete package of his message.
Mike gets our votes if she runs against him..SORRY.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 10:52 PM
It’s not a completely fair comparison, but she is competitive.
Communication ability: I would give the edge to Huck for his interview skills, but Palin can energize a crowd as well as Huckabee. Palin’s reputation as a rambling non-answerer is something she’ll need to overcome; she needs to be more direct about saying “Ask something else” or “next question” or “I’ll get back to you” or “die, maggot.”
Authenticity: this is one of the PRIMARY beefs many (including me) have with Huckabee. I see a vindictive guy whose grudges seem endless. I was initially attracted to him for his sense of humor, but over time the nasty edge became more and more apparent. In a columnist or talking head, it’s a profitable skill. In a president? International Incident waiting to happen.
Preservation of cultural values: I give Palin a slight edge here, but reasonable minds can disagree.
Tax reform: Edge to Palin for now, because I don’t like Huck’s tax proposal and Palin doesn’t have one yet.
Government reform: Huck is notorious for “accepting” stuff that rules prohibit. It earned him a spot on Most Corrupt Pols. I give Palin an edge here.
And so on. I consider Huckabee a talented talker, but his character flaws and vindictiveness turned me off over the course of the campaign. I don’t mind the message (social conservatism); I did mind the messenger.
sulla on November 17, 2008 at 10:54 PM
No it’s not. It’s exactly the way he acted throughout his campaign. Once defeated, he latched on to the CHINO(Christian in name only) RINO McCain because, it’s clear, Huckabee operates from political opportunism instead of any faith-driven agenda.
highhopes on November 17, 2008 at 10:57 PM
Okay, You backed her in the 2008 generals, so she at least clears the bar enough to get your support.
So let’s say in the primaries you choose Huck over Palin in this hypothetical 2012 matchup, as is certainly your right, but in the end Palin is the nominee.
Do you then withhold your support because she beat your guy? Or do you support her, in spite of her not being your top pick, if she clinches the nomination?
sulla on November 17, 2008 at 11:01 PM
Re CATO:I’m not sure exactly why fiscal conservatives should care how a libertarian think tank grades a candidate.
Cato bashes Huckabee for proposing a sales tax to “cover a budget deficit caused partly by large spending increases that he proposed and approved…” Again, 90% of the Arkansas state budget is on education, health, and human services. I realize that the libertarians at Cato consider it blasphemous to have the state funding schools or paying the medical bills of the poor. But complying with state law in order to balance the budget and pay for such entitlements does not make a politician a “big-government conservative.” (And they wonder why we don’t put the libertarians in charge?)
Huckabee got more accomplished with that Dem legislature than most other republicans would have.
Pushed through a Democrat legislature the first, major broad based tax cuts in the state’s history.
Pushed through a Democrat legislature an $80 million tax cut package.
Cut the state’s capital gains tax by 25%.
Established a Property Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights
Limited the increase in property taxes to 10% a year for individuals and 5% per taxing unit
Here are a few that they left off the list:
Eliminated the income tax for families below the poverty line.
Increased the standard deductions.
Eliminated the marriage penalty.
Eliminated bracket creep by indexing the income taxes to inflation, thereby preventing taxpayers from moving into a higher bracket when their paychecks increase due to inflations.
Doubled the child care tax credit.
Eliminated capital gains tax on the sale of a home.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 11:01 PM
I think your collie is very smart.
Constance on November 17, 2008 at 11:03 PM
Also a no- brainer. If there was an honorable campaign on the issues, without the surrogacies that raise ill will towards opponents, (read talk radio white washing Mitt’s record) we would be proud to support her as our nominee.I do think that she has significant hurdles to overcome with her image re a general election campaign though.
So much of our resentment, and I’m sure Mike’s as well, comes from the willingness of the conservative elites to explain away the weaknesses in Mitt’s record, while nailing Mike to the wall for his. It was the conservative version of the Obama love fest, and it was disgusting. Did more to hurt Mitt’s chances with us than anything else.
Mike is more ‘democrat friendly’ and has greater pull in minority communities. I’m african american myself.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 11:11 PM
What about the MSM white-washing Huck’s record to the point where Mitt had to buy ad time just to cover it? I recall the media camping out in front of Mitt’s house, they couldn’t bother finding info on Huck that is a matter of public record? Talk radio didn’t embrace Mitt till it was too late, after McCain won Florida and Rudy dropped out. Rudy and Fred were their darlings, not Mitt.
thecountofincognito on November 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM
Don’t forget that Huck was running down another conservative economic group CFG (Club For Growth), a group which advocates economic freedom, which he labeled “Club For Greed”. Yeah, that will get you far.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Another two words that will rise from the ashes for the Huckster…
Wayne Dumond: The Story Mike Huckabee Dreads
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 17, 2008 at 11:23 PM
An organization that recieved a quarter million dollars in support form Romney donors, and conveniently, produced a critical white paper on Mike just as he was starting to surge in Iowa?
Look this is politics, both sides played their best hands and the results were what they were. You don’t run for president to graciously ’step aside’ to a rival in a close contest.
They fought it out tooth and nail.. often with ‘dirty politics’ Mike may have done it with Mitt.. but Mitt did it to EVERYONE else.. all his rivals hated his guts for pretending to be a ‘better’ conservative than everybody else, when that was clearly not the case.
I’m sure Mitt and Huck will have another opportunity to grind it out..and the better politician will win.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Dumond *rolling eyes*
The good thing about having an effective communicator as a candidate.. he can tell his own story way better than a surrogate.
They will bring it up, and he’ll have to explain it.. and the people will end up feeling sorry for Huck living with that decision on his conscience.
I’ll put one dumond against 16 death penalties carried out any day.
Rensen on November 17, 2008 at 11:29 PM
Worship of the mirror demands sacrifice. Not the Christian kind; the Aztec kind! Time to parole another messenger.
Feedie on November 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Yeah, Huck felt so bad about the Dumond case he kept right on letting violent criminals out of jail early.
thecountofincognito on November 18, 2008 at 1:02 AM
Another day, more GOP cannibalism *eats popcorn*
benny shakar on November 18, 2008 at 1:57 AM
The hatred for Huck here on Hotair is veeeery telling………..
There will always be a rift between those who are conservative for the cause of what is right……..
and those who are “conservatives” because it makes (or keeps ) them rich.
sigh
The voice of one crying in the wilderness
John The Baptist on November 18, 2008 at 2:00 AM
Okay, I’ve read enough Huckabee/Romney posts and will weigh in with my take on the election:
McCain became the candidate because back when the decision was made, the war(s) was the main issue and people thought that the combination of his military experience coupled with his persona of being a “maverick” would make him a shoe-in. However, when the financial crisis came and replaced the war as the main issue, everyone realized what a poor choice McCain was. In that scenario, Romney would have been the much better candidate given his proven track record and success as a business man and governor.
While Huckabee is a decent man, he was never anything more than an “also-ran”. He did better the other lower-tier candidates because Fred didn’t really run a serious campaign and Rudy had way too much baggage. He showed better than Romney because McCain ate into most of the support that would have gone to Romney.
While I don’t dislike Huckabee and actually watch his new cable show, the guy does play the “Christian card” just a wee bit too much.
Dagnar on November 18, 2008 at 2:13 AM
This is one thing I’ll give you. Huck can choose better songs to play rather than that lyrical garbage. I agree. But, that doesn’t translate into him being a carnal Christian, that is, a phony Christian. Look, I’ve listened to all kinds of music I shouldn’t have in years past. I stopped listening to most of it, but every once in a while I’ll use a song here and there as an intro to one of my posts on HA even though I know it is a bad song. Same with movies. Most movies are wicked and vile nowadays. I often turn the television off because they are so sick. I’ve even deleted sick evil disgusting channels, y’know, by using the channel scan buttons to avoid even coming across them. Even so, every once in a while I catch myself overlooking the filthy language or overt violence, and watching something I shouldn’t because I find the storyline interesting. Is it right? NO. Do I strive to avoid such things. YES. Look, what I’m trying to say here is that none of us is perfect. Yeah, Huck likes his music. Do some of the songs his band plays irk me? YES. Are the lyrics bad? YES! Should I improve my movie and music habits? YES! What is it that you can improve? This doesn’t mean Mike is not saved. It doesn’t mean he’s not a true Christian. We’ve all have things we need to improve, and that’s the ultimate goal (John 8:7).
apacalyps on November 18, 2008 at 2:17 AM
Mike Hickabee (intentional misspelling) is a frigging douche.
thebronze on November 18, 2008 at 2:31 AM
Pinky and the Brain.
apacalyps on November 18, 2008 at 2:36 AM
They have their own phraseology, Bible thumpers. Most of us would call a friend to ask if they thought it wise to go ahead with something that seems rash. Politicians browbeat for support, and Huck has his mannerisms. What one finds hypocritical, another identifies as “right”.
So Huck had a hair up his *ss and tried removing it therapeutically by writing a book. The book isn’t meant to win friends and influence people any more than the author is able. What Huck keeps proving is that he is divisive. And in his own way, so was Mitt. The two deserve each other. Since evangelicals gave us GWB, look a gift horse in the mouth.
maverick muse on November 18, 2008 at 2:39 AM
??? Have you been paying attention?
Romney withdrew with a total vote lead, and was beating Huckabee. In the end, he still beat Huckabee in delegates after having withdrawn 5 months earlier.
I think I need to refer you to the stupid Obama voters in the video.
eaglesdontflock on November 18, 2008 at 2:47 AM
Looks like the Mike Huckabee supporters won again. As usual. Oh, uh, one last bit of advice for all the Faux-Cons, that is, all the Huckabee saboteurs. C’mere. *pulls aside to whisper* Whatever you do. Don’t click this link.
apacalyps on November 18, 2008 at 3:01 AM
Looks like Huckabee supporters “won” the same way their fearless leader “won” the Republican nomination. Sticking around well past your expiration date and making yourself look foolish isn’t winning. It is, however, entertaining. So thanks for that. Hucksters really do say the darnedest things.
thecountofincognito on November 18, 2008 at 3:05 AM
While we have differing views on the 2008 candidates and their respective treatment in the media, I appreciate your response.
sulla on November 18, 2008 at 3:30 AM
Yes, but did you know Mitt Romney was a Mormon?
BKennedy on November 18, 2008 at 5:49 AM
Yes Governor, I remember the “tag team” play you did on Mitt Romney in the West Virginia primary.
diogenes on November 18, 2008 at 7:12 AM
Ah, Schmuckabee rears his ugly head once again. And here I was actually starting to kinda’ like the guy… just a little. Thankfully, he has opened his big mouth again and completely disintegrated any shred of that growing respect.
Jockolantern on November 18, 2008 at 7:15 AM
You people are becoming a bore. Insults and name calling is so 6th grade. Grow up already. It is time to ween yourself from the Kool-Aid and the tit or else you risk always being an imbecile.
For those talking about Wayne Dumond, if you do not know the truth by now, it just goes to prove Evolution really is a farce or else people like you would not of survived this long.
Others here should really see a doctor about that Huckabee Derangement Syndrome you have. The whining symptom you present is really annoying to the rest of us.
jparks1972 on November 18, 2008 at 7:40 AM
No it’s not. It’s exactly the way he acted throughout his campaign. Once defeated, he latched on to the CHINO(Christian in name only) RINO McCain because, it’s clear, Huckabee operates from political opportunism instead of any faith-driven agenda.
highhopes on November 17, 2008 at 10:57 PM
Exactly
anniekc on November 18, 2008 at 8:02 AM
Okay this is getting annoying…After reading five pages of Mittens and Chuckles diehards go at each other, I’m all for them going back to the kids’ table. They can continue to fling food at each other while the grown-ups discuss the future of the Republican Party.
Illinidiva on November 18, 2008 at 8:57 AM
Not again! Huck also broke the 11th commandment on PuffHo (of all places). The man obviously has a fundamental misunderstanding of conservatism.
“If you analyze it, I believe libertarianism is the very heart and soul of conservatism.”
–Ronald Reagan
Huck’s the perfect Southern Democrat.
Rae on November 18, 2008 at 9:10 AM
I want a cage match. Huck and Mitt.
And no Huck, you cannot have Chuck Norris as your tag team partner.
Mr. Joe on November 18, 2008 at 9:12 AM
I don’t really like either Huck or Mitt to be honest. Can we just write them off for the next election. Better yet, can their supporters just take their little war somewhere else.
One more point: Some here comment about the fanatical nature of Palin supporters. I’ve got news, they’ve got nothing on the cult of the Huckster. Only he rivals the One.
Darksean on November 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM
I am a conservative Christian that thinks Huck makes people like me look like idiots.
Hurting Head on November 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Hurting Head on November 18, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Nothing could be further from the truth. People like you obviously didn’t fall for his sleazy act. Unfortunately, some people did.
thecountofincognito on November 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Darksean on November 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Hey now, what better place for a Huck/Mitt war then a thread dealing with Huck talking trash about Mitt? If you didn’t want to join in, you didn’t have to read it. However, I would like to point out the obvious. You don’t have to like Mitt to see through the Huckster. He’ll also be running against Palin, possibly Jindal and DeMint. All of them are far superior choices to Mike Huckabee.
thecountofincognito on November 18, 2008 at 10:18 AM
Oh, I know. I REALLY don’t like the Huckster and would choose Mitt over him in a NY minute. Just neither are really good choices in my opinion, from a conservative and a strategic standpoint. You’re also right that both will be in the mix the next election and that’s going to hurt us.
Darksean on November 18, 2008 at 10:21 AM
Great, that’s what we need, more Republican’s tearing each other’s eyes out and stabbing each other in the back..
When will we learn.. When will Huck learn. I was for MITT over Huckabee.
reshas1 on November 18, 2008 at 11:29 AM
I don’t get why people are against Mitt. There is nothing wrong with the guy. “But he changed his abortion position for the election!” If Obama is any indication, flip flopping isn’t the death stroke it once was. Of course conservatives can’t do what liberals do, but still Mitt would have won this election hands down. People were morons to vote against him. McCain was dead in the water until the newspapers started endorsing him left and right. Republicans were tempted by the media’s forbidden fruit. I hope Obama is a good president, but it is you hucksters who we can causally blame if the nation goes to pot. “We didn’t know the economy would be the main issue!” The economy is always the main issue, it’s the economy, stupid! sigh…Racism is dead but religionism is alive and well.
Iceman on November 18, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Huckabee disgusts me. There is no chance in hell that he will ever become the GOP nominee. If he runs in 2012, I will spend every ounce of my energy to see to it that he will be defeated.
Norwegian on November 18, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Looks like I’m very late getting into this discussion, but count me in as one person who would under no circumstances ever vote for Huckabee. He is one sick puppy.
jay12 on November 18, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Oh, I see. Huckster starts this war by ripping fellow Republicans in writing, and then when supporters of those Republicans start to fight back, it’s called a “whining symptom.”
What is truly “annoying” is the fact that Huckabee decides to release this book, in the wake of a general election loss, only to give liberals yet another cause to laugh at us and to gloat about our party’s lack of unity. If Huckabee were truly concerned about the welfare of the Republican Party, he would never have aired such statements in public. It shows he is more concerned about his own status than the status or direction of the Party. It is the Huckster himself who has a “Huckabee Derangement Syndrome,” in that he cannot get over himself.
The liberals could not have hoped for a better “divide and conquer” agent than Huckabee. He did this in the 2008 primaries (particularly in WV), and just at look the damage he is inflicting now in these unprovoked attacks. If Huckabee doesn’t have the character to stop this kind of childish backbiting on his own, then the supporters of every other potential Republican candidate, with the help of the new RNC Chairman, need to unite and do whatever they can to counter this. If this does not happen, and soon, our Party will sustain an even more humilating defeat in 2012.
OneVision on November 18, 2008 at 1:25 PM
I don’t like either CHuckles or Mittens and want both to go away. ;)
Illinidiva on November 18, 2008 at 1:30 PM
I can’t believe this guy is still at it with his sour grapes. Huck turned me off early in the primary with his subtle anti-mormonism in the Iowa caucuses and now he is showing his devious side again. He’s likeable enough, easy to warm up to, but there is something about him that creeps me out. I sense an inner anger in this one.
Daemonocracy on November 18, 2008 at 1:44 PM
I want all of the people who ran in this primary to go away. Never to come back. It is time for some new blood. I really want Huck to go down way before the primaries start. Let’s hope and work towards having strong candidates before they begin so these guys see they don’t have a chance and decide not to run.
Hurting Head on November 18, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Huck’s behavior at that time really bothered me.
I was aware of his “open borders” mentality, and I knew about his populism, etc, and his love for granting clemencies, etc.
But when he pulled that stunt, I lost a lot of respect for him.
ColtsFan on November 18, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Who’s Huckabee to throw stones at faux conservatives? He’s got his own problems there.
Also, his attempts to play the religious base against Mitt’s Mormonism was beyond the pale.
Also … my “Mr. Creepy” alarm goes off every time I see a pic of Huckabee – there is something not quite right about that guy. I really don’t get the same alarm when I look at Mitt and … I feel totally at ease with Palin who just seems to gush honesty and good karma. So there you have it … Huck is jerk who also fails my “aura” test. Maybe yours too?
“Huck You! Huck!”
HondaV65 on November 18, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 Next »