Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Registration is currently closed. That means if you're not already registered, you can't comment. We will let you know if and when registration re-opens. 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.
Krauthammer clearly demonstrates that The High Reverend Huckster is unfit for the office of President of the United States of America.
MB4 on December 7, 2007 at 1:40 AM
As usual Krauthammer hits the point dead on. And I agree with MB4, it warrants a thread.
Patriot33 on December 7, 2007 at 1:48 AM
Post* not thread lol.
Patriot33 on December 7, 2007 at 1:50 AM
It is unfortunate that this is becoming an increasingly serious wedge issue that’s encouraging the antipathy between evangelicals and the rest of the party. Huckabee’s rise is serving to cast a harsh light on the problem, revealing that the Republican tent, while still large, is becoming more and more subdivided as power struggles erupt within it.
Okay, evangelicals, we got the message. You’re still a force to be reckoned with, and we can’t/shouldn’t ignore you. Now please back away from Huckabee, slowly and carefully. That’s it. So, how ’bout that Thompson guy, huh?
aero on December 7, 2007 at 3:15 AM
Charles nails Huck on the religion issue, and never even had to mention that Huck uses his “Christian piety” to mask a far-left domestic agenda and a clueless and ill-informed foreign policy.
And, in reading the article, I got a chuckle out of Charles’ reference to William Henry Harrison. It’s the ultimate “Take That!”… but from whom ???
Always Right on December 7, 2007 at 5:21 AM
I don’t fully think about what religion the candidates are, or how religious they are. What are they going to do when they take over the job? Their moral behavior; They going to cheat on their wives or husbands? They going to have legions of people dedicated to blowing themselves up? They going to kill me or put me in jail because I don’t believe in their religion?
Perhaps an exception are people whose religion is their politics. They worship their party beyond any diety. They worship nothing as athiest or maybe loony enough to worship rocks.
StuLongIsland on December 7, 2007 at 8:19 AM
This issue is starting to break Romney’s way, isn’t it? His speech has people asking why he had to give it, and looking at the voters in Iowa and South Carolina instead of Romney’s Mormonism.
Yes, imo Slu. I wonder how this issue and Kraut’s point breaks down here at HotAir among us Christianists?
I fault the Huckster.
Jaibones on December 7, 2007 at 8:57 AM
To be fair, I fault the Huckster right now as a default position…
Jaibones on December 7, 2007 at 8:58 AM
Spot on. No Huck, ever.
Thread.
juanito on December 7, 2007 at 9:09 AM
To be fair, I fault the Huckster right now as a default position…
Heh. What bothers me is that Huckabee seemingly hasn’t taken the time to think about how using this as a campaign issue will affect how evangelicals are viewed. Short-term gain, long-term damage.
Exactly. Between Huck and some of the comments I have read at Hot Air, I am not getting a positive impression of “Christian conservatives”, and I say that as a conservative who is a Christian, albeit not an “evangelical”.
Buy Danish on December 7, 2007 at 9:36 AM
“Egregious subtlety,” oh my but the man has a way with words. I think things are going to head south pretty quickly for the Huckster. Krauthammer has got his number, and more people are waking up to what this sanctimonious clown is really all about.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Registration is currently closed. That means if you're not already registered, you can't comment. We will let you know if and when registration re-opens. 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
IMHO, this should be a “Top Pick”.
Krauthammer clearly demonstrates that The High Reverend Huckster is unfit for the office of President of the United States of America.
MB4 on December 7, 2007 at 1:40 AM
As usual Krauthammer hits the point dead on. And I agree with MB4, it warrants a thread.
Patriot33 on December 7, 2007 at 1:48 AM
Post* not thread lol.
Patriot33 on December 7, 2007 at 1:50 AM
It is unfortunate that this is becoming an increasingly serious wedge issue that’s encouraging the antipathy between evangelicals and the rest of the party. Huckabee’s rise is serving to cast a harsh light on the problem, revealing that the Republican tent, while still large, is becoming more and more subdivided as power struggles erupt within it.
Okay, evangelicals, we got the message. You’re still a force to be reckoned with, and we can’t/shouldn’t ignore you. Now please back away from Huckabee, slowly and carefully. That’s it. So, how ’bout that Thompson guy, huh?
aero on December 7, 2007 at 3:15 AM
Charles nails Huck on the religion issue, and never even had to mention that Huck uses his “Christian piety” to mask a far-left domestic agenda and a clueless and ill-informed foreign policy.
And, in reading the article, I got a chuckle out of Charles’ reference to William Henry Harrison. It’s the ultimate “Take That!”… but from whom ???
Always Right on December 7, 2007 at 5:21 AM
I don’t fully think about what religion the candidates are, or how religious they are. What are they going to do when they take over the job? Their moral behavior; They going to cheat on their wives or husbands? They going to have legions of people dedicated to blowing themselves up? They going to kill me or put me in jail because I don’t believe in their religion?
Perhaps an exception are people whose religion is their politics. They worship their party beyond any diety. They worship nothing as athiest or maybe loony enough to worship rocks.
StuLongIsland on December 7, 2007 at 8:19 AM
This issue is starting to break Romney’s way, isn’t it? His speech has people asking why he had to give it, and looking at the voters in Iowa and South Carolina instead of Romney’s Mormonism.
Slublog on December 7, 2007 at 8:41 AM
Yes, imo Slu. I wonder how this issue and Kraut’s point breaks down here at HotAir among us Christianists?
I fault the Huckster.
Jaibones on December 7, 2007 at 8:57 AM
To be fair, I fault the Huckster right now as a default position…
Jaibones on December 7, 2007 at 8:58 AM
Spot on. No Huck, ever.
Thread.
juanito on December 7, 2007 at 9:09 AM
Heh. What bothers me is that Huckabee seemingly hasn’t taken the time to think about how using this as a campaign issue will affect how evangelicals are viewed. Short-term gain, long-term damage.
Thanks, Huck!
Slublog on December 7, 2007 at 9:14 AM
Well said C.K.
Exactly. Between Huck and some of the comments I have read at Hot Air, I am not getting a positive impression of “Christian conservatives”, and I say that as a conservative who is a Christian, albeit not an “evangelical”.
Buy Danish on December 7, 2007 at 9:36 AM
“Egregious subtlety,” oh my but the man has a way with words. I think things are going to head south pretty quickly for the Huckster. Krauthammer has got his number, and more people are waking up to what this sanctimonious clown is really all about.
nobaloney on December 7, 2007 at 9:57 AM