1
   

Mike Huckabee

 
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Dec, 2007 11:23 am
Mike Schmuck he be.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Dec, 2007 06:52 pm
Gala wrote:
Nonetheless, he has a sense of social responsibilty which I admire.

But how deep does it go? Skin-deep at best, apparently:

Quote:
THE LIMITS OF HUCKABEE'S OUTRAGE....

Way back in May, at the first debate for the Republican presidential candidates, there was an interesting exchange that signaled the kind of talk we could expect from Mike Huckabee.

The former governor explained, "The most important thing a president needs to do is to make it clear that we're not going to continue to see jobs shipped overseas ... and then watch as a CEO takes a hundred-million-dollar bonus to jettison those American jobs somewhere else." After decrying CEO pay and vulnerable worker pensions, Huckabee concluded, "That's criminal. It's wrong. And if Republicans don't stop it, we don't deserve to win in 2008."

At the time, it surprised some people that a Republican candidate would even pay lip service to the concerns of working people. It led some to argue that Huckabee had something of a populist streak.

He doesn't. For one thing, it's hard to even take the notion seriously given Huckabee's enthusiastic support for a 23% national sales tax. For another, his talk about how "criminal" it is for CEOs to reap a windfall while workers are losing their jobs is just pleasant-sounding rhetoric, which he has no intention of taking seriously.

Huckabee made this abundantly clear during a CNBC interview on Monday night.

    HARWOOD: Governor, let me ask you, which is the criminal part, the loss of those jobs and the loss of pension, or the golden parachute for the CEO? And what would you do about either one? HUCKABEE: It's a combination. It's when one person is losing his job who helped make the company successful and the person who steers the company either into bankruptcy or selling off it in pieces has that golden parachute of $700 million.... What the government ought to do is to call attention to it, put some spotlight to it. I don't think it's about coming up with some new regulation. Corporate boards ought to show some responsibility. If a board allows that kind of thing to happen, shame on that board.
Asked if he, as president, would actually want to do something about the problem, Huckabee said he would "like" to see corporate boards "show responsibility." He would oppose efforts to regulate, though, because government action "only exacerbates a problem."

So, in May, Huckabee insisted that it was "criminal" to see CEOs cleaning up while workers are losing their jobs, and said Republicans have no choice but to intervene and "stop it." But in December, Huckabee believes the government should do nothing more than "call attention to" the problem.

I suppose it's the difference between a long-shot in the spring, and a credible challenger in the fall. Seven months ago, Huckabee could pretend to care about working people, because few knew his name, and even fewer thought he had a chance. Now, Huckabee wants to win, so he's dropping the pretense.

Something to consider the next time the media mentions Huckabee's "populist" streak.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2008 09:39 am
nimh, the more he rises in the poles, the scarier he gets. What's extra uncomfortable is romney is equally a phony-- and it looks like they're the front runners.

How about his latest "I'm not going to release and attack ad, but let me just show it to the mainstream media so they know I made an attack ad but decided to take the high road and not air it." The man's a little koo-koo.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2008 10:10 am
Gala
Quote:
How about his latest "I'm not going to release and attack ad, but let me just show it to the mainstream media so they know I made an attack ad but decided to take the high road and not air it." The man's a little koo-koo.


He is as crazy as a fox.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 08:53 am
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 11:14 am
I love the boy. Sure he's nutty, but I figure I could talk to him about it and he would engage me straight up.

But much more importantly, he is helping to rip apart the coalition. They hate him over at Fox. Serious hate. As does Rush. And Coulter. And the National Review, etc.
0 Replies
 
NickFun
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 11:15 am
However, Blatham, they hate Ron Paul even more! Never bfore has such a popular candidate been so incredibly ignored!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 11:43 am
nick

Oh yeah. For certain. The last thing the corporate Republican power structure wants is 'small government'. They are huge and they want to BE the government...its deciders, its military, its bureaucrats, its planners and, most importantly, its beneficiaries.

Another thing I actually like about Huckabee is that he is not (quite the opposite of what Coulter claims) stupid. The christmas ad was quite brilliant. And how about this comment from last night...
Quote:
Mike Huckabee said Wednesday that he's doing so well in the polls because "people are looking for a presidential candidate who reminds them more of the guy they work with rather than the guy that laid them off."
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 01:26 pm
au1929 wrote:
Mike Schmuck he be.


Excellent.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 02:23 pm
Leave it to the Reps to bring us another certified moron/nut. Of course, he is no worse than GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, or Reagan.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 02:29 pm
Advocate wrote:
Leave it to the Reps to bring us another certified moron/nut. Of course, he is no worse than GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, or Reagan.


Ah. Of the people you've listed I am going to rate them in order of their moron/nutt-itude. One being the highest moron/nut of all.

1. GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, Huckabee
2. Reagan (although, he really ought to join the others)
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 03:55 pm
Gala wrote:
Advocate wrote:
Leave it to the Reps to bring us another certified moron/nut. Of course, he is no worse than GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, or Reagan.


Ah. Of the people you've listed I am going to rate them in order of their moron/nutt-itude. One being the highest moron/nut of all.

1. GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, Huckabee
2. Reagan (although, he really ought to join the others)


I love your term "nuttitude." May I have it? I would put Reagan at or near the top. Contacts, who were nonpartisan, said he was senile and completely removed from reality. He was scripted and controlled during his entire time in office. I could give you many supportive examples . Otherwise, I go along with your list.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 04:01 pm
Advocate wrote:
Gala wrote:
Advocate wrote:
Leave it to the Reps to bring us another certified moron/nut. Of course, he is no worse than GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, or Reagan.


Ah. Of the people you've listed I am going to rate them in order of their moron/nutt-itude. One being the highest moron/nut of all.

1. GWB, Nixon, Agnew, Quayle, Huckabee
2. Reagan (although, he really ought to join the others)


I love your term "nuttitude." May I have it? I would put Reagan at or near the top. Contacts, who were nonpartisan, said he was senile and completely removed from reality. He was scripted and controlled during his entire time in office. I could give you many supportive examples . Otherwise, I go along with your list.



Are you aware that you are talking about a republican saint :wink:
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Jan, 2008 04:04 pm
Bless you for warning me. I lost my head.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 08:08 am
au1929 wrote:
January 2, 2008, 11:33 am

Two-Buck Huck

Au, that was great :-)

A very entertaining read :-D
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 08:53 am
A National Review symposium on Huckabee from this morning...

Quote:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2IxYWMzNGNkNGY1YTY3YTQ2NTU4YjI3OTY5YzQyMTg=
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 10:12 am
xingu,

Quote:
Makes one wonder what influence his interpretation of the Bible will have on our domestic and foreign policy if he's elected president.


If you are old enough to remember, the same sort of thing was said about John Kennedy, because he was a catholic.
Except with him, the religious bigots were afraid he would take orders from the Vatican when it came to making decisions about running the country.

I have said it before, but anyone that worries about a mans religion instead of his stated policies and ideas is a bigot.

Yes, that includes you.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 10:24 am
But Kennedy was not a priest. Huck is a Baptist minister, who has never backed away from his radical beliefs.

He believes in the rapture. Under this belief, those saved would be lifted to heaven just before the imminent destruction of earth. Thus, why should Huck have any interest in making long-term improvements to the country?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 12:42 pm
Advocate wrote:

He believes in the rapture. Under this belief, those saved would be lifted to heaven just before the imminent destruction of earth. Thus, why should Huck have any interest in making long-term improvements to the country?


Why would he run if he wasn't interested in doing this? His beliefs influence him positively as well -- like his biblical belief that man is supposed to take care of his environment.

I think it's easy to have a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that he's a Baptist preacher, and believe me when I say that nobody's knee jerks quicker or harder than mine on this particular point, but I think he's actually fairly progressive as far as Republicans go and that's most likely because of his religious beliefs.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2008 12:54 pm
FD, could you please elaborate on how Huck is progressive relative to the other Rep candidates. I haven't seen this. As you probably know, he doesn't believe in evolution.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Mike Huckabee
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 06:29:43