1
   

Mike Huckabee

 
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:07 am
I look for Huck to win in SC. That's Southern Baptist country. If Mitt doesn't take Michigan kiss him goodbye. Even if he does take Michigan I thing you still can kiss him goddbye.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:17 am
xingu wrote:
I look for Huck to win in SC. That's Southern Baptist country. If Mitt doesn't take Michigan kiss him goodbye. Even if he does take Michigan I thing you still can kiss him goddbye.


Huckleberry made a comment recently about being back in the South--Something along the lines of a complaint how about how cold and icy it was in New Hampshire, and "gosh golly gee", it sure was plum-pickin' nice to be back where the grass was green."

Sounds to me like the good 'ol boy's got a bone to pick with them thar Yankees.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:24 am
Kind of like the Civil War all over again. Huck and the southern conservative Christians vs. the seculars.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:25 am
As for Twit Romney-- he will probably win Michigan.

Although, it will be interesting if he doesn't.

He's running a weak campaign-- too much emphasis on the negative, too much hokey spin: "We've won 2 silvers" etc., too much reversal of previous positions, too repetitive and methodical. Hearing him list his accomplishments is like walking into a car dealership and you see the smiling salesman heading straight for you as you see the cartoon bubble above his head going "kaching, kaching."
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:27 am
xingu wrote:
Kind of like the Civil War all over again. Huck and the southern conservative Christians vs. the seculars.


The word is, the Southerners are still smarting from the loss of the Civil War.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:34 am
And with that in mind what do you think they feel about Obama?
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 09:59 am
Romney, who doesn't meet the Rep nutitude test, is a goner. Huck scores the highest on that test, approaching the scores attained by GWB, Reagan, Nixon, Quayle, and Agnew.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 10:31 am
I can't imagine a more hateful Presidential campaign than one pitting Huckabee and Hillary.

Right wing religious nuts vs. the couple they hate the most, the Clintons.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 10:47 am
Gala wrote:
As for Twit Romney-- he will probably win Michigan.

Although, it will be interesting if he doesn't.

He's running a weak campaign-- too much emphasis on the negative, too much hokey spin: "We've won 2 silvers" etc., too much reversal of previous positions, too repetitive and methodical. Hearing him list his accomplishments is like walking into a car dealership and you see the smiling salesman heading straight for you as you see the cartoon bubble above his head going "kaching, kaching."

There is too much emphasis put on "winning." Coming in second means you still get delegates. Obama came in second in NH and got the same number of delegates as Clinton who won the state but you wouldn't know that from the press coverage.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 10:57 am
Imagine an American president going to an important international meeting, thumping his big Bible, declaring it to be the certain Word of God, and challenging the other world leaders to confess that truth? This is exactly what Mike Huckabee did at an Iowa Republican debate. Does anyone not obsessed with electric organs and choir robes think this is an appropriate posture for the leader of the world’s most important country? Does being a Baptist preacher contribute to statesmanship? Voters needn’t be concerned over Huckabee’s readiness to play Caesar because his kind of Baptist is always ready for some killing, the wrathful God of the Old Testament having played a prominent role in his Sunday School experience, ready, as Mark Twain wrote in Letters From the Earth, to slay even the women for the sin of peeing against the temple wall even though they are not capable of the act.

Huckabee does share one advantage with Obama, and that is his quality of freshness. This cannot be underestimated in view of the desperation of a people to put George Bush and his pug-uglies into the oblivion of forgetfulness. Huckabee may be slightly demented — witness his recent argument about evolution and kangaroos — but he does have a boyish, fresh quality. He doesn’t look or speak anything like Giuliani or Thompson or the other grotesque political goblins haunting the campaign.

It would be the most entertaining outcome were the final candidates to be Obama and Huckabee. That match would provide a modern version of the Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925, with Obama as the voice of reason and good sense and Huckabee as the emotional and articulate defender of nonsense. The outcome in America would be anybody’s guess.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/pardon-my-laughter-and-cynicism/
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2008 11:39 am
xingu wrote:
And with that in mind what do you think they feel about Obama?


Depends what South'ners you're talking about.

The days of George Wallace are long gone-- and even he apologized before his death saying how wrong he had been. That took a lot of guts and I never thought I could admire a good old former racist white boy, but he earned my respect for it.

I think they're some racist holdouts who are in the minority, who will fight till death before they see a black man or Hillary Clinton in office.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jan, 2008 02:10 pm
The best thing Huckabee has going for him is the sheer reprehensibility of his establishment conservative detractors:

Quote:
Jesus' General shares this Jonah Goldberg gem from a recent NPR interview:

    Jonah Goldberg: The benefit of Bush's compassionate conservatism [in 2000] was that it was majorly a marketing sloganÂ… Alex Chadwick: You mean you're worried Mike Huckabee might actually mean it? Goldberg: Yes, that's what I'm terrified of.

At least he's honest.. i guess...
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:28 pm
MH has spoken frequently about the dangers of our plutocracy. Novak, because of this, said that MH favors class warfare. But MH is a bit of a hypocrite on this, having praised Sam Walton, a fellow resident of Arkansaw, to the sky, even though Walton was the epitome of the overpaid CEO.

Also, consider that his FairTax scheme would reduce the taxes of those at the top by 20 %, and increases taxes for the bottom 80 %.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Jan, 2008 03:29 pm
Fersure.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 10:19 am
Advocate wrote:
Romney, who doesn't meet the Rep nutitude test, is a goner. Huck scores the highest on that test, approaching the scores attained by GWB, Reagan, Nixon, Quayle, and Agnew.


I think Romney scores on the nut-itude scale. He's so chipper methodical and redundant.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 10:28 am
Advocate wrote:

Also, consider that his FairTax scheme would reduce the taxes of those at the top by 20 %, and increases taxes for the bottom 80 %.


There's nothing fair about graduated taxes unless you hate the successful.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 10:34 am
cjhsa wrote:
Advocate wrote:

Also, consider that his FairTax scheme would reduce the taxes of those at the top by 20 %, and increases taxes for the bottom 80 %.


There's nothing fair about graduated taxes unless you hate the successful.


It's not so much "hating" the successful as it is those of us who don't fit into the top 20% can't really afford to pay a lot of taxes.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 10:45 am
cjhsa wrote:
Advocate wrote:

Also, consider that his FairTax scheme would reduce the taxes of those at the top by 20 %, and increases taxes for the bottom 80 %.


There's nothing fair about graduated taxes unless you hate the successful.


Would you say that Paris Hilton and Teresa Heinz were successful?

The very wealthy, in general, are the only ones really thriving these days under our system. Thus, they should bear a bigger burden regarding tax liability.

Our country will definitely face discord should virtually all the income, wealth, and power reside in a tiny percentage of people at the top. Have you studied the history of, say, France and Russia?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 11:19 am
cjhsa wrote:
Advocate wrote:

Also, consider that his FairTax scheme would reduce the taxes of those at the top by 20 %, and increases taxes for the bottom 80 %.


There's nothing fair about graduated taxes unless you hate the successful.


The successful have the most to lose, and therefore should have the most invested in securing what they have.

Our graduated tax system is what has allowed the rich to become rich.
0 Replies
 
stevewonder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2008 11:33 am
he talks to God on his mobile!!!!!!!!!
need we say more???
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 5
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 09:34:31