Posted on 12/17/2007 8:34:32 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Most Americans recall all too well the turmoil and discord of the Clinton Presidency of 1992-2000. While in office, President Clinton fine tuned the art of issuing misleading, inaccurate and flat out false statements into a precise science.
The unvarnished truth is that President Clinton lied through his teeth, regularly and unashamedly.
Perjury and obstruction of justice eventually caught up with President Clinton, as he was ultimately stripped of his license to practice law and forbidden from arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court, at least temporarily.
Fifteen years after the Democrat ex-governor from Arkansas lied his way into the White House, the Republican party has its own silver tongued, double talking “bubba.”
That would be Mike Huckabee, another ex-governor from Arkansas who finds the truth devilishly elusive, or downright disgusting to be more precise.
Mike Huckabee has been caught in a real whopper, even by the standards for deceit set by Bill Clinton.
Apparently, Huckabee lied about having a degree in theology.
WND: http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59222
The mind boggles: An ordained Baptist pastor and first-tier presidential candidate lied about having a degree in theology! What in the hell is this nation coming to?
Even more distressing is Huckabee’s record while serving as the CEO of Arkansas. This governor raised taxes and encouraged illegal immigration, for heaven’s sake!
And now he is running as the candidate best suited to meet conservative expectations in 2008?
God, please, spare America and her people from another lying ex-governor from Arkansas in the Oval Office!
Make that “God, please, spare America and her people from another lying ex-governor from Arkansas, or female spouse thereof, in the Oval Office!”
What was Hugh saying? That Iran couldn’t become a country we could befriend. Iran isn’t a country to deal with. They are sending militants into Iraq; therefore they are eternally the enemy. Ultimately, we must destroy the enemy completely. As I wrote, Hewitt was saying “that we in effect should just nuke Iran out of existence.” In effect. Note those two words. “Nuke” is not a direct quote. But in effect, Hugh was dismissing Iran as a country we could deal with.
Why are you so particular with words I use about Hugh, but not with words people use about Huckabee?
Ah, Huckabee went to Baptist Bible college, not Libety University.
1)It is NOT slander to use a man's own words to expose him as a FRAUD and a CHARLATAN of the lowest order
2) IF he is the nominee, I will work my ass off to defeat him in the general election. Not only will I vote third-party, I will actively work to expose him as the RINO fraud he is.
Better to lose an election than destroy the conservative movement and the Republican Party.
All Republicans have told untruths. Of course, conflating “religion” with “theology” with “divinity” with “pastoral ministry” is the worst kind of untruth, and those who do so must die. Better to have another RINO or a pro-abortionist as our Republican candidate.
Nah. Let’s get Hillary in office. Now.
Huckabee went to Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia, Ark.
Not sure what point you’re trying to make. Are you, now, saying that his degree isn’t in “Religion” at all?
You are in favor of Thompson/Hunter. Me too. Trashing Huckabee only alienates his supporters; it doesn’t win them over. Honey and vinegar and all that.
I’ll follow Reagan’s 11th Commandment, and leave it at that.
-—Although I thought ad lib apology was pretty funny.-—
I don’t care who you are. That was funny right there. :^)
Maybe I’m just hyper-sensitive. I’m one o those poor souls that believed Clinton’s, “I did not have sex with that woman.”
I didn’t like his politics, but I didn’t think a President of the United States, whoever he was, would lie straight into the camera like that, about something that was a matter of great public interest and scrutiny.
This the first time we’ve seen Huckabee in trouble and I don’t like what I see. I have friends that I respect that are rooting for Huckabee and have really tried to see the positives in this man. He just seems under-qualified and deceptive to me.
Oh my gosh! I knew he was slimy, but if he really lied about the way he lost weight, that is just pathological. It would have been FINE if he had admitted having bariatric surgery. I wonder what is the truth now.
From your link:
“The findings are as follows:
* Huckabee’s vague history of diet/exercise doesn’t adequately explain his astonishing result.
* His spokeswoman provides an ambiguous denial denial of bariatric surgery.
* Massive and persistent weight loss with bariatric surgery is about 100x more common than with diet/exercise.
* Bariatric surgery has a highly characteristic weight loss pattern that Huckabee’s weight loss record fits exactly for rapidity, amount and maintenance. This pattern is not at all like that of diet/exercise.
* Huckabee demonstrates changes in physical appearance that appear bariatric both in general and the specific (hair loss and skin changes).
* His particular diet habits are tellingly bariatric.
* Just prior to his rapid weight loss he took an unusual vacation with a furtive itinerary and end date which provided plausible window for a private hospitalization and recovery.
* In 2005, Huckabee required abdominal hernia surgery, an expected complication of bariatric surgery. This was termed a Spigelian hernia, which are so vanishingly rare that it appears more likely to be used as a cover story for a post-bariatric inscisional hernia.
* The marathon prowess that Huckabee often touts is not so likely to be an example of exercise inducing weight loss, as it is the expected result of (bariatric) weight loss permitting exercise.
* While running marathons Huckabee is shown carrying that energy supplementation, that is both expected of, and associated with, bariatric marathoners.
* The lack of any identified witnesses to the bariatric surgery/hospitalization is adequately explained by medical privacy ethical standards as well as the rigor of Federal law.
In applying the above mentioned Law of Parsimony, it is evident that the one explanation of bariatric surgery readily, even exactly, satisfies every clinical finding.
Diet/exercise alone is not sufficient to explain the findings; its use as a explanation depends on first compiling a series of highly improbable findings (rapid, massive weight loss), and then introducing new conditions and diagnoses (e.g. rare hernias, hair loss). Making the clinical finding fit bariatric surgery is as effortless as diet/exercise is labored.
If Huckabee did have bariatric surgery, the secret will be unlikely to survive a general election campaign. Huckabee has made his weight loss not just a personal health matter, but a defining saga, a prominent part of his Presidential resume, the subject of a profitable (scam?) diet book, and a model for his public policy. Its disclosure would be an admission of fraud and deceit that would be to Democrats an inestimable advantage.
Presidential candidates have an obligation to their Party and to voters and to disclose any medical condition that may have an effect on their candidacy, e.g., as did Thompson regarding his lymphoma. Since Huckabee’s spokeswoman has made ambiguous comments regarding the possibility of bariatric surgery, and since the evidence does not appear to favor diet/exercise, Huckabee needs to clarify for the record whether any surgery contributed to his weight loss, and this made disclosure made prior to the GOP primaries.
To this end, medical records would be helpful, which could be as simple as making available the film and radiologist’s report of the barium swallow CT scan he most likely underwent to diagnose his hernia in 2005.”
Yeah, Ouachita is not Liberty University where I keep getting these links to so-called “religion degrees” which there are none.
He may have a degree in religion (what kind is anybody’s guess)but he certainly does not have a degree in Theology.
So all of our problems with Huckabee- In-State tuition for illegal aliens, raising taxes 47%, Clinton-esque levels of corruption, utter incoherence, incompetence and confusion regarding foreign policy, and granting clemency to murderers and rapists who went on to re-offend- are "yelling the loudest"? How about countering our arguments with facts instead of screaming epithets of "Christian-basher" and "money-con"? The next thing you know you'll be invoking the blood libel against us. Get a grip and come to terms with the FACT that the Dope from Hope is NOTHING but an amnesty-pushing, criminal-pardoning, tax-raising pacifist with SEVERE ethical problems.
Glad to see Huckabee for what he is. You just admitted he's a RINO. I don't want any RINO which leaves me supporting few candidates.
You wrote: “Let me see if I understand your rant. If we don’t take Huckabee we get Hillary.”
No. That’s not what I’m saying. I want Fred or Hunter. I don’t want Huckabee.
What I am saying is this: Let’s not resort to slathering hatred for particular Republican candidates. Demonizing them does nobody any good, and just ennobles the Democrats, who love to see a feeding frenzy.
Huckabee is wrong on some things. Some significant things. Let’s call him on those. But let’s not resort to name calling (which only strengthens the resolve of those who currently support him) or denouncing him over silly things like what kind of degree he has. Those are petty things to get upset about, and detract from his real problems: illegal immigration, taxation, pardons, etc.
I have said MANY TIMES — read my posts — that Huckabee is a RINO. Duh. I hate some of his policies. Again, read what I’ve written.
What I’m against is demonization of fellow Republicans, and piling on over things that are insignificant (religion vs. theology vs pastoral ministry vs divinity etc.).
Huckabee’s policies on such things as ... ah, forget it. I’ve repeated myself too many times. You, taxesareforever, aren’t worth my time.
What I'm against is not speaking out against RINOs. I have nothing against people speaking out against those GOP candidates who are democrats/socialists in GOP clothing. The more noise against them the better.
“What was Hugh saying? That Iran couldn’t become a country we could befriend.”
Hugh did not say that. You’re lying again.
“Iran isn’t a country to deal with. They are sending militants into Iraq; therefore they are eternally the enemy.”
Hugh did not say anything close to that. You’re still lying.
“Ultimately, we must destroy the enemy completely.”
Hugh never said this, of course. Has anyone ever called you a congenital liar?
“As I wrote, Hewitt was saying “that we in effect should just nuke Iran out of existence.” In effect. Note those two words. “Nuke” is not a direct quote. But in effect, Hugh was dismissing Iran as a country we could deal with.”
In effect, you’re either a liar or a colassal dope.
“Why are you so particular with words I use about Hugh, but not with words people use about Huckabee?”
Face it. You just made up up a bunch of $h!t and claimed Hugh said it in order to besmirch the man.
You bore false witness. You, sir, are a liar.
Nope. Most listen to the minstreme media or to the increasingly liberal evangelical orgs for news.
2. They like being preached to. Content is less relavent than thought or action. "Faith and Faith Alone" is great cover for liars and fools.
Thats exactly right! One of my very conservative Christian friend from Iowa is voting for Huckabee only because he is ahead in the polls. He said I was pathetic for still supporting Thompson and Hunter. He then said to me, “I don’t know what there is NOT to like about Huckabee.” so I threw him some facts about how Huckabee raised taxes more than Clinton, called people who want tighter boarders racist, wants to close Gitmo ect. Then my friend said, “well raising taxes is a good thing! How else is the Government going to pay for things? Bake sales?” I then fired back and told him that “REAL Conservatives believe in cutting taxes, and cutting government programs to pay for things we need.” He didn’t have a response to that, or anything else I brought up about Huckabees record. He just said, “Well Huckabee is ahead in the polls so I am going to vote for him. Maybe next time around we can vote for people like Thompson and Hunter, but I just don’t see them winning.” Then I told him this is probably Thompson’s only chance. The conversation ended there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.