Posted on 11/16/2007 6:42:18 PM PST by dano1
The Democratic debate was great entertainment, but the political news of the week comes the Republican race.
Two news polls from Iowa have former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee rapidly gaining on the longtime front-runner in that state's caucus contest, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.
Romney's poured millions into the state. But In the new American Research Group survey of likely Republican caucus-goers, he leads Huckabee by a meer 26-24 margin. A new The Research 2000 poll has Romney ahead by more -- 27-18 -- but Huckabee is again in second.
Huckabee's stills short on funds. And he's despised by the establishment -- the economic royalists at the Club for Growth are running an attack campaign against him while the National Right to Life Committee just endorsed former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson, despite the fact that Huckabee's a far more consistent social conservative.
So why is Huckabee rising?
In tenuous economic times -- characterized by foreclosures, high gas prices and fears of recession -- the Arkansan is campaigning as a populist who criticizes corporations, talks about the need to change our trade policies and promises to tip the balance away from Wall Street and toward Main Street.
Huckabee's actually secured the endorsement of the Machinists union with that kind of talk. But the real breakthrough is with working-class socially conservative Republicans in Iowa. He's giving them an alternative to Tom Frank's "What's the Matter With Kansas?" scenario -- in which low- and middle-income Americans vote against their class interests in order to advance their "moral values."
No, Huckabee is not a perfect player -- his populism has serious limits, as does his approach to foreign policy, and his stances on abortion rights and gay rights are throwbacks. But Huckabee might just be the perfect foil to the corporate slickness of Mitt Romney. And that makes him the most fascinating figure on the campaign trail this week.
The Midwest is comprised of the following states:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
The American South is comprised of the 11 states of the confederacy:
South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee.
Wrong.
I never said, nor do I believe, that govt power is the same thing as Christian charity.
Read it again, slower this time;
“Personally I don’t believe any Christian conservatives who truly want to give freely to charity....... would have their panties in twist about their tax dollars going to help the poor etc."
Why do you even hang out with conservatives with beliefs like you have?
Because many conservatives on this site agree with me on a whole array of conservative issues.
And unlike you, they don't feel the need to distort what I say every time they don't agree with me on a specific point.
““Personally I don’t believe any Christian conservatives who truly want to give freely to charity....... would have their panties in twist about their tax dollars going to help the poor etc.””
There you go again confusing Christian charity with government power.
Quit pushing welfare and quit trying to portray it as having anything to do with private charity.
Conservatives don’t dig that, in fact fighting that is kind of what makes us conservatives.
Tell your boss to stop plagarizing from Dr. Paul's campaign.
Typical empty-suit Republican...
You just don't get it.
I'm beginning to wonder if you are capable of grasping the distinction I am making between Christian charity and government power.
In any case this brings up an interesting point about the authority God gives Govts;
Romans 13:1-7 vs1 "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. vs2 Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
Quit pushing welfare and quit trying to portray it as having anything to do with private charity.
You stop playing these infantile word games in your feeble attempts to misconstrue my stated positions to fit your personal pet peeves.
Nowhere have I "pushed" welfare on these boards.
But I clearly stated that those who claim to be for caring for the poor privately and yet have a fit when govt does the same I believe are phony and hypocritical.
I prefer private charity to govt simply because it is more efficient, and yes it is by free will. That is why I contribute to Christian based homeless shelters.
The most destructive force known to mankind is a powerful government.
Be careful what you ask for.
“But I clearly stated that those who claim to be for caring for the poor privately and yet have a fit when govt does the same I believe are phony and hypocritical.”
Yep, pushing welfare, it just doesn’t fly with me I am a conservative.
I'm sure you have no problem collecting unemployment benefits when out of work, or SS when you retire, or driving on roads funded by the Feds but you resent your tax dollars going to help anybody else.
You give conservatives a bad name.
No, liberals pushing welfare and claiming to be conservatives does that.
Ok. If you insist.
Have a nice day.
What, you couldn't find any nice articles about him in Workers World?
Hank
Huckabee is being duplicitous when he speaks against unfair trade deals. Don’t forget how Huckabee made that sneaky insider deal with Mexico and some Arkansas businesses. Huckabee talks out of both sides of his mouth. He is just out for himself, don’t let the phony charm fool you.
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.