Posted on 11/28/2007 11:49:49 AM PST by Def Conservative
Lynchburg, VA - He's huge in Iowa, and making headlines everyday. Now a contender for the Republican presidential bid is in the Hill City. Governor Mike Huckabee spoke at Commencement at Liberty University Wednesday morning.
(Excerpt) Read more at new.wset.com ...
Huckabee should have run as a Democrat!
I fear you would be right. Preacher vs Beast. Mmm....she would win hands down. All Hail President Hill.......scary.
Yes, Huckabee's record on taxes and immigration is poor. That doesn't make him "liberal on everything but abortion". Kinda like claiming "Al Gore is conservative on everything except global warming" or "The Mormon church agrees with Catholics on everything except polygomy"
You are wrong on your statements there. Fred Thompson was quoted as saying that the Platform was basically useless when Dole was planning on getting rid of the pro-life plank. Thompson clearly stated that he opposed the federal marriage amendment when he went on Meet the Press. So, no I am not lying - you need to check your facts.
Romney will lead this country further towards socialism.
I don’t trust Huckabee and have serious doubst about his ability to handle serious security issues.
I want neither. The first vote has not yet been cast, and this is far from a two horse race.
Arkanses remains far from sanity.
Since you directly accused me of lying here are the links to back up my statements.
First, here is a link to a David Brody Article which quotes several of Fred’s 1996 statements about the Republican Platform. http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/192754.aspx. Here are two of Fred’s statements about the Republican Platform which are discussed in the article. First, “It’s the most useless device I’ve ever heard of.” Second, “Does Anyone Remember What Was In The Last [platform] , Except Abortion? … If We Get Caught Up In Having A Platform Debate And Stuff Like That, We Deserve To Lose.”
Second, here is what Fred Thompson said on Meet the Press about the Federal Marriage Amendment - basically he supports an amendment which would prevent judges from imposing Gay Marriage but he opposes the federal marriage amendment as drafted which would define marriage as being only between a man and woman. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21623208/page/4/
“MR. RUSSERT: And also with gay marriage, according to the Associated Press: “Thompson favors a constitutional amendment that bars judges from legalizing gay marriage, but also leaves open the door for state legislatures to approve the practice.” So if a state said, “We want to have gay marriages in our state,” you would be OK with that?
MR. THOMPSON: Yes. This, this, this—the—marriage is between a man and a woman. Nobody ever thought that that was contested until recently, and we’ve had a couple judges in a couple states decide to turn all that on its head. So we’ve, we’ve had, again, a judge-created problem. I would support a constitutional amendment that addresses this judge-created problem. But at the end of—and, and say judges can’t do that. But, at the end of the day, if a state legislature and a governor decide that that’s what they want to do, yes, they should have, they, they should have the freedom to do what Fred Thompson thinks is a very bad idea.”
Now, that I have posted links to back up my claims will you apologize for calling me a liar?
Last I checked, Swaggart isn’t endorsing anything but worms....
Just remember Howard Dean. Dean led the dems right up to Iowa.
FRED will slowly surge ahead as soon as Iowa has a real chance to see him. The MSM has such a grip on TV time, they don’t dare give him much time, he is too good and would definately not be the candidate of choice for Hillary to compete with. The truth will eventually win out.
In terms of ideology, Fred Thompson is the heir to the Reagan Legacy...
In terms of communication/expression, he’s a Republican version of Adlai Stevenson. tsk, tsk, tsk, all the movies and episodes of law and order and you can’t communicate better than that???
He needs to hire Karl Rove and Karen Hughes, and tell Spence Abraham to concentrate on winning Michigan for him... they’re both in the job market...
the traditional rules of how the nominating process plays out for the parties seems to be reversed this time...
traditionally, the front runner eighteen months out from the convention seems to be the best option for the GOP (Bush), and the Rodents pick the dark horse at the last minute, such as Kerry in Iowa, while Dean was leading the polls leading up to the Hawkeye Caucci.
Hillary will be the Democratic nominee, that’s for certain, even if she bombs out in Iowa. Too many Masshole flatlanders have moved to New Hampshire to keep it from her....
The Republican nominee, however, is still a mystery, and probably will be up to Super Tuesday..
I stand by what I said. I don’t care what the polls say right now. Talk about fantasy land. That’s about where the average voter’s understanding of Huckabee is at this point in the game. Once the campaign gets going, and the Beast and her minions get to really work the Huckabee record, she’ll tear her fellow liberal to shreds.
When it’s liberal vs. liberal it’s always the meanest, lowest snake in the dirt that wins the fight.
Snake Hillary will beat Snake Huckabee with one rattle tied behind her tail.
He’s not dead........at least physically............
Read the full quote from the AP in 1996 and the Brody quote and you will get the whole story. FRED Thompson wanted to get rid of a written platform altogether. There was a floor fight brewing about the platform because Bob Dole and Governor TOMMY Thompson were trying to water down the language. Senator FRED Thompson was trying to defuse the situation by advocating eliminating the platform altogether, THE WHOLE PLATFORM, not just the abortion plank. FRED Thompson was trying to hold the Republican Party together, which was in more danger of coming apart than most people realize. FRED’s goal was to defeat Bill Clinton. Dole and TOMMY Thompson couldn’t get out of their own way long enough to allow that to happen.
From the May 30, 1996 Virginian Pilot, reprinted from the WaPo:
“Wisconsin Gov. Tommy G. Thompson, an influential voice among Republican state officials, said Wednesday that the GOP platform plank on abortion should be ``modified’’ to make supporters of abortion rights more comfortable with the party’s anti-abortion stand.
The chairman of the National Governors Association and one of several governors reportedly under consideration as a possible running mate for Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, Thompson told reporters that anti-abortion Republicans like himself need to be flexible on platform language to reduce the prospects of a divisive fight at the national convention in San Diego this August.”
Terry Jeffrey and others who don’t like Fred have tried to twist the history of those events to make Fred look bad, but I was a Republican activist during that time. I lived it and I know what happened. Dole and TOMMY Thompson thought that by watering down the abortion plank they’d widen their support. Pro-abortion activists were, rightly, having none of it. They were threatening to split from the party. Fred was trying to keep the peace. You can read more about it at the mclife.org website. TOMMY Thompson had the audacity to try again in 2000, but didn’t get very far, because Bush 43 stopped him.
If you really didn’t know the truth, then I apologize for calling you a liar. Now, you know the whole truth.
As for Defense of Marriage, where in this quote do you see non-support: “I would SUPPORT [emphasis mine] a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT [emphasis mine] that addresses this judge-created problem.”
I will have to look into the platform debate more since you did provide an interesting perspective and some facts I hadn’t known on this. As to the Marriage Amendment, Fred has his own unique one. However, he opposes the federal marriage amendment as it has been drafted and argued by social conservatives in the past. This is the primary reasons that Dobson gave for opposing his candidacy. Basically Fred supports and amendment which says that judges cannot force any state to accept gay marriage but opposes any amendment which would define marriage as only between a man and a women because he wants to leave state legislatures the ability to adopt gay marriage and/or civil unions if they choose to do so.
I still don’t see how you get non-support out of the words, “I support a Constitutional amendment” but so be it.
You have an issue with state’s rights on social issues. Fair enough. Ideally I’d like to see all of these issues put to rest once and for all with Constitutional Amendments, but with a Dem congress it’s a nonstarter for now. But there is always more than one way to accomplish a goal, and as some states outlaw gay marriage and others don’t, we’ve got an interesting case to take to the Supreme Court over the full faith and credit clause. Get one more, just one more strict constructionist on the court, and it’s very easy to see where we will have a decision in favor of defense of marriage, putting into place de facto national defense of marriage.
I’m a pragmatist. I don’t want to change the Republican platform and Constitutional Amendments should be the ultimate goal, but in the meantime you fight the fight you can win, and the states’ rights fight is one conservatives can win, and then look toward the next battle.
I have a question for you. You’re a conservative Christian. At least I get the feeling you are. So am I. And one of my main problems with Huckabee is that he has changed so many of the positions he had as governor of Arkansas just in time for the Republican primary. He was LULAC’s best friend, now he’s Mr. Border Security. He was Mr. Tax and Spend, now he wants to abolish the IRS, etc. It’s all just a little too perfect, a little too calculated for me.
It could be genuine, I suppose, but the timing is highly suspect. Huckabee is a Baptist minister. I hold Christians to a higher standard than other people, and I have a real problem with all the flipflopping. It strikes me as dishonesty, the sort of dishonesty I would expect from a Rudy or a Romney, but not from a man of God. Does that bother you at all?
It’s a real speed bump for me, and the reason that although he seems like a decent man, I don’t support Huckabee. Hunter’s my first choice and Fred is my second. Neither is perfect, but they are honest, consistent conservatives who haven’t changed their positions to appeal to their current audience.
I have the same concerns with Huckabee. I would like to like him because many of the people I respect have endorsed but I don’t trust him because he does seem a little too slick and almost pretends that he never held the positions that he had when he was governor. So, my first choice is Hunter, and then a long ways later its pretty much a tossup between Fred and Huckabee. Basically, I trust Huckabee on social issues and little else. While I trust Fred on economic issues but don’t trust him as much as you do on social issues. That said at the end of the day I probably would support Fred over Huckabee, however, it would be hard for me because I do take his federalism positions on social issues kind of personally.
I here ya. Go Hunter. It bothers me a lot that he’s not getting any traction. It shows me just how powerful the MSM still is with the electorate.
here=hear
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.