Posted on 12/27/2007 4:10:27 PM PST by street_lawyer
Is Huckabee a Jimmy Carter Christian?
Recently Huckabee reportedly was unaware that the Supreme Court struck down an anti-sodomy law as being unconstitutional. How can we depend upon him to carry the social conservative banner into the next election cycle if he fails to understand one of the most basic and recent court decisions. How can we trust him to pick judges who are opposed to anal intercourse, if for no other reason than it is the most fertile infectious form of HIV transmission.
If you can vote for a man who is opposed to school choice and one who is endorsed by the National Education Association of New Hampshire, then Huckabee is your man. He does however give illegal aliens the choice to compete with US children for scholarship money. He did so because he did not want "innocent" children to be punished for the criminal activity of their parents. Perhaps Huckabee will allocate some tax revenue to pay for a fine education at one of our most prestigious boarding schools for the children of drug addicts who are imprisoned (occasionally). If you're a Huckabee supporter then you also agree that illegal immigration makes up for slavery. I don't understand the connection. Maybe someone can explain it to me.Here's a novel idea that apparently has no chance of working yet is the first thing on the Huckabee website: [commit] the resources of the federal government to the enforcement of our immigration laws.
Ok so Huckabee is a man of "faith" like Carter but according to his website he said "My faith doesn't influence my decisions" Neither does Giuliani's, so what is the difference? Giuliani will appoint judges who will not misconstrue the Constitution. Which is more then I can say for the Huckster. I support and have always supported passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right (of the unborn to live); well isn't that just peachy Huckster?. Let's bet on the judges instead and forget about the electoral process which is about as infertile as I wish unwed mother were. He wants to overturn Roe v. Wade, but doesn't understand the Texas sodomy case Lawrence and Garner v. Texas. If it were not for the fact that anal intercourse is a very good delivery system for HIV infection, given the impracticality of policing this disgusting act, anal intercourse should not be a legislative matter, unless of course children in grammar school are instructed on how to perform this act safely. Somehow given the teacher's endorsement, I don't see the Huckster proposing any legislation that would limit teaching any form of perversion. Perhaps churchgoers can somehow figure out how to unconfuse the minds of their children while Huckabee does nothing about removing condoms from the hand-out basket at South Street Elementary School.
Socialism 101: According to the Huckster, Every child deserves a quality education, first-rate health care, decent housing in a safe neighborhood, and clean air and drinking water. Every child deserves the opportunity to discover and use his God-given gifts and talents. Apparently only public schools are capable of providing a quality education, since religious schools are not likely to demonstrate the various anal intercourse techniques. I got my first demonstration watching two dogs unable to separate. I noted that they were not same-sex unions. I also have never seen two same-sex animal unions which leads me to conclude that only in humans is there a normal variant from heterosexuals. In case you have not already discovered, I'm not opposed to homogeneous grouping, just acts which carry a high likelihood of killing a large segment of humanity. There are some acts which are so unnatural that even the Huckster should be able to comprehend them.
” I always vote for whoever is running against Teddy, but what good does that do? There are only about 30% of us in Massachusetts who have any brains. “
I sometimes feel like the Red Sox fans of the early 60’s. Dick Radatz used to say that he would walk through Kenmore Square and someone would yell, “Hey, Dick, what time is the game today?”, and he would answer, “What time can you make it?”
There are a few of us, and someday, some very special day, we’ll win the World Series. And when we do, we’ll charge $4.50 for bottled water, too.
Since you are stating that I misrepresented his position I will reply. In your case I thought to make an exception since this will be a waste of time.
True I didn't quote every word, but you can tell me how his faith will not influence him and still drive his decisions. I interpret statues for a living and if you can't see that adding the rest of the statements is meaningless, then we cannot communicate on this level.
I wasn't going to comment on the statement that he wants to be a good steward of the earth, but I seriously doubt that you will find a statement by him condemning the communist countries, and Japan for their pollution. I would guess that he is not opposed to the Kyoto treaty. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.
I understand your point, but sometimes being blunt gives clarity to ones message.
Actually not all lawyers are a diabolical as you might expect. Fortunately my practice allows me to practice law and be a practicing Christian.
Sorry about reposting the entire comment, but I was moved by the clarity and wit of this post and thought it might be acceptable to emphasis it by commenting on it.
Obviously you get it!
There is something to be said for taking the time to construct an argument that has a hook in front to snare those like yourself who do not have time to read everything. I'll try not to forget that rule when I have time to apply it.
I’ll vote for Huckabee if he gets the nomination, since I do believe that he is preferable to the woman who will be his opponent.
“My faith doesnt influence my decisions, it drives them.”
If you have trouble understanding that sentence, then you need to spend far less time reading statutes and more time reading the English language. Perhaps a paraphrase will make it clearer for you: My faith does not merely influence my decisions. Rather it drives my decisions.
Or even more succinctly: My faith is the basis and driving force for all my decisions.
I knew Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine, and when I meet Huckabee I'm going to say "and you sir are no Ronald Reagan"
But seriously, what I like about this Bush in office is that he has values that he follows regardless of the media criticism. When a president has no values you get Bill Clinton.
I would say Huckster is a bit more salvation oriented and less good works than Carter
but still too much good works which is probably why he called folks who resisted his handouts to illegals as racists
in other words....he’s about like our current President
If you have trouble understanding that sentence, then you need to spend far less time reading statutes and more time reading the English language. Perhaps a paraphrase will make it clearer for you: My faith does not merely influence my decisions. Rather it drives my decisions.
Or even more succinctly: My faith is the basis and driving force for all my decisions.
If that is what he means then I'm ok with the statement. I guess I will vote for him now that you opened my mind to the possibility that his history in office was all a bad dream.
ignorant post....nothing personal
I agree he is about like Bush on many issues and has a similar world view.....which is what bothers me.
It’s a shame he is so screwy....I would love to support a cultural Christian.
Ill vote for Huckabee if he gets the nomination, since I do believe that he is preferable to the woman who will be his opponent.
***I suppose I would as well. The deal breaker for me is pro-life, so I will not vote for tootyfruityrudy.
if you do not vote for Rudy then you are sitting in the center of the isle. Hillary should send you a thank you card for dropping out of the election.
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.