>>Then argue winsomely and convincingly against Huckabee. You won’t win Huckabee supporters over to your side by ridiculing them. Speak the truth in love and they’ll end up leaving Huckabee for a better candidate.
You keep posting this same crap. Who do you think you’re kidding? Your schtick is “I am not a Huck supporter, but I decry the animosity of FReepers who support him yadda yadda yadda”...
Stop it already with the act. You love Huck. Just admit it.
You and others like you won’t be swayed. Very well, have him.
I have posted the truth “without ceasing” as have many others. It won’t sway Huck syncophants like you, but others reading it might, just might, look into the poseur and figure out that he’s worthless.
Huckabee ‘08!
** NO foreign policy!
** Pro-illegal aliens!
** Pro amnesty!
** Pro class warfare!
** Soft on crime!
** Pardons for murderers and rapists!
** Hard on personal freedoms!
** The HIGH TAX candidate!
** The HIGH SPENDING candidate!
** Pro Big Government!
** Supports International Carbon Credit Trading!
I am not voting for Huckabee in the primaries. He’s soft on ILLEGAL immigration, bad on taxes, seems fairly inept with foreign policy, and so on.
I don’t want to see FR descend into such vitriolic rhetoric as I’ve seen develop over the past year or so. It’s as though we’ve taken on Michael Moore’s nasty tactics. I want us to argue winsomely with facts, not with mischaracterization and innuendo. We’re more effective that way.
I strongly advocate voting for either Thompson or Hunter in the primaries.
Am I still being ambiguous?