Posted on 01/03/2008 8:38:17 PM PST by 11th_VA
Edited on 01/03/2008 9:13:06 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
LOS ANGELES (Catholic Online) - First, it was Larry Sabato and then it was Rush Limbaugh. Sabato is the Robert Kent Gooch Professor of Politics of the Center for Politics at the University of at the University of Virginia.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
He lied when called Romney dishonest.
Romney made it sound like Huckabee oversaw a massive free education program to illegals. Untrue.
Also, Huckabee's governorship occured when states all over the country were faced with burgeoning budgets, due in part to unfunded mandates and federal entitlement reform. I've lived in Illinios and Wisconsin and it's been ridiculous.
From factcheck.org:
Huckabee's critics, however, have done some exaggerating of their own. That press release from former Tennessee Sen. Thompson accuses Huckabee of more than doubling state spending, from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion at the end of 2006. But those numbers aren't correct. When we talked to Mike Stormes, the administrator of the Office of Budget for the state of Arkansas, we discovered a different story. In fact, after adjusting for inflation, we found that spending in fiscal year 1998 (the first budget for which Huckabee was responsible) was actually $10.4 billion, while spending at the end of 2006 was $15.6 billion. That’s a big increase, but it’s a far cry from doubling state spending.
It’s worth noting, too, that Huckabee, despite facing a $200 million shortfall in 2002, ended his term with a surplus of $844.5 million. A billion dollar turnaround is, we think, a noteworthy accomplishment.
~”Only Mitt and Rudy have the resources for Super Tuesday.”~
Huckabee is about to have them. That’s what winning does for you in politics.
~”Do you think Fred or Duncan will be around on Feb. 5th?”~
No, but I suspect their numbers aren’t great enough to make the difference. I could be wrong.
~”The big question is McCain: Will the GOP remember his various stabs in the back and pay him back?”~
That is a big question. We’ll find out on Tuesday. If they don’t, then Romney is sunk. If they do, then Romney has a shot at battling his way back.
Does this mean if Hillary doesn't win the presidency, then all women for all time are DOOOOOOMED!? I think not.
Fine. He’s still not a conservative.
Dude - I asked to point out where Huckabee made false statements - not Romney or Thompson.
Not by the Scrooge Conservative Standard (SCS). But, I don't intend to loose sleep over it.
God bless us, every one.
And I’ve shown some of what was really goin’ on and you’re welcome. Night.
Not by a long shot. Border security, national security, foreign policy, fiscal policy, tax policy, individual liberty, and government restraint, to name a few. That’s half the conservative platform.
No candidate remaining is a perfect conservative, but Huckabee is the worst of the lot - and that’s quite an achievement.
That’s nutty, sorry.
Huckabee is strong in those areas. Just keep paying attention.
If by ‘strong’ you mean ‘liberal,’ sure. What’s nutty is that you think Huckabee is anything like the kind of candidate you should be looking for.
I’m sorry, we should not be redefining conservatism to fit our candidate. While I support Romney as the best of the available alternatives, I refuse to do that with him, and I refuse to watch you do that unchallenged.
We don’t need Calvin Coolidge.
We need Teddy Roosevelt.
The irony is that, by insisting on the "100% or Nothing" course in regards to the pro-life issue, they will be putting an ultra-liberal in the White House that will keep Roe v. Wade as the supreme law of the land in all 50 states for decades to come.
In America's current political reality, the pro-life side and the pro-abortion side both have ZERO chance of getting an Abortion Amendment, pro or con, enshrined into the Constitution.
The only realistic change is having a Supreme Court that believes in original intent and not penumbras overturn Roe v. Wade so that abortion may return as a State's issue as the Tenth Amendment intended issues not mentioned in the Constitution to be.
Abortion could easily be outlawed in Iowa if Roe v. Wade were overturned by such a Supreme Court but, by insisting on the impossible, they are ensuring that abortion will remain legal in Iowa for decades to come as Ruth Ginsburg clones fill the next Supreme Court vacancies.
Wow. Just WOW. This so hits the nail on the head, and needs to be repeated. My hat is off to you!
Umm... ok, I think I’m going to bed now.
Lemmings get a bad and totally unjustified rap from infamous film makers giving the lemmings nowhere to run but over a cliff and then terrifying them. The poor lemmings were intentionally slaughtered for the sake of a fake documentary. They had no choice but to run over the cliff.
Many conservatives running over the cliffs willfully today by supporting fake conservative candidates can’t make the same claim. They could think it through but choose not to, preferring instead the addictive rush of blind panic.
18 to 24 months from now, these same people will claim to have never supported the candidate they are supporting today.
Now would be a good time to remember 1992 and what supporting a fake conservative cost the country.
Those who forget the past slander of the noble lemming will be doomed to repeat the caricature over and over and never get the joke.
The GOP is happy to engage in Christian identity politics to woo Evangelicals, so long as the latter mind their place as footsoldiers, never seeking to join the establishment.
Since government took that away, it should put it back.
Me thinks that the Huck's Iowa victory is more like a straw fire. We will see what it will happened in the heartland. Senator Thompson will prevail because he has the right message and his steadfast beliefs in the Conservative creed at any level.
I never bought into this Sunday morning onslaught of so called self appointed reverends/ministers of God telling you that for some fee they will save your soul from the Devil, while they live like kings.
Taking money from little old gullible ladies to fashion their own life styles, via bombastic rhetoric is wrong.
Vice free? What are you talking about? I doubt Bush was ever vice free for a lifetime, come on, get real. Do you really expect us to follow that line of reasoning? Look,I won’t tell you what to do with your womb and you won’t tell me what to do with my body or my mind, otherwise I can’t see the party holding together or representing a challenge to the democrats. You don’t trust people that have vices, I’m assuming you mean drugs, but alcohol as well and smoking. I don’t participate in either of any of those but I reserve the right to if I want to. You seem to think that none of the republicans elected have had vices? Most of these candidates have vices, It wouldn’t be a shock to find out the same about Huckabee. Responsibility requires goals and respect for others property and life. If you want to drink or whatever and you don’t hurt me go right ahead, but as soon as you start telling me how to use my mind the jig might be up. Otherwise you’re extolling the virtues of clergymen with billyclubs.
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.