Posted on 01/13/2008 1:01:49 PM PST by TornadoAlley3
Just one more reason to add to the dozens of others as to why Mike Huckabee shouldn't be President of the United Staes of America and leader of the free world.
Are you surprised...
Why must you turn this site into a house of lies. Fred Thompson has a 100% pro-life voting record and has received the endorsement of almost every right to life organization. Has a single one endorsed the lying Dope from Hope.
There is a complex social dynamic at work that is common in evangelical circles (I say so as a member of evanglicalism). A person comes along and convinces the hoi polloi that he is part of their group. But, not only is he "one of them," he's going big. He's gonna be National. International. Now, it doesn't matter what he does. He can have sex with a subordinate. He can photograph a prostitute. He can raise taxes. As long as he still is "Big Time," they will support him.
Even after Swaggart confessed, I had dozens of conversations with Christians who would defend him and his ministry. They were absolutely convinced that he was still a "man of God," an "anointed person." His actual record didn't matter. Their feelings about him were the defining factor in their arguments.
You can insert Joyce Meyers, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson or any other number of public evangelicals and you will find a devoted band of followers who don't care about anything the person actually does as long as they're saying something clever and they're "one of us."
Anyone who gets in that person's way is "not of God" and the enemy. Anyone who dares to speak ill of that person is "touching God's anointed." Any person who points out actual facts about the person which do not fit with the true believer's emotions concerning their hero becomes a liar. I think that pretty well covers it.
The conversation was about Reagan. I believe you said that "every principled conservative was for Reagan" in 1975. I found that hard to believe given Reagan's atance at that time on abortion. It really had nothing to do with Fred, no matter how much you wish that it did.
I strongly suspect you have no actual idea what a "straw man" argument is.
Why would you come to that conclusion? Just because someone recognizes the obvious? Maybe we should ask: why is it? What can we do? Is it possible to reconstitute it? Do we want to?
“which do not fit with the true believer’s emotions “
Key word.....”emotion”.
Well, it seems Fred wanted us to believe that every principled conservative was for Reagan. But as it turns out, I guess he wasn’t.
He continued, “In almost 30 years of practicing law I must have had hundreds of clients and thousands of conversations about legal matters. Like any good lawyer, I would always try to give my best, objective, and professional opinion on any legal question presented to me.”
A lawyer who works for a law firm doesn't pick and choose his clients his employer does. In a country that is founded on the rule of law the principle of fair and equal representation is paramount. Any lawyer that doesn't believe in that should stop practicing law here. Any politician who doesn't respect and support that ought to get out of politics. Anyone who opposes that prinicple doesn't have the faintest clue what this country is supposed to be.
Duncan Hunter - '08!
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/mike.huckabee.html
Huck seemed to be an unregistered lobbyist.
Your reply is somewhat ambiguous. Judging from your other posts, I will assume that you believe that Fred is too honorable to seek a potential VP position in the event that he somehow fails to be nominated. I suggest that that view is naive. Thompson and Hunter are the only true conservatives in the race, and Fred is the only one with a ghost of a remaining chance. He would make a fine president. However, the deification of Fred on FR is laughable
As opposed to Fred who really was a registered one. Right?
Huckabee worked to defeat a Republican, in a legislative race in Mountain Home, Arkansas. Huckabee helped Democrat Benny Magness in his race against Republican Shawn Womack. Womack won.
In 2002, he supported Rep. Bobby Glover, D, over Rep. Randy Minton, R, in a state senate race.
In 2000, He campaigned for Barbara Horn, D, in a Dem. primary against Dennis Young, D, and Spencer Plumlee, R, dropped out because Huck didn’t support him.
Isn’t it time for a Huckster truth file, Jim?
I don’t believe it’s dead and neither do most people who post on this forum.
As for the Huckaboob, his history with tax-love, his obscene rate of violent criminal pardoning and his utter ignorance of foreign policy make it quite clear that he shouldn’t hold any position higher than state level.
If the citizens of Arkansas want to elect this man, so be it. But stop trying to foist his liberal RINO-ism only the rest of the country and conservatives, of which Huckabee is most certainly not.
Fred Thompson voted for Permanent Normal Trade relations with the Chi-com’s. Maybe Fred’s Chinagate hearings should have been investigating Fred himself instead of the Christian Coalition and Americans for Tax Reform.
Even as he quizzed Butterfield during the hearing, Thompson said later, he believed the tapes would exonerate Nixon, so he saw no problem in pressing for their release. It was after Thompson heard Nixon incriminate himself on the tapes that Thompson finally decided that Nixon was a crook — and stopped be ing a Nixon apologist.
“Looking back, I wonder how I could have failed to realize at once . . . the significance of the tapes,” Thompson wrote. “I realized that I would probably be thinking about the implications of Watergate for the rest of my life.”
BTW, you’re argument is exactly a straw man . . . setting up a false proposition (abortion), then using it to attack others when it’s irrelevant.
No, the Reagan coalition led to conservatives having some major influence in US politics. Fred said that coalition was based upon strong defense, limited government, responsible fiscal policies (read: no new taxes), and conservative moral values.
Now, Huckabee's campaign manager has proclaimed that coalition "dead." As FR holds these principles in high regard, we are suspicious of people who claim to be "one of us" and yet proclaim the coalition based upon these principles is dead. I hope that clears up your confusion on the argument.
See post 261, where you got your arse handed back to you before I had the chance to do it again.
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.