Posted on 01/31/2008 2:09:25 PM PST by Jim Robinson
My friends, I have to admit that I've been in a bit of a quandary since the Real Conservatives ® Thompson and Hunter dropped out of the race leaving us to to place our bets on one the four headless horsemen. But after having a day or three to sort it all out, I'm beginning to see a ray of hope.
Number one, my worst fear that the pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun social liberal Rudy Giuliani might be nominated, and thereby bring an abrupt and unholy end to the pro-life conservative movement within the GOP has been allayed. His evil culture of death platform has been soundly rejected by the Republican voters. Thank God! If nothing else is gained, that alone is a huge victory for us!
And that leaves us with the unwelcome slippery task of having to determine and select the least evil of the three remaining RINOs. But wait! When choosing between evils, why not choose the good?
McCain is insane and there are many good reasons not to choose him, but I'll list just five: McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman, the Keating 5, and the Gang of 14. No thanks. McCain is out!
Romney ran on a pro-abortion platform, is pro gay rights, is prone to BIG government solutions, promises anything to anyone for a vote, and flip-flops on important issues. Can't trust him.
Now Governor Huckabee. Could this be the good vs evil? He's a Baptist minister. A genuine 100% pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, Southron Christian social conservative!
And that would be my reason no. 1 to support Huckabee. He has the trust and backing of the Christian evangelicals and the support of the Bible Belt. You cannot win the presidency without the South, and I believe the pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-America Mike Huckabee is the most likely of the three GOP hopefuls to carry the South. And that's a pretty darn good reason!
My number two reason is that he is NOT McCain (and that's a pretty darn good reason too).
Number three (and this will be a tough one for a lot of my FReeper Friends) is that he is NOT Romney.
Numbers four and five are he's NOT Hillary and NOT Obama. Oohrah!
Number six, he plays a mean bass and he's a traditional favorite at Free Republic's infamous quadrennial Inaugural Balls in Washington, DC. Perhaps we could persuade President Huckabee to drop by our ball and perform his rocking rendition of "Sweet Home Alabama!" Now, wouldn't that be a hoot!
Number seven, if we can keep Huckabee in the race all the way through, thus preventing McCain or Romney from gaining enough delegates to win the nomination, then maybe, just maybe a deadlocked convention might seek out another candidate. One who can re-unite the Reagan Coalition, save the GOP, and put us back on the conservative track. Of course, my personal favorite to be that man would be FRed Thompson.
Woo hoo!!
Let it ring out through grassroots America and on to the convention! Support life! Support the GOP! Support Huckabee! And re-draft FRed Thompson!!
Never give in, never give up, and never lose hope.
Long live the Reagan Revolution!
Wow! Ya got a patent on that heart x-ray machine? (Or what specific statements and actions are you referring to?) Make 'em very specific (no generalities)
No it was’nt the Black Avenger — It was Bill Handel. He was pretty moderate, but about the best you could do in LA during morning drive time.
The line was during a discussion of the Mass. State Supreme court’s decision on homo marriages - that it was discriminatory to prohibit gays from marrying and as the sidekick was reading that part of the decision, Handel said “I wonder if the city fathers of Sodom were saying something similar right before God smote them”. The side kick said something and Handel offered the observation of “Its been a while since we’ve had a good smoting around here...”
Yeah, funny line. Are you doing you’re part to “Keep Austin Weird?”
Please be specific...general slandering is like gossiping
http://www.nypost.com/seven/12202007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/baptists_split_over_huck_221233.htm
That link will give you a little background over the fight among Southern Baptists a few years ago. I probably let my assumption run ahead of me here, but I remember the fight over whether southern Baptists as a denomination would take a liberal turn. One thing the secularists were open to considering was gay clergy. I knew Huckabee was on the liberal side, but don’t know that he personally came out in favor of it.
It could have something to do with the fact that Romney hasn't said he thinks the Constitution needs to be rewritten to conform with God's word?
In other words, it's OK for America to be saddled with Hillary or Obama so you can continue to delude yourself that you have never compromised in your support for any candidate.
I am willing to bet that if you listed ALL the candidates whom you have ever voted for in the past 40 years --- SOME OF THEM WERE NOT totally 100% die-hard take-no-prisoners conservatives.
But now, for some unfathomable reason, you demand purity.
Now, in 2008, you demand total allegiance to 100% conservative positions going back to when the candidate was a teen, or in his early 20s, or whatever.
Methinks you are overlooking your OWN compromises of past selections, and NOW believe yourself to be infallible.
I ain't buying it. Nobody has a 100% perfect voting record because no ONE candidate is 100% perfect --- much less all those you've supported.
Hugh Hewitt said on his program today that McCain doesn't have any $ left & the conservatives won't back him to re-infuse his campaign. So other than the delegate count, how is Huck is any worse shape that McCain?
Hewitt also said Obama raised $32 million in January. It doesn't matter what GOP nominee you pick, if it's vs. Obama, the GOP candidate will only have spare change to run against that.
"I resent him for using religion"...says the supporter of the candidate whose sect turns out lockstep by over 90% to vote for him.
But, THAT kind of bigotry is just fine, to the Mittbots.
As I said, I don’t trust any of them. I politician who does a flip flop based on the political realities of the race they are running does not surprise me. Look at their platforms and hold them to their campaign promises.
Jim, was Romneys campaign site statement not strong enough for you or do you just not trust him?
OK, if you're going to go with that argument...then think of all the POTUS candidates we've had from the Bay State: Teddy Kennedy; Michael Dukakis; John Kerry...so what would that say about Romney?
He still needs to convince me, but he, at least, has a shot.
“If it worked, that’d be great. BUT, I don’t foresee Huckabee getting enough delegates to stop McCain, not at this point. The only thing he’ll do is get enough delegates to assure that McCain gets the nomination. And that would be the end of conservatism for the time being.”
Huckabee does not have to stop McCain. What needs to happen is for Huckabee and Romney and possibly Paul to have a total of half plus 1 delegate. No one wins without a majority. Just because there are more than 2 running does not change the rules that a majority is required to win.
Are you saying Romney lied to the people of Massachusetts on several highly critical issues just so he could get himself elected?
Jim, you are NOT supporting the “Reagan Revolution” by endorsing Mike Huckabee.
You are supporting the CULT-of-PERSONALITY......
Why? Because you are supporting Huckabee simply because Duncan Hunter endorsed Mike Huckabee.
If you think Duncan Hunter infallible, you had better do a quick soul check, because as far as I know, there was only ONE infallible person who ever walked the earth.
And He is back on Heaven’s Throne.
Jim, I think you've nailed it! I've been a Hunter supporter wonderin' what to do with that vote.
I've looked @ Huckabee: He's not only what you say above...he'll protect marriage...he'll protect businesses from being forced to hire alternative sexual minorities (Romney won't)...he's good on religious liberties...he's got the best position of the remaining candidates on healthcare (and he's a living example that healthcare begins with us--having lost over a 100 pounds)...he's had the best position on judges of all of them...
On taxes...Arkansas Guy Tucker left Arkansas in a sorry state...probably one of the worst infrastructures...so he had to pore more $ in to that state as a "make-up" for the previous administration...he's promised he won't raise taxes (something Fred didn't even promise)
That leaves inexperience in foreign policy & not the best position on education and a poor track record on how he released some folks who should have remained behind bars. But that's why other FReepers were supporting Hunter & Fred, anyway.
Jim, I think you've nailed it! I've been a Hunter supporter wonderin' what to do with that vote.
I've looked @ Huckabee: He's not only what you say above...he'll protect marriage...he'll protect businesses from being forced to hire alternative sexual minorities (Romney won't)...he's good on religious liberties...he's got the best position of the remaining candidates on healthcare (and he's a living example that healthcare begins with us--having lost over a 100 pounds)...he's had the best position on judges of all of them...
On taxes...Arkansas Guy Tucker left Arkansas in a sorry state...probably one of the worst infrastructures...so he had to pore more $ in to that state as a "make-up" for the previous administration...he's promised he won't raise taxes (something Fred didn't even promise)
That leaves inexperience in foreign policy & not the best position on education and a poor track record on how he released some folks who should have remained behind bars. But that's why other FReepers were supporting Hunter & Fred, anyway.
ROFLOL. Cult of personality? Well, I certainly will not be endorsing the cult of death:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
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.