Posted on 03/28/2011 10:07:49 AM PDT by kristinn
“Huckabee is an idiot on many a subject, up to and including, American history, the power of pardons, and immigration.”
I wouldn’t use the term “idiot”, but he has made some serious gaffs recently. He is not an intellectual by any means...but “intellectuals” aren’t usually good leaders. However, I do agree that Mike isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed.
“Worse is that he seems to view the Government as a tool to fulfill his Christian duty of forgiveness (pardons) and charity (handouts for illegals).”
I agree with that assessment. However, it is part and parcel with the welfare state which isn’t going away. I don’t like to see taxpayers “forced” to engage in charity by use of tax money.
On the 9-11 issue....I don’t consider “self defense” to be a violation of the “turn the other cheek.” The Lord Jesus’ words have been misapplied too many times....and I don’t have the time to write an essay on that topic. Suffice it to say, “turn the other cheek” was in a different context than a nation responding to an external threat.
I have repeatedly told you that I’m NOT a Huckabee fan. I just don’t believe he deserves the vitriol is gets at times here on FR.
Watch this low rent Elmer Gantry on Saturday Night Live explaining why he was still in the 2008 race even though it was a “mathematical impossibility” for him to win - then tell me he looks sounds or acts Presidential.
“I agree with that assessment. However, it is part and parcel with the welfare state which isn’t going away.” Sola Veritas
So because it “isn't going away” there is no trouble in electing someone who not only doesn't support it “going away” but thinks it is actually fulfilling his Christian duty - thus supports expanding its ‘umbrella’ to cover illegal aliens?
That’s the reason I was against repealing DADT. You’re probably right that if you get the moral stuff right, the rest will follow. How do you go about doing that in a political sense? I know what policies we need and don’t need from an economic standpoint, but to improve the moral situation hearts and minds have to be changed more than laws.
“but to improve the moral situation hearts and minds have to be changed more than laws.”
It is true that no one can be “made moral” by changing a law. Moralty, like faith, has to come from within. You cannot force anyone to believe anything. Ultimately, the real solution is to change hearts and minds as you rightly suggest.
However, you can most certainly change “behavior” by law; most people will refrain from an illegal act out of fear of punishment. Also, once something is illegal (or the reverse legal) it does have an effect on how the average person perceives it. Keep homosexuality out of the military as unacceptable, and the disdain for it will mostly remain...although the media is working overtime to change the public perception that perversion is OK. If you make it legal, it will eventually cause even those with strong moral upbringing to be accepting of it.....issue after issue in time has shown this.
I remember the days before Roe v Wade, and how doctors that did abortions were considered slime. By two decades after that, most didn’t see them as that way anymore...the acceptance of “law” brings a perception that something is OK.
“So long as he contemplates seeking the Presidency of these United States, a position he is particularly and grandly unsuited for, he deserves every bit of vitriol AND more.”
I keep telling you, I’m not a Huckabee proponent. However, and I really don’t mean this as an insult, you are just irrational in you “dislike” for Huckabee. Also, when someone uses the “Elmer Gantry” comparison...they are just like those that resort to calling someone a NAZI. As a Conservative Christian Evangelical (Southern Baptist variety)....I take great offense to someone referencing a fictional character (Elmer Gantry) to describe a real world person....even one with obvious flaws.
You don't mean this as an insult but I am irrational? I suppose you didn't mean it as an insult when you said I was anti-Christian and had a rabid hatred of Hispanics either?
Disengenousness is so repulsive.
No, all my reasons were rational, and described in detail.
It is your defense of this low rent brain dead Elmer Gantry (I don't care if you are offended at the comparison) is not rational in that you have given no RATIONALE for it (other than you are most certainly NOT a proponent.... sure).
Lame attempt at invoking Godwin's law by proxy.
“No, all my reasons were rational, and described in detail.”
No..you are not rational.....and you lack any class. I already told you that calling a Baptist an “Elmer Gantry” is akin to calling a black person a “nigger.” It is unacceptable talk used by liberals to put down persons of faith.
Also, I stand by my statement that you don’t like Hispanics, regardless of so-called relatives you claim to have. You have an irrational fear of Mexicans.
Additionally, I told Huckpack to STOP sending me emails, etc. and I told them I wouldn’t support Huckabee anymore. That is the absolute truth. I have no intention of supporting Huckabee in the primary. I only “defend” him here on this thread because I see “irrational” and extreme characatures of him being pushed by many....and it is insulting to those of us that are Moral conservatives.
And the poster who says I am anti-Christian and have a rabid hatred of Hispanics now tells me I lack class????
My reasons for opposing Huckabee have a rationale.
Your defense of him is absolutely irrational.
So Elmer Gantry is just like a “Nazi” and a “nigger” to you?
And no, opposing giving public benefits to illegal aliens doesn't indicate an irrational fear (or hatred) of Mexicans.
I didn't even mention Mexicans until you did. I said Illegal aliens. In your irrational mind are all illegal aliens Mexican? Does opposing giving them benefits indicate an irrational fear and hatred?
If so there are a LOT of fearful and hateful people here on Free Republic according to your irrational idiocy.
Huckabee...
thinks it Unchristian to not give benefits to illegal aliens.
apparently thinks pardons should be handed out freely if the prisoner repents.
doesn't know that George H.W. Bush was an incumbent defeated for re-election.
thinks Obama was raised in Kenya.
thinks single mothers would have children starving if not for welfare.
is a tax raising, big government, nanny state ELMER GANTRY.
You had better wake up and get your emotions in check. Huckabee is NOT a good choice for POTUS. However, he may well be the only one in the current field with a solid chance. He has strong backing in the Southern States. He is one of the few that can get the GOP base of Conservative Evangelicals to back him....whether you like him or not. There is definite Palin fatigue out there.....she becomes less relevant everyday. Bachman shows promise, but I see her more as a VP. I’m disgruntled with Huckabee over his non stand on DADT (as I am with Palin). The stuff you bring up is just meaningless to me and childish whining (of course issues are a personal decision).
You are right about one thing that has puzzled me as well. Why has Huckabee made some the really dumb statements he has lately. The one about Obama being raised in Kenya definitely stands out. Like I keep telling you, I only supported him in 2008 because an Army buddy, that I respect, thought highly of Mike. He is NOT my horse, but I don’t have a horse at this time. My ONLY goal is to get a GOP nominee that is unwaivingly socially/morally conservative....and strong on national defense (to include our borders). If that means some “nanny state” stuff...it doesn’t affect me because I don’t smoke, drink, overeat, gamble, etc. and think things would be a little better if there were less of the above. I want to see an end to:
1. Abortion
2. Homosexualization of the nation
3. Further moral decay
4. Destruction of our military
If these are right, I know that the rest will fall into place.
He manages to combine all the worst features of establishment Republicans.
Spineless, clueless, no fight, no conservative ideology, business as usual, extend and expand the welfare state, give benefits to illegal aliens, who thinks people would starve without the all powerful benevolent nanny state they envision.
He would entirely discredit conservatism with his soft hearted soft headed ideology. He may well be smart enough to be Governor of Arkansas - but I don't really think so, but apparently the good people of Arkansas disagreed (but they also thought Clinton was a good Gov) - he is way too stupid to EVER be President of these United States.
I think you mean well, but it concerns me that a freeper would write this, “If that means some “nanny state” stuff...it doesn’t affect me because I don’t smoke, drink, overeat, gamble, etc. and think things would be a little better if there was less of the above.” Like I said, you mean well, but you are not my keeper or any other adult’s keeper. I strongly agree with points 1 and 4 and certainly don’t disagree with 2 and 3, but it shouldn’t mean I can’t have a brew and put 50 bucks down on the Kentucky Derby if I wish.
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.