Posted on 12/17/2007 1:46:43 PM PST by Aristotelian
Killing the dog by Huck’s kid was not trivial, but posting this years old story in an attempt to damage Huck...is nit-picking, and to me shows the desperation that the anti-Huck people are feeling.
Satan! Oh come now, are you anti-Huck people that desperate?
Thank you, I read the story when it happened, YEARS ago.
Why should his son have anything to do with whether he is good enough for President. If that is the case, we would not have President Bush. His girls went on a criminal spree when they were young. His brother had the S&L scandal. This should have no bearing whatsoever in who to chose for President. NO I AM NOT A HUCK SUPPORTER. NOT VOTING FOR HIM, BUT LIKE FAIRNESS IN ELECTIONS. I AM A DUNCAN HUNTER VOTER AND SUPPORTER!
We’re talking about two separate issues. First is whether Huck’s son participated in torturing and killing a dog. There seems to be a pretty strong case for that, but as others have posted, blaming the father for the son’s misdeeds is a pretty cheap tactic.
The far more damning claim — and the one that’s uncorroborated — is that Huck interfered in the investigation. That would be a matter of official misconduct.
No... but we do recognize evil when we see it.
LLS
Axel
Please enlighten us. How did this stray dog deserve to be hanged, throat slit and stoned to death.
Huckie’s spawn didn’t fall too far from the tree.
Possibly, but what and when? And how can we be sure the former director isn't making this up to get back at Huck because he was fired?
he had the audacity to go on Larry King last night and say that the killing of the dog wasn't criminal.
I'll have to take your word for that since I don't watch Larry King. But since no charges were filed, perhaps it wasn't. (Remember, the director was fired, so he obviously didn't give in to whatever Huck was supposedly wanting.)
I'm not a Huck fan and won't be voting for him in the primary, but I think we need to be careful with the charges we levy against any candidate (even Rudy and Ronnie, whom I wouldn't vote for under any circumstances).
Except he did. If he did so because Huck pressured him, why was he subsequently fired? It seems you are implying that the firing was not related to this, yet the article implies that it was.
Something's not right with the way this article is written, apparently.
STUDY SHOWS BAPTISTS’ MOST OVERWEIGHT
http://www.baptiststandard.com/postnuke/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=display&pid=5544
The reason my son didn't join.
My own Scout experience was wholesome and rewarding, so needless to say, I was shocked that the boys of the later troop were so undiciplined. I didn't pressure him to join.
My son turned out much better anyway. U.S. Marine, Master's degree, family man, very good position with a widely-recognized firm.
Designer is very proud.
My comment was so outrageous I thought no one would take it seriously....especially coming from someone with a screen name of "woofie"....sadly I was wrong
Instead of going into a long drawn out reply, let me just ask you one question. How popular was governor George Romney in Michigan and how much of his rule was directed from Utah?
You seriously want to compare the influential sphere of either Michigan or Massachusetts to the leader of the free world?
Don't leave it up to me to prophesy how long the arm of Salt Lake City would extend...'cause frankly I think it could be less dependent upon Mitt & more upon who the SLC "prophet" would be come 2009-2016.
The "Mitt" side of the equation could be defined thusly (based upon the temple oath he took):
He vowed that he would "consecrate himself, his time, talents and EVERYTHING he now has, or WILL HAVE IN THE FUTURE, for the building up of the Kingdom of God here upon the earth, and FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ZION."
(Allow me to define "Zion" as the LDS PR Web site defines its primary meaning: "membership in the [LDS] church.")
BTW, a side note here, I've noted the media, even conservative media people like Laura Ingraham & Hugh Hewitt over the past few days, defining Huckabee as a Baptist preacher who will cater primarily only to a Christian contistuency...Romney himself reinforced that accusation of Huckabee in response to an Ingraham question today...so I'm not sure why the conservative talk shows hosts & the MSM don't equally make the same charge of Mitt the 2-time LDS bishop & 1-time LDS stake presidency. How is it that Huckabee would only cater to a Christian constintuency but they don't simultaneously accuse Romney of catering to only a Mormon constituency? (Sounds like blatant hypocrisy & Christian bashing to me.)
As for the LDS "prophet" side of the equation, allow me to quote a former LDS "prophet" who served in the Eisenhower administration (be sure to note highlighted areas)...this comes from a speech @ BYU in 1980:
Ezra T. Benson was identifying 14 descriptors of an LDS "prophet" (Here are some of them…note particularly #8, #9, #10...& imagine a future LDS prophet consistently implementing these edicts from his so-called spiritual leader on earth):
1. The Prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything. The Doctrine and Covenants states, ‘We are to give heed unto all his words as if from the Lord’s own mouth.’”
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet. The living prophet has the power of TNT [Today’s News Today]. The most important reading we can do is words of the prophet contained each week in the Church News or the Church magazines.”
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time. Sometimes there are those who feel their earthly knowledge on a certain subject is superior to the heavenly knowledge which God gives on a subject....We encourage earthly knowledge in many areas, but remember—if there is ever a conflict between earthly knowledge and the words of the prophet, you stand with the prophet and you’ll be blessed, and time will vindicate you”
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning. There will be times when you will have to choose between the revelations of God and the reasoning of men—between the politician or professor”
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual. In a meeting in Kirtland, Joseph Smith asked the elders to draw a line of demarcation between the spiritual and temporal so he could understand it. No one could do it. Then he said ‘...temporal and spiritual things are inseparably connected and ever will be.”
10. The prophet may be involved in civic matters. When people are righteous, they want the best to lead them in government. Great leaders in the Book of Mormon and in church history have been involved deeply in political matters. Those who would remove prophets from politics would take God out of government.”
14. The prophet and the president—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer.”
Every mormon I know and have known are very fine people,
and I have zero prejudice, suspicion, antagonism against mormons.
Again, having worked in American companies for 37 years which
survived by making profits, I have tremendous admiration for people like Romney who have proven executive skills.
On the other hand, people like Huckabee, McCain etc
have never spent a day in a survive by making a profit type private outfit. So my personal 1st choice is Romney. I am not a religious bigot against mormons or christians. I belong to the hindu religion. Please don’t come up with a long list of items you don’t like about hindu religion. This is not a religious board. This is a political board.
I am much more worried about pocket book issues since they affect my life and my family’s life more than what religion the president belongs to. So I prefer a candidate who in my opinion is the most capable in getting a handle on the financial mess our government is in.
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.