I don’t trust anyone who tells me that conservatives can trust Huckleberry.
Why would the author feel it necessary to assure us it’s OK to trust Schmucklebee unless the vibes are that the Huckster can’t be trusted.
And why should I believe this musician/facility guy any more than I would Hicklebee?
I've already answered your question. Because of the unprecidented, Internet-fostered slander campaign against Huckabee, for the sake of his rivals. (Well, for the sake of his rivals that have fallen by the wayside, plus Ron Paul.)
Huckleberry should go home. With Rommey backing McCain (Payback for West Virginia?) Huck is out of the running. Like it or no, we are stuck with a McCain. Lets see what happens now. When the convention come we can see who the McCain Rino-Party picks as his poor sucker VP and what they will do for conservatives (if anything). I wish I had a Third Party but—failing that I will vote for conservatives and pick some joker third party to cast my vote as a protest (Gus Hall still Running? or Ralph Nader?)
Why would the author feel it necessary to assure us it’s OK to trust Schmucklebee unless the vibes are that the Huckster can’t be trusted.
While I don't disagree with your assessment of Huckabee, I disagree strongly with your logic. You seem to be assuming that because the author is aware of a widespread sense that Huckabee is untrustworthy, the author must therefore be aware that Huckabee in fact untrustworthy, and thus anything he says to the contrary is a lie. That pattern of logic is one of the keys to Liberal Mind Fog. Conservatives had best beware of it.