Peggy Noonan wrote what I felt about the Huckster’s “floating cross” spot much better than I could have:
I wound up thinking this: That guy is using the cross so I’ll like him. That doesn’t tell me what he thinks of Jesus, but it does tell me what he thinks of me. He thinks I’m dim. He thinks I will associate my savior with his candidacy. Bleh.
The celebrated Reagan speechwriter goes on to call the ad “shrewd”. The biblically literate among our readers will also note that she was silent on whether it was “as innocent as a dove”.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:00 pm
I have met this man face to face. I asked him the question in person on Tuesday. I believe his answer to me. It wasn’t planted or planned. It was a book case.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:02 pm
This is a stupid accusation. There was nothing subliminal about the ad. He said “Merry Christmas” and also mentioned “Christ’s Birth.” Thats hardly subliminal.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Wonder what Noonan would think of the mysterious other ads Huck ran?
December 21st, 2007 at 12:10 pm
I think Rush is going to finally take out Huckabee today. listen now!
December 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pm
In his campaign events in the last few days in Iowa, Huckabee has shown himself delighted at the controversy that the ad brewed, using it as a springboard into a stump speech that can be summed up as “This is a war against Christians and I alone can step forward to save Christianty”. If the ad was innocent, why is he making the controversy the center of his campaign? Huckabee is running for Pastor-in-Chief. End of story. Memo to Huckabee: we’re not electing a Pastor-in-Chief. Even if we were, I would not vote for you because I go to a different church. Identity politics is dangerous stuff. If Huckabee continues much further on the identity politics campaign, he has the potential to destroy the influence of the Christian right as well as rip apart the Evangelical movement. Read his speeches, he treats Evangelicals who have decided to support more credible candidates as prodigal sons; sinful, wayward Christians because they do not support God’s candidate. Identity politics is dangerous stuff.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Rush is tearing Huckabee apart!
December 21st, 2007 at 12:20 pm
6 – NICE FINALLY
December 21st, 2007 at 12:20 pm
huckster just got toasted by Rush. You cant take on rush and expect to get away with it.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Chris,
What empty ridiculous rhetoric your comments are. What evangelical leaders has he treated as you described? You are the one expousing identity politics.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Huck’s game playing is going to cost him. He thought he was so funny, but the general public takes the presidential office too seriously to let some guy laugh his way in. I mean, the cross in his ad was so obvious. You don’t pay all that money to run an ad and hire a new chief strategist and try to say that you never even noticed it.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:23 pm
#10, Greg, that is stupid and you know it. The message was straight forward, there was nothing hidden.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:25 pm
can we all get over it? it’s a bookcase.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:25 pm
in fact, Huckabee is very straight forward regarding his faith, he does not have to “hide a cross” in his ad. If he wanted a cross in it, he would have put it there on purpose.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Huckster continues to get shelacked by Rush…..
December 21st, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Wow rush is not relenting on Huck for 2 segments now….
December 21st, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Huck, Huckster, Huckleberry, Huckamoron, Hickabee…Nah, we finally have the right nickname:
THE SERPENT!
December 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pm
9, read Robert Novak’s column about how he reacts to Baptist leaders that support others:
Shortly thereafter, bitterness was demonstrated by an interview with Zev Chafets of The New York Times. Huckabee was irritated that Richard Land, a prestigious Southern Baptist leader, had not endorsed him. “Richard Land swoons for Fred Thompson,” he said, though Land as a policy endorses nobody. Huckabee appears to believe that everyone in the Southern Baptist Convention is obliged to support him: “If my own abandon me on the battlefield, it will have a chilling effect.”
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RobertDNovak/2007/12/20/huckabees_baptists
December 21st, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Rush continues to pound huck for the 3rd straight segment…..
December 21st, 2007 at 12:37 pm
go rush – preach the truth!
December 21st, 2007 at 12:41 pm
Well said by Peggy Noonan. Sure, it was an innocent bookcase. Nothing subliminal intended. Yeah . . . sure. Just like he slid in that dig against the LDS Church in his NY Times interview, “Don’t Mormons believe . . .” Sure, innocent . . . yeah that’s right.
That is why I despise the man. His subtlety in his attacks, and then his, “Who, me?? I am as innocent as the purely driven snow” attitude is sickening. Huckabee is Serpent-in-Chief. HA! Love it.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:42 pm
All this proves is what we have been saying all along. The Coalition is broken. When Christian Conservatives find their guy, and the elites, YES ELITES, don’t agree, they go on their typical attack mode even when he is one of them. You cant trust the right wing leaders anymore than you can trust the MSM. Rush, you are becoming the drive by media – better watch it.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:43 pm
I cannot believe that you are actually saying that the cross was not intentional. Now I have seen true blindeness. These commercials are edited so much. If anything in the background stands out, it gets noticed and discussed. mean, this is so basic. The bright white cross was the only part of the background that stood out. It was no error.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Personally, I think Huck is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I have read enough about his record of back-door presuasion, etc.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:45 pm
#22, Greg, you sound like moveon.org.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:46 pm
So is Romney wrong? My view is that no one should be VP who shouldn’t be President.
“Huckabee Would Make A Great VP”
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/12/20/politics/fromtheroad/entry3637006.shtml
December 21st, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Jared – since you brought that up – may as well understand a little more about Huckabee’s innocent question.
Huckabee’s co-chair on Faith and Values certainly didn’t have any ‘innocent’ questions regarding the matter back in October.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJsxNwAmLT4
December 21st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Greg,
Even if there was a cross in the background, what does that matter, he said “Christ’s birth” is there outrage for that? That is straight forward. The issue is that people are saying that it was a subliminal message. That is ludicrous.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pm
I don’t know why there is all this argument from Mitt guys. He endorsed Huck for president.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Here is a great article about Huck struggling to con people into believing he is conservative.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTJmYzI3ZDY1ZDg2ZWU3YTgyMTRkODNmNTU4YTkyOGY=
December 21st, 2007 at 12:51 pm
I’m sorry, but Huck is done. When I saw that bookcase in the ad, I was repulsed that he would be pushing literacy. That’s it, I can’t support the guy.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:52 pm
27 – what is ludicrous is him denying it was intentional nod nod wink wink. The fact that it is there is no big deal.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Huckabee’s Christmas ad was brilliant from a political strategy perspective. Of course the cross was intentional -they won’t admit it – so what. Nothing in political ads isn’t deliberate. The fact that the ad has gotten so much buzz and coverage only served to get Huckabee’s ad out to a wider audience than may have otherwise been possible.
True, honest, and sincere kudos to team Huckabee for that play – well executed.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:54 pm
25 – Mitt is shaping the discussion about Huckabee. He commented that he’d be a fine VP – translation – he would not be a good POTUS. Nothing more and nothing less to the statement than that.
All of this parsing and discerning of hiddent intent and motives is really fun to watch.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:56 pm
32 FCOH – i agree with that. The problem with it for me is the “who? not innocent little me.” attitude just BUGS.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:57 pm
21, you are completely wrong. I am a Christian Conservative. I know Huck from AR. I agree with him on abortion and guns. But I also believe in market economics and a strong foriegn policy.
I believed what you now believe about Huckabee when he first started running in AR. I guarantee you that as time goes by you will see through him. Huck’s “us v. them” mentality within OUR party is just one more example of his self promoting selfishness.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I disagree with Mitt, I think Huck would be a bad VP nominee and a bad VP.
December 21st, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Steve,
Those of us who can think for ourselves don’t need Rush to choose our candidates for us.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:01 pm
37 – Its funny how all the hucksters are saying the same things about the conservative base that the dems have been saying for years. I guess that says it all.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Rush is an entertainer.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:02 pm
39 – Its funny how all the hucksters are saying the same things about the conservative base that the dems have been saying for years. I guess that says it all.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:03 pm
“Here is a great article about Huck struggling to con people into believing he is conservative.”
Erik,
Why pay attention to the NRO? They have openly endorsed the candidate that has a PROVEN track-record of flip-flopping to suit whatever event he attends.
What possible good couls come from ANY advice given by an organization who would support the biggest flip-flopper in the history of politics when four years ago they were slamming Kerry for flip-flops not even CLOSELY approaching the magnitude of Romney’s?
Romney’s a fraud. Just like his religion.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pm
33
You mean Romney is being disingenuous?
Would Romney say that Paul would make a fine VP?
Will Romney be disingenuous when he tells us who would make a fine Supreme Court Justice?
Funny thing about everything Romney says, it always seems to need commentary and explanation. The plain meaning is not to be believed.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pm
You guys should watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr58xZdHo9Q
December 21st, 2007 at 1:05 pm
41 – NRO did not endorse a candidate.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Romney is starting to remind me of Clinton. Someone should make an ad with his mispeaks.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:07 pm
#35 I am from AR as well – I am good friends with people who worked with him. I know his character from both personal and 2nd hand experiences in his administration. You and the others have picked your candidates. That is fine. But the senseless debasing of Mike is outrageous. He is being held to a different standard then the other candidates. He is purposefully avoiding this discourse but it is being forced upon him by the others.
If this same type of hypocrisy was being laid on Mitt or Fred you can bet that you guys would be up in arms.
What can we do as Huckabee supporters? continue to be called “Hucksters” or Serpents? people – we disagree on certain issues, but principle is the same. You are slitting your own throat – He is not running this undercover campaign as you suggest – he is about as open as you can get.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pm
41 – “Romney’s a fraud. Just like his religion.”
the scource behind your hatred shines through.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pm
#41 They started the conservative movement. That would be 1 reason to listen to them. Because you are blind to Hucks liberal tendencies doen’t make him a conservative. Sorry to ruin your day! Oh and don’t forget what Noonan, Lowry, Ingaham, Rush, Hannity, Novak, and a host of other conservatives are saying about Huck. I am sure that you think they are all in the bag for Romney though right. If he stinks like crap he is crap=Huckabee!
December 21st, 2007 at 1:10 pm
48 – erik his premis is wrong. NRO didn’t endorse a cadidate. You are confusing it with National Review – not national Review Online.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:13 pm
CHALLENGE TO ANY HUCK SUPPORTER
I have a question for ANY Huck supporter how come they never respond to the claims that he is a liberal with any facts just lame attacks on Romney his biggest rival I want a Huck supporter to explain, other than Abortion and his lame recent conversion to the fair tax, HOW he has shown to be small gov. and pro free trade and fiscally conservative (bedrock of Reagan’s conservatism)?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:14 pm
#48 true.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pm
43, all of this rejection of “left v. right” and horizontal politics (The politics of “up and down”) is just the same as Bill Clinton and Dick Morris’s “third way” triangulation strategy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2000/10/30/wben30.xml
Dick Morris was Huckabee’s political consultant during the early years of Huck in AR.
I can’t believe you buy this guy’s sloganeering as “leadership”.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:15 pm
#52 Huckabee did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Look at these little Huckamorons, acting just like little Clintonistas. Rather than debating the facts, they just turn around and attack the other guy, all while simultaneously and self-righteously pretending that they are above negativity.
They unthinkingly dismiss every word ever written in National Review and National Review just because they endorse a different candidate. Attack the messenger, don’t even attempt to meet the intellectual arguments.
How clintonian.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:22 pm
At least Rush told a caller (a Huckabee supporter) to make up his own mind and not to let influential people make it up for them. I give him credit for that.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:26 pm
#54 I have been waiting for UA, Michael Reichard, rett hatcher, or ANY huck supporter to state ONE fact about their Candidate and they CANNOT. HUCK is a TERRIBLE CANDIDATE and I have never not voted republican (exept one time and that was last election for Schwarzenegger) and this election if HUCK wins the nod I will vote Ron Paul or libertarian if Huck wins the nod (b/c I will not vote Obama or Hillary and Bloomberg is an Idiot)
December 21st, 2007 at 1:31 pm
#54 – can we not state our position with out being branded as Clintononian?
December 21st, 2007 at 1:38 pm
57, try stating it, instead of responding to anything and everything by attacking Romney on abortion, or dismissing any word written by anyone doesn’t conform to Huckabee’s talking points as an elitist that only cares about rich people.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:42 pm
#57 Just state ONE fact showing Huck is Conservative (without using the abortion issue or w/o using fair tax).
December 21st, 2007 at 1:44 pm
#46 – “But the senseless debasing of Mike is outrageous”
If you are claiming your guy is alone in what you refer to as “senseless debasing”, look to your right and left at who you are standing next to. Huck supporters have had the worst track record at senselessly debasing Romney. It is this overall tone of innocence, and “why is everyone picking on me”, while he stabs other candidates in the back (“Don’t Mormons believe Jesus and Satan . . .”) Huckabee is a smarmy fellow, who is coming across that way to others. Hell, every policitan has a degree of smarminess, or they wouldn’t be a politician. That is a sad comment as to the nature of our country’s leadership.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:46 pm
#59
In Arkansas, the income tax when he took office was 1 percent for the poorest taxpayers and 7 percent for the richest, exactly where it stood when he left the statehouse 11 years later. But, in the interim, he doubled the standard deduction and the child care credit, repealed capital gains taxes for home sales, lowered the capital gains rate, expanded the homestead exemption and set up tax-free savings accounts for medical care and college tuition
December 21st, 2007 at 1:48 pm
#60
We will have to disagree on his intention on that line. Even the reporter that wrote that article said that he was surprised at the uproar because he didn’t take any ill will when it was said.
Mike supporters might be over zealous on certain things.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
so #61 what you are saying is he only raised middle class taxes ok that IS one fact that he is not like Hillary.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
hillary only wants to tax the rich (or so she says
)
December 21st, 2007 at 1:53 pm
#63 you asked for one example. Here is another:
When he had to pass an income tax surcharge amid the drop in revenues after Sept. 11, 2001, he repealed it three years later when he didn’t need it any longer.
December 21st, 2007 at 1:58 pm
I’m Impressed Brett You have done what no other Huck supporter has been able to do
give me facts about huck.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:00 pm
61, you conveniently left out the income tax surcharge which was imposed and later repealed. You also conviniently left out that when you add up ALL of the tax cuts and ALL of the tax increases, the net result is a huge tax increase.
You also left out the fact that when Huck took office, Arkansas was ranked 30th among the 50 states in state and local taxes as a percentage of income. When Huck left office, Arkansas was ranked 13th in state and local tax burden as a percentage of personal income. Arkanas passed more than 18 states moving up in tax burden during Huck’s years. SOURCE: Tax Foundation (column on the left hand side.)
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/442.html
And don’t even try to blame the Democrats for this. You cannot name a single tax cut that Huck proposed that was killed by the legislature. You cannot name a single tax increase supported by the legislature that Huck opposed.
During this time, about half of the Arkansas Republicans in the legislature consistently opposed Huckabee’s tax increases. Huckabee branded them as “Shiite Republicans”, attacking members of his own party to pander to moderates and liberals. Many of these true conservative Republicans are campaining in Iowa against Huckabee.
That is the truth on taxes and Huckabee.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:01 pm
66, you spoke too soon. Read 67. I agree it was a better try than most Huck supporters.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:05 pm
65, I did not complete my post quickly enough to see that you added a post about the income tax surcharge.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Huckabee vs. Romney – Tax Burden in Actual Dollars (inflation adjusted to the year 2000)
http://www.pnreap.org/United_States/comparative-trends-analysis.php?indicator=Per_Capita_Income
(choose Arkansas then Massachusetts on the right, then click on “Generate & Display Output”; when the next screen appears, scroll down to the graph at the bottom: “Arkansas and Massachusetts: Per Capita Income, 1969-2006″)
Arkansas’ tax burden in actual dollars, inflation adjusted to the year 2000:
1996: $20,232 per capita income * 10.1% state+local tax burden = $2,043.43
2006: $24,804 per capita income * 11.1% state+local tax burden = $2,753.24
Increase over 10 years = $2,753.24 – $2,043.43 = $709.81
Increase per year = $70.98
Massachusetts’ tax burden in actual dollars, inflation adjusted to the year 2000:
2002: $37,536 per capita income * 9.8% state+local tax burden = $3,678.53
2006: $40,336 per capita income * 10.5% state+local tax burden = $4,235.28
Increase over 4 years = $4,235.28 – $3,678.53 = $556.75
Increase per year = $139.19
Conclusion:
Under Huckabee, increase of $70.98 per year.
Under Romney, increase of $139.19 per year.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:10 pm
“Many of these true conservative Republicans are campaining in Iowa against Huckabee.”
2 of them are. Paid for by Ron Paul.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Ok Brett how do you argue that Huck increased AK’s tax burden? and 13th in nation that is pretty high!
December 21st, 2007 at 2:13 pm
70, there you go again with attacking Romney. Huckabee has a bad tax record. Deal with that. It might be the case that Romney has a bad tax record too. All you do is make me want to vote for someone else.
And by the way, Massachussetts is a pretty poor guidepost for comparisons whether it be on taxes or meth sentences. If the best you have is “it was worse in Massachusetts” you must be defending a poor record.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
I would say that is pretty good for Romney less of a tax hike and the taxes are lower over all especially when he inherited a deficit of 2 billion dollars and turned that into a surplus that is what I want in a president.
P.S. by the way 11.1% is higher than 10.5% therefore Romney wins that comparison
December 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pm
#73,
There are several reasons why, but mostly because he came into a state that had it’s infrastructure abandoned by the previous administration. This includes roads, schools, hospitals, and a lot of corruption. Arkansas was a “good ol boys” club. That is a hard environment to change. It takes time and effort. Mike did a great job pulling together a heavily democratic legislature. When he came into office there was only 15% republican legislature, after he left (13 years later) Arkansas had 40% republican legislature. that is tremendous growth. The most in their history. That is in the Reagan legacy as well.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:19 pm
When Mike left office he had an 800 Million dollar surplus – the first is state history. His plan was to refund it to taxpayers.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:19 pm
And don’t forget that Huckabee’s tax increases were put on top of a big pile of taxes that was built by Bill Clinton.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Why did he not improve the infrastructure by cutting spending? I think we NEED a president with a proven track record of cutting spending Romney increased fines and taxes by about 500 million (that number comes from Romnots), but considering the deficit was 2 billion and he made it into a 500 million surplus Romney cut spending by 2 billion dollars. I say we need a president who cuts spending.
Rudy initially cut spending as he claims but in the second term spending increased and he left bloomberg witha deficit and bloomberg increased that deficit. so that is why I support Romney noone else has a prove track record of cutting spending.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:24 pm
so Mike raised taxes when he did not need it?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:24 pm
75, the legislative count is absolutely false, and to give Huckabee credit for the increases in legislators is misleading. There were 10 Repubs in the House when Huck took over and about 28 of 100 when huck left. Not 40%, no where near.
Huckabee refused to raise funds for the Republican party because he was mad at true conservatives who voted against his tax increases. He insisted on setting up a separate entity so he could control the money. The esparate entity contolled by Huckabee engaged in misconduct that led to the biggest fine in FEC history. See the Decmber 13, 2007 Arkanas Times for the details. To give him credit for legislative gains is laughable.
The infrastructure abandoned? With all of Clinton’s spending? That is a poor excuse.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:25 pm
and why didn’t he refund it to tax payers when he was IN office. It is easy to say Well he was going to refund it.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Less than half of those who served as Republicans in the Arkanas legislature during Huckabee’s years have endorsed him. When this was first reported, Huckabee’s campaign sent out a release which claimed about half of the former and current legislators as supporters. The list was riddled with spelling errors, mistakes about offices never held, and listed names of those who asked not to be named.
This is the corrected list, which amazingly still lists Hoyt Johnson as a former legislator when he lost his race and did not serve.
http://arkansansforhuckabee.blogspot.com/2007/11/arkansas-republicans-heart-mike.html
Check this list out and ask yourself why so few Republican legislators who served with Huckabee endorse him.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Any more questions Brett?
December 21st, 2007 at 2:36 pm
# 79,80,81
79- Spending cuts were made, but keep this in perspective- the average income in AR is 26k a year – in MA it is 48k a year. There is a huge discrepancy in those figures and that lends to huge differences in tax revenues. Plus he was having to work with a heavily democratic legislature.
80- No, the surplus was caused by the economic stimulus from pro-growth initiatives in the administration. The peopl of AR benefited, and business in AR benefited – so Tax revenue went up.
81- It was being returned in the next years’ budget. Mike was term limited out of office.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:38 pm
#83 –
“I have known Governor Huckabee for many years, and at one time, I served as his Chief Legal Counsel,” former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins said. “He is a true leader, who makes firm, informed decisions based on simple standards of right and wrong and what is best for the citizens who elected him. He owns his decisions and doesn’t need to take a poll before deciding to do what’s right. He has been so successful with his straightforward approach that it makes you wonder why more of these people don’t try it.”
“For the past 14 years, I have watched Mike Huckabee lead our state,” former U.S. Rep. Asa Hutchinson said. “He fought the Democrat machine in Arkansas and brought honor and dignity to our highest office. He has campaigned long and hard for our Republican candidates to help build a better Arkansas .”
“I had the privilege of serving for eight years in the legislature during the Huckabee administration,” Sen. Shane Womack said. “Anyone who saw his leadership during the Hurricane Katrina relief effort had to be impressed by the way he was able to organize the resources of the state to provide relief and comfort to the tens of thousands of evacuees.”
“My experience with Gov. Huckabee that of a man who was thoughtful and well reasoned in his decisions,” Sen. Doug Matayo said. ” Arkansas is much better off because Mike Huckabee was our Governor. He is the best choice for president and I completely support his candidacy.”
December 21st, 2007 at 2:40 pm
What pro growth stimulus the obvious reason for the surplus seems like to me from the tax hikes from clinton and Huckabee.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Tax hikes do not create surpluses, they fund programs for the state. The surplus is created by economically friendly business environment and tax initiatives for pro-growth companies.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:45 pm
If you want to read them, here are 2 great blogs on Huckabee and taxes.
http://rightsmart.blogspot.com/2007/11/truthing-about-taxes-and-huckabee.html
http://rightsmart.blogspot.com/2007/11/addendums-to-truthing-about-taxes-and.html
December 21st, 2007 at 2:45 pm
And mitt was working with a bunch of conservatives? The income is lower, that makes the impact of the taxes higher.
Pro-growth measures of the administration? What a joke, the best pro growth measure is to CUT TAXES, and you have already argued that Huckabee RAISED taxes (less than Romney).
Spending exploded under Huckabee and he raised taxes to be able to spend.
Huckabee is a big government conservative:
In a report issued in May 2005, the Pew Research Center pointed to the rise of a new group within the Republican alliance it labeled “pro-government conservatives.” Pew sees this group accounting for just under a third of the GOP’s core support.
“The report described them as “broadly religious and socially conservative, but they deviate from the party line in their backing for government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, such as government regulation and more generous assistance to the poor.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/huckabees_rebellion.html
He increased taxes to help the poor. That might be a good idea. It might be a good idea but bad economics. Just ask Cuba how its working out. But that is what Mike Huckabee REALLY IS. Quit pretending he is a fiscal conservative.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:48 pm
#90, “Quit pretending he is a fiscal conservative.”
Arg. I didn’t say he was the most conservative.
You guys asked me to stand up and defend him – I am doing that. Are they more fiscally conservative candidates? yes. If that is all you want, vote Ron Paul. I want the whole package, and I want it in the form of someone I can trust. If you do not want to trust him, fine. I have met him, I have good friends that work with him, and I have known and see his character over 15 years. Im convinced. You might not be. God Bless America.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:49 pm
87, that is nonsense. Economically false. False as a matter of definitions in the budget process.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:54 pm
89 there was a time I believed EXACTLY what you believe about him. Then he raised taxes, he blasted Republicans for opposing his tax increases and when Republicans tried to run against Dems on the tax issue, the answer was always the same: That is Huckabee’s tax increase.
The he got personal and vindictive, not wanting to help Republicans who were against increase taxes after years of Bill Clinton’s tax increases.
Same for crime. Then a supporter of Huckabee, I was baffled. Why would he thumb his nose at the justice system, police prosecutors and jurors, and cut these criminals loose? And the embarrassing taking of 10s of thousands of $ in gifts from special interests with issues before state government.
MARK THESE WORDS, if Huckabee is the nominee and is elected, you will be disappointed in him.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:00 pm
85 you have reached the silly stage with this.
“I had the privilege of serving for eight years in the legislature during the Huckabee administration,†Sen. Shane Womack said….. “
….My experience with Gov. Huckabee that of a man who was thoughtful and well reasoned in his decisions,†Sen. Doug Matayo said. â€
Sen. SHAWN Womack is running for JUDGE and isn’t supposed to make endorsements, they did this to him withou his permission, and misspelled his FREAKING NAME.
SEN. Doug Matayo is a REP, was never in the Senate. They didnt get the OFFICE right.
This arrogant and idiotic attitude is why so many legislators do not endorse him.
85, you are quoting the very press release that I quoted and said was riddled with spelling errors, mistakes and false endorsements. HAHAHA, you just can’t believe everything Mike Hucakbee says. When you do, you get hung out to dry.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:09 pm
#94 – thanks for the info – I will let the poster of the blog know -
December 21st, 2007 at 3:14 pm
The poster of the blog is just quoting a Huckabee press release that had 15 errors regarding spelling of names, offices not held, improperly claimed endorsements, etc. The inside scoop put the blame on Huckabee’s former political director.
This kind of stuff charatarized Huckabee’s relationship with Republicans in the legislature and with the Republican party in Arkansas.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:18 pm
# 96, once again I appreciate your willingness to talk about these things and not just denigrate Mike with baseless claims. I see your point of view and I can respect the fact that you apparently have done your research. I have done what i can to support Mike and research him, and Im sure I have a long way to go to get to the bottom of these accusations. I do not profess to know everything there is to know here – I am just doing the best I can to help reduce the noise and false claims. thanks again.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:26 pm
“Huckabee’s Christmas ad was brilliant from a political strategy perspective. Of course the cross was intentional -they won’t admit it – so what. Nothing in political ads isn’t deliberate. The fact that the ad has gotten so much buzz and coverage only served to get Huckabee’s ad out to a wider audience than may have otherwise been possible.
True, honest, and sincere kudos to team Huckabee for that play – well executed.”
So,let me summarize: Baptist preacher just LIED. And you call it a “good execution”. Is that mean that we should be OK with him as a President, too? After all, he is a Good Executor, Well Executing a Lie.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:30 pm
# 98 –
I have met this man face to face. I asked him the question in person on Tuesday. I believe his answer to me. It wasn’t planted or planned. It was a book case.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:47 pm
After seeing some of the attacks on Huckabee, I’m starting to wonder if all the Huck accusations are baseless. Arguing about a cross on a Christmas test, and whether he got a Theology degree or Religion, seem like some really pathetic arguements. If all the Huck charges are this pathetic Huck could float up to my number two or maybe even number one.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:58 pm
John Mark, please, don’t forget that he called Jesus “a child who fed crowd with 5 loafs of bread and fish”.
Jesus at that event was about 30 years old. If he is a preacher, I would like to ask what he really preaches?
December 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pm
99, Wow! thats nuts, the stuff being out against is just sounding more and more desperate. Jesus fed the crows with a Child’s lunch. To say that Huck was saying that Jesus was a child is just nuts just nuts. This has got to be the lamest arguement against Huck I’ve yet.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pm
99, Or was that parody?
December 21st, 2007 at 4:24 pm
#103, If you hang out here, it get worse. Im doing what i can, but this is Anti-Huck territory, like Red State.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:26 pm
I’m not even a Huck fan, but a couple of these last attacks seem rather pathetic to me, especially that last one.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:29 pm
I’m a strong Mitt backer, but I’m sick of seeing the same things over and over and over and over,…enough flip flopper, enough cross in an ad, enough marching with mlk. Nobody on here is such a dunce that he/she has to have the same things hammered at them indefitely. The flip flopper thing is by far the worst cause they’ve gone on forever, and they are all about things many, many years old; and they’ve all been answered a hundred times to establish them as incorrect. We all have out opinions about whether or not the cross was put their intentionally or not, but to me, its not that big of a deal, whether it was or not. Huckabee has many, many things that are a bigger problems than worrying about whether or not the cross was put there on purpose or not.
There is no doubt in my mind that Huckabee intentionally brought up the question about Christ and Satan, and it will be a long time before the people out west forget that. Huckabee has no chance of becoming the nominee. He can only act as a spoiler. When he is on tv, he always gets the interviews that allows him to refute the comparison ads between he and Mitt, and when he does, he becomes extremely negative. As he’s uttering the words of how much he hates the negativity, he is being much more negative than anyone else by far, and night after night he is given the forum for it. I just wish people would be more careful on here what they sling at the other side. It’s unnecessary. I’m as guilty as the next about getting a little dig in for good humor occasionally. I liked Beth’s link doing the Huckabee 12 days of Christmas. Those things are humorous. Let’s just try not to get nasty with personal or religious attacks.
December 21st, 2007 at 4:38 pm
I’m sure Huckabee knew Jesus was a man of about 30, but he had apparently temporarily forgot, or just misspoke. But if you don’t want these obvious things discussed, why pick on Mitt if he uses a perfectly permissable usage of the word saw. It’s in the dictionary that way, and at least many of the people did not visualize him standing my the street and watching, but rather he admired his father as being a strong civil rights leader when it was not popular for a white person to be so. He lead a march through the streets of Detroit, and someone is nitpicking whether or not Mitt was literally standing there or not. Let’s stop this crap.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:32 pm
105, I don’t think he didn’t forget that Jesus was grown up, he had a slip of the toungue considering it was a Child’s lunch that got multiplied. I have never criticized Mitt on the MLK thing. Just because some do so, doesn’t make it right to make a totally bogus arguement against Huck. two wrongs don’t make a right. It just means both sides are hypocrites. And this all probably part of reason my generation is totally not involved in politics.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Hey Steve (#7) and anyone… Wanna bet how long will it be before Huckabee says something bad about Rush like he did with everyone who has bad-mouthed him so far?
December 21st, 2007 at 5:55 pm
Brett (#21) and any other Huckabee supporters, can you actually point to an instance when we had a leader who tried to lead our country religiously? Every single one of them (except perhaps Jimmy Carter, and I do not know him that much. He’s not worthy my time) tried to lead with example, not to make the government a religious organization. That is our SERIOUS problem with Huckabee. He wants to make our government a religion. It was not designed for it. It will tweak away too much of people’s rights. It will cause fractions all around. This has been the principle of our government the whole time. Huckabee wants to use our government as if it is the religion organization.
Why cannot you see that it is not attack against Huckabee’s religion, but against his belief that this must needs happen? Regarding this cross, have you seen the recent McCain AD? It too has cross. The difference is how it was presented. McCain made it obviously that his believe in Christ defines who he is, and that it is one aspect of his personality. With Huckabee, it is more of, I am a promised savior, and I am here to save you! That is the impression we received from him. He cannot save us, he will not save us. Only we together can save ourselves. Together, we stand, under God. Separate, we fall, under God.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:57 pm
*not* been the principle of our government…
December 21st, 2007 at 10:02 pm
“This has got to be the lamest arguement against Huck I’ve yet.”
I am not attacking him John Mark. I couldn’t care about him less.
It is simply strange, that, supposedly, pastor confuses events in The Bible. I wouldn’t make this mistake and I am for all purpose an ateist.
I don’t care about him, because I am sure he will follow Tancredo very soon. Sooner than most of the people expect.
December 22nd, 2007 at 9:10 am
[...] Cross To Bear A lot has been made of Mike Huckabee’s Christmas ad. Too much, even. Especially about the bookcase that almost looks like, gasp, a cross to some (if you squint [...]