Wall Street Journal suggests that Mike Huckabee might replace Paul Harvey on his news show (though not on “The Rest of the Story”):
This week, ABC plans to run a tribute to Mr. Harvey during his time slots, said Jim Robinson, president of ABC Radio Networks. Mr. Harvey’s son, Paul Harvey Jr., wrote and frequently read “The Rest of the Story,” and may continue to do the show in the future, said Mr. Robinson.
As for his “News and Comment” show, which ran for a few minutes twice a day, it is unclear how affiliates might fill that programming. “There is no replacing Paul Harvey because he is a national treasure,” said ABC Radio spokesman Omar Thompson. But former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, whose new ABC Radio show already has more than 90 affiliates after launching in January, might be a good fit for many of those affiliates, in part because his show is also short-form.
Harvey was syndicated on 950 stations, while Huckabee currently has 90 (which isn’t bad for just a couple months). If Huckabee gets most of those additional stations, it could be a big boost for him politically. On the other hand, it might be so lucrative, he might decide to stick with broadcasting.
Semi-related update: Citadel, the company that owns ABC Radio, will be de-listed from the big board this week, because their stock price has dropped to $0.14.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
I hope it works out for Huck, and that he doesn’t run in 2012.
Of course, this would strengthen Palin considerably, at least in the short run.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:10 pm
I hadn’t heard that Huck has a radio gig. Is it a daily call-in type deal or what?
Chuck Todd was on MSNBC when I flipped through this morning explaining that AM radio was a dying business — and that talk radio was such a retro 1990s phenomenon. Todd’s view was meant to support his belief that Limbaugh is meaningless to American conservatism and politics.
Bob, have you seen any signs of AM talk radio in decline?
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Is it gay that my first reaction to Harvey’s death was “OMG, not her, she’s sooo young. I haven’t heard her in years.”
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Please God, no. Non one can replace Paul Harvey. And huck is a limped choice to even begin to fill his shoes.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
I agree with Flip Dixon.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Please God, no. No one can replace Paul Harvey. And huck is a limped choice to even begin to fill his shoes.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Anything that keeps Suckabee from running.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I take it that “short-form” means something more along the lines of “news and commentary,” to answer my own question.
If you dislike Huck the politician, wouldn’t you want him to succeed at something else and have no further interest in running for office?
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I liked it when Mr. Fred Thompson filed in for Mr. Harvey. It will be a double edge sword to a degree. Mr. Huckabee will have some freedom to define himself. However, he may find that he is more of a TV guy than a radio guy. If Mr. Huckabee truly sticks with media and does not throw his hat in the ring, it will change to dynamics a bit to be sure, it is difficult to say how. It would most likely make Mr. Pawlenty a member of the big three by default, but it could shake things up further and open the door further to a variety of candidates, but whether these candidates will be serious is another question.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Fred was good, he’s easy on the ears.
I want Huck to run. He can’t win and he actually makes things easier for Romney.
March 2nd, 2009 at 1:32 pm
“He can’t win and he actually makes things easier for Romney.” Be careful what you wish for, he may or may not make things easier for Mr. Romney, depending on how the cookie crumbles.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Tough to say. Radio in general is hurting — not as badly as newspapers, but it’s pretty bad. Combine the general fragmentation of media with the effects of satellite and internet radio, and you can see why they have problems.
In 2008, I understand talk radio did quite well, but of course it was an election year. I haven’t heard anything recently, but I’ll see if I can find anything else.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
All those who say Huck will lose and should stick to his radio and media are just afraid of him because he is a threat. You wouldn’t be talking about him if he wasn’t a threat to Romney or Palin. If Reagan ran today, you would criticize him because he RAISED taxes in California. He ended up a great president and inspired a nation. He had great communication skills and that is what we need to win in 2012.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
That would be great if Huckabee got into that. He would do a good job. It wouldn’t be the same as Paul Harvey, but then again, no one would.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:09 pm
I agree that you’re not going to replace Paul Harvey. Think Fred Thompson would do well, though Huck wouldn’t be bad. I would personally leave it as “the Paul Harvey News and Comment Minute” and have rotating host doing purposefully Harvey-esque commentary.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:10 pm
In a funny coincidence, Romney also filled in for Paul Harvey, about a year ago. Something about Republican presidential contenders and that show…
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:10 pm
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
Steele is starting to sound more like John McCain than Mr. “big tent”. Not a Rush fan, but ruh types oare an improtant part of the party. He shouldn’t be playing into the msm’s hate fest with him like that.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:12 pm
..also, I will say that, while replacing Paul Harvey is not possibility for any man, I do think Huckabee could have a VERY bright future as a Harvey-esque figure. I didn’t like him as a candidate, but I LOVE him as a TV host.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
I’m not a Limbaugh fain either, but this quote sounds like a bit of insecurity on Steele’s part:
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Paul Harvey was a great commentator and broadcaster. Mike Huckabee is no Paul Harvey. The work ethic of Paul Harvey and his integrity as a person was way above the norm. Paul Harvey was one of my favorites when I was growing up. Paul Harvey was a one of a kind and he will be missed.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:15 pm
17 I saw Steele on the “State of the Black Union” or something like that with Tavis Smiley and was a bit let down. Some CA congresswoman was talking about how racist our justice system is and how its designed to keep black people from getting jobs because there are 56 jobs in California you can’t get with a felony on your record, Steele was just sort of nodding his head. She then made a joke about not trusting them with scissors because you can’t get a barber license if you have a felony. I thought it was pretty funny since the Democrats are the party of over-regulation and I can’t really think of much reason someone should have to get a license to cut hair in the first place.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I am listening to Mr. Limbaugh now, it is a shame that there is a contest between him and Mr. Steel. This help neither of them or the party.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Steel better get his head on straight. Rush is right — do your job, fix the damn primary system and act like you want conservativest to win.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:26 pm
In fairness to Mr. Steele (unfortunate as it may be) it is not his job to be Conservative, it is his job to promote the party. Perhaps, it should be one in the same (I for one would like it to be,) but there is a slight difference.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Fred won me over with his Paul Harvey stand-ins.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:50 pm
The best thing about Huck being on the Raido and TV is that he is not in office! the second best thing? I can…**Click**
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:53 pm
IT would be a perfect move for huck, do something he likes and is good at, keep his name/profile out there, and make some $’s…yet don’t think he could take the job and run in 2012 but i don’t think 2012 is hucks last shot at the white house, in fact i think he has almost up to the 2024 cycle to make his run and he does have one more solid prez run in the bank…the further he waits past the 2012 cycle, he will need to either be a very public figure, like take this radio gig, or run for another office to keep himself relevant…RIP PH
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Lovely match, he has my blessing.
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
The Rom-bots desperately want Huck and Palin to run, because Romney’s only chance of winning in 2012 is if the socon vote gets all split up between competing candidates. That way Romney can pull a McCain and slip through with his liberal record on abortion, gun control, etc.
I don’t want Huck to run, so I hope his radio and TV shows do just great!
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Point #1: Nobody, but nobody can replace Paul Harvey.
Point #2: Huckabee has just as much right to try to fill Mr. Harvey’s shoes as the next man. I don’t envy any man who attempts it.
Point #3: Harvey had a remarkably upbeat air around him. Can a populist such as Mike Huckabee who essential plays on class envy attract and keep the Harvey audience? Time will tell.
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
FlcHqp
March 2nd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
I agree with probably the majority of what Rush says, but I totally disagree with his approach & think he is bad PR for our party. The man IS divisive & the insults ARE frequently ugly – why do you think so many people dislike him?
So, the media is playing this game now that W is gone, grabbing a prominent polarizing figure like Rush & saying “See? This is the face of the GOP!” Knowing full well that more voters are going to be repelled by Rush’s style than impressed by what he’s saying.
Meanwhile, the actual head of the GOP speaks up & says ‘this is bogus, Rush is not the spokesperson for this party & we recognize that people are justifiably put off by his tactics’. So, what’s the media going to do?–Keep stirring the pot because the more they divide the GOP, the less chance the party has of preventing the liberal socialists from consolidating their power grab.
Wake up to how you’re being played, guys! This is not Rush vs. Steele. This should not be Americans vs. Americans. This is the socialists vs. Americans. How can we persuade the rest of the country that it is not in their best interest to support the DC carpet-baggers if they’re ticked off & defensive before we even start?
Think about it – how open are YOU to listening to someone who irritates the crap out of you? We need leadership that is charismatic & persuasive if we’re going to convert people to the conservative cause. Stop playing into the real opposition’s hands!
P.S. Speaking of irritating the crap out of a person, this site appears to be rampant with Huck derangement syndrome.
@marK #30 – would like to hear you justify this accusation that Huckabee “plays on class envy”. Sure sounded like he was just flat out telling it like it is (and when Palin came along & said similar things, many of the same Huckaphobes suddenly thought it was “great” & “real America speaking”). I’m gonna take a wild guess that you’re a Daddy Romney-bucks supporter?
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Grace,
Are you saying you’re not playing the “class envy” card when you dismiss Romney as “Daddy Romney-bucks”? Is there something wrong when someone works hard, plays by the rules, and is rewarded with a sizable fortune?
“Us” versus “them”. No matter how you slice or dice it, identity politics is almost always a loser for a Republican. We already start with fewer voters than the Democrats, and we want to divide the electorate even further?
That was Huckabee’s biggest mistake in 2007-2008.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Huckabee’s show is available to listen to here.
http://radio.mikehuckabee.com/Article.asp?id=1084809
The archives are 1 business day behind. If many radio stations want Huckabee to replace Harvey, he may have to expand his show from his current 3 minutes to something more in line with Harvey’s time.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:41 pm
34
Thanks for the link Adam.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Grace.#32:“Speaking of irritating the crap out of a person, this site appears to be rampant with Huck derangement syndrome.”
Actually, Grace, this is one of the tamer sites. Huckabee’s reputation among Republicans really took a beating last year from his antics after Romney bowed out at the beginning of February. When Rudy, Fred, Willard Mitt, and nearly all the other former candidates dropped out, they stopped lobbing potshots at their erstwhile opponents and got behind McCain. They were determined for the good of the party and the American people to let bygones be bygones.
Not Mike Huckabee. Every chance he got, he slammed Romney. The race was over. Romney had left, but Huckabee was obsessed with him. He couldn’t leave him alone. And the funny thing was, Romney refused to reply in kind. Here was Huckabee ranting and raving about how terrible Romney was, and Romney was utterly refusing to play along. He just laughed, smiled, said something non-confrontational, and continued to work to advance the Republican cause.
You think that went unnoticed? On site after site, Huckabee’s stature fall with every bash at Romney. On every general Republican site I visited, even ones who had been very anti-Romney or luke-warm to him at best, the anger at Huckabee grew higher and higher. Romney response, or lack thereof earned him a tremendous amount of respect from many people who had worked hard to defeat him. On such sites as Hot Air, RedState, and here, I read comment after comment from former Huckabee supporters totally disgusted with his obsession with Romney.
So Huckabee now has an awful lot of ground to make up. His own reputation is in shreds, and Romney’s is accentuated, all thanks to Mike’s antics post-February. Huckabee has no one to blame but himself.
I do give him credit, however. I haven’t heard a single peep out of him attacking Romney since about the first of the year. Maybe Mike has finally decided to grow up. Let’s hope so.
March 2nd, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Steele is a total tool; first he makes it a #1 priority to win in the Northeast (#1 priority? not Ohio, Colorado, and Missouri?) and now he starts a feud that serves as the #1 news story on a day that Obama tanked the stock market and on the day that it’s been reported that he will be surrendering missile defense in Eastern Europe?
Maybe Duncan wasn’t so bad after all…so what if he wasn’t on tv, the guy could raise money and stay out of conflicts that create media narratives that are detrimental to the party/movement.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Amen, Tommy Boy.
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:48 pm
37 – See what I mean? We’re being played.
33 & 36 – marK,
Hot Air, RedState & apparently this site seem to represent what one might term “Rush” Republicans. That would be sufficient to explain Huckabee’s low standing at those sites. But when you hang around sites where everyone is down on somebody, it’s not particularly startling that it wears off on others – sort of like peer pressure. If all I knew about Huckabee came from these sites, I would reject him, too.
For those who keep touch with a wider variety of perspectives, it was very clear that Huckabee was passionately hoping to dissuade McCain from selecting Romney as his VP. Now while Romney’s supporters would understandably be miffed by that, the fact that Huckabee did it despite the way it was being perceived in circles that a more calculating man (like Romney) would have wanted to avoid disturbing actually testifies to Huckabee’s willingness to go to the mat for what he believes is best for this country rather than play politics & serve his own self interests first.
As for the ground that you believe Huckabee has to make up while claiming that Romney has gained, well, they both have apparently lost some enthusiasm at CPAC, and CNN’s latest poll shows Romney trailing both Huckabee & Palin (the other “identity politics – I’m one of you” candidate. Do you feel equally incensed about Palin?). It leaves a bit of room for doubt about how in touch the HotAir-Redstate crowd is with the rest of the party. See, I don’t think they speak for the majority of conservatives anymore than Rush does.
Yes, I’m afraid Daddy Romney-bucks was deliberately pejorative. Sorry, it’s not that I find his business resume to be offensive – even if his dad was a pretty large factor in that success. (And frankly I think his political resume demonstrates a ‘daddy’s shadow’ complex) And I have nothing against honestly gained wealth – in fact, I greatly respect it. I was, however, completely offended by Romney’s blatantly calculated attempt to buy the presidency no matter who he had to step on in the process.
Romney was supposed to be the Great White Hope who could save our economy! He was going to rejuvenate Michigan! Yeah, right, he was right there with McCain on W’s bailout (while Huckabee the so-called economic liberal is on the record as saying it was a bad idea & the GOP shouldn’t support it from the outset) & people were talking him up as the future economy czar – then when polls showed that the American people were angry about the bailout, Romney said ‘but we must be tough so no help for Michigan’. Romney has no clue how to serve this country – he’s a GOP version of Clinton, i.e. ‘What do the polls say I should do?’
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Grace,
Actually I don’t feel “incensed” about anyone, even Obama. Getting angry doesn’t do any good, and usually plays havoc with your reasoning. You can’t think straight when angry. Besides, why waste this wonderful life God has given us by being angry? It makes no sense.
Yes, you are right. Sarah Palin did make the same mistake as Huckabee when she went into small town America and called them the “real America”. Again with the populist identity politics. Again with the “us” versus “them”. And how successful was it? Sure, it drew large cheering enthusiastic crowds; but the last time I checked, it was the Bidens living in Blair House, not the Palins.
Grace. You may like Romney. You may hate him. You may like Huckabee. You may hate him. You may like Palin. You may hate her. None of that has any bearing on the fact that identity politics is nearly always a losing strategy for Republicans. The numbers simply do not add up.
Beyond just the numbers, we win by being positive. What is positive about putting down “them”?
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Grace, you sealed your identity here at race with the line “I find his business resume to be offensive.” Hehe. You are such a Huckster it’s not even funny.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:09 pm
#41:
You sealed your identity here as Martha by failing to read the full line in context, “it’s not that I find his business resume to be offensive”
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:23 pm
I looked up romney’s comments on the bailout at the time of the bailout:
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/15555/
i find them to be rational…As for #39 other comments, such as:
1)daddy’ romneybucks
2)Sorry, it’s not that I find his business resume to be offensive – even if his dad was a pretty large factor in that success.
3)‘daddy’s shadow’ complex
My advice #39 go f’ing see a shrink, you have an irrational hatred of the man…your comments in #2 are downright comical at the stupidity of them…gee what is wrong with people
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:29 pm
#43:
And Huckabee had a crumbling network of roads in Arkansas and a court order that forced more funding for schools. yet, those are unforgivable sins.
Romney on the other hand advocates for blowing $700 billion on Wall Street investments and it’s all reasonable.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Huckabee policies have nothing to do with my comments in #43 other than the poster in #39 is clearly a huckabee supporter trying to personally smear romney…i will also any blast romney supporters who go dirty against huckabee with cheap snide comments like those written above
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:39 pm
41 – Martha, it would appear that you find reading what I *actually* write rather challenging, please either go back & read what has been written before you respond further or bow out.
40 – marK, how ironic that you have ended up where I began, lol! The original point was that regardless of how anyone feels about him – whether it’s your pov or mine, the facts are that Romney doesn’t tingle enough legs to be carried to Pennsylvania Ave. and we need to look elsewhere.
I did not suggest that elsewhere was Huckabee, either. I simply said that I see no valid reason for ruling him out (in response to the apparent assumptions that my not mentioning him in my criticisms was some kind of manipulation). Apparently THAT incenses a few people here!
That made it necessary to go into further detail.
So I’m all for going positive – so have you given any thought to current conservative Republicans who are upright, experienced, innovative (or at least good at finding innovation), charismatic, persuasive & articulate? Just your short list!
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Grace, yes I got that little part wrong, but look at your combined comments about Romney, religion, and Huck today. I stand by my assessment that you are a full-fledged Huckster – although pretending not to be. Those Huck-colored glasses are amazing how they alter reality, aren’t they?
Speaking of that, Adam has a case of it too. He actually believes that Huck was forced to raise 500 million in new taxes. Honest, it wasn’t Huck’s fault.
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:17 pm
44. The 700 billion was to shore up the financial sector so that it would not collapse. We’ve been over it enough already, but you know that Romney is not responsible for it, and that it isn’t going to hurt Romney’s chances. If everyone was as angry about it as you seem to think, he would not have won the CPAC straw poll. He’s still seen as the most capable person to deal with economic issues. You can’t undo his reputation, record of financial success/expertise with his advocacy of the bailout.
Also, Adam. Id like to know why you think Romney won CPAC, and why Huck faired so poorly. Were you surpirsed that Palin didn’t win or even come close seeing as how you believe she’s the frontrunner? I’d like to see your assessment of the CPAC results beyond just saying it’s meaningless.
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:43 pm
45 – blue, take a breath, you’re turning colors.
BTW, better get busy blasting Romney supporters – the cheap snide comments about Huckabee (Huckster – Suckabee – and so on) are all over the comments on this site to the point of pathology.
Your GlennBeck link (which is dated at about the peak of the huge public backlash) simply verifies that your economy czar was playing follow the leader instead of leading. Romney was on the dream-economy team that was advising McCain during this critical part of the campaign. He said the same thing all those guys were saying – that we have to do this or things will crater – well they did it, and things still cratered, and are continuing to crater.
(Giving the socialists the crisis they want in order to “take control of the economy” – look for the govt ownership of banks talk to resurface again real soon. Actually, I’m expecting the MSM to start saying it’s necessary in order to start the drumbeat)
In fact, today’s news that AIG was going to get bailed out some more led to the market’s new low. So why am I supposed to believe that the LBO expert is what this country needs to turn the economy around? (Actually, China will probably be leading an LBO on the U.S. shortly.
)
And for the (how many times is this now?), it is true that I have no problem with Huckabee, but I’m not the one who brought him up – you guys are the ones who seem to keep assuming anyone who knocks Romney must stumping for Huckabee. So who’s carrying the campaign baggage?
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:57 pm
47 – sure, Martha, have it your nasty little way. I’m a Huckster and you’re a Romney-bought – does that make everything comfy, cozy again for you now? You can dismiss every point that was brought up and accuse us of blindness while offering nothing but insults to back up your stance and continue on your merry way thinking that you have won some great victory — so long as you continue away on your way… ugh, I’m gonna go have to go detox now…
P.S. Who won CPAC’s last 3 straw polls? BTW, ever heard of George Allen? Look a little farther back. So their straw poll means exactly what?
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:03 am
Grace, you’re not worth responding to because you have your own reality. Heaven love him, marK tried to reason with you to no avail. I didn’t think that anyone on race could make Flip look reasonable, but you pulled it off.
So this is my last response to anything you say on race.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:03 am
In one blog on another site, it is being speculated that the GOP asked Sarah to stay home, as she’s been an embarrassement to herself and to the GOP of late.
It was not my blog…someone else said it. I don’t know what the REAL reason for her no show was. Perhaps without a AK Attny Gen, she had more work to do? (He resigned over the Troopergate thing).
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 am
Palin is starting to be seen for the problem she is. The last few weeks haven’t treated her well.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:32 am
Grace,
There is zero reason to rule out anyone at all at this point. It is a full three years before the first primaries. It is a full two years before the campaigns really begin. That is an eternity in politics.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:39 am
Martha.
Bingo.
And you might find this an interesting read. Go to the comments as well. Seems our gal in the northern wanders, has changed the line of succession , in case she and th Lt. Gov can’t do what they are supposed to do.
Another of her BFF’s from High School gets a job he’s not ready for. and now is in the line of succession. Oh well. Gald I don’t live there.
http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/705347.html
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 am
#52
I don’t have a problem with Palin missing CPAC. She does have a state to run, after all. She did spend a huge amount of time ignoring her state during the campaign. Time to mend some fences.
#53
Well, every candidate is a “problem” in one way or the other. Sarah Palin is just proving she’s human is all. It happens to everyone of them, eventually.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:15 am
51 – Martha, that’s the nicest thing you’ve ever said to me! Thank you!
54 – marK, you’re right! Romney might actually participate in a Walk for Life or protest the violation of conscience clause that big ‘O’ is going after now! He could follow his church’s lead and become active against the redefining of marriage in our country! He could march in protests just like his father did! Anything’s possible! Now, probability wise, well…
So, have any of you people considered guys like Pence, Thune or DeMint? Anyone besides the usual list the media keeps trotting out? Or is this place mainly the RomneyPAC?
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:18 am
Huck could not fill Paul Harvey’s shoes….No way, no how…..and besides he would be in a position to sway people away from Mitt Romney who just won the CPAC most hopeful in 2012….I know, lots of speculation, go check the AOL poll, Mitt is further AHEAD IN THAT POLL WITH SAME CONTENDERS…..People know we made a huge mistake, Mitt was more Reaganistic than any other candidate…..Quite honestly, Mitt is more qualified as a successful businessman…This will take a financial, moral, honest man….Please America, wake up, it is getting late in this game, will we survive??? Only if we stand up and stop this administration from taking away our liberties!!!!!!!!!!Thank you those who did not vote for Obama, I feared his intent and here we are….Having Tea Parties all over this country because he and the Dems wish to control this country we call, HOME of the BRAVE, LAND of the FREE…Wake up, AMERICA, PLEASE…………………..
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:27 am
Not mainly Romney Pac……but aware of what this county needs, besides lots of prayers, and I am not a Mormon, not that being a Mormon is a bad thing……..We still have questions about Obama’s religion, being a Muslim??? Do we really know the truth??? I don’t care about Pac’s, who will most honestly listen to the people and include them as a family in this country?? Knowing full well. we are a government, for the people and BY THE PEOPLE, not GOVERNMENT in CONTROL……
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 am
I think I’ll join with Martha 51. Grace has sunk to the depths of such annonymous trolls as Tano and Metrorepublican.
You can learn a lot from somebody like Dotan, though. At least he had style and class.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:17 am
It may not be the wisest thing to get into a Romney Huckabee contest, but I will anyway. First of all Grace, just like people joined the Romney camp for different reasons, people joined the Huckabee camp for different reasons. While at this point, so far I sympathize with niether Mr. Romney nor Mr. Huckabee in 2012, but I did vote for Mr. Huckabee in 2008. While Mr. Huckabee did not win any delegates in Ohio, the people in my own presint voted for Mr. Huckabee’s CD delegates. Most of Mr. Huckabee’s voters (in my presinct) were middle class Catholic voters that shared Mr. Huckabee’s values. I certainly did not agree with Mr. Huckabee on everything. While I do not believe that Mr. Huckabee is a Socialist or even a Liberal, he is not quite as economically Conservative as I would like. When he came to Ohio to speak, among other many things, he expressed concerns about America losing jobs to Overseas, but in that particular speech, he did not blame the rich. However, I was concerned that in his speaking, he perhaps went a bit over-board in the campaign with his class war-fare and this made me uneasy. He did not use the class war-fare card nearly as much as Romney campaign claims, but he did it too much for my liking.
Yes, I did like Mr. Huckabee’s speaking style, he was charasmtic funny and he did in deed indentify with the values that many of us in the Heartland have. I realize that many Americans also liked the way he identified with the working class. As a middle class person, I have nothing against either the poor or the rich per se. They are neither better or worse human beings than me. I have no problem when a politician want to identify with me (depending on your definition of identify,) but I get a bit nervous when a politician claims he can walk in my shoes, promises my food stamps, health care and education. In reality, I do not think Mr. Huckabee was an economic Leftist and I do not think that he would give those of us in the middle class social programs that we do not need, but some of his speech scared a some people.
Mr. Romney’s wealth was probably a bigger lightening rod for many people than his religion from my view, on the one hand, I do not think that Mr. Romney is owed the Presidency just because he is a successful businessman, on the other, it is wrong to be jealous of him for his success and unforunately, some held it against him. Yes, among other things, I question the wisdom of how he used his money on the campaign trial (I have nothing against him spending his own money, but the way he spent it, did not give me confidence) and until his latest CPAC speech, I certainly questioned his speaking abilities, but I for one am not jelous of his wealth. Look, I have had some lucky breaks in life (like becoming an American Citizen) and I have had a few lucky breaks, but generally, I have worked hard to get where I got. I can either be jealous of Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney for owning fancy houses, or I can be thankful that I own two modest homes. It appears Grace that although you have made some good points, you have a jealous attitude against Mr. Romney and this is not ideal. Perhaps you did not get lucky breaks in life and although it may not be fair, it is not fair to blame Mr. Romney.
I think your particular question about MarK’s income was unwise to say the least. Let’s say for the sake of arguement that MarK is in a higher income bracket (which is none of our business.) Does it not occour to you that perhaps he worked hard to get where he got? Frankly, this kind of question is reverse snobery and just drags people’s nose in the mud. Yes, many in the Romney camp took your word out of context and yes some extreme elements in the Romney camp are guilty of looking down their nose at other people, but by you playing the class card, you are not acting any better.
Perhaps since I now sympathize with another candidate, it is not my business to stick my nose in a Romney- Huckabee contest, but regardless of who win the nomination (Mr. Romney, Mr. Huckabee, Mrs. Palin, Mr. Pawlenty or somebody else) we need to have element of both the Romney and Huckabee camps to get behind the winner. by dragging Romney’s people’s noses in the mud, it is not helpful. In short Grace, with respect, this attitude does not help Mr. Huckabee.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:26 am
Joseph.#60
I would not consider Tano a troll in the purest sense of the word. Rather, he is our resident devil’s advocate. Though his posts can be annoying, they are very useful in shaking our complacency. That is certainly a worthwhile endeavor.
And I would say that calling Metro a troll is an exaggeration. I certainly have not always agreed with him, but that doesn’t make him a troll. Trolls do not have his intellectual honesty.
I judge trolls by how attentive I read them. The less attentive I find myself, the greater the troll. I almost always read Metro’s posts very carefully. He has a lot to say worth reading. Ergo, he is no troll.
By that standard, we do have a few trolls here. They shall remain nameless, however.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:35 am
Interesting definition of troll, there is one or two people (who I also won’t) that most people (I am not saying i am among them) do not value their opinions at all. While they may be off the wall at times, I think they are sincere. Thus, unlike others, I do not think they are trolls. I think that a troll is basically somebody who sets out to cause trouble. Very few people fit that mode, but a few others come close.
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 am
I have having a bad day with spelling and grammar it should say (who I also won’t mention their names)
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:49 am
“Actually, Grace, this is one of the tamer sites.”
Well… I’ve been giving Huck a break lately.
Grace,
rush isn’t that popular on this site, either. Some front page posters will occasionally use him as a reference, which I have done occasionally (as well as Gamecock and MattC.),but not often.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:03 am
Grace.#57:“Or is this place mainly the RomneyPAC?”
This site actually has a wide ranging audience. We cover the political spectrum here. We even have a Ron Paul advocate or two. And Tano is our resident liberal Democrat.
One thing we see happening over and over again is when newbies come on here. They often come from “echo-chamber” type sites where everyone is in agreement with them. They often seem shocked at the fact that not everyone here agrees with them and find themselves vigorously challenged. Quite often they respond by accusing us of being extremists. That is perhaps understandable, since they aren’t used to it.
Given time, they either leave, or they will eventually learn that honest, sincere thinking people can come to the opposite conclusion from them. Ascribing bigotry/stupidity/insincerity/nefarious motives/whatever to them is seldom merited, and really reflects more upon themselves than upon others.
So stick around. This is a great site. You are most welcome to stay. We need Huckabee supporters/defenders. Just lay off the wild accusations for awhile, okay? It makes it difficult to take you seriously.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:13 am
No such thing as RomneyPac. His pack is called Free and Strong America Pac. His pack enjoy’s a 60 percent election rate. His pac is not named after him, but there are other pac’s named after their leaders.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:37 am
Grace: The name-calling (Daddy Rombucks, etc) will get you ignored — it’s why nobody takes Knickers seriously.
We do have a variety of viewpoints here (I’m in the Uncommitted/Sanford camp for the moment) and another Huck fan is a welcome addition.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 am
Well said Bob Hovic!
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:43 am
Huckabee’s Huckabee report would do well in the Harvey timeslot. That does not mean that I think Huckabee would replace Harvey, just that Huckabee’s report would be tuned in with interest, keep audience numbers and would bring in $ for the stations. Huckabee is a good commentator and has had some time to work on his radio show and could easily expand his 3 minutes to Harvey’s 15 minute show.
I am a Huckabee supporter and not a troll. I think Huckabee is a great communicator because he is able to instill passion in his listeners, talks in a manner that helps them understand the issues, comes across as reasonable as he is not angry about being a conservative, uses humor to defuse a situation, and can relate to his American audience.
That being said, I myself was a little disappointed in his CPAC speech. One criticism against Huckabee is that he does not have enough redmeat when he talks. I was hoping for some specific suggestions in his speech and was disappointed with his puppy story. He had a great point about how social conservatives did not lose the election for McCain, but that soc cons and fiscal cons need to come together-and he talked about how the positive structure of the family helps keep govt programs at a minimum. He also gave a good analogy about getting out of the boat warehouse and putting your boat in the water-get involved in politics and fight for your country’s beliefs. Huckabee did miss an opportunity to give Americans specific examples on what exactly to do to get involved.
Another thing I like about Huckabee is that he is not afraid to tell it like it is. He criticized McCain/Bush for not going against the Tarp. If one really looks at the election, that is where McCain blew the election-what happened to that black sharpy where McCain was going to cross off earmarks and name names-didn’t happen and McCain showed his true colors by backing down and not knowing what to do about the economy.
Huckabee has a lot of good ideas, if only those that HATE him would listen. Just like during the primaries when he said that the economy was not doing well, that the Bush administration had a bunker mentality, that Pakistan was a problem, that we needed to build a fence, make illegals go to the back of the line-but STILL treat them as fellow human beings who deserve dignity and respect. Those issues that he talked about, were mocked, but if you look closely, those issues were real and he had the right idea.
Who know if Huckabee, Romney or Palin will run in 2012?? But lets treat them all with respect and use their ideas for the good of the republican party. Because if we do not, we are looking at 4 more years of Obama and socialism.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:58 am
“That being said, I myself was a little disappointed in his CPAC speech.” Great post TexasConserv. I was actually impressed with both Mr. Romney’s and Mr. Huckabee’s speech for different reasons. In terms of speech delivery, it is no secret that this is one of Mr. Huckabee’s strong points and one of Mr. Romney’s weak points. Thus, it was kind of ironic that at CPAC, Mr. Romney gave a more charasmatic speech than Mr. Huckabee. However., just like Mr. Romney, Mr. Huckabee has his own issues to deal with. To Mr. Huckabee’s credit, he dealt with some of those issue in his speech so in different ways, both men did what they had to do.
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:27 am
Yes, dog me. But I post under other names as well… same stuff, and it’s just fine!
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:33 pm
LOL
I’m sorry, but I have a hard time believing you, Knickers. Either you are posting different stuff, or you aren’t posting under different names. Take your pick.
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Not a bad point MarK. I also recall (assuming my memory is correct) that Kavon stated that Knickers does not post under different names and those who question differently face being banned.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Wow, I am really impressed with the general civility here (minus Martha of course). For the record I voted for Huckabee but I am open to other viewpoints. I think if we could somehow bottle up Romney and Huckabee into one candidate than we’d really have something then. The ultimate point is to win reguardless of who the candidate is. I support Huckabee because I think he represents all 3 legs of the conservative platform.
Back to the main topic of discussion, the Huckabee Report is a good avenue for Huckabee to get is views out in the open and for people to discover that he isn’t what others would make him out to be. In two years I think bloggers will still be unchanged about thier views on him but the general public will view him as a much more viable candidate because of his time spent on his radio gig and his Fox show. I don’t know any other possible presidential candidate that will have as much opportunity as Huckabee to refine his message for 2012.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:10 pm
You guys are at trip – everything I have been accused of doing y’all have have been doing regularly in spades from my short time here. More than a few of your responses to my posts have more often than not been knee-jerk, not even following the conversation answers. (marK, I appreciate your efforts & am not including you)
I can already foresee the answer to this will be “well your posts weren’t worth reading” but then why on earth bother to respond to people you’re not listening to? It makes you sound a few circuits short of a load. And many of the responses to my RomneyPAC question show an odd inability to recognize figurativism over literalism.
There may be a variety here, but clearly Romney supporters are the good ol’ boys club residents. (I know, I know, someone is now going to inform me that this isn’t actually a club :rolleyes:) I bow out to your vastly superior intellectual acumen, gentlemen, and your uncanny ability to recognize a Huckabee troll when you see one! Thanks for playing! Shakin’ the dust…
(ooh, Biblical allusion – see, she IS a Huckabee troll! Oh wait, if I dislike Romney & I don’t dislike Huckabee, I must not only be a Huckazealot but an anti-Mormon bigot, too!) You know, all this party unity that Romney generates is just more warm fuzzies than I can handle…
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
77 – Grace, don’t go yet! You’ll miss the vote for Miss Congeniality! You can’t let Knickers take it in a landslide of sarcasm!
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I have a bad habit of typing the wrong post number. That was, of course, to Grace in 76.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
That last sentence should of read:
I don’t know of any other candidate that will have a much opportunities to refine his 2012 message as Huckabee will.
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pm
With respect Grace, I think you are missing the point. I do not think many people think you are a troll. So far, I do not think that, but you do need to watch your tone a bit and be careful not to drag people’s noses in the mud. It did not do Mr. Romney any good when a few of his extreme supporters dragged people’s noses in the mud so why do you think it will help Mr. Huckabee if you do the same? I do not believe that you are a trouble-maker on purpose, but if you do not tone it down, the result will be nothing, but trouble. What is it that you want for and from your candidate?
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:52 pm
I agree with OHIO. So stick around, Grace. You might grow to like this site. If nothing else, we need more Huckabee supporters. The ones we currently have are feeling a bit outnumbered.
But if you must go, I wish you the best of luck. Have a great life!
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Grace, stick around.
Some of the Rom-bots on this site are simply outrageous in their conduct, but I’ve always responded to them civilly, with a lot of cold logic and factual information that they never seem able to directly respond to.
I like Huckabee personally, but he seems to have a very narrow base of support. I just don’t see how he can win, although I give him enormous credit for opposing the bailout at a very early stage (unlike Romney and Palin).
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Mark, I am posting pretty much the same stuff. Just saying it a bit differently!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Mark,
I have recently started a new name. But I’ll not expose it – yet. Prior to that, I used only one other name. But, you all hate to see that other name, nad it could get me ‘banned’!
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Knickers:
Ah HA!! “Just saying it differently”, huh? That’s a loophole you could drive a Mack Truck through.
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Flip.#82“Some of the Rom-bots on this site are simply outrageous in their conduct, but I’ve always responded to them civilly…”
And calling supporters of Romney ‘Rom-bots’ is being civil?
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Good point MarK, apart from quoting somebody, I am easy about the term Bot, it does not appear to be good language.
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
FYI
Ratings for Huckabee this past weekend. This is a typical weekend with the trend line being increasingly more viewers.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_saturday_feb_28_110134.asp#more
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/the_scoreboard_sunday_march_1_110135.asp#more
He had been lagging in the 25-54 demographic but thats coming up too. As with the rest of Fox programing, Huckabee is killing the competition.
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Does Flip even realize she is hilarious?
March 4th, 2009 at 12:43 am
Fiscal,
Just shows me that too many folks have too much time to spend parked infront of the boobtoob. My kids get 1 hour a week. Use it well, we say. Oh, I get that same hour as well. I use it to watch 24. Much, much more entertaining!
March 4th, 2009 at 12:44 am
And I’ve kinda warmed to the name ‘rombots’! I’m sure others have too.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
For those who care, the Huckabee Reports have aired twice daily since January 5th. They are also readily available “On Demand” from ABC Radio (radio.mikehuckabee.com) so I listen to them regularly. He provides great commentary, and is a strong fical conservative. He started with 45 affiliates (for which ABC was delighted) and has grown to over 90 in two months. The last three days, On Demand has THREE reports daily, so I am sure there is a connection with Paul Harvey.
As for his Fox weekend show, and all those who hate him, there are in the aggregate between 3.9 and 4 million viewers every weekend who disagree with you. He kills all other competition, both on FOX and in his timeslot and other cables out of his timeslot (even with his repeated shows) and he has been #1 in the demo for over a month now. And his viewership is growing.
In addition, he is a regular guest on other FOX shows — i.e., Cavuto, Greta, and Hannity has him every Friday night for the last four weeks. He is a regular on Fox and Friends either Friday or Saturday a.m.
I understand he announced on Fox and Friends this morning that, in a few weeks, he is commencing a bus tour to several troubled cities — and I imagine he will be airing his show locally, with lots of local exposure.
So for all of you who think (i) Huck sucks, (ii) better to have him in the media than a candidate, (iii) nobody likes him anyway and/or (iv) he doesn’t stand a chance in 2012 — I would suggest you think again.
Whether Huckabee runs in 2012 has everything to do with how Obama is perceived and nothing to do with Romney or Palin.