A Huckabee Ally On El Rushbo

Pure bunk. Rush doesn't like Huck because Huck is only conservative on abortion and gay marriage. He is really a liberal on everything else (i.e. taxes, etc.)

Rush has really only praised Romney and Thompson. You can argue that Romney is the favorite of the "chattering class" but you can certainly not argue that Fred is.

Posted by Joel | December 20, 2007 10:34 AM

Wow! How to destroy your own campaign: attack the most listened to talk show host in the free world two weeks before a close caucus. Are you sure this wasn't a Romney ally posing as a Huck ally? Huck won't know what hit him. This is the updated version of "never get into an argument with someone who buys paper by the ton and ink by the barrel.

Posted by Matt in Maine | December 20, 2007 10:51 AM

This analysis makes absolutely no sense.

First of all, Rush opposed the GOP/DC establishment on immigration.

Second of all, why would Rush oppose Huck if he wanted Hillary? Wouldn't he support Huck if he wanted Hillary (since Huck is probably easiest her her to beat)?

Finally - while I agree that Rush generally tries to be the GOP cheerleader (he takes talking points, expounds upon them, and attacks Democrats), this guy is a pretty smart guy. Most of the other radio idiots (Hannity, Savage, etc) are completely moronic and can be easily led by the GOP talking points, but Rush is an intelligent fellow. Don't underestimate him!

Posted by Democrats Against Hillary | December 20, 2007 11:12 AM

No: Rush doesn't think. Not one of the wacky radio celebs (left and right) have a functioning brain.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by matt | December 20, 2007 11:13 AM

Rush, like many of us, are REAGAN conservatives. Limited government, not expanding it. Huckabee wants to expand the role of the federal government in education, smoking, preventative health care. His immigration policy as governor was also an expansion of benefits for illegals until the "cooler" heads calmed down his "compassionate" side.

Huckabee as "Heroic Conservative" like Gerson writes in his book. There is nothing heroic about conservatives who want to expand the role fo the federal government. It's political pandering to get into office.

I wrote more about Huckabee's expansion of the federal role in education on my blog.

www.spunkyhomeschool.blogspot.com

Posted by Spunky | December 20, 2007 11:39 AM

The Christian right (and other fed up conservatives) are supporting Mike Huckabee, but the right’s pundits are not flocking to support him, and many of them are actually trying to derail him. Case in point:

Rush's Hit-Piece on Huckabee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu-ZSSaZELM

Something is very very very very wrong with this picture. Bottom line: The best candidate for the Republican nomination is Huckabee.

Posted by apacallyps | December 20, 2007 11:43 AM

Hmmm...I don't really trust comments from anonymous "allies" of politicians.

Posted by KeepinItReal | December 20, 2007 11:50 AM

Cuervo Christmas Cookies

1 cup of water
1 tsp baking soda
1 cup of sugar
1 tsp salt
1 cup of brown sugar
Lemon juice
4 large eggs
1 cup nuts
2 cups of dried fruit
1 bottle Jose Cuervo Tequila

Sample the Cuervo to check quality.

Take a large bowl, check the Cuervo again to be sure it is of the highest quality, pour one shot and drink.

Turn on the electric mixer. Beat one cup of butter in a large fluffy bowl.
Add one teaspoon of sugar. Beat again. At this point it's best to make surethe Cuervo is still OK, try another shot just in case.

Turn offf the mixer. Break 2 leggs and add to the bowl and chuck in the cup of dried fruit. Pick the frigging fruit off the damn floor. Now mix the turner.

If the fried druit gets stuck in the beaters, get it out with a drewscriver. Check Cuervo aggin to check for tonsisticity.

Next, sift two cups of salt, into it. Hceck the Hose Cuervo.

Now shift the lemon juice and strain your nuts. Add one table. Add a spoon of sugar (or not if you don't like it too much). Whenever you can find. Greash the oven and bake a cake.

Turn the cake tin around around. Don't fall in the ofen. Forget to beat off the turner. New, threw the bowl throw window, finish hte Cose Juervo and putt the stove in dishwasher.

HAPPY BIRTFDAY!!

Posted by Larry Derry Barry | December 20, 2007 11:56 AM

Wow! I hope Rush helps to bring down the liberal Huckabigot campaign. Conservatives need to vote for conservatives. Mitt or Fred in '08!

Posted by Cory | December 20, 2007 12:00 PM

""" the right’s pundits are not flocking to support him, and many of them are actually trying to derail him. """

The pundit's hate Huckabee because they've worked too hard advocating for conservative issues and values, including faith in the public sphere, to have it mucked up by a passive aggressive, divisive yet wannabe populist. He should take his communication skills and leadership try to run for president of the Southern Baptist Convention. He's the last thing conservatism, republicanism, or evangelicalism needs right now.

Posted by Ninjapirate | December 20, 2007 12:01 PM

This proves my statement that Huck is too stupid to be President.

Posted by Carolina | December 20, 2007 12:11 PM

Rush just read this post on the air. Way to committee suicide Huckabee!

Is he aware of which primary he is running in?

Posted by Steven | December 20, 2007 12:11 PM

I like Rush. I respect Rush. I'm still voting for Huckabee.

Posted by Jack | December 20, 2007 12:14 PM

This is very aggressive reporting, but in this case the reason I have come to read this author is becasue he consistently writes pieces at the bleading edge of this political season. I agree that the sourcing is suspect, but the reporter seems to be placing his credentials, publisher, and reputation to validate this piece, of some importance. Sort of like Novak last month, but it turned out to be a very good indicator of what actually occured.

I would like to see the source revealed. Is this "in between the record"

Posted by ROB | December 20, 2007 12:33 PM

This post is so inane and without serious content that it must have been ghosted by Andrew Sullivan.

Posted by Terry | December 20, 2007 12:37 PM

HUCKABEE SEES HIMSELF AS BABY JESUS - POLITICO
check this out!! Oops - thats creepy.

http://dyn.politico.com/playbook/

CBN's David "Brody File" Brody rode with Gov. Mike Huckabee on his bus from Des Moines to Ames yesterday and got this Biblical shout-out: "Ultimately what I sense is happening - people everywhere will come to me, look me in the eye and say, 'We are claiming Isaiah 54 for you' — that 'the weapons formed against you will not prosper'." And you know I just have to deep down believe that there is just a hunger in this nation for truth. There is a hunger in this nation for authenticity."

(Isaiah 54:17, KJV: "No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord."

Posted by ROB | December 20, 2007 12:39 PM

That's gonna leave a mark.

Posted by Roninacreage | December 20, 2007 12:40 PM

Who cares who said it?

It doesn't change his Arkansas record or his ignorant, absurd campaign platform, "A vote for me is a vote for God."

If he gets the Republican nomination, I'll vote for Obama. He won't be any worse than what the Huckster would bring us...

Posted by DJ | December 20, 2007 12:41 PM

If Huck listens to people that stupid, then it would be twice as scary to put him in office.

Posted by Smarty | December 20, 2007 12:43 PM

I gotta give my 2 cents. Huckabee's rep. is right. There hasn't been a more funny man on the radio since Red Skelton's radio show. He is very entertaining and really enjoys manipulating the comments others and, though he's not lying, he tells only half the truth concerning most issues. "Perception is Reality" and should be his credo.

Posted by James | December 20, 2007 12:48 PM

LOL. Yet more Republicans eating their own. What a beautiful thing.

Posted by vrk | December 20, 2007 12:50 PM

Rush is lighting Huckabee up again (12:50p EST). He also tore the staffer and Huckster campaign a new one in the opening segments.

LOL...still going.

Posted by Good Lt | December 20, 2007 12:51 PM

vrk,

Many of us don't think that Huck is one of us. We think he is running in the wrong primary.

Posted by Joel | December 20, 2007 1:12 PM

I am a conservative and support Huckabee 100%.

There is a lot of truth to the ally's comments. Too bad for Rush, who looks down on conservatives like myself, I think for myself.

Posted by Samir | December 20, 2007 1:39 PM

Rush is so 1990's - is he still on the radio?

Why would anyone waste their time listening to him? He is such a bore...and only appealls to Rio Lindans....

Posted by Mulitple Choice Mitt | December 20, 2007 1:45 PM

I don't think there really is an actual position that can be called a "Reagan conservative". Reagan ran on tax cuts and delivered massive increases in deficits, which is exactly what Bush ran on and delivered. Reagan represented strength and standing up to enemies. Bush responded to 911 with considerably more force than Reagan did to the Marine barracks bombing. You simply cannot say that Bush is less strong than Reagan. Reagan presented an image of being a deeply religious man, and of holding the same social conservative values as religious conservatives.

The difference between Reagan and Bush is success. One was successful the other was not. A "Reagan conservative" is one who likes conservatism that advances the movement.

Posted by Mike Alexander | December 20, 2007 2:37 PM

What a wonderful Christmas gift to the Left, the sound of the conservative coalition crumbling, crumbling, crumbling. Thank you, thank you, thank you!! Now crawl back under your rocks for another 40 yrs.

Posted by JohnMcC | December 20, 2007 2:58 PM

"You simply cannot say that Bush is less strong than Reagan." You can, and I will. Reagan stood up to the Soviets with their 40,000 nukes, while Bush is running scared about a "possible" nuclear program from Iran, a country with the GDP the size of the state of Alabama and almost no military. Bush also got us into an ongoing quagmire, which Reagan did not-- he took the Marines out of Lebanon when he realized how crazy Middle Eastern politics was.

Reagan did not talk about his religion like candidates do today and didn't even attend church that often (although he was religious). He would probably not be elected in today's climate of wanting to elect religious fundamentalists.

I agree that Limbaugh is a joke who just jumps on the latest bandwagon. Huckbee is a tax and spend liberal, though, that's for sure. I don't think Romney's much better. Ron Paul all the way! He's the only one who can beat the Democrats in the general election.

Posted by Libertarian Girl | December 20, 2007 3:29 PM

I have my own vote: Rush doesn't decide for me. So if he doesn't like Huckabee, that doesn't affect me. When the Republicans nominate Huckabee, Rush will be in his corner 100% for him and against Clinton/Obama.

Posted by voter | December 20, 2007 3:30 PM

"Honestly, because Rush doesn’t think for himself. That’s not necessarily a slap because he’s not paid to be a thinker—he’s an entertainer. I can’t remember the last time that he has veered from the talking points from the DC/Manhattan chattering class. If they were praising Huckabee, he would be too."
"Also, I have to think that he’s dying to have Hillary in the White House. Bill Clinton made Rush a megastar. Having another Clinton back in power would make him the Leading Voice of the Opposition once again."

Of course, it could also be because Huckleberry is a Bible-thumping, slick-talking Southern politician who thinks that getting elected entitles him to get rich. Come to think of it, Rush does have experience with this type of officeholder.

What I find interesting is that, like Slick Willie before him, Huck finds a vital character flaw in anyone that doesn't like or support him.

I have a feeling that Rush will be around long after everyone has forgotten the Huckster.

Posted by trentk268 | December 20, 2007 3:59 PM

It seems that Rush, like most of us for that matter, find ourselves in a reactive role. I was just thinking that if George Washington were here today, he'd act. While Hillary and Slick Willie toast their good fortune, the good general would be proactive. He'd go on the offensive, like that long ago Christmas Eve. Oh, I don't mean literally; this isn't the French Revolution. What I mean is, if the pen is mightier than the sword, then the Internet's a pretty good tool. We don't have to cross the Delaware River, or even the Potomac River to launch an information offensive. This Christmas Eve, lets spread the word. Help me distribute this link. In the true spirit of Christmas, I thing the general would give us his blessing: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | December 20, 2007 4:57 PM

Rush is so 1990's - is he still on the radio?

Posted by Mulitple Choice Mitt

Still on, but with much less clout. His vaunted "22 million" listeners has dwindled down to under 13.5 million on the last Arbitrons... an almost 40% drop.

After the multiple marriages and divorces (and no children), the drugs, the chartered "boy's trips" offshore to do who-knows-what with who-knows-whom, I'm honestly surprised he still has that many Dittodrones brainwashed into tuning in every day...

Posted by David | December 20, 2007 5:14 PM

Rush is a prostitute for the corporations.

Huckabee is for the avarage man. Any questions?

Posted by Oscar | December 20, 2007 5:15 PM

Oscar, you are quickly proving the theory that the not very smart people are supporting the not very smart Huckabee.

Rush Limbaugh has a larger audience of PEOPLE than most other media programs in this country.

Not corportations, millions of VOTERS. Only idiots would piss off the man who has so many devoted listeners.

Only an idiot.

Posted by Carolina | December 20, 2007 5:36 PM

I have been a loyal listener of Rush for over 16 years. I will be voting for Mike Huckabee.
Imagine all of the media frenzy if a supporter of Mrs. Bill Clinton made nasty remarks about Al Franken?----NOT!

Posted by Adirondack Al | December 20, 2007 6:18 PM

I cannot believe how many uninformed idiots are out there nowadays with so much info available. Rush is right about ignorance being the most costly thing in the United Stated today. Most of these hate Rush comments make no sense at all. "chartered "boy's trips" offshore to do who-knows-what with who-knows-whom"? What is that all about?

Posted by Rush#1 | December 20, 2007 6:25 PM

Just listened to Rush this afternoon and heard him mention this blog post and just after I posted Why Rush secretly wants Hillary to be president

Found here

All amusing!!

Posted by Gman Fess | December 20, 2007 7:18 PM

I'm voting for Huck because the Republican party has given me no one else who really wants to be president.
You can't support Rudy because the party stands for life and he doesn't. You can't vote for Romney because believe it or not, Mormans do believe that Jesus and Satan are Spiritual brothers (There are many souces including the book of Morman that will support this belief).
I would rather see a Hillary or Obama before I vote for someone who does not honor the Bible and the Word of God. I have to answer to God one day why I voted for a leader who belongs to a cult or who believes in killing inocent babies. Their is not answer that will justify going against God.
If a Dem wins then the party will realize what type of canidates we need in the future.

Posted by Bonnie | December 20, 2007 8:47 PM

Rush is right on this one for sure. Huck is a nut! If he is the nominee, I will vote dem or indie.

Posted by Paul in Iowa | December 20, 2007 9:13 PM

Anyone who think Rush doesn't think is getting their info from a liberal website--the same sites that first claim he's "full of hate". If you actually listen to his shows--yes they're entertaining, but the entertainment mostly serves to spice up shrewed political analysis. Rush is constantly ahead of the curve on the issues, and routinely makes accurate predictions. That being said, I'm actually not a Rush fan--too much schtick and too many parodies. Hugh Hewitt is much better.

Posted by kyleb | December 20, 2007 11:32 PM

Marc, this really is a silly comment by a Huck insider. What's to be gained by this ? Your "ally" insults an enormously popular talk show host and to what end ? The "ally" is certainly not very sharp and yet, he/she is indicative of the amateurs on Huck's team. Really stupid.

Posted by Texpat | December 20, 2007 11:45 PM

Rush is a prostitute for the corporations.

Huckabee is for the avarage man. Any questions?

Posted by Oscar | December 20, 2007 5:15 PM

Yes. I have a question, Oscar.

By your post, you appear too stupid to breathe on your own. Do people send you emails telling you when to inhale and exhale?

Posted by Mark in Texas | December 20, 2007 11:56 PM

Doen't it say something about the listeners that Limbaugh has by his failure to embrace Huckabee?

His demographics aren't neccessarily right-wing religious zealots. (Not really the demographic he would want...)

His audience, anecdotally in regards to my life, tend to be conservative independents. I know roughly five people that listen, three voted for clinton in 92, one in 96.

The common denominator is they all distrust the media. They don't necessarliy buy into everything he says, but considering positive public opinion of media is less than 20%, I'd say his popularity will continue to grow.

Posted by paul | December 21, 2007 12:02 AM

You can't vote for Romney because believe it or not, Mormans do believe that Jesus and Satan are Spiritual brothers

And this (assuming it's even true) would be markedly different than most Christian beliefs how, exactly? Don't most Christian faiths believe that Lucifer was an Archangel - perhaps even the most powerful of all - who led the rebellion in the War of Heaven, being cast out with a third of the Heavenly Host?

So, anyway, you're going to make your choice for President based on how many angels can dance on the head of pin. You're not doing much to disprove Carolina's theory.

Posted by JMH | December 21, 2007 12:07 AM

You just killed the Huckabee campaign all by yourself you nimrod. You don't attack the leader of the conservative movement and expect to get any support down the road. I have dumped Huckabee like a bad habit.

Posted by tiv | December 21, 2007 12:36 AM

Huck's hubris is going to catch up with him fast. George Bush one day, Rush the next. Dim...bulb.

New book shows Saddam did support al Qaeda and the Taliban:

'Both In One Trench: Saddam's Secret Terror Documents'

http://www.bothinonetrench.com/index2.html

Posted by Ray Robison | December 21, 2007 12:50 AM

I am really tired for one of the pundit-driven talking point that Huckabee is a liberal except for marriage and abortion. He is the only GOP candidate talking comprehensive tax reform and a complete elimination of the income tax. This attack only persuades people who don't analuze the argument to see if it is true or not.

To believe Mitt Romney is a conservative is a hard thing to understand. It's like if Dick Cheney were to register as a Democrat and started to suddenly have different views on the war in Iraq and "global warming" - right in time for the next election. Only a foolish Democrat would buy into his new positions and say "yup. He's one of us. He's a progressive!"

Posted by The Values Voter | December 21, 2007 12:51 AM

"I would rather see a Hillary or Obama before I vote for someone who does not honor the Bible and the Word of God."

This is the reason why "evangelical" is conflated with "stupid" in so many regions of the country. You would honestly- honest to God, as it were- rather vote for a functional atheist than a Mormon, because the atheist was raised under an ostensibly Christian roof.

Not voting for a Mormon because of what Huck Smith or Joseph Jones or someone said about God is only slightly less stupid than not voting for a Catholic because of Mexicans finding images of Mary in their tortillas, and only slightly less clueless than the Muslims holding a grudge over the Moors.

Bottom line: how is the President going to ACT in office? That should be the question you ask, whether your dealbreaker issues are religious, social, or economic.

Posted by hitnrun | December 21, 2007 1:07 AM

OOOPS!

All these people complaining that there's no conservative to vote for other than Huckabee....

Duncan Hunter anyone?
Fred Thompson?

Oh, you'll say that these candidates have no chance. So, where was Huckabee's polling until recently?

Fred08! Oh, and Huckabee's man just ticked off at least 5 MILLION listeners.......

Posted by cargosquid | December 21, 2007 1:39 AM

"How is the President going to ACT in office" is why I cannot vote for Romney. He states his faith is everything to him. So to understand him you must know about the Morman religion, what it stands for and what it believes. If you would take the time to learn these things you would know they are not a Christians but a cult. I cannot trust anyone to lead us honorably who belongs to a cult and who think they can be equal to God. Mormans have good family values but I cannot embrace one to vote for him to be President of the USA. This is also a man who changes his mine to fit the political winds. It must be what happens to politicians from Mass. I also would not support a functional atheist. I've be hearing a lot about Romney and Rudy and I don't understand what is so great about the way they acted in office or the negativity of their campaigns.

Posted by Bonnie | December 21, 2007 2:31 AM

Bonnie --

Have you ever heard of 'Render under Ceasar..."

Would you really not vote for a non-Christian? This is the united States, a temporal government, not a religious entity. We are not electing a pope. I hope.

And what power do you think the President has vis-a-vis pro-life policies other than to appoint Supreme Court Justices? How do you think the nominees of HRC vs Romney would compare?

Posted by marcl | December 21, 2007 3:13 AM

"This is the reason why "evangelical" is conflated with "stupid" in so many regions of the country."

No, this is the reason that "evangelical" is conflated with "stupid" by gullible people who take the comments of a tiny number of nutjobs on the internet as representatives of a movement consisting of millions of people. This is called stereotyping, and it's considered wrong if you do it to blacks or Jews or Mexicans or Muslims, but stereotype evangelicals? Well that's just rational thinking.

Furthermore, I seriously doubt that the person who wrote that comment is even an evangelical. Most likely he's a left-wing troll flying under false colors in order to convince gullible people to adopt negative stereotypes towards evangelicals.

Posted by Doc Rampage | December 21, 2007 3:50 AM

1. He's from Hope, Arkansas.
2. He's clintonesque.
3. He thinks charity is a branch of the government.
4. He flunked geography in school, he could not see any borders...."it's all one world" he still says.
5. Huckabee's Not For Me.

Posted by webloafer | December 21, 2007 3:53 AM

Lets not eat our own here. First lile rush or not. dont care. But saying that name even one national media type the sources every single thing they say. Rush does Go to his site and you can read the entire piece he references. nobodu does that. Fred is the man to go with I would give up my estate to see him and Hillary debate

Posted by iowan | December 21, 2007 7:19 AM

Lets not eat our own here. First lile rush or not. dont care. But saying that, name even one national media type that sources every single thing they say. Rush does. Go to his site and you can read the entire piece he references. nobody does that. Fred is the man to go with. I would give up my estate to see him and Hillary debate

Posted by iowan | December 21, 2007 7:21 AM

Huckabee either has a Democrat in DC as an "ally", or else a profoundly clueless Republican.

Rush is one of the most astute pundits in the country on Republican politics. Anyone who says Rush tows the party line doesn't listen to him more than once a month at best.

I find it risible that those who readily tout endorsements from the likes of Barbara Streisand, are so quick to ascribe Rush's huge audience to his strength as an entertainer. Al Franken is an entertainer - so is Whoopi Goldberg - where is their radio audience?

Limbaugh has wisely not endorsed any candidate, but knowing Rush, I can guess he doesn't heart Huckabee because he is Jimmy Carter in Republican drag.

Posted by franco53 | December 21, 2007 7:25 AM

I personally don't listen to Rush but 20 million people do....He is #1 in talk radio.

That does mean that Huckabee is an idiot because FOX News gets 2.6 million when O'Reilly is on....that is the max for their day.

CBS, NBC, ABC get around 6 million viewers each...CNN gets about 600K and MSNBC 800K during Olbermann.

All of those entities WISH they had 20 million people listening to them. The way to win is not to piss off those who have the ears and the eyes of the public. If the idiot were to win the primary he would NEED Rush to combat the MSM....and he just blew it!

Posted by Jaded | December 21, 2007 7:42 AM

Huck is scary. That he let prison ministry preachers decide who gets pardon and clemency is just plain nuts. He should have asked prosecutors and police officers. Instead, some criminal pretends to worship Jesus, and Huck falls for it hook, line and sinker. He isn't just soft on crime, he is gullible and soft in the brain. With immigration being jammed through by so-called churches, we are going to steamrolled by the bible thumpers hoping to get rich from the illegals because they have alienated their US citizen flocks. I don't want the Catholic Church, the Imans, or the Televangelists telling a president what policy should be. Huck is the only republican who won't get my vote.

Posted by Karen | December 21, 2007 8:20 AM

Very simple explanation as to why Rush, and others are decidedly uncomfortable with the Huck:

Republican Jimmy Carter.

Foreign policy disaster.

Posted by ghost of themistocles | December 21, 2007 8:40 AM

I think we are finally seeing a split between the not-so-sensible evangelical Republicans and the rest of the party.

The bottom line is that many of the so-called evangelical interests are not necessarily conservative interests. That is a good thing to be made clear.

Posted by Mikeb | December 21, 2007 8:51 AM

"You can't vote for Romney because believe it or not, Mormans do believe that Jesus and Satan are Spiritual brothers (There are many souces including the book of Morman that will support this belief)."

"I would rather see a Hillary or Obama before I vote for someone who does not honor the Bible and the Word of God"

"If you would take the time to learn these things you would know they are not a Christians but a cult. I cannot trust anyone to lead us honorably who belongs to a cult and who think they can be equal to God. Mormans have good family values but I cannot embrace one to vote for him to be President of the USA."

Interesting, this describes the Huckabee supporters very well. They are more concerned about being anti-Mormon than voting based on the issues. Yet, they'll listen to Huckabee's superfluous lies. How about them "94 tax cuts"?

UNDEBATABLE FACT:
He “cut taxes 94 times” for a reduction of $378 million dollars, but INCREASED TAXES 21 TIMES RAISING $883 million - NET INCREASE OF $505 million dollars in taxes. This gave Arkansas the 11th highest in the nation state-local tax burden.

Posted by David W | December 21, 2007 8:59 AM

"You can't vote for Romney because believe it or not, Mormans do believe that Jesus and Satan are Spiritual brothers (There are many souces including the book of Morman that will support this belief)."

"I would rather see a Hillary or Obama before I vote for someone who does not honor the Bible and the Word of God"

"If you would take the time to learn these things you would know they are not a Christians but a cult. I cannot trust anyone to lead us honorably who belongs to a cult and who think they can be equal to God. Mormans have good family values but I cannot embrace one to vote for him to be President of the USA."

Interesting, this describes the Huckabee supporters very well. They are more concerned about being anti-Mormon than voting based on the issues. Yet, they'll listen to Huckabee's superfluous lies. How about them "94 tax cuts"?

UNDEBATABLE FACT:
He “cut taxes 94 times” for a reduction of $378 million dollars, but INCREASED TAXES 21 TIMES RAISING $883 million - NET INCREASE OF $505 million dollars in taxes. This gave Arkansas the 11th highest in the nation state-local tax burden.

disclaimer: Non-mormon, just to let objective readers know.

Posted by David W | December 21, 2007 8:59 AM

"Rush doesn't think for himself."

"He's dying to have Hillary in the White House."

So which is it? The latter implies he's thought for himself.

It's funny when someone smashes their own argument.

Posted by TSO | December 21, 2007 9:21 AM

"Rush doesn’t think for himself"

This just shows how thin-skinned both Huckabee and his supporters really are.

Posted by Chris | December 21, 2007 10:38 AM

Matt in Maine said:

MM> Are you sure this wasn't a Romney ally posing MM> as a Huck ally

Nobody has solved this problem (why was this said?) correctly.

This actually bears out something I said 14 years ago:

Date: 11-11-93 (19:17) Number: 24573 of 25078 (Refer# NONE)
To: ALL
From: SAMMY FINKELMAN
Subj: New Jersey election
Read: (N/A) Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE (Echo)
Conf: POLITICS (39) Read Type: TEXT SCAN (+)

Well, Bill Clinton has just blown his best double agent, Ed Rollins. . .

. . .Or has he?
---
* REDPHONE BBS / NEW YORKS FINEST / (212)924-1138 /
* PostLink(tm) v1.07 REDPHONE (#504) :
>>>

Ed Rollins is now running the Huckabee campaign (since last Friday)

And even before that Huckabee was taking advice from Dick Morris, who I don't think really broke as much with Clinton as tells - and who was workeing for Huckabee at the same time ass he wass working for Clinton.

What all this of this means is that Bill Clinton is by now running the Huckabee campaign by proxy.

In fact you may remember Bill Clinton sort of endorsed him - or promoted him I should say - a while ago a little before his big rise. I don't have the quote but it happened. And maybe somebody else remembers or can find it.

The whole thing is bit reminiscent of the movie "The Great McGinty"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0032554/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_McGinty

In that movie the political boss says: "I am the Reform Party". I'm all the parties."

Well, not all of them of course now (although Vladimir Putin seems to be doing this, somewhat cluimsily, in Russia) but some of theopposition is probably being run by Clinton Inc.

I would guess that the purpose of this is to destriy Fred Thomoson and maybe some others (Clinton is probabkly hping for Romney) and if Huckabee gets the nominaiton, have someone who can be managed in such a way so as to lose the campaign and if he doesn't lose, who will be somewhat easy to manipulate in office.

Ed Rollins is the person who sabotaged the Perot campaign in 1992, and even earlier told the head of the Federal Savings and Loan Association [FSLIC] from Ed Gray (served 1983-1987), not to try to get directly in touch with Ronald Reagan about the problems because Don Regan would badmouth him. And instead use Frank Farankoph as a conduit. (It's all in the books about the savings and loan scandal - and Bill Clinton played a bigger role than you think - it wasn't ionly Madison Guaranty. There's was FirstSouth of Pine Bluff for instance - the biggest failure when it happened, in 1986.)

Ed Rollins, also was the one who came out with that astonishing and false statement about what he had done (handing out walking around money to suppress (??!) the black vote) to help Christie
Todd Whitman win the 1993 New Jersey Governor's race (that's what I thought - or hoped! - blew him)

And he was the one who wrote in a book that Phillipine President Ferdinand Marcos had set aside $10 million to give to Ronald Reagan's 1984 campaign, which the Clinton Adminsitration Justice Department proceeding to publicly investigate and then said it was beyond the statute of limitations.

Here's a website taht takes the Rollins (and some otehr accusations) at face value:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/lost6.html

And - this is really the killer in more ways than one to me - Ed Rollins was the dean of the faculty of the National Fire Academy during the first two years of the Carter Administration.

Which is a patronage position after all.

So I had a thought in 1993. He would have known what experts to consult, who could be trusted, who would help Clinton devise a method of burning
down the Branch Davidian's compound in Waco; a method where they would be able to deny they did it, and even "prove" they did not.

It is an obscure fact, with the literature in
dispute, but nevertheless a fact, that CS tear gas can, under proper conditions, start a fire.

The big defense against the FBI having started a fire was that it broke out in severakl places at once.

But in fact it is quite logical it should have
started in several places þafterþ the last tear gas injection because the gas would have had to drift near a flame and be in the proper
concentration - not too strong, not too weak, in the air.

The whole subject itself has been obfusticated.

A big point in the official defense was the infrared video. Leaving aside any technical questions, a big question there should be: Why was it even shot?

That's getting into many more things and there are many more things that need to be explained for this to make sense to people (such as why would Clinton do this? A. To protect J William Buford head of the BATF in Little Rock who had shot 3 of his own men on Feb 28, 1993. And his connection to Buford - that's another long story involving the murder of Alice McArthur, among other things)

If Ed Rollins was not involved, it seems hard to understand how he could have allowed himself to say what he did about Christie Todd Whitman and the 1984 Republican campaign

Posted by Sammy Finkelman | December 21, 2007 10:56 AM

Hey, MC Mitt! We Rio Lindans know how to spell "appeals", moronskavitch.

Posted by RioLindaRick | December 21, 2007 11:04 AM

Makes perfect sense, Sammy. Clinton's somehow able to campaign for Hillary, run his own foundation, and run Huckabee's campaign (which urges voters to "Give Hope a Second Chance," referring to their common birthplace). Kudos on tying it to Waco, too!

That's all sarcasm, in case it doesn't come through over the Nets...

Posted by Graham Davis | December 21, 2007 11:39 AM

The amazing thing here is how many of the commenters "think for them self." Obviously, nobody but you does. Give yourself a pat on the back and have a cookie. Then try some of the Cuervo cookies and stop taking yourself so seriously!

Posted by rrm | December 21, 2007 11:50 AM

I pray repeatedly that Huckabee will not get the Republican nomination.

But God tends to let humans make their own mistakes -- that free will thing, again -- and I fear Huckabee has a good shot.

The result will be disastrous: A for-certain Democratic presidential win, as the GOP once again stays home in droves (as they did during the last Congressional election).

If Huckabee were both an evangelical Christian AND a conservative or libertarian, I'd be all for him. If his campaign message weren't targeted to whip up economically moderate/populist fundamentalists at the expense of all other parts of the Reagan coalition, I'd be all for him.

Instead, he *is* an economic populist, more full than Bush himself of the big-government "compassionate" conservatism that caused G.W.Bush to make all of *his* biggest domestic-policy blunders. We cannot afford a fresh deluge of entitlements, nor a fresh helping of regulation which, while putatively intended to reign in big business, is actually written almost exclusively by...big business.

Huckabee is also just as ignorant of foreign policy as G.W.Bush was, but without the good sense to surround himself with sober-minded experts. And in a post-9/11 world, too. That won't cut it, any more.

His tone of campaigning does not merely alienates far too many GOP voters. I am a committed Christian; an evangelical; my doctrinal opinions are described by some as "fundamentalist"; but...importantly...my tone of conversation never is. I wish the same thing could be said of Huckabee's campaign. He seems determined to avoid ingratiating himself to anyone who isn't exactly like him.

He speaks to evangelical churches all day long: I understand that, it's a comfortable crowd for an evangelical. But to hold the Reagan coalition together, one has to be able to articulate to people who aren't exactly like oneself why they should support you. Has he spoken before one Catholic congregation? Can he say what there is to like about him, from their perspective? One Jewish congregation? Can he say what they should hope for in his candidacy? Could he articulate why gay Republicans should support him? (Yes, I think gay sex is a sin, but so is gossip; if the GOP can stand the votes of gossiping church ladies, they shouldn't turn their nose up at the votes of the sexually confused.) Has he clarified why libertarians should vote for him? Why agnostics, atheists, Hindus, and Buddhists should?

In short, the loss of all of the above, plus Wall Street, will guarantee a Democrat win in the '08 election.

And that's before we get to Huck's temper, Huck's past brushes with corruption (hey, I know, it's Arkansas). That's before we factor in the ability of the Mainstream Media to include Huck in their usual "narrative" of Southern Evangelicals as ignorant bigots. When the MSM adopts a "narrative" they hold on to it despite all contrary evidence -- not that Huck provides much -- and when it's Huck against Hillary, or Huck against Obama, you know exactly what'll happen.

Instead of the happy narrative of "dark horse shakes up the GOP nomination race" -- which biased the MSM to give Huck favorable coverage until now, since they SO love a "horse race" -- there will be the narrative of "old-school Baptist who thinks women should submit against the fresh egalitarian hope of the first female president!" ...or, conversely, "white male southerner whose grandfather probably owned slaves against the young, African American, dynamic, idealistic beacon of hope for all minorities!"

You know it'll happen. And it'll be sufficient to grant the Democrats an additional 3-5% vote swing from media bias alone.

Please, folks, don't give this gift to the DNC; you can see how they're already salivating.

Posted by R.C. | December 21, 2007 12:06 PM

I forgot to add in my previous post:

I am all for the FairTax. If more of the country were already clamoring for it, and already knew how false were the various criticisms against it, I'd probably want Huckabee to win on the hope that perhaps we could enact it.

But, no dice: The time is not yet ripe. Most folks aren't yet pleading to their congressmen for the FairTax (except in Georgia); most have never heard of it. Which means that, even if Huck got elected, the FairTax would have no chance of passage. None.

And I'm not going to vote for a guy, no matter how much I agree with him theologically, who alienates/scares my friends and neighbors and votes for big economic spending and intrusiveness, just because he supports (but will be utterly unable to implement) the FairTax.

Posted by R.C. | December 21, 2007 12:12 PM

Maybe the reason is very simple.

*************************
December 14, 2007
Mitt Romney's Venture Capital Firm to Buy Clear Channel
Posted by Chris Brunner at December 14, 2007 10:25 AM http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/017694.html

What would it cost to buy the support of just about every nationally syndicated neocon talk show host in America? About $19.5 billion, which is what Mitt Romney's private equity firm, Bain Capital, and Thomas H. Lee Partners have agreed to pay in a leveraged buyout agreement with Clear Channel Communications, the largest radio station owner in the country. This is part of a negotiation that has been pending for over a year.

Clear Channel owns more than 1,100 full-power AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations, twelve radio channels on XM Satellite Radio, and more than 30 television stations in the United States. Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest syndication company in the United States, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel and is home to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and many others. Sean Hannity recently signed a large multi-market contract with Clear Channel, as well.

It should be noted that Mitt Romney, while no longer the CEO, remains a silent partner of Bain Capital.
****************************

CNN's Money Magazine (12/10/07) notes: "About 43 percent of the Romney portfolio is tied up in private equity investments through Bain Capital Management."

*******************
Perhaps the answer to this question is not complicated. Would you critique your boss who was running for President?

Posted by Donna | December 21, 2007 12:28 PM

Huckabee is a dead ringer for the gormless 24 president, Charles Logan.

Posted by Watching From Above | December 21, 2007 12:45 PM

Well, you've got to admit, if Huckabee's ally did come up with the term "the DC/Manhattan chattering class" to describe who gives Rush his talking points, it's a little more subtle way of saying "The Jews" than leftist blogs and writers employ by spouting the term "neocons" every time they want to get the code word out to their core base.

Posted by John | December 21, 2007 12:51 PM

This Huckabee ally is obviously intellectually weak if he thinks Rush doesn't think for himself. Rush has been fired a few times in his life, enough said.

Posted by Hogs | December 21, 2007 1:26 PM

Huckabee will do nothing at all to challenge the WELFARE/WARFARE state. All of you know it.
I am an ordained Baptist Minister from South Georgia. You can't get any deeper in the Bible Belt than I am. And I would never vote for my fellow minister Huckabee. Why? Because he is part of the problem: He believes in using the power of Gov't to 'change' our lives through Gov't programs. Huckabee seems to be the essence of a Compassionate Bureaucrat: bless everyone with the taxpayers money. Huck is almost as scary as Clinton/Bush. I see little difference.

Ron Paul is the only Constitutional Conservative.

Posted by tom baptist | December 21, 2007 1:30 PM

Long time rush listener. Before rush said anything I knew huckabee was a phoney. I am an independent thinker. I believe fred thompson is the true conservative. Romney is second choice. But I will vote for whoever is the republican nominee. Do not vote for 3rd party. It may be mike bloomberg and he is a big time liberal. He will take votes away from the republican nominee. If he decides to run he will annouce it in march.

Posted by cindy | December 21, 2007 1:32 PM

I am reconsidering Huckabee now . . . Although I have donated to his campaign I have also doubted his conservative credentials and if he attacks Rush and Bush in this matter in the same week he definitely is not a true conservative. Sorry Huckster - I'm changing back to . . . someone (I don't know who though).

Posted by A Lendel | December 21, 2007 1:38 PM

To John:

Leftists are not the ones who use the term 'NEOCON' It is the true, constitutional conservatives that believe we have been 'neoconned' by the Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz crowd. These pathetic Leninists have hijacked American foreign policy, covered it with a veneer of patriotism (i.e. nationalism) and a smattering of social conservatism (not much though) and called it conservatism. What a joke. They are nothing more than welfare/warfare statists, just like Huckabee.

Posted by hman | December 21, 2007 1:43 PM

Yes, Huckabee as a candidate is interesting, but lets do this the other way around.

Lets run Romney for the Democrat party, and Thompson for the Republicans.

If we have to have either two liberals, or two conservatives and can't seem to manage one of each; can we force two conservatives this time?

But, lucky us, we're going to have Hillary for the Democrats, and Huckabee (who's record is more liberal than Hillary) for the Republicans.

Unless you believe that he raised taxes, increased spending, and made the government bigger in Arkansas for over a decade in preparation for a small government fiscally responsible Presidency.

If you believe that, why not vote for Hillary, she's probably saying the "right thing for the week" as well. How come you'll believe Huckabee has changed all of his major positions just in time for the election after promoting none of them in the past, and working against most of them?

I really don't understand Huckabee supporters. Seriously, if you're that gullible, send me an e-mail; I have some investment opportunities for you.

Who will I vote for? Jack Daniels... and I'll have some assistance from him on voting day too.

Posted by Gekkobear | December 21, 2007 2:02 PM

If Huckabee gets the nomination after mounting a campaign that hangs it hat on, hey I am your same religon, forget the fact that I don't have any substance and/or vision for the country and that when you look at my record it's swiss cheese and I have never accomplised a damn thing...

Romney has gone out of his way to include members of all faiths, especially Born agains and Non dem... And basically said, I know we are not the same on theology, but we have the same values. Let's work together.

Chew on this, the Southwest/Mountain West is to Baptists as the South. Huckabee will not win , Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Idaho, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming... I am not saying that LDS people make all the population there, but a huge chunk.. And I will personally lead a capaign against Huckabee...

NOT because he is a different faith then me, because I respect everyone faith but because you has tried as gracefully as possible to attack Romney's religon. All the while Romney has tried to unite.

Posted by Scott from AZ | December 21, 2007 2:04 PM

You'd think Ambinder would be able to spot someone so incredibly full of s**t.

The 'DC/Manhattan chattering class'??????

Either Ambinder is not qualified to discuss media and politics or else this is deliberate flame bait......no wait, that disqualifies him too.

What a mindless article.

Posted by harkin | December 21, 2007 2:40 PM

Colossal mistake, it's a classic "how to lose a campaign in 10 hrs"
Wonder who the brain child called "prominent DC-based Huckabee ally" is? and why would anyone quote such a feckless idiot? the only question is who is the most dense?
1.Marc Ambinjder
2.Marc Ambinder's contact
3.Marc Ambinder's employer

Neither one of the above is qualified to shine Rush's shoes let alone write an article or run a country.

Posted by betterred | December 21, 2007 3:15 PM

So, let me get this straight. Conservative Republicans shouldn't vote for Huckabee because he's been married three times, had an affair while in office, hired a crook to run his police force and thinks gay marriage and abortions are O.K.- Oh yeah, and he flip flops on the immigration yard service thing. You guys are right what was I thinking, this guy can't possibly be a conservative. I mean if he's stupid enough to spend millons of his own dollars just to beat up on some broke ass from Arkinthaw that doen't know a lot about those Mormoms than dads in Utah..I aint votin for'em either. Last time I checked, being a compulsive liar, commiting adultry and condoning abortion and homosexuality were not considered conservative credentials. This country needs conservative VALUES more than ANYTHING else right now. You WILL NEVER have a perfect candidate. There are checks and balances to ensure the President does what "The People" wants. Bush wanted the border erased. Did it happen? We have lost the worlds respect because leaders have turned our capitol into an Animal House sitcom. If Americans really did care about our "IMAGE" in the world they would elect leaders with the values that this country truly represents.

Posted by Rick | December 21, 2007 3:20 PM

Rush is a big phoney who is only concerned about his pockets. Mitt Romney is nothing but a businessman. He only cares about how much money he can stuff his pockets with from his unholy alliance with our major enemy, China. And Rush has no respect for Christians, he thinks we all are backwards, barefoot, with mud between our toes. He talks about "indentity politics", well that's exactly what he does, he identifies with what Mitt has in his pockets, money.
My message to Rush is that the love of money is the root of all evil. Mitt will say anything to become the next president of the United States, just like the Islamics say, by any means necessary as does the Clintons, of whom Mitt reminds me. He is just a front for some communist, Illuminatist agenda. Mitt is only fit to be president of Utah as Hillary is only fit to be president of Hollywood.
As for Huckabee's past stance on illegal immigration, the illegals are just future soldiers for WWIII, which is sure to come. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are not building their armies for nothing. Mitt seems to be blind to the fact they are building their armies, and weapons. That's why we can't trust him, he is blinded by dollar signs. I say give the illegals amnesty and suit them up. Those who will fight can stay, those who refuse to fight can go back to their native countries. Being able to call themselves American will cost them heavily, just like it cost our ancestors. American citizenship is not free, and it's not cheap. There is a reason why President Bush isn't so quick to build walls along our borders, we need the man power, thanks to legal abortion, which Mitt supported, that is, until he stuttered.
Forget about Rush, he is just a spindoctor, just like the liberals he hates so much at CNN, The New York Times, etc. The Democrats have their elistist, and the Republicans have theirs, Rush is one of them, what's the difference. And we should all listen to them, because only they know what's good for us. Right.
Vote your intuition, which is God given. Of course, Mitt and Rush wouldn't anything about that, would they.
You know, we should all stop listening to WABC and Fox, because all their talking heads are pushing Romney, I wonder why, not.

VOTE HUCKABEE!!!

Posted by truthbetold | December 21, 2007 3:42 PM

Clear Channel owns more than 1,100 full-power AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations, twelve radio channels on XM Satellite Radio, and more than 30 television stations in the United States. Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest syndication company in the United States, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel and is home to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and many others. Sean Hannity recently signed a large multi-market contract with Clear Channel, as well.

It should be noted that Mitt Romney, while no longer the CEO, remains a silent partner of Bain Capital.
****************************

CNN's Money Magazine (12/10/07) notes: "About 43 percent of the Romney portfolio is tied up in private equity investments through Bain Capital Management."

*******************
Perhaps the answer to this question is not complicated. Would you critique your boss who was running for President?

Thank you.

Posted by truthbetold | December 21, 2007 4:38 PM

Wow. I was leaning towards Mitt already but now I have made up my mind. Now that Huckabee's people are attacking Rush I'm sure I will be Caucusing for Romney. In fact I am going to go to Mitt's website now and donate.

Huckabee is a Huckster, a RINO (Republican in Name Only) who expects me to support him just because I'm a Christian. How offensive.

He is so done here in Iowa!

Posted by Dave | December 21, 2007 4:51 PM

Good, Lord! Re Marc Ambinder, the chap seems actually to have his “little grey cells” (to reference H. Poirot) securely shelved at near absolute zero, where they have proven somewhat incapable of functioning logically. The gentleman has blithely recounted dubious hearsay as factual, rather than performing a modicum of research to establish its authenticity, a failing too often of those in the so-called “Main Stream Media.”

May I suggest, most earnestly, that scribe Marc take daily three hour afternoon breaks to expand his personal sphere of knowledge, or that instead of taking three hour breaks, he listen at his leisure to three much briefer, daily recorded sessions of that on which “El Rushbo” actually expounds, and that he not depend for his output on some anonymous, to all but he, biased babbler. I’m sure Mr. Ambinder, and his submissions, would profit, mightily.

James O. Dirden, CSM, U.S. Army, Retired

Posted by James O. Dirden | December 21, 2007 5:09 PM

Huckabee is a Huckster, a RINO (Republican in Name Only) who expects me to support him just because I'm a Christian. How offensive.

You mean "Christian," in name only.

Posted by truthbetold | December 21, 2007 5:19 PM

Hey Truthbetold. Are you suggesting I'm a "Christian in name only" because I do not support Huckabee???

Posted by Dave | December 21, 2007 5:23 PM

Hey Dave, take you blanket and your diapers with you.

Posted by Rick | December 21, 2007 5:50 PM

Rush, like many of us, are REAGAN conservatives.

The same Raygun who raised taxes twice after his supply-side tax cuts failed miserably? The same one who sold arms to terrorists and sent Ollie North to Tehran with a birthday cake for Ayatollah Khomeini?

Posted by Steve J. | December 21, 2007 8:11 PM

I don't care about general elections at this point so much but the more I look at this train wreck of campaign from Romney, I can't help but thinking he is the last person I would ever want in oval office. This is a guy groomed from the very childhood to become a president by his father. He has only one driving ambition which is to become a president (at whatever the cost). When he gets there, then what? We cannot elect an empty shell to presidency. I actually prefer HRC to Romney to be the next president. That my friends (and enemies alike) is truly paddling up the X-creek without a paddle.

Posted by xubio | December 21, 2007 8:33 PM

the huckster has NO chance, just look at his family photo! nuf said...beer na neer neer neer

Posted by kid solor | December 21, 2007 9:19 PM

I like how the Huckabee supporters have promoted people like little ole me to DC elite status.

I'm very prolife, Christian and I do not support Mike Huckabee.

Posted by Mark | December 21, 2007 9:43 PM

Huckabee and his crowd aren't being all that careful when they fire their shots. Let's see, in one week, he or his supporters have dismissed National Review as the "chattering class", criticized Bush in terminology straight out of the Kos and Moveon.org playbooks, dissed Condoleeza Rice, took on Rush Limbaugh and quoted scripture comparing those that oppose Huckabee to those facing God's wrath (right out of Isaiah). Can't wait to see what next week brings. Is this who you expect to unite the party and face the Dems in the general election!? Try again.

Posted by Steve | December 21, 2007 10:54 PM

As southwest Iowans, we were interested in Huckabee until we learned that he is neither a real conservative (fiscally, national defense and immigration) nor is he capable of working with others. Unfortunately, he's apparently a first degree poseur, and worse yet, can't handle constructive criticism from those who might possibly support him.

These campaign-fueled comments on Rush Limbaugh are clearly in the Ron Paul nuthouse category. We don't need a conspiracy freak leading our nation. No thanks, Huckabee.

Posted by redherkey | December 21, 2007 10:58 PM

Listen people, just because Huck is conservative on social issues doesn't mean he is the ideal conservative candidate. Listen to knowledgable conservatives on this. A conservative is more than just pro-life and pro traditional marriage. This is about how to run a government and a country. It amazes me how all of us evangelicals (yes, I am one) know bunches about social issues but not much on OTHER issues that are ALSO covered in the Bible, such as the role of government. Get it thru your heads that good conservatism involves having a government that doesn't take $$ money from the people through oppressive taxes, doesn't view the government as GOD, but rather leaves that to the people. Huck is merely a politician trying to push your social conservative buttons, he knows very little about the Biblical mandate for government. If was a good conservative, he would be talking about the role of government in our lives, not about one or two issues that turn you on, cause your eyes to brighten up, and make a voting zombie out of you. That's why I'm skeptical of him and suspect he is nothing more than a politician. Reagan, on the other hand, applied conservative prinicles to every sphere of life. Why else do you think he wanted to abolish the department of education. He knew that education was the responsibility of the federal government. Do you think Huck has even thought about stuff like that? Would a true conservative support a federal ban on smoking? My gosh, what core values regarding the role of government does this guy really have? Can you imagine what we would say about a Democrat who called for a federal ban on smoking? Get real, get aware, and stop falling for this phoney baloney "I'm a conservative" bullcrap. The man is all over the board but for two issues: abortion and gay marriage. But for that, you wouldn't give him the time of day. Get some depth people!!!

Posted by NotInArkansaAnymore | December 21, 2007 11:53 PM

I am a born again baptist. I like Huckabee. I prefer Romney or Thompson to be president.

Posted by Anonymous | December 22, 2007 1:12 AM

Any person who calls themselves Christian and plans to vote for Romney, you need to read Galatians 1:6-9, Galatians 3, and II John 9-11.

Plus if you are really Christians, the Spirit of God would have warned you about Romney. These things are spiritually discerned.

Posted by truthbetold | December 22, 2007 4:28 AM

Personally I hope Huckabee wins. Maybe he'll sour enough people on evangelical conservatism that we can all finally realize what damage this particular group has done to American politics.

After all, it only takes one crazy with his thumb on the nuclear button to start making people nervous! The minister versus the mullahs, anyone? :)

Looks like a fun four pre-Apocalyptic years are coming for us! Buckle up, guys!

Posted by JMW | December 22, 2007 4:35 AM

truthbetold, are you part of that creepy group that Huckabee is preaching to and getting money from -- the Christian Reconstructionists?

I've heard they want the whole country and the world to be under strict Biblical law - including stoning adulterers. Sounds like those radical Islamofascists to me.

I am an evangelical Christian and I do NOT support Huckabee.

Mike Huckabee wants to bring this nation into the Dark Ages - Inquisition-style, and he wants to be the great white knight leading the Crusade.

Mike Huckabee is a liberal democrat dressed in pro-life clothing.

The great thing about Huckabee is that he's so filled with pride and not the smartest light bulb in the room, and that's causing him to quickly expose himself, with his own mouth, for the fool and poseur that he really is.

Wake up, people -- this guy is the real phoney.

What is it politicians from Hope, Arkansas, anyway?

Posted by bethtopaz | December 22, 2007 8:13 AM

Attacking the most popular conservative on radio is a major league screw up for the Huckabee campaign. His advisors need to remember Reagan's 11th commandment.

That DC-based 'ally' needs a zipper in his face. With allies like that guy, who needs enemies?

Posted by dan | December 22, 2007 11:05 AM

I fully realize that by posting in this forum, I am being a hypocrite regarding what I am about to say. Ironic, no? That said, I nevertheless have to address all the heated rhetoric passing back and forth between political supporters from all camps. It's understandable. People are passionate about their chosen candidate, and rightfully so. It's about time people got passionate about electing our leaders, and I am thrilled with the interest in the 2008 elections from people who have in the past let others elect their leaders.

But, really! Let's all take a deep breath and agree on a few things:

-The Internet and single media outlets are not reliable sources of information. People who form their opinions primarily (or entirely) from things they see posted in blogs and forums are begging to be misled. Likewise, people who rely on a single news source, albiet Fox, Limbaugh, CNN, ABCNews, Atlantic, NYTimes, Washington Post, etc., are not hearing all sides of the debate...just that particular outlet's spin. Readily-available information provided by the Internet and 24-hour news stations makes us lightyears ahead of previous elections, but there is a caveat: the potential for misinformation is compounded exponentially. Misinformation, repeated often enough, takes on an air of "fact".

-The level of literacy in this country has obviously slipped dramatically. These forums are full of posts from people who cannot construct a sentence. Proper syntax, punctuation, and spelling are nonexistent. It is not my intent to minimize the ideas of the people who posts those ideas, but well-reasoned, carefully-crafted posts have a more legitimate tone than hateful diatribes shot through with grammar and usage errors.

Mark in Texas, your response to a previous post "By your post, you appear too stupid to breathe on your own. Do people send you emails telling you when to inhale and exhale?" was mean-spirited and simply uncalled-for. This sort of comment does nothing to elevate meaningful debate.

Huckabee supporters tend to be characterized as narrow-minded bigots. Guliani supporters are characterized as liberal baby-killers. Every supporter of a candidate tends to cast the opponents in the worst possible light. For the record, I support Huckabee but, to appropriate one of his comments for my own usage, "I'm not mad about it".

I have a Masters in Education and a Bachelors in Communications. I am a 50-year-old president of a corporation and a lifelong resident of Arkansas. I support Huckabee because during his tenure as Governor, our schools were improved, our roads were improved, our standard of living was raised, and he left office with a hefty budget surplus. Not bad for a governor who stepped into an office left in shambles and plagued by scandal. I believe him to be a reasonable, moral man who genuinely wants to improve the lot of every American and reclaim the lost dignity of the office of President of the United States.

That's my opinion. You are welcome to your own. Just do some research before believing everything you see on TV or the Internet.
Lee in Arkansas

Posted by Disgusted | December 22, 2007 11:06 AM

Lee, I read your comments. However, being the president of a large corporation, I would like to know how you would feel if someone interviewed for a job at your company and lied about their credentials? Would you hire them if you knew beforehand? Would you fire them if you found out after hiring them?

Well, it looks like Governor Huckabee is lying about his credentials. He has said repeatedly that he is the only candidate running for the nomination with a theology degree.

He does not have a theology degree. He has a Bachelor of Arts and went to seminary to earn his theology degree or Masters in Divinity for one year, then dropped out and worked for a televangelist.

A lot of folks don't think it's a big deal when they hear this, but the following is why I think it's a big deal, and why other people should think so, too.

What Huckabee is doing is the same thing that as someone went to law school for a year and yet told everyone they had a law degree.

My dad was the business administrator at Grace Theological Seminary and College in Winona Lake, IN for nine years.

Many Princeton graduates and other college graduates came to the Seminary to obtain their theological degree.

I have a BA in Bible College My BA in Bible qualifies me to get a theological degree.

ANYONE who goes to Bible College for a BA in Bible KNOWS that it is a prerequisite to getting a Theology Degree.

For Huckabee to twist the truth in order to make himself look good or qualified and to
further promote his political career is deceitful and definitely qualifies him as displaying un-Christian behavior.

He is turning out to be really smarmy liar with a smooth tongue who is in the process of trying to deceive the masses.

He may have been able to pull it off before We, the People got real freedom of the press through talk radio and the Internet, but I doubt if it will be long before most Conservatives realize that their “gift from Heaven,” Mike Huckabee, is hardly the gift they thought they were getting for Christmas.

Posted by bethtopaz | December 22, 2007 11:55 AM

bethtopaz

truthbetold, are you part of that creepy group that Huckabee is preaching to and getting money from -- the Christian Reconstructionists?

I've heard they want the whole country and the world to be under strict Biblical law - including stoning adulterers. Sounds like those radical Islamofascists to me.

I am an evangelical Christian and I do NOT support Huckabee.

May I ask you how do you know that you are a Christian, meaning, how did you become a Christian? Attending a Bible College doesn't make you a Christian, you know. I don't recall the Apostle Peter having a degree. In fact, that's how God wanted it, so that his glory could shine through the uneducated, ordinary people; people who have no reason to feel puffed up. Didn't your professors teach you that at that "Bible College"? I tell you where you could find this information, I Corinthians 1:26-31, and I Corinthians chapters 2-3.

Would you vote for someone that is an known Satanist? And tell me, what were the epistles meant to do? Do you believe that there are spirits? And is your life your own? Or, was it bought and paid for with a price?

There are so many people filling up the churches every Sunday that couldn't tell you the gospel if you asked them. It's very simple, but if you ask them, they can't tell you.

In past, I've helped many so called "Christians" come to the realization that they are not really Christians, it's like deprogramming cult members, and a lot of them sound like you. And a Christian would never equate Christianity with Islam. Never. Plus, if you are Christian, you wouldn't mind if America went completely back to it's Christian-Judeo roots.

Believe me, I'm writing with love, but I can't beat around the bush. I don't believe the truth is not being taught in the churches. It seems like people are just being told that because they go to church, they are Christians. That's a lie. Again, please tell me, how did you become born-again?

As for Limbaugh, Hannity, and whoever, they are are being paid to support Mitt Romney. What does Rush call what they do, use talking points? It's all sad, but it's true.

Honestly, I don't think you are Christian, you sound like a liberal to me, "stoning adulters". What did Jesus say about that? And "evangelical Christian", why do you call yourself that? We born-agains don't judge non-Christians, only God can do that. However, when someone says that they are Christian, and we see that they are in error about something; not holding true biblical doctrine, it's our responsibility to admonish them, and pray that God shows them the truth.

And you are in error, but I don't think it is my job to correct you, only God can do that.

Posted by truthbetold | December 22, 2007 1:18 PM

Shut up already, truthbetold. Every nut-job street preacher in the country goes on with this "you're not a real Christian, I'm the real Christian" crap. FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) is a ridiculously silly marketing tactic that only works on fools like you.

bethtopaz: Americans don't have a mind for nuance. The minute anyone brings nuance into a political discussion, it's labeled as a flip-flop.

He did, however, head the Arkansas Baptist Convention so I think his chops are pretty solid. The technical matter of his degree would be overlooked by most people in that light.

Posted by JMW | December 22, 2007 2:32 PM

bethtopaz,
You're referring, of course, to the David Brody article for CBNnews (founded by Pat Robertson, who has endorsed Guliani)in which Huckabee did indeed state that he had a theology degree. He did not claim to have a Masters or Doctorate in Theology or Divinity. Most people are comfortable using the terms "religion" and "theology" interchangeably (even though they don't mean exactly the same thing), except when they are trying to read more into a statement than actually exists. People tend to want to find drama and outrage where none need exist. And to that end, they will put their own spin on what they read. For example, you referred to me as president of a major corporation. I never used the word "major".

You claim that Huckabee has stated "repeatedly" that he is the only candidate running for the nomination with a theology degree. I found the CBNnews/David Brody interview at http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/287527.aspx
Please supply additional references so that I can check them out myself (first-hand statements, please, not excerpts from blogs and forums).

I found it interesting that Brody wrote
"I think it's a hard sell to say Mike Huckabee PURPOSELY lied. He clearly overstated it but it's not like his education credentials aren't public knowledge so it would be simply stupid to lie when the record is out there. Huckabee seems smarter than that. Having said that, Huckabee's pull is the fact that people see him as genuine."

Brody, the author, does not think Huckabee was being disingenuous, let alone the "smarmy liar" tag you applied. Brody did indeed think Huckabee's lapse was stupid. No doubt, it probably was as stupid as Romney's claim to have seen his father march with Martin Luther King, Jr. When pressed, Romney said he had not actually seen it, just heard about it. He clarified.

Huckabee clarified. He stated "I have a bachelor of arts in religion and a minor in communications in my undergraduate work. And then I have 46 hours on a master's degree at Southwestern Theology Seminary. So, my degree as a theological degree is at the college level and then 46 hours toward a masters -- three years of study of New Testament Greek, and then the rest of it, all in Seminary was theological studies, but my degree was actually in religion."

The Arkansas Governor's office, during the tenures of Bill Clinton and Jim Guy Tucker, was embroiled in one scandal after another. Google "Whitewater", "Madison Guaranty", or Hillary Clinton's $100,000 commodities trading profit. Tucker was removed from office for misuse of public funds. Huckabee cleaned up the mess and performed admirably.

Look...no man or woman is beyond reproach. Me included. You included. But I have firsthand experience living in a small state that Huckabee governed. The whole state is much better off having had Mike Huckabee as governor. The nation would benefit by having him as President, warts and all...
Lee

Posted by disgusted | December 22, 2007 2:59 PM

Lee - all that you said still doesn't change the fact that Mike Huckabee has ethical problems, has pardoned or commuted sentences of over 1,000 criminals, lied about what what happend with the parole board regarding the parole of Dumond, and most of all ...

is a liberal democrat dressed up in pro-life clothing.

Huckabee is the Republican version of Jimmy Carter. Period.

He would be a disaster of a GOP nominee. Disaster. And the liberal democrats are licking their chops at a chance to face him in 2008!

Posted by bethtopaz | December 22, 2007 3:06 PM

bethtopaz,
You state that Huckabee lied about what happened with the parole board with respect to Wayne Dumond. Please relate to me what you know for a fact happened with the parole board, not what you read online, in blogs, or see on ABC News. The fact is you do not know what happened with the parole board any more than I, because neither one of us were there. All we know is that there are conflicting accounts and there is not enough evidence based on those accounts to state unequivocally who, if anyone, lied. Please note that the parole board at the time was made up of Democratic appointees serving under a Republican governor. Note also that the pardons and commuted sentences you refer to were for non-violent offenses (excluding Dumond, of course, because he was not pardoned...he was paroled as discussed earlier). Most of the commuted sentences and pardons were for minor offenses that were committed by people at a time in thier life when they did not realize that their indiscretion could someday cost them a job or perhaps a security clearance. People who turned out to be hardworking citizens that had something embarrassing on their past record. Not violent prisoners doing hard time as you seem to believe. Maybe someone who, as a young adult, had a petty shoplifting charge. To me, it suggests a compassionate man who believes in giving a second chance to those who have proven they deserve it.

It's entirely forgiveable for you to have not heard this side of the pardon/commutation story, since the media typically has not pointed out the extenuating circumstances of those pardons and commutations. To do so would take the edge off a sensational news story and make it a non-story. And that doesn't sell advertising.

So you prove the point I made in my first post...that people put too much faith in what they see online and on TV.

But I do know for a fact that the Governor of Arkansas does not have the constitutional authority to issue paroles, nor can he suborn the parole board into doing so if they are opposed to it.
Lee

Posted by disgusted | December 22, 2007 4:37 PM

Huckabee was a problem in the very beginning; Rush didn't fall over for him and really never said anything that should have provoked their comments; there isn't any way that Rush will "call" him and you better believe that unless the Huck a boom carries over to the big states on Feb 5, Hucka won't be the nominee of anything other than the Southern Baptist convention long after the presidential election of November 2008.

Posted by whitney | December 22, 2007 5:36 PM

Please, GOP'ers, we had better think, and think fast. Huck is NOT a conservative. As Ann Coulter pointed out, even on evolution, he told Larry King that he'd not try to change textbooks. Horrors if this great fraud of our time is ever exposed to impressionable teens. Huckster is a leftist on every issue save guns and abortion.
And may I state this? Americans will never elect a preacher to the Presidency. Never. Fred Thompson is such an obvious choice that I am wondering if some conservatives want America to hit rock bottom with a Marxist President.

Posted by Bob | December 22, 2007 8:04 PM

hucky is like Zezro - what's really behind the masked face? He didn't do squat in his own state - just screw it up more like Dodd and Liberman did and do in their state. Oh I forgot Liberman was running in 02 -same as the rest. Tell the voters 1 thing and do just 180-----

Posted by Tom | December 22, 2007 8:46 PM

I donse like much of this kinda of talk. At least, that's what Nigger Jim says...
You see, Rush is very conservative. How many times has he been married? 2 or 3? Family values.
He is overweight and proud of it. Conservative nutritional values. Where does he live Palm Beach.
Republican Country Club values.
Yes, he is a role model for America, that's what Nigger Jim says.
And Mike Huckabee, well he mightin be a good guy, but all that Bible learnin might make it harder for a body to see, at least that's what Tom Sawyer says...

Posted by Huckleberry Finn | December 22, 2007 9:23 PM

I donse like much of this kinda of talk. At least, that's what Nigger Jim says...
You see, Rush is very conservative. How many times has he been married? 2 or 3? Family values.
He is overweight and proud of it. Conservative nutritional values. Where does he live Palm Beach.
Republican Country Club values.
Yes, he is a role model for America, that's what Nigger Jim says.
And Mike Huckabee, well he mightin be a good guy, but all that Bible learnin might make it harder for a body to see, at least that's what Tom Sawyer says...

Posted by Huckleberry Finn | December 22, 2007 9:23 PM

I was born and will die Southern Baptist. I believe every word of the Bible in its plain-sense meaning and I believe the SBC's doctrines hew closest to the Bible's. I also believe that America will only endure as long as its Judeo/Christian ethos endures.

But the LAST THING I WANT IN THE WHITE HOUSE, AFTER CARTER & CLINTON, IS ANOTHER SOUTHERN BAPTIST!!! And after GWB--whom I supported with all my heart and energy--I'm not sure I want another Methodist.

Mormonism is no more a Christian cult than Roman Catholicism is, and RC has a problem Mormonism doesn't: it is also a political entity, the Vatican state with which the US has full diplomatic relations since 1984. But no one would be uttering a peep if Romney were Roman Catholic. Why? Is it because there are so many more Catholics than Mormons to offend? I don't understand this brouhaha, but I suspect it's MSM-driven rather than evangelical Christian-driven.

I don't have a horse in this race yet; don't know enough about any of them. Romney is a presidential figure of immaculate repute with much administrative experience, and I like the way he handles the press. I've also never known a Mormon who wasn't a surpassingly decent person who shared all my conservative values--both social and economic.

I might yet discover reasons to vote against Romney, but his Mormonism will not be one of them. This is about election to the Presidency, not election to heaven.

Posted by SouthernBaptistFundie | December 22, 2007 10:45 PM

It has to be a Democrat who said Rush was just an "entertainer". No Republican worth his salt would ever say that. The idea that Rush is part of the D.C.-New York chattering class is laughable. More than likely, Ambinder made up the quote himself. Sneaky way to get Republicans to fight amongst themselves. When someone quotes an anonymous source, immediately ask yourself, "Who is doing the quoting?". Who is Ambinder and what are his politics?

Posted by Jim Webster | December 23, 2007 12:24 AM

I would really like to see Rush and Mike talk about Huckabee's stand on the issues. Why? Because of all of the distortion that is floating out there about Huckabee's record as Governor.

Here is an example. Huckabee has been blasted for being soft on immigration because he wanted to award merit scholarships to the children of illegal aliens in Arkansas. They had to have applied for citizenship, be drug free, and a part of Arkansas schools for at least their Senior High years. Do you know how many there were state-wide who would be helped by paying in-state tuition? Thirty. 30. That's thirty students state-wide.

Rush doesn't know ALL of the facts. Meeting with Mike can maybe clarify some of these issues.

I love Rush. I don't always agree with him, but he's been a strong, Conservative voice and I appreciate him and thank him.

Is he entertaining? Absolutely! Who says that is a BAD thing? Not me!

Vertical Politics. THAT is a chance for unification in our nation. Polarization has stagnated this nation, and Huckabee has a proven track record of building concensus and actually accomplishing something in a relatively hostile environment.

I support Rush AND Huckabee.

Jane
North Carolina

Posted by Jane Hall | December 23, 2007 7:40 AM

Huckabee is running for office, not any particular talk show pundant. If a candidate can't stand up to the media and press they certainly don't have the strenght to lead the country or run a government.

Posted by Mike | December 23, 2007 9:25 AM

Ironic that the round mound of Oxycotin makes his millions spewing Subjective rants against the boogie men that roam America scaring Conservatives into hating this Country and then whines because someone does the same?

Rush hasn't had an original thought since the day he quit his $30K job in the back back offices of the Royals and realized all he had to do was rant about all those things Cons hate about this Country.

Huckabee's person is dead on with their assessment.

Posted by RushSucks | December 23, 2007 1:39 PM

"If you would take the time to learn these things you would know they are not a Christians but a cult. I cannot trust anyone to lead us honorably who belongs to a cult and who think they can be equal to God. Mormans have good family values but I cannot embrace one to vote for him to be President of the USA."

You know so much about "Mormans" that you misspelled the word multiple times in your post. It's "Mormon", and they are much less of a cult now than the Baptists were considered to be 200 years ago, let alone what early Christians in the Roman empire were considered to be.

One of the MAIN reasons for the seperation of church and state sections of the Constitution and the Bill of rights was to protect the Baptists who, at the time were being persecuted for being a "cult"... my how things have changed. The hypocrisy of it all.

Posted by Ishmael | December 23, 2007 2:24 PM

"Plus if you are really Christians, the Spirit of God would have warned you about Romney. These things are spiritually discerned."

And this is the "winning strategy" that the Huckabites have to defeat the Democrats? God wants you to vote for Huckabee? And you call Romney elitist? Give me a break.

Posted by red fred | December 23, 2007 3:00 PM

"....nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American people." H.L. Menken

Posted by fahrender | December 23, 2007 3:30 PM

Ishmael, Google "Adam-God theory," and then come back and try to tell us Mormonism's not a cult. Those people are messed up (albeit no more so than Christians, or anyone else who believes in Magical Cloud Cuckoo Land in the sky, and the invisible proprietor thereof. Religion is just organized insanity.)

As for the rest of this ridiculous thread...munch...munch...munch...that's the sound of terrified Republicans eating their own. Sounds good. Keep it up.

Posted by Ken | December 23, 2007 4:50 PM

So Google is where you get your information about Mormons? That tells us quite a bit about you.

I did look up the Adam-God theory, and it did sound pretty wierd. Then I asked a friend of mine who is Mormon about it, and he explained it quite well. They don't believe it! Nor do they believe much of what their detractors would have you believe that they believe.

You know, when I wanted to know what a catholic believes, I asked a catholic. When I wanted to know what a Jew believes I asked jews. I do the same for Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-Day Adventists, Prespreterians, Methodists, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and any other group. The fact that so many refuse to do just that when it comes to Mormons shows how far we still have to go especially among the ranks of those who claim to espouse "Christian" virtues.

BUT REGARDLESS OF WHAT MORMONS BELIEVE their current "cult-like status" is nothing compared to the cult-status that other groups including baptists in America or Christians during the Roman Empire had.

The fact that baptists or any other group of Christians is calling them a cult only shows their hypocrisy.

Posted by Ishmael | December 23, 2007 6:19 PM

Yeah, you guys are right. Rush is fat. Why should we listen to him?

Maybe he should follow Huck's example and get a gastric bypass, then we would be able to trust him.

Posted by Jules | December 23, 2007 6:26 PM

"Huckabee has a proven track record of building concensus and actually accomplishing something in a relatively hostile environment."

Is this why most of the Arkansas republicans HATE Huck? Because he built so much "consensus" with the democrats? What a hostile environment... one where you're own party is completely fed up with you selling out and getting paid for it.

And I bet it was really hard to remain unequiviably anti-gay, anti-abortion, and pro-gun in Arkansas... yeah, he's been through the fire.

Posted by Jules | December 23, 2007 6:32 PM

So what makes you so special to have recieved a vision from God saying not to vote for Mitt Romney? Furthermore, how do you condemn others for doing so?

Fortunately for America, you are off track. Thousands of very prominent evangelicals completely disagree with you.

http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/

Posted by Bloke | December 23, 2007 6:49 PM

Where the hell did this Manhattan-D.C. connection come from? Rush would be the last person to accept the BS from the eastern elitists. Sounds like the Alex-Jones-paranoia syndrome. For those, like most, who don't know Jones, he is the pimple on the delusional fringe who trying to breed more Timothy McVeigh’s. Thankfully, no one with an IQ higher than their age is listening.

Posted by Mike | December 24, 2007 3:13 PM

Brownback was the only real conservative in the race. Had he stayed in the race, he'd be the frountrunner right now instead of Huckabee.

Posted by Lee | December 24, 2007 10:25 PM

How can any of the current so-called conservatives still back Bush. Smaller Government? what is the Department of Homeland Defense all about then. Fiscal Conservatives? give me a break please , we quadrupled the deficet. Maybe they didn't raise taxes they just put it all on plastic, while they free trade us into oblivian. Huckabee is the last best chance for the party, he's the best communicator by far...of any of the canidates in either party. He not a serious republican because he has not embraced Wall Street and K Street taking their 30 pieces of silver... this is about the Chattering Classes againt the rest of US. Look at Iowa, Huckabee spent nothing and Romney spent zillions of his stolen fortune. That really tells you all you need to know.

Posted by Ken Lay | December 25, 2007 2:07 PM

Is Russ Limbaugh helping the Demarcates take the White House again in 2008! Only this time he has additional help.....

I think the 2008 election looks a lot like the 1992 election? Is Rush Limbaugh selfishly trying again to influence voters away from other conservative candidates the same way he tried to influence Ross Perot voters away in 1992? Well, it did not work then and it will not work now. In 1992 Limbaugh handed the Presidency over to Bill Clinton, but then continuously cried for months that the defeat was due Ross Perot and his supporters, not Limbaugh trying to shape the election with his Kool-Aid drinking followers. The only difference this time is Limbaugh has the help of people like Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham to help the conservatives get their heads handed to them by the liberals at election time.

The conservative voters who are supporting Mike Huckabee are not Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham Kool-Aid club members. They are hard working, God-fearing Americans who do not need elite talk show hosts to filter their candidates through the Wall Street elite Boardrooms before elections day, as Limbaugh did in 1992 when Bill Clinton took the White House away from President Bush.

P.S., was Ross Perot Right about immigration and NAFTA? “Well, the historical lesson is clear. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace reports, "Real wages for most Mexicans today are lower than when NAFTA took effect." Post-NAFTA, companies looking to exploit those low wages relocated factories to Mexico. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the net effect of NAFTA was the elimination of 1 million American jobs. Can you hear that “sucking sound” of jobs going to Mexico and over seas that Ross Perot was talking about?

America’s Elite Talk Hosts’, If you don’t have the “set” to run for President your self, then shut the #^@$% up! You are hurting America with your preconceived selecting of Wall Street candidates.

Posted by David - Oregon City, Oregon | December 25, 2007 10:13 PM

The conservative voters who support the Huckster are fools. He will, like W., sell us down the river that inundates our nation under the rubric of "diversity", calling his opponents, i.e., true Americans, bigots. Bob

Posted by Bob | December 26, 2007 12:16 AM

I believe Mr. Limbaugh thinks that it was he who delivered a victory for the GOP in two consecutive presidential elections. As I recall, it was we in the Christian conservative community that delivered them. And we didn't do it through Mr. Limbaugh's radio program. We did it through our CHURCHES.

So why is Mr. Limbaugh not supporting our candidate? Does he want the GOP to lose?

Posted by G.T. Hamcraft | December 26, 2007 10:08 AM

It doesn't matter. Anyone Limbaugh considers worthy of his praise is not someone I would want in power. Limbaugh's only goal is to keep the sheep on the right listening so he gets higher ratings that in turn lead his broadcasters to higher revenues, which helped make him wealthy and continue to keep him in mink, pills, and underage third-world prostitutes. He has no intrinsic value beyond being meat, bone, and gristle.

Posted by Rob | December 26, 2007 12:19 PM

Mitt Romney's business tentacles now extend in a large way into the broadcasting industry...namely ClearChannel Communications. With that in mind, I take ANYTHING from broadcasters and writers...left, right, or center with a grain of salt, not that they ever influenced my vote very much to begin with.

Simply stated, if it didn't come from the candidate's mouth or pen...then as far as I'm concerned it didn't come from the candidate. That's where my trust level with the media is right about now.

I'm voting for Mike Huckabee because of his rock-solid consistency against abortion and against homosexual marriage, issues I consider more important than fiscal matters.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is well-documented in his own words in video, voice and print to be a complete flip-flopper on these issues as well as a few fiscal issues, by the way. Mitt's distinction of the $500 million in "fee increases" he levied on Massachusetts businesses not being "tax increases" wasn't convincing in the least. How he is painted in the media as a down-the-line conservative is very suspect to me. If fiscal conservatives can live with that, then I suppose he'll get some of their votes.

I'm voting for Mike Huckabee.

Posted by Paul | December 26, 2007 5:24 PM

I find it amusing there is so much "Anti-Mormon" and "Anti-Mitt" rhetoric, all of which is distorted from the truth.

The definition of "Christian" is one who follows the religion of Christ, i.e. Love your neighbor (treat others with dignity and respect). Mormons are the most generous and decent people I have ever known. They have literally spent billions of dollars on Humanitarian Aid around the world (quite a large number considering how relatively small in number they are worldwide). They are ALWAYS one of the first to arrive after any Natural Disaster, NEVER trumpeting their arrival, nor asking for anything in return. THAT is Christian to me.

All the "Anti-Mormon" ridiculousness has made me curious as to why it is out there. It is common knowledge that "Born Agains/Evangelicals" actually teach "Anti-Mormon" classes and distribute "Anti-Mormon" Literature, promoting intolerance and alienation. (What century are we in?) I believe it is because their leaders make an obscene amount of money off their congregation (I have actually seen documentation)and are afraid of losing members, thus their income. Otherwise, they would allow theological differences and still respect those of other religions. By the way, Mormons give of their time freely. No one is paid.

Posted by L.P. | December 26, 2007 8:00 PM

Rush:

I want to say "dittos from California", but can't say I'm happy with your handling of the Huckabee dialog...not that I'm happy with how some of Huckabee's followers act and react. I've looked at his record myself, and I see tons of deception from lots of (opposing) places regarding his record...you say you see a liberal record. I just don't. I'm an Iowa native, so I pay close attention (albeit by association). I'm disappointed you are not more objective...comprehensively objective. You seem to simply look down on him and accept characterizations being spun out of control by so many others of influence...in so doing resembling the behavior of just the cultural elites you've been railing against forever...

Like others, Rush, I respect you but am disappointed that you (seem to) approach the whole discussion on Huckabee already biased...and THAT is (I think) what many others are really saying - on the air and in these posts.

Bottom line, I usually use an alias when posting like this, but I'm wanting to stand up and be counted on supporting a governor who has governed an overwhelmingly democratic state (and therefore has a record suited for misinterpretation). There are a few things that have bothered me about him, and yet every time I have heard Huckabee HIMSELF respond to questions on the exact matter I have come away GREATLY encouraged. He (really does) in many ways resemble another politician people called dumb (RR).

Cudos nonetheless...God Bless!

GT in CA

PS: Currently the entire brouhaha AGAINST Huckabee nationally resembles the decade plus long AK disinformation (and unfair criticism) campaign that those of us who have done our homework know about full well.

Posted by Gaylon TeSlaa, DVM | December 26, 2007 9:17 PM

Huckabee is a RINO (Republican In Name Only). He obviously is using his head as a suppository. He's just slightly more conservative than the Hildabeast. The man needs to get out of his own way.

Posted by James S. | December 26, 2007 11:52 PM

I like Mike. I think he'd make a great President, because he's a outsider for one. I don't care what FOX news or anyone says. He's 100 percent pro-life, he's a real Grade A Genuine Conservative who is for a low fair tax system for the working class and small businesses. He's a breath of fresh air plain and simple. Unlike the rotten say one thing and do another Washington crowd. I'm going with my heart on this one, folks. You do what you feel is right, but as for me I'm voting for Mike Huckabee

Posted by Jason | December 29, 2007 12:24 AM

Mike Huckabee is the last person on earth I would vote for. He won't stand a chance against Hillary or Obama because his record is so terrible. He can fast talk all he wants but his record is very clear.

All the Flip-Flop accusations about Romney are shallow. His record is also very clear. Not once has he voted Pro-Choice, Not once has he voted for Gay Marriage. He took over Massachusetts when it was in a completely disasterous state and turned it into a fiscally sound state in only 4 years. He is the only one that can show significant success in every arena, Government, Business, Volunteer. He truly is the only PROVEN leader.

Huckabee? His record is enough for me to say not only "NO", but "HELL NO".

Posted by AP | December 29, 2007 1:09 PM

I'm not sure I'm understanding you, AP. So Romney has never voted pro-abortion or for gay marriage. How does that distinguish him from Huckabee? Huckabee has never supported those things either.

I don't trust Limbaugh's opinion on this because I believe that if he is promoting Romney it's because Romney is the pick of GOP insiders. As a matter of fact, I see Limbaugh as part and parcel to the GOP insiders. I like the fact that Huckabee doesn't appear to be part of that crowd.

Posted by G.T. Hamcraft | December 29, 2007 3:08 PM

G.T. - You're kidding, right? Romney is far distinguished above Huckabee in every area. Do your homework.

Posted by AP | December 29, 2007 4:02 PM

This attack that Huckabee has a terrible record, is a unfair gross distortion of the facts. The truth of the matter is he has a great record as the Governor of the state of Arkansas. He's been a strong fiscal conservative who cut taxes almost 100 times in the state of Arkansas. Check out his record. I support Mike Huckabee and I believe he can win against the Democrats. I think if we play politics by putting in some soft moderate Republican or a pro-choice Republican we will lose the election to the Dems for sure.

Posted by J.R.H. | December 29, 2007 10:23 PM

J.R.H.,

You have obviously not lived in Arkansas. He left it a mess. You are just puppeting Huckabee's deceptive campaign rhetoric. He may have cut taxes 100 times but he raised them many times more than that, netting one of the largest tax increases Arkansas has ever seen. His record coupled with his lack of experience (especially compared to the other candidates), lack of judgment, and lack of policy depth doesn't give him even the slightest chance against the democrats.

I agree with AP. You "Hucksters" need to do your homework. It's obvious you have not really checked out his record.

I'm a definite NO vote on Huckabee.

Posted by Robert | December 30, 2007 12:47 AM

America has no room for Bigotry. I will not vote for Huckabee under any circumstances.

Posted by Lin | December 30, 2007 1:09 PM

I am as conservative as they come, but Huckabee is turning me off big time with his constant Christian references. Separation of church and state is as American as apple pie. Religious faith belongs OUT of presidential campaigns. These retarded attacks on Mitt's Mormonism are stupid, and appeal to bigotry, nothing more.

I won't vote for Huckabee because I don't like the campaign he is running. If he is the nominee, I will stay home. If it is anyone else, I'll be first in line at the ballot box.

I have a feeling there are many Republicans like me.

Posted by Mike | December 30, 2007 3:25 PM

I disagree with you, Mike. Our country was founded on men who weren't afraid to share their faiths in the political arena. Read the Bill of Rights or the writings of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln. As for Mormonism, I disagree with the theology and the book of Mormon. If I didn’t I wouldn’t be true to what I believe. However I have nothing against Mormons, Jews, or other denominations personally. Mormons, Jews, Atheist, or other Christian denominations wouldn’t be true to their faiths and beliefs if they agreed with my theology. I think everyone should me treated equal in the workplace and also in politics regardless of their faiths. Huckabee as stated this as well and is not attacking Romney on his faith. He only made one comment in which he apologized for. So what you just stated is another distortion of the facts, by saying that he‘s attacking Romney on Mormonism.

Posted by J.R.H. | December 30, 2007 9:59 PM

I believe these attacks and spiteful distortions on Huckabee's record by Fox News and so called conservative commentators are born out of fear. The fear being that Huckabee is an outsider whose not bought and paid for by the powerful elite and the strong arm of special interest. I not saying, its wrong that the other leading Republican candidates sold out to big oil, the huge insurance companies and the powerful elite. It’s a free country after all. Hey that's business as usual is up in Washington. That's nothing new. You scratch my back and I scratch yours. It's as American as American Pie. It's the same old say one thing to the public for votes and do another up in Washington. That's why I’m not listening to Fox or Rush this time around. I support Huckabee because he’s not bought and paid for by the powerful elite. He is a man on a mission. A mission to set things right, so our kids can have a future and enjoy the same freedoms we have now in this country. But hey, if you want the same old thing, go ahead vote for the bought and paid for. Just remember you didn't buy and pay for them, so I highly doubt when push comes to shove, their going to put the average everyday working American citizen first on their agenda.

Posted by Jason | December 30, 2007 10:57 PM

The one and only reason Rush is going after Huck is money... pure and simple. Huck's campaign doesn't draw as much cash as Romney or Thompson's. Therefore if Huck wins the GOP primary the party will be at a complete financial disadvantage to Clinton's or Obama's campaign. So forget the issues...think money.

So what does the great Limbaugh do? He's instantly sells the party down the river and already begins to compromise with moderates like Romney because he's got the bucks. Huck is a growing threat and Rush needs to paint him as the Jimmy Carter of the GOP to give Mitt some breathing room.

How can anyone with "half their brain tied behind their back" say Huckabee is liberal? Pro-second amendment, pro-life, wants to get rid of the IRS?
Yah, he's a real commie-lib Rush!

Someone might want to tell Maha Rushie to pipe down about Huckabee, because if he loses the GOP primary he would make an interesting 3rd party CONSERVATIVE candidate...compared to Romney.

Posted by EDGE | December 31, 2007 11:30 AM

I agree with all of the comments that say the source is a VERY, VERY important matter here. If the source is NOT on the Huckabee campaign team, then who cares? Any goofball can say anything they want. If the source is connected to any other campaign, then THAT campaign should be taking the hits, and this is a scumbag move.

Marc, it appears from the blog that you yourself DO know the source. On THIS particular instance, it is not appropriate for you to provide anonymity to your source. You owe your readers (and everyone trying to decide who to vote for in the Republican primary) to produce the name of the source, so we can "consider the source", when it comes to this piece of news.

Posted by Mark Rolfes | December 31, 2007 2:06 PM

I am a Christian (preacher's kid, Bible college graduate, married to a preacher turned cop) raising my kids in line with the Bible as best as I can and I DONT' LIKE HUCKABEE!!!!! I would suspect that if you were to sit and talk with me that you think that I am the most conversative person you have met but (you may want to sit down for this) I HAVE A BRAIN!!! I have done my own homework, talked to folks from Arkansas (some of who are democrats along with some conservatives) and made my own mind up on Huck without any help from anyone. The evangelical movement like anything else is made up of MANY people who all don't think exactly the same way. Don't pigeonhole the evangelical moment into one box and try to label us all on what you see or hear a FEW say or do. Believe it or not believing in God doesn't equate ignorance. Fred Thompson is my candiate and for many of my friends but not all. I think Huck is riding a wave right now but it will be over eventually.

Posted by Debbie | December 31, 2007 3:16 PM

Debbie, I agree with you about Huck. I don't like him either. I am a Christian also. So is my husband who is a retired cop and a deacon . We like fred Thompson too. I think Huck will be out of the limelight when people really start listening to him, and researching his politics. I don't think he will make it to the nomination. I don't think he could beat Clinton or Obama. I think Thompson or McCain would beat Clinton or Obama, tho.

Posted by Emma | December 31, 2007 7:50 PM

These distortion tactics and hateful comments toward Mike Huckabee are just so strange and psychotic. For example, no one on the Huckabee side is pigeonholing the evangelical moment into one box. No one is saying your not a independent thinker just because you support a different Republican candidate. Were on earth did that come from. And by the way; the only people who are putting anyone down as stupid or out of there minds, are people who are attacking Mike Huckabee. They are the ones saying that the supporters of Mike Huckabee are crazy. They’re the ones lumping evangelicals together. Not the other way around. But like I wrote earlier, vote for who you think is right. But as for me, I like Mike! Vote Huckabee for real change.

Posted by Jason | January 1, 2008 12:31 AM

This is the most interesting blog I've ever come across in the way the way it represents all the various combinations of those who call themselves conservative Republicans. I'm a conservative Calvinist struggling to find a good Republican candidate. I've belonged to Citizens Against Govt. Waste and Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) two organizations that would be very uncomfortable with Huckabee. I'm wondering if anyone has noticed that Rush didn't start talking about illegal immigration until the last couple of years. I really like a lot of the insights that Rush brings to the table but it seems ironic that Rush is attacking Huckabee so strongly on immigration given that Rush is only a recent convert.

Posted by hornsleuth | January 1, 2008 12:16 PM

More distortions. Mike Huckabee has a very strong position on stopping illegal immigration and supports the completion of the border fence. He also supports and wants to put up an interlocking surveillance camera system along the borders and supports adding more border agents to list a few. As for illegal immigration, he’s against amnesty and believes everyone who comes to our country needs to do it legally. I don't see anything soft or weak on his stance. In fact, in 2005, Huckabee signed legislation that prevents illegals in Arkansas from getting driver's licenses. That’s not a soft approach to illegal immigration. These attacks are geared toward those who haven’t done their research on Mike Huckabee, in the hopes of giving them a misconception of him as a softy on immigration. Don’t take my word for it, go to Mike Huckabee’s web site and see for yourself where he stands on these issues.

Posted by J.R.H. | January 1, 2008 4:52 PM

oops!! I need to make a correction. I meant to write "These attacks are geared toward those who haven’t done their research on Mike Huckabee, in the hopes of giving them a misperception of him as a softy on immigration." I wrote misconception. sorry.

Posted by J.R.H. | January 1, 2008 6:04 PM

Wow...just wow. I haven't read such ignorant, sicophant, goose-stepping drivel in a long, long time. From the bigoted insults against Mormons to the "questioning" of ones Christian faith if they won't vote for Huckabee, this blog has been most enlightening.
First of all, I am ever so glad to be Catholic. Secondly, I'm ever so glad to be a Conservative Federalist instead of a "Christian" Republican. And thirdly, what exactly did the pro-lifers have to vote on BEFORE the 60s?
Oh, and on another note, this country was founded on the Christian moral principles that our Founding Fathers found superior to any other form of moral principality. However, this country was not formed as a "Christian" nation, it was formed as a free nation. Our Founding Fathers did not want another Theocracy popping up across the pond of England, so stop with the "Huckabee is the Christian candidate who will take this nation back..." and yadda, yadda, yadda. That tag-line has grown old with those of us who know our history and who know what this country was founded on; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Not Christianity, bible study, and the pursuit of salvation.
To all you "moral highground" Hucksters out there, I have some words of wisdom for you...no mask is as evil as the mask of self-righteousness. Prideful casting of dispergences and the incessent dronings of spiritual superiority will get you no where but seperated from yourselves. So be wary of your prattlings, there is only one God, and he does not share his divinity with any man.
And that is my two cents for the day. I could go on, but I'm running out of cigarettes and coffee. Have a nice day. Fred08

Posted by Nastassja | January 2, 2008 9:56 AM

Nastassja,
Looking back on all the comments, for the most part the ones who are the most hateful and doing the most name-calling are the ones against Huckabee. I don't know what you're reading or on, but sure glad you're running out cigarettes and coffee.

Posted by Jack | January 2, 2008 9:01 PM

Mike-
I agree with you. Huckabee has completely turned me off with his bigotry and self-righteousness. The anti-Mormon slur he made was intentional to call out all the Anti-Mormon Minions (which is what most so called "Christians" in the Bible Belt occupy their time with). That's what gave him the boost in the polls. It was nothing else.

His knowledge of foreign affairs is laughable. His economic record is anything but conservative. His judgement? SCARY.

He is a very deceptive person i.e. "I'm not running an attack add (because I don't have the money, and I want people to believe I am something I'm really not) but let's have the newsmedia run it for all to see"; and "I lowered taxes in Arkansas over 100 times" when his record shows the burden of tax increases he placed on the working class. He reeks of dishonesty, deception, and distrust. He gives me the creeps.

Posted by T | January 2, 2008 11:42 PM

Nice double-talk for Huckabee today. His extremely disingenuous "Not Running the Attack Ad" tactic only confirmed my position against his candidacy. The attempt to slam Mitt Romney for Massachusetts COURT IMPOSED $50 co-pay for abortions and make it appear as if it were Governor Romney's Health Plan was appalling. The co-pay was NEVER part of his Health Plan. WHO"S THE DISHONEST ONE HERE?????

Posted by Rob | January 3, 2008 12:06 AM

I don't understand how you evangelicals can turn a blind eye to an economic record that rivals the Clintons. The back-peddling Huckabee is doing to try to show he is fiscally conservative does not change his record. The democrats will take him down in a nano-second.

Posted by baffled | January 3, 2008 10:15 AM

Well, even Mr. Romney has called to congratulate Mr. Huckabee. Seems he's not as sore about losing as some of his supporters seem to be. Mr. Romney ran a fine second and should be congratulated too.

Now it's off to New Hampshire and it's Huckabee all the way!

Posted by G.T. Hamcraft | January 3, 2008 10:45 PM

I don't understand, Rob. How has Mr. Huckabee been disingenuous? I would think had he made his statements about not running the ads and then turned around and run them, THAT would have been disingenuous. He didn't run the ads, though, so your statement is confusing to me.

All over this board, people have taken swipes at Mr. Huckabee and at evangelical Christians, yet some of the posts claim that it is the other way around. I don't recall reading a single post that questions Mr. Romney's integrity other than to say that he is too much of a Washington insider for some of us. Why can't you just trust that the people of Iowa have spoken and God's will be done? I think some of you are doing Mr. Romney a disservice otherwise.

Posted by G.T. Hamcraft | January 3, 2008 11:15 PM

G.T. Hamcraft -

You are an Evangelical, aren't you? Your remarks just further prove the race in Iowa was not about the best candidate based upon qualifications, record and experience. It was about Evangelical's unbelievable hatred towards Mormons, plain and simple.

The rest of the country is not fooled by how Huckabee magically surged in the polls after he publically (and strategically) made bigoted remarks about Governor Romney's religion, and then claimed he didn't know much about it. Really?! He helped organize a Baptist Convention in Salt Lake City that sent their attendees door to door armed with Anti-Mormon Literature. And you folks in Iowa voted for someone like this for President? Iowa and Huckabee should be embarrassed about and ashamed of their extreme bigotry.

Disingenuous is an understatement for Huckabee's deceitful propaganda. He ran the ad (that he said he would not run) 3 times Dec. 31, in addition to running it for the press. EVERYTHING he said in the ad was DISHONEST AND INACURATE ABOUT ROMNEY. There is no death penalty in Massachusetts (therefore no execusions), Abortion provisions were also never part of his health plan. Check the record.

In response to your comment "God's will be done", you seem to have forgotten that God allows us to choose for ourselves and then suffer the consequences of our choices.

Isn't it interesting that NON-evangelicals in Iowa supported ROMNEY 2 to 1. They saw right through Huckabee.

Posted by Pete | January 4, 2008 2:34 AM

Open you eyes, what is with the don't vote for mentality?

How about Rush for president, would we discover that rush isn't the perfect conservative? Would we conservatives back a drug abuser? What was Reagan's record before being president, spending in california went up.

Regan's greatness was as President, wasn't reagan once a democrat. Should we hate any conservative who ever raised taxes. I think that all conservatives to recently hold office should be ashamed for letting this robbery tax system we have stay in place. Republican House, Senate, and White House have in no ways been conservative at all.

Lets engage in why we should vote for a particular candidate, tell me what plans you have to better the country. Give a message of hope and Greatness for the country. We have to be more than a party of hopeless ideas. I don't want to see the rich taxed as they are nor see poor people with no hope because all they see is a world controled by money. Reagan inspired us and served all americans with the what is best for our country. Romney, Guliana, Thompson are great conservatives? not buying that one. So pass around the check list and lets see if any candidates are left. Huckabee is a candidate that we should consider, not dismiss because Rush or any other group says so.

Posted by J. Theriot | January 4, 2008 3:30 PM

I have listened to and supported Rush Limbaugh for years. He has lost his credibility with his anti Huckabee rant. He only tells half truths to attack Huckabee. Just one example: Huckabee lowered many taxes, he raised taxes in some cases. Due to 12 years of democratic governors, the roads in Arkansas were the worst in the nation. They had to be fixed and the people of Arkansas voted overwelmingly for the gas tax to fix the roads. There are many other examples. Investigate for yourself.

Posted by Mark | January 8, 2008 4:51 PM

"Something is very very very very wrong with this picture. Bottom line: The best candidate for the Republican nomination is Huckabee."

Something is wrong with your picture if you think some politician who claims to be a preacher and lies, bears false witness against his decent and competent neighbor and uses the Lord's name in vain to get power is a real Christian. Maybe you should try putting the Ten Commandments back in your churches, for a refreshing change of pace. You're just mad because you have the highest divorce rate in the country and a fine man like Mitt Romney makes you look like who you really are. Hypocrites.

Posted by artforlife | January 10, 2008 11:36 AM

Rush, along with Lou Dobbs, has become an irrelevant gasbag.

Huckabee is a true Christian as opposed to being a CINO. I will not vote for him - or any other Republican - but were he running as a Democrat, I'd give him a look. I dislike his views on gay marriage and abortion because both are far too intrusive, but his compassion for the poor is what Jesus was talking about rather than gun rights, the servitude of women and certitude.

Posted by Tony | January 10, 2008 12:45 PM

"Pure bunk. Rush doesn't like Huck because Huck is only conservative on abortion and gay marriage. He is really a liberal on everything else (i.e. taxes, etc.)"

Got it all figured out, huh? Actually Rush is employed by the corporate mainstream media which is charged with propagating the corporate/Republican/Whitehouse version of "the truth". Therefore he says what he is told to say, and supports he is told to support, by his neoconservative corporate masters.

You're right on one point: he does zero original thinking. His brain is burnt from all the drugs. Those fat hoglips still move though.

This is not about conservative vs. liberal anymore, in case you haven't noticed. It's about corporate interests vs. the interests of taxpaying middle class citizens.

Obama is on the rise against Hilary, Edwards and every Republican because it's readily apparent he understands this dire state of affairs in our government after 7 years of corporation thugs sitting in the Whitehouse and 12 years of corporation whores running Congress.

Posted by Dave | January 10, 2008 1:59 PM

I love it - after 25 years of lip service the Republican establishment is shocked, shocked to find that the religious right took them serioiusly and threw up a candidate of their own. Go ahead guys, rip each other up - I'll take any one of the Democratic candidates - they're not perfect, but they're not crazy, either.

Posted by Powkat | January 10, 2008 2:25 PM

I agree with him.

Rush is a drug addict, who is lead around by his nose.

Posted by AZstate | January 30, 2008 2:29 PM

Huck wins again. Kansas. Those of us that are Christian Conservitives know that he is the real deal. reading these posts, a lot of those that are not believers Hate him. Rush has his opinions and that's OK. He doesn't hate him, just points out some non-standard lines. But I like the way Huck presents himself and makes his points clear. He has a ton of conservitive view points. Wants to end the IRS and is backed by Chuck Norris and Dr. James Dobson.

Reagan was great, but remember he was not the perfect conservitive either. The way folks are grilling today's candidates, I'm pretty sure Reagan wouldn't get a lot of support from these guys either.

Posted by Brado | February 9, 2008 9:03 PM

The Washington insiders are angry because the nation has rejected their candidate, Mitt Romney. They are angry with Evangelicals because we prefer Huckabee, and so now they are mocking us. They didn't mock us when George W. Bush needed our votes and we delivered them. Frankly, I'm becoming sorry that I voted for Mr. Bush. If the insiders want someone to be angry with, maybe they should be angry with him. It is he, afterall, who has caused true conservatives to look for an outsider. We no longer trust the insider crowd.

Go, Huckabee!

Posted by G.T. Hamcraft | February 9, 2008 10:13 PM

A Huckabee Ally On El Rushbo

Comments (173)

Recent Posts

Monthly Archives