Huckabee's Impact and Exit

If you cannot get the baseball metaphor, you cannot get the man.

Why didn't the article by Marcus Borg open? The inane comments on the political party of Jesus came on whenever I tried to open the Borg article? Jesus would have been tossed out of both parties as too radical a progressive, socialist, or tagged Marxist or Communist!

What happened to the Borg item? R.B. "Dugan" Weber

Geez, I though the well attended pas been on the Demo side. The Repubs? Not so much.

Was the reason for Huckabee dropping out because he will be the running mate of McCain?
Also, we must remember there are good and bad in All Religions, and terrorist come in All races, religions, sizes and shapes. Remember Tim MacVeigh?

Last night left me near tears, and feeling so lost.
The good thing is, I was more engaged in this presidential election than I''ve ever been- and I know the same is true for many others. That''s a good thing! I know what I want to fight for: the FairTax, illegal immigration reform and border security (I believe it should be a state issue now), Second Amendment rights, American sovereignty, addressing our aging infrastructure, an accelerated program to energy independence...and Mike Huckabee.
This country bought into the stereotype, and never bothered to research Governor Huckabee''s stands on the issues- I know it, because I''ve encountered so many narrow-minded people in blogs all over the ''net. We lost an opportunity to nominate the Real Deal, and that so seldom comes along. We lost an opportunity to elect a President with excellent ideas for America''s future success, and the ability to brilliantly articulate them. We lost a true leader who is capable of uniting us and inspiring us to greatness.
I will stop yelling at the TV soon, I''m sure. In the meantime, I''ll watch to see the next step Mike takes on the national stage.

Huckabee is as unelactable as Hillary. The only way either one gets in office is if they run against each other.

No one who wants to 'Take back the Constitution for Christ' should be anywhere near a public office, and that 1/3rd of Ohioans voted for Huckabee is sad and rather disquieting.

That 54% of Ohioans voted for Hillary is similarly sad, since they apparently don't get (or care) that she CAN NOT win. Voting for Hillary is a vote for a Republcan President.

Huckabee's withdrawal is a hopeful sign Americans no longer vote out of Rovian manipulation of evangelicals through fear and hate. Let's hope this seditionist, who wants to change the Constitution to match his twisted version of "God's standards" doesn't pop us as More War McCain's running mate. McCain's too old for us to take a chance on this lunatic becoming President.

"He was self-deprecating and loose -- and honest about who he was and his Christianity."

I agree. Huckabee seems to honestly believe that theocracy is best for America. If he had ended up becoming a Nehemiah Scudder, it would have been because he was following his beliefs to their logical conclusion. Whereas Mitt Romney was merely engaging in demagoguery, slamming secularists as traitors merely to pander to voters who share Huckabee's beliefs.

FoxNews' delegate tally count is wrong. Romney won 286 but released some to McCain to put him closer to the needed 1191. Ronney released 35 delegates so that McCain would have the nomination last night.

In delegates WON, the tally is actually:

McCain - 1189 (without Romney's delegates, McCain would have had to look to the next primary for victory)

Romney -286

Hucakbee -261

Paul - 14

Total - 1750

It really doesn't matter very much since Huckabee will not be VP and will be a blip in the history of the race - a side note - a commentary - no more than that.

Why? Because Huckabee has no broad base appeal. He won due to the misguided support of Evangelical Christians for two really bade reasons: 1) Huckabee goes to their same Church, and 2) Huckabee supports are bigotted against Romney's religion.

Huckabee supporters, please get on board with McCain - the pipedream was fun while it lasted but you've got to get real. Huckabee didn't ever have a chance this year and doesn't have a chance in 2012. Why? Because he does NOT have broad base appeal - he's a preacher first and not-so-good politician second.

Use Hucakbee's own predictions - he said God had ordained him to be the nominee this year. As it turns out, God never did want him to be the nominee - that was just false advertising by Huckabee.

Now it's time to set aside the religious cult mindset and get behind McCain to protect:

Life
The borders
The economy
The courts

Our best chance of protecting all of those is John McCain.

I have to say that it's good he's out of the race, and it's good he ran... Fact is the man was a lot scarier and tied to a lot more nasty groups than the media got around to reporting, (Glad we didn't have to find out about *that,* or how his idea of rewriting the Constitution for theocratic ends would pan out) ...but I think it gave America a chance to see that the unholy alliance of Big money and Big Religion doesn't have to be.

Also that the Fundamentalists among us just aren't that many, and that they do *not* have anything like a mandate to rule over the rest of us.

James, et al-
You are truly delusional if you think Governor Huckabee would ever advocate a theocracy, or violate the separation of church and state.
Huckabee's widely-quoted comment was a simple reference to his goal of using a Constitutional amendment to ban abortion and define marriage. Of course, such amendments require Congressional passage- a President can't just "re-write the Constitution". The comment, taken out of context, sounds much different from its intended meaning.
Though he has been painted as the evangelical candidate, Huckabee has millions who support him because of his platform on illegal immigration, border security, American sovereignty, the FairTax, an accelerated program to energy independence and myriad other "non-Christian" issues.
He was never anti-Mormon, either. He is refreshingly open in welcoming others' religious beliefs (or absence of them). All he did was answer a question about LDS belief that a reporter asked him- accurately. Period.
Just because some of us are
anti-plastic-wind-testin'-
flip-floppin'-artificial-insincere-politician doesn't mean we're anti-Mormon.
Mitt spent over 100 MILLION DOLLARS on a very brief campaign...I would hope he picked up some delegates along the way!
286? Not exactly a staggering accomplishment, folks...

Tonio wrote,

"He was self-deprecating and loose -- and honest about who he was and his Christianity."

I agree. Huckabee seems to honestly believe that theocracy is best for America. If he had ended up becoming a Nehemiah Scudder, it would have been because he was following his beliefs to their logical conclusion. Whereas Mitt Romney was merely engaging in demagoguery, slamming secularists as traitors merely to pander to voters who share Huckabee's beliefs.

* *

i agree. this is one kind of honesty i can do without. I mean, i'm glad he didn't lie about how he wanted to destroy the foundation of democracy... but i don't tend to praise thieves who tell me in advance that they're planning to rob me.

When will you people understand that Huckabee had support from voters who are NOT evangelicals- not even Christians? Are you so stupid that you have to categorize everyone that narrowly?
Give the man some credit- he has sound ideas, many of which could've turned this economy around, led to independence of foreign oil, and dealt with 12 million illegal aliens in this country.
Now we're stuck with the War Czar, Mr. Sunshine and Lollipops (300 billion dollars' worth!) or the Hill and Bill Machine.
Just GREAT.

It's amazing to me how many people are afraid of someone with Christian faith. Maybe it's their own level of guilt. I'm constantly seeing references to Mike Huckabee wanting to re-write the Constitution and form a theocracy. That is a total misconstruction of wanting to legally define and protect life and marriage. The Constitution was developed to be amended. That's the beauty of the document---it stands the test of time because it can be adapted as times need. Our forefathers didn't know what the year 2008 would look like, but they did know it would not be the same as 1783 and made sure the Constitution could accommodate that. Different amendments certainly prove that (end of slavery, women's vote, Prohibition and end of Prohibition, and institution of the income tax) Our forefathers probably never thought we'd have to define life or marriage, but they certainly left us with the means to do so. Amending the Constitution would not turn us into a theocracy---or does any decision with moral overtones do that?

"It's amazing to me how many people are afraid of someone with Christian faith. Maybe it's their own level of guilt."

Or maybe it's what people who claim to represent 'Christian faith' have done *before.*

Or maybe it's what he did to the education system in Arkansas, or his connections to Dominionists and even paramilitaries.

Or I could be feeling guilty. Yah, right.

Mike Huckabee is a great guy. He is honest, transparent and he did what he did from the heart. He was not shy to declare who he is and firmly established his faith. Dont we all go to Church, we all believe in God, most of us believe in the Bible. We are taken to Church when we are born for Baptism, we go to Church when we get married and again are taken to Church when we die. Church and our faith is the center of our life but in the arena of politics we are shy or scared to talk about our faith. Mike has changed it.
Love you Mike - May the Almighty Bless you.

I mean, let's put it this way: if a sincere Evangelical sincerely wants to make life harder for a sincere Pagan and her committed long-term partner in the name of a branch of a religion I don't even follow...

Then I sincerely want no part of him.

I'm sure he's a nice man, ...what he wants to do to me and my country... Not so nice. I think we've had enough of that from Bushco as it is.

Yes, if he thought waving a Bible makes acting against freedom OK, then he had another thing coming. And he got it.

paganplace-
Please don't drag out that old argument about how more people have been killed in the name of Christianity, etc.- it's a fallacy. Millions more people have died through atheistic regimes like Stalin's and Hitler's than have EVER died in the name of Christianty. It's a fact.
Huckabee took Arkansas' education system from ranking 48th in the union to 8th. I'd say that's a remarkable accomplishment!
Vague accusations about Dominionist and paramilitary connections sounds downright looney, like conspiracy theory...wait a minute, are you a Ron Paul supporter?!

"paganplace-
Please don't drag out that old argument about how more people have been killed in the name of Christianity, etc."

I didn't. And if you read my posts here, I don't. I was talking about there being reasonable grounds to not approve of Mike Huckabee.

"- it's a fallacy. Millions more people have died through atheistic regimes like Stalin's and Hitler's than have EVER died in the name of Christianty."

Hitler and Stalin were both abused as kids by Christians, though. ...They weren't so much atheist as wanting to substitute *themselves* for Christian figures.

They were about the cult of themselves, like most dictators are. Whether or not they displace this onto Christianity or another religion is really secondary.

I'm not even an atheist, anyway. I'm a Pagan. Like in my name.

"That is a total misconstruction of wanting to legally define and protect life and marriage. "

The issue is not Huckabee wanting to rewrite the Constitution. The issue is his reason for wanting to do so. He didn't even try to present secular arguments for banning abortion or gay marriage.

TXTransplant You ask if any decision with moral overtones to amend the constitution turns us into a theocracy. The answer is yes, when those moral overtones are not shared by the whole of America but by a select few who believe their version of the truth is correct. Your examples of ending slavery and enshrining women's right to vote actually give rights to people and therefore are considered morally good.

Restricting the definition of marriage to enshrine a certain class of US Citizens as second class citizens because of who they love, and or taking away a woman's right to make choices regarding her own body, are quite frankly morally repugnant.

Similarly, the attempt at controling people's action through prohibition was a repugnant choice and failed policy, which is why it was repealed. A person is free to make choices in our society, and so long as it does not actively harm another, it is not the place of the state to litigate those choices.

Oh, well, as for 'conspiracy theories,' here's a handy blog entry with a whole bunch of links you can check the record out with:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/19/175629/012/188/439174

Bethidee, this isn't about Christianity versus atheism. The "God's standards" comment was condemned by many liberal and moderate Christians as an affront to the principle of nonsectarian democracy. And there are some atheists who oppose abortion and gay marriage.

Pagan, that link is to a site packed with false allegations. I can send you links to some pretty juicy stuff about Clinton, Obama and McCain, too. I hope you don't regard everything you see in print as truth.
Tonio (and Pagan): it's unusual to find myself in this position. The truth is, I support a woman's right to choose, and don't think the government has any business involving itself in reproductive rights. Similarly, I am not very concerned about gay marriage. Those social conservative issues are not what attracted me to Huckabee at all.
The key issues in this election- the vital ones to me, anyway- were more like tax reform, illegal immigration, border security, stimulating the economy...and Mike Huckabee had some excellent plans to address all of those. He also has executive experience, which I truly believe is important (and none of the other candidates possess). I also REALLY LIKE the idea of an intelligent, brilliant communicator in the White House for a change.
When considering a presidential candidate, I think voters should examine each platform carefully- not just label and dismiss based of preconceived notions. I also am willing to compromise on less-relevant social issues to get the best overall leader elected.

"Millions more people have died through atheistic regimes like Stalin's and Hitler's than have EVER died in the name of Christianty. It's a fact."

It is not a fact that Hitler's regime was atheistic. What kind of atheistic regime would have "God With Us" on its military belt buckles? What kind of atheist leader would write a book (Mein Kampf) espousing creationism and saying that he was doing the will of the Creator?

Bethidee, I do see social issues as relevant because they address the relationship between the government and the individual. You're right in principle about looking at a candidate's the overall platform.

But the deal-breaker with Huckabee was his justification for his positions on social issues, not the positions themselves. I would say this even if agreed with Huckabee's positions on social issues. The concept of "God's standards" doesn't allow for disagreement or debate.

Tonio:
The overreaction to that isolated quote is ridiculous! If considered in context, all he was saying is that he supports Constitutional amendments banning abortion and defining marriage- in a way designed, admittedly, to appeal to the evangelical base. But to jump from that to "Huckabee would institute a theocracy" is absurd.
Without such amendments, African Americans would be slaves and women couldn't vote. I'm sure "God's standards" were invoked in support of those.

I'm not saying Huckabee would necessarily institute a theocracy. I'm saying that the concept of "God's standards" in a Constitutional is itself theocratic in principle.

This article answers your point about other Constitutional amendments. It was written by a liberal Christian.

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2008/01/king-and-huck.html

From the article: "(Martin Luther) King's biblical oratory and Huckabee's bibliolatrous babble serve very different arguments. King's argument was ultimately a secular one: a call for justice in accord with the biblical prophets but also, even more so, in accord with the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Huckabee's argument is ultimately a religious one: a call for the Constitution to be re-written in accord with the (alleged) fiats of his faith...Those are very different. It is in no way inconsistent to endorse the former while opposing the latter. In fact, it would be inconsistent not to...By stating, explicitly, that he wants 'to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards' Huckabee is saying, precisely, 'You can't challenge this because it comes from a transcendent authority that can never be challenged.' His approach is defiantly unconstitutional and profoundly undemocratic. To accuse him of endorsing theocracy here is simply to quote him accurately."

I left out a word - "I'm saying that the concept of 'God's standards' in a Constitutional discussion is theocratic in principle."

Tonio,
I understand what you're trying to say, and am not arguing that you can't characterize his words that way. Again, in context, it was a remark crafted for maximum appeal to the evangelical base. I do not, and will not, believe that Huckabee ever intended to institute a theocracy- and while your reaction may not extend to that perception, I have encountered lots of near-hysterical bloggers who loudly proclaim it so.
Political misstep? Yes, I'll grant you that- but I stand behind my belief that Governor Huckabee is as staunch an advocate for democracy and separation of church and state as you and I are.

Bethidee:

"But to jump from that to "Huckabee would institute a theocracy" is absurd."

He probably wouldn't... but he's waste a lot of time and hurt a lot of people, not to mention the country, in trying.

"Without such amendments, African Americans would be slaves and women couldn't vote. I'm sure "God's standards" were invoked in support of those."

They were also invoked *against* outlawing slavery. There are also obvious, reason-based, and secularly-justifiable reasons to condemn slavery as a crime against humanity.

It's one thing if people feel religiously-moved to *enhance* freedom and *redress* real injustice.

Instituting *more* discrimination and injustice, or imposing choices on others *solely* based on religious belief, is another: To say: Gay marriage='Sin.' Religious belief. To say Humanity begins at or before conception: Religious belief. Any attempts at claiming there's a rational reasonable to make these decisions for others simply don't hold enough weight to justify government interference: generally, it's simply rationalizing what some want to believe, anyway.

This is simply wrong, and it undermines our democracy and freedom.

(Not that my own religious beliefs are exactly 'Rah, rah, let's go have an abortion, kids!' ...but we don't believe that the blastular stage creates a soul with one and only one chance at life, either, or anything like that. Motherhood is sacred, ...not a punishment for sex or sin or compulsory in any given case. I think a lot of conservative Christians simply don't understand how peculiar to particular sects and subsects (I mean this in the sense of particular, not in a derogatory way) some of the beliefs they base these political ambitions on *are.* )

It works both ways, too. I believe the Earth is the very body of the Goddess: I don't run for office or support environmental protections on the basis, "It's just wrong. Goddess says so." I talk about the effects of our actions on the present and future.

I don't particularly believe in practical ways that we should have all these *guns* flying around in our society, ...while religiously I believe that a person is responsible for their uses of power. So I don't run around stumping for the 'right' to pick up an Uzi at Oshman's. (That's aside from the legalities and Constitutionalities, just trying to say I know it works both ways.)

We know Huckabee wants a theocracy because he *says so.* And so do a lot of people he has supported and been involved with in the past.

For people that are supposed to be about 'small government,' religious conservatives *sure* like trying to use the government to tell people who aren't hurting anyone what to do.

This isn't about 'excluding Christians from American democracy.'

It's asking you to *come back to it.* Secular is how we do things, here... even if we don't want to.

Bethidee,

Your comparison of an anti-gay marriage amendment to the 13th-15th amendments is really kind of disgusting. Almost exclusively, amendments to the constitution have been either structural in nature or have EXPANDED our rights. Huckabee and his ilk want to REMOVE rights, and they want to do so merely to satisfy their reprehensible beliefs.

Oh, calm down. I mentioned 13 & 15 simply to point out that "God's standards" have been invoked in arguments for Constitutional amendments before.
I've already told you: these are not my issues. I'm pro-choice, and not concerned about gay marriage. What I AM concerned with is excessive taxation, border security, and no amnesty for illegals. I am concerned with our sagging economy, and aging infrastructure. I am concerned with American sovereignty. I am concerned about the war against Islamofascism.
And sorry, but in the face of those issues, gay marriage does not factor into my choice for President, and neither does banning abortion.
Oh, and I do support stem cell research, btw.
So, at the very least, maybe you've discovered that everyone who supports Mike Huckabee is not an evangelical religious nut.

I'm really trying to understand this Christian fear and hatred of the homosexuals. I know a few gay men, a few lesbian women, they are as harmless a group of people as one could imagine.

If you listen to the fundies long enough you realize it's the gay men they're really after, nothing in leviticus about women lying with women is there?

Something about leviticus? Well as we've all seen time and time again here in these forums, there are any number of prohibitions in leviticus that the christians never bring up, bad food and bad clothing whatever.

So the christians are peeing themselves about one particular prohibition there, about one particular group of humans, gay men.

How will gay men getting married affect me? How will it affect you? I just can't see it, I just don't see why I should care.

Defense of Marriage amendments are purely religiously motivated, based on this Christian fear and hatred of gay men. It may be said to be "in defense of marriage", but the real effect is the oppression of a perceived-as-undesired group of people, for stated religious reasons. This is unamerican, this is sick.

Huckabee claiming he would amend the constitution for this, Christians claiming they want it done ... this is why we don't want these people anywhere near our government.

To those who think he only got the support of evangelicals, I'm a Buddhist and I voted for Huckabee. Why? Because morals are important in this country, and it's important the president is not just a political leader but a moral leader. He is the figurative father of the country, and sets the example that others follow.

I will be supporting Huckabee in 2012.

Oort,
Christians believe that marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman, which is God's design for procreation (it takes one of each) and the best way to raise children (one mom and one dad). You have to admit, it seems an optimal design.

Oh, it does seem to be the optimal. Our mammalian bodies have gonads and other parts of our reproductive systems for a very specific purpose. But we have sex all the time without any intention of reproducing, even the normal way we do things is above and beyond the basic plumbinb.

I don't understand the attraction gay people feel for each other, but I don't have to. It's none of my business.

You can believe all you want about some god's design for things, that it's a sin and all that, but that's what it is - belief. Your belief would prohibit other people from doing what they want, something they want to do that does not effect you.

My belief is that this is wrong. It's none of my business what they do with each other, and it's none of yours.

Andrew:

You said:

"Though he has been painted as the evangelical candidate, Huckabee has millions who support him because of his platform on illegal immigration, border security, American sovereignty, the FairTax, an accelerated program to energy independence and myriad other "non-Christian" issues.

and

He was never anti-Mormon, either. He is refreshingly open in welcoming others' religious beliefs (or absence of them). All he did was answer a question about LDS belief that a reporter asked him- accurately. Period."

Huckabee did have some genuine supporters that did not vote for him because he was Christian. Polls estimate about 20%. But his win in Iowa and other areas are attributed directly to the Evangelical Christian vote. The crux of the issue is that because an overwhelming number voted for Huckabee solely based on religion, it gave rise to a false sense that Huckabee had broad base appeal. Because he won early in Iowa, people thought that he had "real" appeal. (i.e. leadership, vision, and answers to solve real problems in the country.) Can he talk folksy and play the guitar, yep... he get's an A for appearing likable. But that wasn't enough.

In regard to Romney, he had the most broad-base appeal overall regarding his conservative platforms, experience and leadership. Evangelical Christians with an antimormon bias sunk him in Iowa - and Christian conservative voters other places were confused whether or not it was "ok" (religiously speaking) to vote for Romney (who is mormon.)

Huckabee gets an "F" for LDS relations as his comments were truly antimormon. Let me give you an example. If someone asked a conservative Christian, "Don't Christians believe that Jesus Christ created evil?" Would you say yes or no? On one hand you'd have to say "yes" since Jesus Christ created all things knowing before hand the outcome of that creation. But then you'd want to say no because then it would mean that Jesus is not omnibenficient.

Mormons don't believe that the "Devil" and Jesus are brothers, they believe that Lucifer, son of the morning, who dwelled with God, WERE brothers. It has to do with the premortal life - something that Evangelical Christians know very little about. Therefore, asking the question in that way misleads the unsuspecting listening to conclude that Mormons believe in some "brotherly" connection between Jesus and the Devil TODAY.

Everyone knows that Christian pastors preach against Mormons in their own Churches calling the the LDS Church, the "tool of the devil" among other things including that its a "cult of the devil".

Huckabee's comments were code for "hey remember... this is the cult of the devil".

By the way, the reporter didn't ask Huckabee about Mormons. Huckabee WILLINGLY offered it as a dig in the interview. It was an off the wall comment, totally UNSOLICITED by the reporter.

Further, about 4 years ago, Huckabee went to a Souther Baptist conference in Salt Lake City to specifically preach against Mormons that they are a cult and of the devil.

Andrew, I wish it were true that Huckabee wasn't a bigot, but he is. His own campaign staff got caught on camera telling conservative Christians in Iowa, "How can you vote for Romney when he believes that the Devil and Jesus are brothers?"

Huckabee won because they used religious intolerance against Romney. Huckabee's win in Iowa gave him momentum ..and the rest is history.

I hope that Huckabee will not be VP. He's not ready for the job. He doesn't have enough respect for people that are not like him. I do not believe that he lives his religion very well either - especially a person who calls himself a "pastor".

Huckabee deserves a whole lot of credit for sticking to his guns under fire. He was not politically correct and he didn't follow the rules, but he conducted himself overwhelmingly with character.

I don't think he would have been a Pastor and Chief, don't think I could have voted for him f I thought so, that was an unfair media characterization. I believe strongly that he would have been president much in the way he was Governor. By building bridges, creating consensus, and representing the people in a way which brought results.

Godspeed Huck! You will have my unwavering support in the future.

The road to hell, paved with good deeds etc.
I liked Huckabee personally, he seemed a great guy who wouldn't step over somebody on the ground.
But his good Christian intentions would have him altering our constitution to be inline with his perceptions of what God wanted. Where would he stop once he got the first thing through?

I don't believe Huckabee has an evil thought in his heart, but I do believe what he would do to our constitution would be an evil committed with the best intentions.

James, I've been attending Christian churches ALL my life, and have NEVER heard a single Christian pastor preaching against Mormons. Never! Honest.
Do Mormons REALLY believe that? I'm truly incredulous.
I have no knowledge of your other allegations about Huckabee.
All I can offer is this: I would not have liked or voted for Mitt Romney were he Mormon, Baptist, Buddhist, atheist, or Confucian.

Paved: I have to say, regardless of how you feel about Huckabee's single remark about rewriting the Constitution...do you REALLY think it's that easy for the President to rewrite the Constitution at his will? I can assure you, it's quite the process to amend the Constitution- no President has that kind of power in this great country.

bethidee you have a good point. The feminists tried to get the ERA passed for years, they even modified the rules to extend the period needed to have it ratified but it still failed.

Amending the constitution is a difficult thing to do, of course it was designed that way.

Huckabee's desire to amend the constitution to fall inline with his perceptions of God's will is a statement of intent. He has motive, he has intent, what other kinds of Christian Law will he enact and enforce that do not require a constitutional amendment?

What will happen when he chooses to press for issues which are denominational in nature, one side being for and one against?

We can see the ugly battle going on now between Hillary and Obama, two supposed supporters of the same side tearing each other's throats to win. What will happen when southern baptist Huckabee tries to force a Christian Law opposed by the Catholics, the Lutherans, the Jews?

I fear him for the reasons I stated, he will pave a road to a hell in America with his good intentions.

To Those who supported Mike Huckabee:
I am a Huckabee Ranger who has supported Mike financially and assisted in a number of other ways-working hours at end (gladly!!) for his campaign.
My question to all of you is this:

Would you vote for McCain if Huckabee was his running mate? If so, would you support a petition calling for McCain to name him as such?

European Traveler,
My answer is yes, though I seriously doubt we can influence McCain to choose Huckabee through a petition.
But, I'd gladly sign one if properly worded.

Bethidee:
We can try!! :)

Don't care if Huckabee is vice president, or not. I expect we're going to see him on TV somewhere though, making a good living being a personality.

I do expect a McCain-Huckabee ticket would not win McCain any voters he wouldn't already get, but might alienate the independents to a degree that would not be helpful him.

After WW3, Huckabee would be the President of the States. By that time there would be no more liberal states coz God has wiped them off the earth already.

I suggest that He keeps on trying till that day happens coz it's coming soon.

I believe God chose Huckabee as a candidate, but God did not make Americans robots,He gave them freedom to choose.But they chose wrong candidates.
And now, three democrats are competing each other.Americans chose darkness rather than light.

Paganplace- try this- we are scared of what people who say they are christians have done. we are also scared of what people who say they aren't christians have done.
it doesn't really matter.
i think christians get branded a certain way, and that's wrong. just like muslims get branded, and that's wrong.
however if you do look at it objectively as a whole, true christianity has done a lot more good in this world than bad. if you look at the whole.

James: i am sorry but you are wrong. huck actually did get tons of votes from non-evangelicals. he got the most votes from conservatives, just as mccain got the more liberal or moderate votes.

and even tho he's out, as a tradition, here it is: GO MIKE!!!!

I will vote for McCain if Huckabee is his Vice President.

If McCain or Obama wins, he will deal with Israeli-Palestinian conflict [it's really bad right now], Venezuela and Colombia? and Iraq and a lot more. Americans will test the ability of their war hero when times come.

OORT...we don't hate people for instance gays, but we hate their lifestyles. God loves the sinners but hate their sins.

God isn't upholding and defending the constitution, we are. You hate their lifestyles, what does that hate do for you? Hate is hate, how many of you are able to tell the difference between hating the lifestyle and just hating them?

Why not just ignore them, that's what I do. I am untroubled by their existence. I do not hate them or their lifestyles since it never enters my consciousness. So I don't do anything to impede their lives.

You and those who feel as you feel will.

It seems that many of you are far too willing to refuse them their place in our society because of this hatred. You modify our constitution to suit your hatred, who are you going to hate next? Who's next on the list?

Hate as a motive for defining government policy, I just don't like that.

Why would China who's a godless nation ban gay marriage? Liberals should think about that.

Sodom and Gomorah was set as an example for future generation to learn from. Fools don't learn, do they?

Does that mean communists are wiser than liberal secularists? I think so

Hey, that's a good idea. Let's follow the Chinese, they sure know how to run a government by the people and for the people.

Really Spidey, you should avoid the thinking stuff. Every time you open your mouth you remove all doubt.

It was obvious that God changed His mind after Iowa and no longer wanted Huckabee to win.
But Huckabee refused to listen to God.
Instead, he committed blasphemy by continuing on with his campaign in complete defiance of God's wishes.

Ummm, Spiderman?

Who's the good guys in your world, again?

I keep losing track.

I mean, Spidey...

pardon me for growing up in America or something but, when you say this for Christ:

"After WW3, Huckabee would be the President of the States. By that time there would be no more liberal states coz God has wiped them off the earth already.

I suggest that He keeps on trying till that day happens coz it's coming soon"

...Well, it confuses me. Cause I always thought that those who wanted to nuke Hoboken and everyone in it so the world can end were the *bad* guys.

Maybe you can elucidate, here.

" spiderman2:

"Why would China who's a godless nation ban gay marriage?"

Cause repressed gays might dress in tights and sublimate their sexuality to a controllable, unquestioned insanity or three? :)

That's just off the cuff, there. :)

i'll vote for mccain if mike is vp

spiderman2, how many pipe bombs can you make in a week these days? Or do you prefer the anonymous anthrax mailing?

Anthrax for God, hey spidey, there's a book you can write.

I was very glad Huckabee stayed around as long as he did. What a wonderful man! I felt that there was someone who was out there that understood how millions of us feel (may not say). He stood his ground even in the midst of being mocked and called everything under the sun. And to those who believe conservatives and evangelicals are few, your misguided in your belief.

God Bless Mr. Huckabee for standing up for truth and not being ashamed of the Gospel.

God Bless You; See you at the Celestial City...

Just a question for the Huckabee supporters. I realize that when he made the famous "amend the Constitution" statement, he was talking about abortion and same-sex marriage. It is the reason for promoting the change that gets people upset. To bring the Constitution into accordance with god's law. Besides those two issues, are there any others that you believe should be brought into accordance with god's law? And which god's law? Canon Law of the Roman Catholic church, Shariah, etc? How do we choose which yardstick to apply for Constitutional law?

Agathodemon-
No. I don't believe there are other issues to merit Constitutional amendment.
Huckabee's words were designed for dramatic effect, to impact the Christian conservative base. I believe they have been greatly misinterpreted and exaggerated into a theocratic threat that never did, and never would, exist.
Again: many who are pro-choice and at most, unconcerned with gay marriage supported Huckabee because of his plans for the economy, illegal immigration, the FairTax, border security, energy independence, and transparency in government spending.
The guy has some great ideas. It is unfortunate that people only see the ex-preacher, and not the former governor.

"Dont we all go to Church, we all believe in God, most of us believe in the Bible."
No, no and no.

After WW3, Huckabee would be the President of the States. By that time there would be no more liberal states coz God has wiped them off the earth already.

I suggest that He keeps on trying till that day happens coz it's coming soon.

Bethidee:

I understand the Huckabee's statement was mostly [I hope] for rhetorical effect, especially given the almost single minded focus that the Religious Right place on the two issues. However, since the stated justification was that god's law is superior to man's [I don't think I'm reading that into the statement], I wanted to know which other laws should be reviewed under this criteria? Using god's law as a criteria, slavery would never have been ended. I think it is the idea that the constitution needs to be in line with god's law that concerns the secularists amongst us. All his other ideas may or may not be good, but the justification that he gave as a reason makes him forever [in my opinion] unsuitable for public office.

Agathodemon, I get what you're saying...and frankly, I'd bet Mike Huckabee would re-word his statement with a bit less rhetoric, given the chance.
If you need to take it that literally, so be it- I simply believe with all my heart that it was not meant to be interpreted so broadly.

Bethidee:

I'm sure that he would. I'm not so much concerned with Huckabee, as with those who resonated with the statement as given. Whether it was his intent [and I believe that it was] to imply that the justification for the two Constitutional Amendments was religious. There should never be an explicitly religious reason for modifying a secular document. Sometimes the justifications might be parallel, but we should never, ever seek to bring the Constitution into alignment with god's law. And we should never attempt to mobilize support with such an unamerican idea. There are plenty of Christian Dominionists for whom this would mean just that.

"Please don't drag out that old argument about how more people have been killed in the name of Christianity, etc.- it's a fallacy. Millions more people have died through atheistic regimes like Stalin's and Hitler's than have EVER died in the name of Christianty."

If you grew up as a non-Christian in this country, you would understand why one would not want a right wing fundamentalist (I did not say generic evangelical) as president. And then there is European Christian history
Hitler and Stalin were products of Christian culture and religion and Christianity can not entirely disown responsibility for what they did. Before them there was widespread persecution and killing of so called heretics, Jews, and Christian sub-sects, homosexuals, Gypsies, etc. I call that a scary heritage. Not very pro-life.

Errol:

I too am so tired of this argument. It is basically the "you can't be moral/ethical without religion." This basic contention is just plain false. It is usually the religious who hammer the secularists with this, not the other way around. It doesn't matter how many times the falseness of the contention is pointed out, the religious use this as a mantra.

"There should never be an explicitly religious reason for modifying a secular document."

I agree with you. I'm not arguing that. Truth is, I think Mike Huckabee would agree with that.

Errol,
It's quite a stretch to say that Hitler and Stalin were products of Christian culture and religion. They are better defined as products of evil; mental illness, even...but not Christianity.
People have been persecuting people since the beginning of time. I don't think Christians have the market cornered.

Bethidee:

We agree Huckabee would probably agree with us, but the words themselves pander to the religiously motivated. These people do believe that there should be no secular government and that man's law can never legitimately conflict with god's.

Of COURSE you can be moral/ethical without religion!
Look, Agathodemon, I was raised Christian, and I embrace all the goodness I think Jesus intended to teach: universal love, forgiveness, helping the less fortunate. I do not embrace the judgemental attitude some Christian denominations espouse.
Not all of the "religious" are like your stereotype. In addition, we respect others' points of view- to do any less IS un-Christian.

"These people do believe that there should be no secular government and that man's law can never legitimately conflict with god's."

Interesting to note that you're describing fundamentalist Islamic regimes. Do you really believe there are Christians in America who would support a theocracy? Really?

'A person is free to make choices in our society, and so long as it does not actively harm another, it is not the place of the state to litigate those choices.'

I'm responding to someone's quote above. About abortion, do you think the unborn child feels pain when he is aborted? The movie, "The Silent Scream," leaves no doubt that the child feels pain. (The movie was filmed by an abortionist, who, after seeing it for himself, stopped doing abortions.)We treat ANIMALS better than we treat unborn human beings.

We need to stop abortion! The time to "choose" is whether to have sex or not! Come on guys and gals, we're not animals. We can control our passions. Let's take the high road.

Bethidee:

Google Christian Dominionist to see that there are indeed people who think that we need a religious basis for our government. D. James Kennedy [Coral Ridge Ministries] has for years been calling for Christians to reclaim America for Christ. They are not mainstream, and I am not claiming that mainstream Christians support the idea of theocracy, just that Huckabee's statement resonate with people who believe that our government is too secular. I also understand that Christians can extract the good parts and ignore the bad parts of Christianity. This is fine with me, but seems somewhat intellectually dishonest because what criteria is used to decide what is good or bad.

"Huckabee's words were designed for dramatic effect, to impact the Christian conservative base."

Bethidee, has Huckabee offered that defense himself, or is that your own conclusion? If it's the former, I would be disappointed because that would mean Huckabee was engaging in Romney-style pandering.

"Do you really believe there are Christians in America who would support a theocracy? Really?"

Yes! Not necessarily de jure theocracy, but certainly de facto theocracy. Look at the attempts to force religion on public school students by teaching creationism as science. Look at how the Air Force Academy was turned into a Jesus Camp a few years ago.

Tonio, the opinion I expressed about Huckabee's comment was entirely my own.
(Incidentally, show me a politician who has never pandered!)
The Christians you refer to are certainly not among MY Christian acquaintances, and represent a small minority.
Obviously, you are more familiar with "attempts to force religion on public school students by teaching creationism as science" than I. It's news to me.
I was interested, btw, to hear Mike Huckabee say on Tyra Banks' show that he supported the teaching of the theory of evolution in the classroom, and felt that religion was to be taught in the home, not in school.

"I also understand that Christians can extract the good parts and ignore the bad parts of Christianity. This is fine with me, but seems somewhat intellectually dishonest because what criteria is used to decide what is good or bad."

Agathodemon, I don't just choose the good parts of Christ's lessons and example and ignore the bad. I try to live my life in accordance with all of his teachings.
It is my belief that he gave the world a beautiful religion, which has been interpreted, re-interpreted, misinterpreted and misused by man over many centuries. There is plenty of "Christian" denominational doctrine I feel free to avoid!

Well said bethidee: "here is plenty of "Christian" denominational doctrine I feel free to avoid!"

Huckabee is a member of a denomination. Once he gets the more generic christian laws enacted that most of you claim to agree with - abortion and gay marriage as we seem to be discussing here, what will he do next, what will you demand of him now that he's put your religion over us all? What will the other denominations demand?

Why do you think there are so many denominations anyway, you believers can't agree on the Real Truths you all seem to claim.

Religion is the genus, denomination is the species. Catholics and Lutherans and Jews and Muslims are all believers in Religion. Once you start running your government with one of them, what do you really expect will happen to the others?

Bethidee,

"Errol,
It's quite a stretch to say that Hitler and Stalin were products of Christian culture and religion. They are better defined as products of evil; mental illness, even...but not Christianity.
People have been persecuting people since the beginning of time. I don't think Christians have the market cornered."

What I said was that they were products of Christian culture and religion because they grew up as Christians in longtime Christian cultures. These cultures had been extremely Christian centric with unfortunate ethnic/religious cleansing on a regular basis for centuries. It was PART of the equation - not the whole. The problem I have is with the Christian world taking little or no responsibility for the messes it has spawned (genocide of American Indians for example, and yes the Holocaust is one of them and it came out of centuries of religious persecution of "OTHER" people).

I agree, no group has the market cornered in the persecution department.

Always fascinated by the christian claim that "atheists killed more people than religion."

Ok, I'll buy that for the sake of argument. I guess this means that it's better to be one of the 10s of millions killed by religion than it is to be one of the 100 million killed by the communists.

Wow, one corpse is better than another.

It wasn't atheism that made them do it by the way, it was communism. It was the same kind of blind faith in "the system" being run by the government pukes who owned the armies. Faith is stupid, it leads to mass death.

Oort- slowly, carefully, please consider: Mike Huckabee was a Baptist preacher over twenty years ago.
He was Governor of Arkansas for over ten years in recent history, which is far more pertinent.
Alleging that his presidency would be a de facto theocracy is ignorant and paranoid at best, hateful and slanderous at worst.
I consider myself an open-minded person- I hope I've shown that clearly here- but I have no patience with hysterical exaggerations.

"Ok, I'll buy that for the sake of argument. I guess this means that it's better to be one of the 10s of millions killed by religion than it is to be one of the 100 million killed by the communists.

Wow, one corpse is better than another."
No, NP, that's not the point. I am just tired of people blaming religion for all the world's problems.

Yeah, well I'm tired of hearing that argument. It sounds like the crap coming out of the politician's mouths, "at least we aren't as bad as they are" ... hooey.

The mass death caused by the nazis and communists was done during the 20th century. There were millions more people to kill, it was a far more target-rich environment than when the religions were busy killing. The nazis and communists had industrial revolution equipment - airplanes carrying tons of bombs, dropping them on cities with millions of people.

The opportunity for death was far greater simply as a matter of timing in history. Do you really think the Catholics and Protestants killing each other in Europe several hundred years ago would hesitate for a second to use these death machines if they had? Do you think for another second they would hesitate because of the numbers of people killed? The Muslims and Christians were busy for a thousand years killing each other like that, make the same point with them.

Just because your little neighborhood church says you have to hate gays and abortion and these other religiously-motivated hatreds, that doesn't mean you're going to kill people, does it?

If you believe too much, if you have too much faith, if you never stop to ask your leaders, both religious and political, why you should hate someone ... your credulity and gullibilty makes you more prone to joining these mass movements, more prone to joining these armies, and more prone to being one of the killers.

It's not the content of the religion or the politics, its' the gullibility of the followers that makes this possible.

Everyone who thinks McCain is going to be just a Soldier taking on the War, has another thing coming. He's going to change the Supreme Court!! There will be no SAFE abortions and in the long run, he will make it possible to change the constitution. If the ultra-conservative right has it's way, there will be NO privacy rights.

bethidee be specific. What have I exaggerated?
It's easy to say that, it's easy to claim someone is hysterical when you find yourself in a position you can't defend. Whether because it's indefensible or your are just incapable of making that defense, you are using the same method to avoid having a sense of losing something.

Be specific. I was.

1. I am not the "Ultra Conservative Right". You need a different girl. I have already made that clear.
2. How am I to disprove what a theoretical President would do, Oort? I only know that Governor Huckabee believes in the separation of church and state...which is why you sound hysterical.

"Just because your little neighborhood church says you have to hate gays and abortion and these other religiously-motivated hatreds, that doesn't mean you're going to kill people, does it?"
My church would NEVER tell me any such thing.
Is it impossible for you all to believe that a Christian can have gay friends and be pro-choice? If so, you have an entirely inaccurate view of millions of Christians. Your stereotypes are as offensive as those you denounce.

i love huckabee!

I love Huckabee, too!

Damn!

I was hoping Huckabee would not only win the nomination, but the election!

America desperately needs at least four more divisionist-revisionist Republican-lead presidencies so that American society crumbles into a puddle of our own sniveling, emotional, cowardly, bible-besotted goo.

The sheer arrogance and superficiality of some of these amazing creatures like Huckabee, The Clintons, and Romney actually getting anywhere near the Whitehouse *again* is mind-numbing. We may never survive George The Boy King's reign as it is.

Imagine having a president in the year 2008 (let alone 2000) who has absolutely no clue as to what is inscribed inside that gigantic tomb of the very founder of the Republican Party, nor any clue as to what those words actually mean -- and if they actually did, simply preferring to ignore them.

Personally I doubt either party's current hopefuls can genuinely see beyond their own patronizingly- flared nostrils -- windbags and dissemblers all.

Shouldn't we have like, really 'Intelligent, Gifted, Innovative, and Honest people' running for President? What's up with that anyway? Isn't there an IQ test or something? Hello?

Can we please have someone who can hire people that might actually be competent enough to save our beloved cities like New Orleans from bad weather and unemployment? Someone who could send our young men and women after Osama instead of Sadama (or did He get those names confused)?

Well I know one thing for sure. When it all comes tumbling down, I and many other *true Americans* will be here with the chance to rebuild and make damn sure it never happens again, and, if there's going to be any revisions to our Constitution -- a sacred document if there ever was one (a model of freedom still revered and aspired to by peoples of every nation on earth) -- it will be to include a guarantee that Geebus, Muhumid, Yehu, and Yoda, and all their lovers can all have free passage back to the barren, empty, hopeless desert they came babbling out of 2000 years ago -- and stay there.

The fact that Mike Huckabee is such a "nice guy" is precisely what should terrify any free-thinking American.

The following is a direct quote from Huckabee, which I read every day to remind myself of the fundamental threat to our country which far, far outstrips that of a handful of idiots with boxcutters:

"I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that's what we need to do — to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

Huckabee is a theocrat, and represents nothing less than an American Taliban in "Christian" garb. Like our current president, he's not only willing but eager to use our Constitution as a weapon to restrict the rights of millions of Americans.

Isn't the real issue is that a lot of you are afraid Mike Huckabee would use his religion to try to change America even though he didn't do that in Arkansas. He never tried to cram his religion on the people of Arkansas and most of them thought he was a great Governor. He was elected in a Democratic state and he accomplished a lot of great things for that state. He received over 60% of the vote in Arkansas on Super Tuesday...that should say a lot about how they feel about him. Can't you use his actions as your proof instead of your misintpretation of his words?

Don't you remember that many people used these same arguments for JFK? Many Democrats think he was the best President ever! George W. Bush did not push his religion down anybodys throat. So why can't you remember how people just like you were wrong then, just like you are wrong now and, unbelievably for the same reasons as in the past. Don't the people of America ever learn?

Mike Huckabee said he was defined by his religion. That only means he would be honest, have integrity and rule God-given principles, like kindness and love.

Mike Huckabee is the only person I can ever remember who was a candidate for President without being a millionaire or next to it. He was poor when he was being raised and governed in one of the poorest states in the U.S. What a great advantage for the people of America to have a President who can feel and understand the issues of the middle class and the poor. That's why he said he wanted the poor to get richer.

I believe Mike Huckabee would be the best President this country could have, and I will vote for him no matter when he runs again.

Getting 60% of the vote in a state that has the nation's lowest education level isn't any accomplishment. David Duke did as well in Louisiana, another national embarrassment.

If the state of Arkansas has the lowest education level, then I guess you MUST be a Huckabee fan since he improved the schools from 49th in the country to 8th in the U.S. I don't think because they aren't IVY LEAGUE schools and the people don't have the money to go to college, you should classify them as ignorant (remember most of them are Democrats). You should very elitist! That's why people like Mike Huckabee...he doesn't make people feel inferior or stupid, but he had many more accomplishments in Arkansas than many other "smarter" states.

So many (spideyvcu) are attacking Huckabee and evangelicals for assuming "their version of the truth to be correct". Do we not all assume our version of the truth to be correct? One of the beauties of our system is that we have the freedom to express what we believe to be true and to vote for people who represent us. Huckabee and those who support him should not be slammed for promoting what they believe. We all do it.

As for Huckabee's statements about changing the Constitution...if the situation were reversed and abortion / gay marriage were currently unconstitutional, would there not be an equal push to change the Constitution from the other side? And who would give that group the "moral right" to push for a change?

Frankly, whichever side of the issue you fall on, no one is to be blamed for choosing a side and arguing it. Huckabee is to be commended.

You said, "I had no desire to have Huckabee as my President -- I disagree with almost everything he believes in -- but I liked him."

That is exactly how I feel about Obama, but not Hillary, since she is totally unlikeable.

bethidee:
"There should never be an explicitly religious reason for modifying a secular document."

I agree with you. I'm not arguing that. Truth is, I think Mike Huckabee would agree with that.

Errol,
It's quite a stretch to say that Hitler and Stalin were products of Christian culture and religion. They are better defined as products of evil; mental illness, even...but not Christianity.
People have been persecuting people since the beginning of time. I don't think Christians have the market cornered.

Bethidee:

It is NOT a stretch at all to say that Hitler was a product of a Christian culture. Go to Germany today and make a count of all the churches, (I've been to Bavaria and I can attest - they're everywhere). Do some research on German pograms of jews and other groups over the centuries prior to Hitler. Germans were more ferocious than any other group in Europe in killing the hated "Christ killers". Hitler was only the latest and greatest, so to speak. The fact is, ALL of Europe was Christian and to say otherwise to try to get that great undercurrent off the hook is just weasely, and a standard argument whenever Christians want to disavow the clear evil done by other Christians. That great evil grew and flourished in a Christian culture, period. And the vast majority of "good Christians" sat by silently IN their churches as this went on. Talk about sins of omission! Christians may not have a corner on the market for evil deeds, but they sure ain't pikers either. Kinda puts the lie to their claims to moral superiority.

As for religious justification for policy, well, we've already SEEN what one man in the Oval Office who claims to talk to God Himself can do. And some of us are simply not as trusting of a person's claims as you are. You believed Huckabee, I and quite a few others apparently, do not. I LIVE right in the middle of the Bible Belt, and see massive amounts of sanctimony and underhandedness coming from people who loudly proclaim their piety and quite frankly I have learned FROM THEM, not to trust the public display of religiosity.

I do not want a Pastor In Chief, no matter WHAT his policies may be.

Ah, the old 'hate the sin, love the sinner'.

Funny. You don't see that applied to, say, divorcees.

Where are all the Christians demanding that divorcees be treated like second class citizens? That it be legal to fire divorcees because of their marital status. Or to evict them. Or to deny them the right to remarry.

But why not? I mean, hate the sin, right?

No, you all reserve that for homosexuals.

A bit of hypocrisy at best, wouldn't you say?

If you are really going to claim the Bible is the reason for persecuting gays, then you need to use ALL of the Bible. You need to start supporting slavery, as it's clearly condoned in the Bible. You need to BAN divorce. Period. You need to make sure women are secondary to men.

Heck, you even need to establish clear rules for how long American soldiers must wait before they rape the wives of dead Iraqi soldiers. After all, there are specific instructions in the Bible about how you must wait a 'proper period' before it's ok for soldiers to rape the wives of enemy soldiers they've killed.

So, how long is that 'proper period' anyway?

The Book Shelves
(Dedicated to all People of Faith)

There is a tiny cinder block church, on my way to Williamstown, that
has three large wooden crosses set in its front lawn.
While passing the church, the other day, I strained to look back and just for
an instant, I could swear I saw a series of books stacked on the horizontal members
of the crosses. When my eyes refocused and mind cleared I realized it was only a flashback of Mike Huckabee’s televised holiday commercial.
His Christmas Card to us, if you will………..

Now Mr. Huckabee, with a wink and a smile, insists “it was just a coincidence” that
his perfectly proportioned, beautifully lit Book Shelve, appeared to almost
every living soul to be a Cross……..

On Mike’s Shelves, there rests many books.
He could have chosen the one referred to as the “Good Book”.
This time, however, I fear, he picked the book best suited to his new profession.
That being the one written for the Politician………

Too bad Huckabee wasn't the nominee.

The Democrats would have mopped the floor with that whacko.

He believes the Earth is only 6000 years old.

Anybody who believes that is mentally defective.