Posted on 12/16/2007 7:47:09 AM PST by Clint Williams
I covered for you on the am shift ASA Vet.
Regards
Thanks...didn’t take the time to check history. ;*)
That works as well. Wish I had the smarts to start one.
I haven’t paid much attention to Huckabee until this latest fracas. From what I just saw in his interview w/ Bret Bair(?) on Fox News a minute ago, he’s a lightweight, not a deep or strategic thinker, not convincing in his arguments, petty with respect to the other candidates, somewhat of a muddled mentality, a shallow politician willing to say whatever, etc.
Did I miss anything?
“These hits are a laugh.”
They sure are. Stick a fork in that liberal phony, he’s done. Oh wait, that isn’t what you meant?
But he is a lifelong prolifer, and he has not divorced.
The new deep-thinking, serious, and critical “values voters” litmus test of a Wartime President.
Response: Of course contributions influenced his decision. He is a politician ! It is the very essence of politicians, 2007 A.D., to be corrupt.
Your crazy. Huck made some mistakes in his past. But never once did he waiver on abortion (like Fred who lobbied for it, Mitt who was for gay marriage and abortion as the same goes for Guiliani) nor did Huck ever waiver on the Gay marriage issue.
Huck is the only one that can beat Hillary or Obama. He is a great communicator, a born again Christian, and that is why he is doing good in the polls. Fred was my early choice until he came off as the laziest candidate to ever run for office. Thats how George HW Bush lost to Clinton, by being complacent and lazy in the early run.
Go Huck Go!
Here is what he told Mike Wallace, of fox news:
WALLACE: Let's turn to immigration, because you put out a new immigration plan this week. You called for building...
HUCKABEE: Yes.
WALLACE: ... a border fence, for cracking down on employers, for telling illegals to go home.
But last year in an interview, you said something somewhat different. You said this, "I think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship."
Governor, in your new plan, the only path is to go home and to get on the back of the line, which, of course, would mean years of waiting. Why the change?
HUCKABEE: Well, I don't think there's an inconsistency. When I said a pathway, I didn't say what the pathway was.
I now believe that the only thing the American people are going to accept — and, frankly, the only thing that really makes sense — is a pathway that sends people back to the starting point.
But this idea of the waiting years — no, I don't agree with that. In fact, look, if we can get a credit card application done within hours, if we can get passports done within days, if we can transact business over the Internet any place in the world within seconds, do a background check instantaneously — it's our government that has failed and is dysfunctional.
It shouldn't take years to get a work permit to come here and pick lettuce. So part of the plan that I have is that we seal the borders. You don't have amnesty and sanctuary cities. You do have a pathway that gets you back home.
But that pathway to get back here legally doesn't take years. It would take days, maybe weeks, and then people could come back in the workforce.
Now that plane and simply is the voted down amnesty plane of jorge's.
The Commander in Chief can’t do a damn thing to correct Roe v Wade.
You single-issue folks will destroy the party.
How very right you are and had the internet been around in 1975 “another scumbag” from Georgia would never have seen the inside of the Oval Office either!!!!!
“He commuted the prison sentence of the stepson of one of his staffers. He commuted the murder sentences of any number of depraved killers, including at least one who had been turned down for release a total of three times by Gov. Bill Clinton, who himself should have gone to prison, and Clinton successor Jim Guy Tucker, who did (go to prison, that is). In the next debate, there’s only one thing Mitt, Rudy et al. need to say to this faker: “You have the right to remain silent. . .” HowieCarr
Surely you are not so dense that you actually believe this. The CIC is the ONLY one who can do anything to correct Roe v. Wade since he has the choice of who he will appoint to the SC, and that is the ONLY way there will be any change on abortion.
I'm not a single issue voter. I have several issues, read principles, that a candidate must satisfy to get my vote. Life is ONE of them.
Yes and we all know that Thompson is also a nanny stater.
He supported McCain Fingold which limited free speech.
As BillyBoy pointed out here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1939985/posts
Thompson supported amnesty one year ago.
“We woke up one day and found 12 million illegals here, there’s no easy solution. And I think that you have to realize that you’re either going to drive 12 million people underground permanently, which is not a good solution. You’re going to get them all together and get them out of the country, which is not going to happen. Or you’re going to have to, in some way, work out a deal where they can have some aspirations of citizenship.”
— Fred Thompspn, Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes,” 4/3/06)
Why don’t you post the rest of his statement!
In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law.[12]
Finally, Huckabee argues that the 2003 historically high sales tax hike was mandated by the state Supreme Court and that he refused to sign the final product.[30] This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. The Arkansas Supreme Court did not mandate a tax hike. It simply mandated that the state spend more money on education and distribute that money equitably.[31] Reducing state spending in other areas in order to increase education funding would have been a perfectly acceptable remedy for the court ruling, but it is one that Governor Huckabee did not embrace. Instead of cutting spending, the Legislature opted to raise taxes by historical levels.[32] While Huckabee allowed the bill to become law without his signature, his opposition was not due to any philosophical opposition to tax hikes; rather, he opposed it because the Legislature refused to adopt his school consolidation plan,[33] telling the Associated Press through his spokesperson that "He doesn't want to obstruct the wishes of the Legislature but still believes we should have obtained a more-significant level of reform for this size tax increase."I looked at one of their own sources:
[12]The Gurdon Times, 03/02/04which can be found here: http://www.picayune-times.com/showstory.heitml?show=t&k.number=17390&pubname=picayune&headline=Gov.+Huckabee+allows+opposed+bill+into+law From the article:
Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is allowing a bill he opposes to become law without his signature.Mike opposed the tax increase.
Huckabee wrote the bill doesn't represent "a serious, systematic approach to restructuring public school districts in order to achieve efficiency in the expenditure of taxpayer dollars."
According to Huckabee, the new law will mean the state is again paying for inefficiency and keeping high administrative salaries at the expense of classroom teachers.Mike wanted to make schools more efficient rather than raise taxes.
"If the Legislature doesn't want to responsibly confront the need for an efficient public education system so we can maximize the tax dollars paid by our overtaxed citizens, then I feel you need to explain this to your constituents."Mike thinks that the citizens are not getting a fair deal for their taxes. CFG said
his opposition was not due to any philosophical opposition to tax hikesThis is in direct contradiction to this article which is one of their own sources.
He said he didn't want to be a "mere obstructionist" and will allow this bill to become an unsigned law.It is my understanding that the Governor of Arkansas has very weak veto power and can be overruled by a simple majority. If this is indeed the case, that would be a valid reason IMO for not vetoing the tax increase which already passed the legislature. Mike Huckabee was working with a heavily democratic legislature and doing his best to lower taxes and reform the tax code. Can someone from Arkansas who knows more about this(and isn't a rabid antihuck) confirm any of this?
I keep reading on FR that the Arkansas republican party HATES Mike Huckabee. If this is the case how does donating money to the Republican Party help Huckabee?
The Supreme Court can do and Congress can do it as well — but the President can not.
There is that little separation of powers thing.
AND, please note that I was able to respond to your comment without hurling insults at you.
You may well get your wish for that tiny, little minority party yet, since this election cycle appears to be exposing that big fracture that will drive those Republicans who embarrass you away for good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.