Posted on 12/26/2007 11:31:44 PM PST by FocusNexus
But as Huckabee now mounts his closing argument for the Iowa caucuses, he has moved full bore into the rhetoric of economic populism. "I am out to change the Republican Party. It needs changing. It needs to be inclusive of all those people across America for whom this party should stand," he said Sunday, on CBS's Face The Nation. On the trail, he speaks regularly of challenging the "Washington to Wall Street power axis."
At some of these events, if you close your eyes, you would think a Democrat was speaking — Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton turned southern Baptist.
The GOP does not need "changing." It needs reminding and it needs energy in its new leader. It needs to recommit to its traditional stand against excessive spending and the growth of government. It needs to affirm its belief in victory in the war and to the nomination and confirmation of originalist judges. It needs to endorse extension of President Bush's tax cuts and elimination of the death tax. It needs to argue for the rights of the unborn and the protection of those least able to protect themselves.
What the GOP definitely does not need is neopopulism, class warfare, and identity politics of the sort Mike Huckabee has been selling the last four weeks. Huckabee's lunge left may not have been premeditated, but it clearly displayed a candidate with no anchor in the GOP's tradition of fiscal restraint, free trade and low taxes and a very limited understanding of the world's most dangerous forces.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Thanks for the reminder.
Amen. Amazing more people haven't figured this out.
Rollins also worked for Ross Perot and Christie Todd Whitman before working for the Huckster.
We have friends who are Baptist and are voting for him just becasue he’s Baptist. I asked them “have you looked at his position on the issues”? silence
Then I tried to point out the hypocracy of their stance on Mormons who would vote for Romeny for the same reason. continued silence
They’re still supporting Huck because he’s one of them.
If I had to base my vote on someone who shares my religion, I’d be out of luck, not a single Episcopalian is running.
Before someone says McCain, he has left the Episcopal church and attends a Baptist church although he has not been baptized there, according to an interview he did with Beliefnet.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/220/story_22001_1.html
I knew about Perot—damn, ever since he worked on Reagan’s 1984 campaign he’s been working for every RINO/GOP subverter he can pander to, hasn’t he?
It appears afte I looked further that there’s some controversy over McCain’s Baptist comments.
Is Thompson attacking him at all? They say that Huckabees’ rise has been at Thompson’s expense. If he doesn’t go on the attack then he’s probably not smart enough to be Pres. anyways.
touche'
She see's things just fine. We elect one 'tree', not the forest. Duncan Hunter is her choice, and the only one in the race sound on all the issues.
Geez, the point here in primary season is to pick one tree out of the forest.
He is the leading water carrier for the GOP (not to be confused with conservativism.)
Huckabee has surged because he won a couple of debates and he’s got evangelical support. If a quick rise can happen to the liberal pro-life evangelical Huckster, it can happen to the conservative pro-life evangelical Hunter.
.
.
.
.
According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
In this poll Hunter is up 3% and even with Paul and Thompson.
http://www.wxyz.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=3481ef60-8195-46a9-af04-b87b907bcfdd
Don't know if the Huckster is a socialist, but you certainly sound like one.
As socialist as Theodore Roosevelt.
No, as socialist as Chavez.
I've been thinking about that myself lately. Look at what happened with Dean/Lurch in '04.
The difference in this case, is if Hunter ever got that bump to the top, he has the credentials to stay there, and shred Hobombary in the main.
So would Fred, IMO, but I think Hunter might be a stronger president overall.
That’s why I support Hunter. I would vote for Thompson, but Hunter would be a “hands down” better president.
.
.
.
.
According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts
Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts
In this poll Hunter is up 3% and even with Paul and Thompson.
http://www.wxyz.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=3481ef60-8195-46a9-af04-b87b907bcfdd
I want you to think about something.....
The alphabets being the only game in town for television. No Internet. The MSM being the only newspaper publishers. Now, the Repubs put this base of candidates up. Who would the MSM be backing in then Republican primary? At least we can get the truth out there now. It’s harder, but we can.
Paul
“No, Mr. Hewitt.
America (and the GOP) really do need to stop pandering to multi-national and globalizt economic manipulators.
We are not a “capitalist” nation, per se. We are a free nation. Domination of Americans by those who use economic power in order to create artificially manipulated economies slanted in their favor is akin to fascism — and when that is supportted by government, it actually is the economic definition of fascism.
Our “originalist” America is a healthily nationalist nation, where government governs taxing and tariffs, and trade, to assure that it is in America’s interest.
Wholistic benefits of globalism are a lie. Just look at the economic bring-down we’ve been suffering for transplanting manufacturing to other nations and to flooding America with illegal aliens.
Or, do you just call that “employee productivity” along with the crooks?”
The economy is booming.
“Neither do Mexico’s illegals”
How do you feel about illegal aliens paying in-state tuition?
“I think you’re jumping on the bandwagon of irrationally distoring Huckabee’s positions, however, which is a shame.”
I agree with you that it is a shame to distort the Huck’s positions.
Many of his undistorted positions are repulsive to Americans.
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.