Mike Huckabee

Page 1 of 3 123 Last
  1. Mike Huckabee


    I dont know how many of you here really plan to support him, but if anyone has been listening or reading what he has said it is somewhat disturbing. He has claimed to be part of Christs army, and just yesterday made reference to changing the constitution to be similar to gods values. Oh goodness gracious, please no one vote for him!!!!!


  2. wow, I am surprised that no one has said anything. this guy seems to be a legit (I use that term loosely) candidate.
    •   
       


  3. Well I dont know much about Huckabee nor am I defending him, but the guy in your sig (Biden) was the author of the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004.

  4. Huckabee is a Republican running with Democratic policies. I don't have issue with him running under the flag of an evangelist Christian. The founding fathers build this nation on Christian principles.

    However, what does concern me are these extra "changes" he would make to the constitution to make it "more" Christian. I believe he is pro amnesty, pro open borders, which I can see him making a Biblical correspondence to justify such policies. That does bother me, A LOT.
    NSCA - CSCS

  5. Huckabee is a good and motivating speaker and is playing on identity politics. Thats why he is doing so well. The fact that people cant see past those superficial issues and that he is doing so well while Fred Thompson is doing so poorly really speaks badly about the intelligence level of the average voter. Same goes for Obama. The only thing he is better at than Hillary is spewing political rhetoric and drawing identity votes.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    Huckabee is a good and motivating speaker and is playing on identity politics. Thats why he is doing so well. The fact that people cant see past those superficial issues and that he is doing so well while Fred Thompson is doing so poorly really speaks badly about the intelligence level of the average voter. Same goes for Obama. The only thing he is better at than Hillary is spewing political rhetoric and drawing identity votes.
    I think Huckabee has great morals and ethics, but his policies don't represent the Republican party.
    NSCA - CSCS

  7. Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    Huckabee is a good and motivating speaker and is playing on identity politics. Thats why he is doing so well. The fact that people cant see past those superficial issues and that he is doing so well while Fred Thompson is doing so poorly really speaks badly about the intelligence level of the average voter. Same goes for Obama. The only thing he is better at than Hillary is spewing political rhetoric and drawing identity votes.
    I agree. Charisma and Personality gets you voted these days, not party and policy.
    NSCA - CSCS

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Mass_69 View Post
    Well I dont know much about Huckabee nor am I defending him, but the guy in your sig (Biden) was the author of the Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2004.
    yeah, but almost, if not all, others who had a vote on it were on his side, it was hardly biden only. not defending biden, as I am far from a fan of his, but just pointing that out.

    and i definitely have to agree with what cnorris and volcom say, far too many people vote without knowing anything candidates stand for. i personally am dumbfounded by the number of people my age who like obama just because everyone else they know does, although the college education system definitely plays a role too

  9. regarding huckabee, he is a dangerous candidate. I dont think he will get the nomination but his religious agenda is not what we need at this point. Also, the founding fathers did not create the country on christian principles. in fact they did all they could to keep religion for the most part out of it. which is where it belongs.

    regarding biden, keep in mind something, and it was mentioned before, he was not the only one on the steroid act. Additionally, when looking at experience and foreign policy expertise he was probably the class of the field, but as mentioned before he just didnt have "it" like an obama.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by VolcomX311 View Post
    I agree. Charisma and Personality gets you voted these days, not party and policy.
    I dont disagree, however you shouldnt be voted on just based on party. To me it should be the issues

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I dont disagree, however you shouldnt be voted on just based on party. To me it should be the issues
    Double agree, however, for the most part, policies generally fall under particular principles of either conservatism or liberalism, and the two are usually distinct to a particular party.
    NSCA - CSCS

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    regarding huckabee, he is a dangerous candidate. I dont think he will get the nomination but his religious agenda is not what we need at this point. Also, the founding fathers did not create the country on christian principles. in fact they did all they could to keep religion for the most part out of it. which is where it belongs.

    regarding biden, keep in mind something, and it was mentioned before, he was not the only one on the steroid act. Additionally, when looking at experience and foreign policy expertise he was probably the class of the field, but as mentioned before he just didnt have "it" like an obama.
    Huckabee is not dangerous, he is just using that type of talk to get votes. Its 100% identity politics. Your fears are as absurd as thinking Hillary rallying women around her means that she will lead a fascist anti-man administration and appoint women as the supreme sex in America. He will not use his faith to legislate any more than Romney would. In truth Huckabee is not really that conservative.

    And by the way if you think for one second that judeo-christian philosophy is not what the country was founded upon there really is not debating with you since you have already discredited yourself. The country was founded upon judeo-christian values with respecting religous freedom in every way possible at the same time.

    A Ron Paul supporter calling another cadidate dangerous is very ironic.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    Huckabee is not dangerous, he is just using that type of talk to get votes. Its 100% identity politics. Your fears are as absurd as thinking Hillary rallying women around her means that she will lead a fascist anti-man administration and appoint women as the supreme sex in America. He will not use his faith to legislate any more than Romney would. In truth Huckabee is not really that conservative.
    I was not calling him conservative <I guess reading is not your strong suit> I was saying that the religious agenda he is pursuing will be dangerous if he continues to gather support.

    Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    And by the way if you think for one second that judeo-christian philosophy is not what the country was founded upon there really is not debating with you since you have already discredited yourself. The country was founded upon judeo-christian values with respecting religous freedom in every way possible at the same time.
    I am assuming you are not reading the whole points that have been made. The term used was founding fathers. If you have done any extensive research into the formation of this country, the men who did so did it with the separation of religion from the government. However, the earliest settlers (dating back to Roanoke, and Jamestown) here did in fact use religion as their guide and yes this is a christian country unfortunately. Additionally, please feel free to look further at the topic before you confirm your lack of knowledge on the topic by writing drivel.
    Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    A Ron Paul supporter calling another cadidate dangerous is very ironic.
    Actually Paul is probably the turest conservative of the bunch

  14. I am a conservative, but I will never vote for Huckabee or any person with evangelical ties. I am sorry if this is anyone here, but evangelical views do not sit right with me one bit. Working with a bunch of evangelicals was mind-blowing enough with some of the things they said and claimed, but watching "Jesus Camp" scared the absolute crap out of me.

    The puritanical forefathers also believed in witches and allowed slavery, and killed Indians in the name of God and manifest destiny. They did set our government up to be an evolving process, not one that relies on archaic beliefs that time has passed by.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I was not calling him conservative <I guess reading is not your strong suit> I was saying that the religious agenda he is pursuing will be dangerous if he continues to gather support.

    I addressed the issue of his so called religous agenda. <I guess reading isnt your stong suit.> I agree he has said some nutty stuff but once again, so has Barack about blacks, Hillary about women... its the name of the game when it comes to identity politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I am assuming you are not reading the whole points that have been made. The term used was founding fathers. If you have done any extensive research into the formation of this country, the men who did so did it with the separation of religion from the government. However, the earliest settlers (dating back to Roanoke, and Jamestown) here did in fact use religion as their guide and yes this is a christian country unfortunately. Additionally, please feel free to look further at the topic before you confirm your lack of knowledge on the topic by writing drivel.
    I dont even know where to begin here. I am not saying that this country was founded upon a state sanctioned religion, but the founding fathers were overwhelmingly influenced by judeo-christian philosophy. Our freedoms are god given, each person is equal because we are all created equal. Free will, free speech etc. These are all judeo-christian ideas. They certainly didnt originate in the middle east or dictatorial asian governments. The fouding fathers came from and descended from ancestors that live in nations where the laws, social norms and most ideas were heavily influenced by judeo-christian ideas. Apparently you dont understand the difference between having your views of the world influenced by judeo-christian values and your views formed by relious dogma. Feel free to research and attempt to understand some very simple concepts before you spout such idiocy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    Actually Paul is probably the turest conservative of the bunch
    Ron Paul is a conservative in the most extreme form of the word. He is so conservative that he ignores basically every political precedence set by conservative leadership in order to change with a rapidly globalizing and rapidly evolving world since the time our country was formed. Unfortunately, Ron Paul's brain is living in the 1700's.

  16. I understand your fear, but I really don't see him as being a threat. What do you think he would really do because of his religion that would so horribly change the nation? He used to be a Baptist minister, and seems to have a good understanding of the Bible from what I've seen. I see the Bible as pure and just, and I have a hard time believing that Mike Huckabee of all people would further bring down this countries moral values...if we have any left that is.

    I really don't understand what peoples beef is with Christian values and principles. They are so basic and have such a good reason behind all of them. Example:

    If everyone waited until marriage to have sex and they were only with one partner their whole life, would AIDS exist? No.

    You Democrats really are having a hayday with this whole "Jesus Camp" video, aren't you? I'm a Christian guy, but I'll be the first one to say that those people are complete loons and don't have a clear understanding of the Bible whatsoever.

    As far as this country not being found on Christian principles, I completely disagree. It's simple; the US Government was created on Christian principles, however, people of other religions were free to worship however they wanted.

    I just really don't understand what would be so bad about his religious agenda. He wants to get the country moving in the right direction again. Keep in mind that Huckabee isn't some crazy Pentacostal, tap you on the forehead to get rid of demons, type guy. He's a friggin Baptist. Haha.
  17. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    he says he just wants 2 constitutional amendments. A right to life kind, and a marriage defined as mand + woman. realistically he can WANT to force prayer in schools and 10% tithe to the church and etc. but a constitutional amendment requires a large majority of GOVERNORS to vote for it. First it has to have 2/3 majority in each the house + senate, then a 75% majority of governors. I don't think any president can make crazy religious changes unless the overall sentiment of the country changes enormously

    I hope mccain gets the nomination, he has the best chance to actually beat the democrats in the general election
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum

  18. A completely suppport both of those Amendments.

    He would never want to create an Amendment to force prayer. That would be ridiculous. And I wouldn't support it.

  19. I think this is all hype to get votes. I doubt any candidate would be allowed to make such changes to the American establishment. If he/she (in case Hillary wins) tries then there will probably be an assassination. I just don't want a liberal in office. My dad says they're like the digestive system because they can turn everything into crap LOL.
    Last edited by Iron Warrior; 01-17-2008 at 01:08 AM.

  20. We need someone liberal enough to want to change, and conservative enough to know how to go about it.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by Irish Cannon View Post
    A completely suppport both of those Amendments.

    He would never want to create an Amendment to force prayer. That would be ridiculous. And I wouldn't support it.
    I definatly have a differing opinion on this. There should not be any amendments pertaining to right to life (IMO) but specifically marriage as a man and woman. I never understood peoples issue with this. Why does it matter if two men, or two women truly are married? It is so silly

  22. Quote Originally Posted by Iron Warrior View Post
    I think this is all hype to get votes. I doubt any candidate would be allowed to make such changes to the American establishment. If he/she (in case Hillary wins) tries then there will probably be an assassination. I just don't want a liberal in office. My dad says they're like the digestive system because they can turn everything into crap LOL.
    I guess the current conservative in office has done a wonderful job?

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I dont know how many of you here really plan to support him, but if anyone has been listening or reading what he has said it is somewhat disturbing. He has claimed to be part of Christs army, and just yesterday made reference to changing the constitution to be similar to gods values. Oh goodness gracious, please no one vote for him!!!!!

    Let's see, God's values: Don't steal, don't lie, don't cheat on your spouse, honor your mother and father, don't lust after what others have, don't murder. Hmm, seems like wise, sound counsel. Good foundation for a good man to live by.
    Now, man's values (that are always changing to suit their own needs btw): I probably shouldn't take this cause it's not mine but they won't miss it. It's ok to lie if it'll suits my needs or keeps me out of trouble. My wife doesn't satisfy me so I'll get it elsewhere....Do you see the pattern? We (mankind) are too wishy washy and change our moral compass to suit us. God's values are the gold standard.
    This isn't a pro or con Huckabee thing, it's a common sense, look at the moral failure/decline of our nation thing.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by Ribo68 View Post
    Let's see, God's values: Don't steal, don't lie, don't cheat on your spouse, honor your mother and father, don't lust after what others have, don't murder. Hmm, seems like wise, sound counsel. Good foundation for a good man to live by.
    Now, man's values (that are always changing to suit their own needs btw): I probably shouldn't take this cause it's not mine but they won't miss it. It's ok to lie if it'll suits my needs or keeps me out of trouble. My wife doesn't satisfy me so I'll get it elsewhere....Do you see the pattern? We (mankind) are too wishy washy and change our moral compass to suit us. God's values are the gold standard.
    This isn't a pro or con Huckabee thing, it's a common sense, look at the moral failure/decline of our nation thing.

    so then you are saying we should amend the constitution per what Huckabee said? Thats kinda of odd for the "melting pot". It makes no sense with the variety of religions here, that there should be no reference to religion in our government. It needs to be as limited as possible.

    So in your mind the decline in morals is b/c we dont have a constitution based on "gods" law?

    Referencing a previous point, if we allow the government to make amendments based on religion we are giving too much power to religion and to government, which is not the best idea imho. small government is that way to go.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    so then you are saying we should amend the constitution per what Huckabee said? Thats kinda of odd for the "melting pot". It makes no sense with the variety of religions here, that there should be no reference to religion in our government. It needs to be as limited as possible.

    So in your mind the decline in morals is b/c we dont have a constitution based on "gods" law?

    Referencing a previous point, if we allow the government to make amendments based on religion we are giving too much power to religion and to government, which is not the best idea imho. small government is that way to go.

    I definitely don't think we should make vast amendments to the constitution. I think people should be free to do as they wish, and that includes cheating on your spouse; it's their decision and they will have to take the consequences. I do think that marriage DOES need to be defined, however. As for abortion (partial birth abortion, at least), I find it to be one of the most vile things I can think of. It's like saying, "It's okay. You don't have to take responsibility for your actions. We will just deny the life of this child so you can go on living your life without any hindrances." I've never met a woman that has had a partial birth abortion and was right in the head afterwords. They are all so mentally screwed up from it. Have you ever seen one of these taken place? Try to find a video of it. It will make you so sick to your stomach. You see this thing that is simply a smaller version of a newborn baby contract all its muscles as the doctor scoops out its brain, and then it just goes limp.

    I'm still on the fence about the morning after pill. It's sort of a lesser evil I guess, but still not right.

    And I still don't understand why people get charged for murder of unborn children. Is it or is it not a life? You can't go both ways.

    Back to Huckabee, he may be weak on some issues, but overall I find him to be a good candidate. With that said, I'll be happy with McCain as well.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by Irish Cannon View Post
    I definitely don't think we should make vast amendments to the constitution. I think people should be free to do as they wish, and that includes cheating on your spouse; it's their decision and they will have to take the consequences. I do think that marriage DOES need to be defined, however. As for abortion (partial birth abortion, at least), I find it to be one of the most vile things I can think of. It's like saying, "It's okay. You don't have to take responsibility for your actions. We will just deny the life of this child so you can go on living your life without any hindrances." I've never met a woman that has had a partial birth abortion and was right in the head afterwords. They are all so mentally screwed up from it. Have you ever seen one of these taken place? Try to find a video of it. It will make you so sick to your stomach. You see this thing that is simply a smaller version of a newborn baby contract all its muscles as the doctor scoops out its brain, and then it just goes limp.

    I'm still on the fence about the morning after pill. It's sort of a lesser evil I guess, but still not right.

    And I still don't understand why people get charged for murder of unborn children. Is it or is it not a life? You can't go both ways.

    Back to Huckabee, he may be weak on some issues, but overall I find him to be a good candidate. With that said, I'll be happy with McCain as well.
    to me, I dont disagree about partial birth abortions, however abortion in the first trimester is ok (if that is appropriate). I am not prochoice personally, but the woman should have the option, specifically in the case of rape and incest. What I would like to see is a database set up to avoid women using abortion as a means of birth control.

    In terms of marriage, I dont see why it needs to be given something specific. To me, if two people of the same gender do want to be married and do love each other, they should be entitled to all that marriage brings, both good and bad.

    Back to Huckabee, I will give him this, he is very charasmatic, however typical conservatives are going to start to back away from him and have already started to do so, b/c he truly only appeals to the evangelicals. McCain is too much of a war monger for me, and is inconsistent on his amnesty for illegals issue.

    Ron Paul is ok, but stands no chance. The only fairly moderate Republican with a chance IMO is Romney, but there is a lot wrong with him as well. The bottom line is there is not one great candidate out there, so sad. Hey maybe Bloomberg will run. At least the economy will have a shot

  27. Coming from a Southern Californian point of view, amnesty and open borders are my biggest issues. We're infested with illegals, now I don't mean I'm anti-immigration, just the influx of illegals that tax the $*** out of our society.

    I include this next example not out of any type of racial bigotry, but to make a point (I'm Asian and my roommate is Mexican, he's also my best friend, so it's all good in the hood). My roommate teaches 8th grade at a Jr High. The school has 600 kids, 556 are mexican, 60% of the students are in ESL classes, meaning they don't speak proficient English and did I mention I said I lived in California which last I checked was located in the U.S. I have nothing against immigration, my family is slowly coming across the Pacific, but they're paying the procedure fee's and waiting out the due process. My 45 yr old aunt who's been a teacher for 20yrs, is enrolled at a J.C. to learn English, because she realizes now that she's in American, she better assimilate to the language.

    I won't even get into what kind of devastation it would be if illegals were issued driver's licenses, as Hilary tends to sway back & forth on. Southern California traffic is a joke as is.

    Plus out here in Southern California we've had TWO Mexican Pride rallies in Los Angeles where people brought out their Mexican Flags, green, red white shirts, denouncing America and burning U.S. flags, it really makes you scratch your head and say WTF sometimes.

    Our F'n major Villareygosa makes maybe half of his speeches in SPANISH!!!! WTF!!!! Again, I'm not racist or anything, my best friend is Mexican, but our situation out here has gotten waaaay out of hand.

    All the pro amnesty politicians need to get sniped.
    NSCA - CSCS

  28. I agree on the immigration issue. I am originally from Long Island which is struggling in an immense way with this very issue. There are towns now that are almost all predominantly called "centros". It has gotten out of control. The expense and crime rates are through the roof. Keep in mind I am also the son of an immigrant

  29. If Ron Paul had more of a spine I'd be all for the guy. His stance on the war really screwed him over for the nomination.

  30. In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with being part of “Christ’s army.” That’s really just Christianity 101. What really matters to me is how Huckabee (or any candidate) performed in the past. It is starting to sound to me like he and Ron Paul may a little to left of center for me.

    But in regard to all this fear of religion, the first thing the Founding Fathers did when they met was to pray for God’s guidance. The first line of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”. Despite what the critics say, we’ve establish the most successful system ever. Our FF knew they could not produce such a successful model without Divine Providence.

    Without a God centered system then truth becomes relative. Whatever is in fashion becomes the truth. Eventually, things fall apart and we can either realize we went wrong, or blame some one else and find an equally erroneous fix. Since our rights are endowed by their Creator when we take God out of the equation they are no longer unalienable. The idea of separation of church and state does not appear in the constitution. That idea appeared in the late 19th century, but that is another long story. What the FF did not want is a “Church of America” (like a Church of England), although, a “Church of Rhode Island” would have been permitted as a state’s right.

    Like it or not, God is intimately involved in our existence, to deny that would be unnatural and irrational. To build a system on the irrational would be dangerous. Personally, I think much of the extremes are media hype, but regardless, we have a system with a lot of checks as balances. All and all, we pretty much get the leaders we deserve. Lately, we are, as a whole, into pandering, more on the left IMO, than on the right. We elect leaders that promise us more than is practical (or even constitutional) and then wonder why the nanny wants to poke its nose where we don’t want it to.

    Lastly, I liked IC's example. Promiscuity was supposed to be fun and liberating. Instead we got an epidemic in: sexual diseases, illegitimate births, abortion, broken homes, and children who have no idea of who their father is. From broken homes we have poverty, crime, and failing test scores. Now we want the government to come and clean up the mess.


    DB
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Mike Mentzer
    By Panther06 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-15-2004, 02:49 PM
  2. Mike "Mule" Miller Benches 730lbs at Bench America
    By YellowJacket in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-07-2003, 05:49 PM
  3. Kansas City's Running Back Mike Cloud Busted
    By YellowJacket in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-08-2003, 10:55 PM
Log in
Log in