I H8 Huckabee

Just in case any of you were still on the fence…
Just in case some of you didn’t get the memo…
Just in case you weren’t aware that Mike Huckabee is a Christofascist…
We have this video from MSNBC. It shows Mike Huckabee at a campaign stop on January 14:


(YouTube page is here.)

That’s right. He said we have to amend the U.S. Constitution to bring it into line with “God’s standards”. By the way, that “contemporary view” that he discards so dismissively is the view that has been enshrined in the Constitution for over 200 years. He wants to discard the very values upon which this country was built, in favor of his version of Sharia Biblical law.

The Carpetbagger Report has a good commentary on this video. Here’s an excerpt:

Huckabee whined at a recent debate that he, a former Baptist minister, gets more questions about religion than any of the other Republican presidential candidates. As he sees it, that’s unfair.

But Huckabee is, in more ways than one, terribly confused.

When we have an evangelical candidate publicly arguing that we should change the U.S. Constitution to bring it in line with his views of “God’s standards” — and then he criticizes his GOP rivals for disagreeing — we’re looking at a candidate who probably isn’t receiving enough questions about religion.

I don’t care how charming Huckabee is. It’s irrelevant whether he can be funny on The Colbert Report. Anyone who believes the U.S. Constitution is flawed because it insufficiently meets “God’s standards” is almost certainly living in the wrong country.

Huckabee is also making immigration one of his campaign issues. I think he does need to focus on immigration, but not on Mexico. Huckabee needs to look at Iran. Maybe they’ll let him immigrate.

15 Responses to “I H8 Huckabee”

  1. WCG Says:

    What’s really scary is that Americans tend to vote for candidates they like (or against candidates they really dislike), despite the fact that they disagree on the positions. That’s how Bush was elected, after all. People just LIKED him (for some unknown reason). All the polls showed that the majority didn’t agree with him on the issues, but they voted for him anyway.

    Now Huckabee is a great campaigner and comes across as a nice guy. Furthermore, he’s a minister, which means, to most Americans, that he’s a nice guy by definition. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is really, really HATED by a lot of people. I don’t understand it, myself, but she’s been ‘Swift-boated’ for two decades. Her high negatives are an undeniable fact.

    I’d worry that Clinton would lose the general election anyway, given the intense feelings about her. The religious right would turn out in droves, no matter which Republican candidate won the nomination, just to vote against her. And it’s not just the far right, either. Against Huckabee, in particular, she’d have a huge disadvantage. There’d be a lot of people voting for Huckabee, despite his positions, because they ‘liked’ him. And there’d be a lot more people simply voting AGAINST Hillary Clinton.

    This is very, very scary. I’ll admit that I support Barack Obama, so I’m probably biased. But the fact is, people really LIKE him. There’s almost no difference between Clinton, Obama, and Edwards on the issues, but Obama is likable. He’s got the best chance, by far, of attracting Independents and dissatisfied Republican voters. He’ll have a hard time winning the primary, because primary voters are very partisan and intensely political. But he’ll blow away any Republican in the general election. And right now, that sounds very good to me!

  2. Arkonbey Says:

    Luckily, the system of checks and balances, coupled with the marvelous invention, Gridlock, will slow the process of amending the constitution to a standstill. A Republican congress and president couldn’t get a gay marriage ban passed, so a religious fundamentalist would have trouble passing such sweeping changes.

    That being said, he’s a wacko. Personable, but a wacko.

  3. Parrotlover77 Says:

    Well, although I agree that Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are all VERY preferable over basically anything on the right these days, I disagree that there is not much difference between the Democratic frontrunners. Clinton is, by far, the most corporatist of the bunch, Obama is the most green (how long did he support liquid coal until he found out he was duped by special interests?), and Edwards is the most “bleeding heart” (taking up the poverty cause big time). I agree about Clinton’s electibility issue. Polls support the data that she’s the least electible. For that single reason, I hope she doesn’t get the nomination. It’s really quite sad. Very, very sad. However, I have hope that the proliferation of the blogosphere and other internet technologies will create a more connected, informed, and less apathetic electorate in the years to come. We have to have hope!

  4. Parrotlover77 Says:

    lol… I meant “green” as in new / freshman, not as in eco-friendly. I guess unless you realize which definition of “green” I was using, my post was confusing. 🙂

  5. Brian Says:

    I believe it was George Carlin who once said, “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” What better warning than that could we be given for this upcoming election? It is a maxim that has already proven itself in 2000 and 2004.

    Huckabee. Sigh. Yeah, he’s a scary bastard, despite his aw-shucks nice guy demeanor. It shows how far from the ideals of the framers we have drifted when a presidential candidate can give such an undemocratic speech and still be a viable contender. On the one hand, as stupid and as politically powerful as the Christian right has been, I still don’t see him getting the nomination. Yes, he could win, but I don’t think he will. The Republican party is now paying the price for sucking up to these people for the last few decades, and watching it tear itself apart is at least entertaining.

    On the other hand, if he did win, and was somehow able to enact even some of his bigoted, hateful, bronze-age ideas, things would undoubtedly get very bad in America, but only for a while. OK, maybe not in any of our lifetimes, but one day the fire of religious zeal must burn itself out, and when it does, the survivors will wonder what kind of fucking morons we had to be to let it happen at all. Europe is the most secular place on earth, but it was forged in the fires of religious totalitarianism. They aren’t eager to go back to the dark ages, but we, or at least some of us, apparantly are.

  6. Jalestra Says:

    It shows how far from the ideals of the framers we have drifted when a presidential candidate can give such an undemocratic speech and still be a viable contender.–Brian

    Well said, I’ve been trying to say that for days, but you put it much better.

    Quite frankly, I don’t hold out any hopes about the lessening of people’s stupidity. The ONLY support I’ve really heard in favor of Hilary Clinton has been “Well she’s a woman and we have to stand up for our gender”. Unfortunately, it’s also the only GOOD thing I’ve found about her in my investigations. The democrats seem uniformly for national healthcare, but apparently no one is watching the recent behavior in England with the NHS. Do we really think our current and possible future politicians are any less sleazy than England’s? I really think our least dangerous candidates are Ron Paul and John McCain…and I really just feel McCAin is the best of a bad lot, not really any better than the rest, just less likely to acclomplish anything, good or bad. I like ontheissues.org….a voting record is very informative.

  7. Ron Britton Says:

    I like to think that Huckabee is too whacked out to have any real chance, but I fear George Carlin is right. We should all be very worried.

  8. Troy Says:

    I’m glad I saw this, not that I would vote for Huckabee (or anyone else endorsed by Chuck Norris) but he keeps his religion so low key I wasn’t sure to what degree he is a Christian fascist. Let me point out Hillary is a bit of a religious nut going to the John Ashcroft prayer breakfasts, and incidentally she did vote for the flag burning amendment which essentially is a repeal of the 1st amendment.

  9. Brian Says:

    As far a Clinton is concerned, has there ever been a more calculating, triangulating candidate for president than her? While I do not question whether she has genuine religious beliefs, these occasional forays into traditional Republican territory smell like pandering to me. In Clinton’s defense, however, a few months back she did make a very encouraging statement about being far more supportive of science and science education as president.

    Obama claims to be a Christian, but has thus far made hardly any mention of it that I have heard of. The same could also be said of John Edwards. Both candidates deserve a lot of credit for that, in my estimation. Interestingly, as an apparant sign of just how frightened someone is of Obama, I keep receiving an e-mail of dubious factual accuracy which raises the alarm that Obama is a Muslim (he’s not) and that he chose to be sworn into Congress on the Koran (no, that was House Representative Keith Ellison). Most of the people forwarding this thing on to me are Republicans, which is very telling.

    Speaking of the Republicans, we’ve already dissected Huckabee here. Giuliani is someone I ought to be willing to support because of his rational stances on social issues, but I think the guy is nothing more than a thug. While we’d be safe from a theocracy under a President Giuliani, I have a feeling we’d be too distracted by our new wars to be appreciative of that fact.

    Romney has the wackiest beliefs of all, but for as much attention as his speech on religion garned a few weeks ago (when he said only people of faith ought to have greater rights than those of us without any faith), it had the feel of a political tactic, not a core conviction, and frankly he doesn’t scare me too much, apart from the fact that he’s a complete moron, much like the president he’s trying to succeed.

    McCain is pretty theocracy-proof, and any mention he makes of religion is almost certainly tailored for his audience at the moment. He now claims to be a Southern Baptist, but for all of his life he was (if I remember correctly) a presbyterian. He does have the laudable history of calling Jerry Falwell an agent of intolerance, but that is unfortunately countered by his commencement speech given at Falwell’s “university” a few years later. I suppose if I had to pick one Republican to hold my nose for, it would be McCain.

    If polls are correct, there ought to be something like 30 million voters who reject religion. I find it hard to believe that if all of us could be motivated to vote it wouldn’t make a difference in the election. Huckabee is just the sort of candidate that might just make that happen, if the stupid people decide to wield their power.

  10. WCG Says:

    Er,… you’re right that McCain is sucking up to the religious right (‘tailored for his audience’ is your more-refined phrase), but you haven’t looked at what that really means. McCain is not popular among the religious right. So what’s he going to do if he gets the nomination? Almost certainly, he’ll pick a young Christian evangelical as VP. You can’t win the presidency if you don’t have your OWN party solidly behind you, and Republicans will be scared their far-right fringe will just stay home. A young Christian evangelical VP will be well-prepared to run for president later, so that will get the backing McCain absolutely has to have. And the Christian right won’t overlook the fact that McCain is an old man, either. Who knows what the pressures of office might accomplish, what health problems might develop? THIS is why McCain is just as scary as the rest of the Republicans.

  11. ParrotLover77 Says:

    You can’t be in the race and not be a Christian. It’s sad, but true. This isn’t necessarily a result of massive religious zealotry but more to do with how atheists and agnostics have been painted by christianity over the decades. What is worse than a sinner? A sinner that doesn’t repent. By definition, everybody is a sinner. By definition, an atheist will not repent. Ergo, they are more dangerous than murderers. This is the fundie thinking.

    Now, it is true you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time… But I have faith in humanity. If you put people on equal playing field with GOOD information, they make the right decision most of the time. The problem is that our media is more obsessed with Britney Spears and how politicians pray than with real substantive issues. This is not the fault of the electorate, but the fault of just a few major corporations steering the debate.

    When you are, like me, earning a great wage, but STILL just scraping by, it is VERY hard to keep up on the issues. Luckily a few years back I decided to spend more time reading and I discovered political blogs to augment my daily dose of cnn.com and I learned I was missing out on a LOT of information.

    I think this will happen again in the future.

    Try as the beltwayers might, you can’t stop the blogs. The blogs are the modern day revoluationary pamphlets usurping the disinformation from the state-sponsored newspaper. When people have the information, they make the right decision! The trick is getting them the information.

    I disagree with Brian about McCain. McCain is 8 years from his “straight talk express” days (which I didn’t even buy back then). He may not be as fundie as Bush, but I highly doubt we’ll get non-fundie supreme court nominees from that joker. At least Hillary would appoint a moderate to moderate-liberal on the courts. Not to mention his stance on pre-emptive military strikes! He may not come off as much fundie, but all he wants to do is bomb the opposing equally crazy religions in the world. That brings us closer to a mad max apocolypse than the Cuban Missle Crisis. The “Christians vs Muslims” wars are going to destroy the world. It’s worse than Democracy vs Totalitarian Communism because neither side seems to be afraid to engage in “hot” wars or attacks!

  12. Brian Says:

    Perhaps I ought to clarify my thoughts on McCain. I have no realistic intention to vote for him. I think whatever he had to offer the country is now a thing of the past. I can never forget the shameless way he embraced the worst president of all time and continues to think the Iraq war is a wonderful idea. I was only attempting to say that of all the fools running for the GOP nomination, he’s the least odious, in my opinion. For the record, I’m pulling for Obama. If Huckabee wins I’m packing for Sweden.

  13. ParrotLover77 Says:

    Brian – Thanks for the clarification. You think Sweden will take us as political asylum refugees if that happens?

  14. Brian Says:

    They’re taking plenty of Iraqis. Why not a few rational Americans as well?

  15. WCG Says:

    Sweden? Not me. I’m not going anywhere. Why make it easy for the fundies? If they want to get rid of me, they’ll have to burn me at the stake!