A woman Congressperson suggested on NPR that lawyers are win or lose in court and operate like that in politics. (Poly, Latin, “many” tics, "blood sucking.) They dislike compromise, which is sometimes the best solution.
Gosh, I was sooo wrong! Turns out, that whole diabetes thing was just about healthy eating!
I am so ashamed! I go now to the river, to perform the ancient Tasmanian ritual of self-abasement, accompanied by chorus of bitter virgins, intoning dirges of woe and humiliation!
Nobody who uses the word “misnomer” in place of the word “misconception” deserves to be allowed to speak in public, let alone lead the country (or even deliver moral instruction).
I don’t think that Huckabee is likely to be the nominee, but how about the running mate? He seems to me like he’d be much more appealing as a vice-presidential candidate than as presidential, and would probably draw people to the ticket.
Then again, I thought that in 2012, and he was completely ignored then, too.
Will tore him one, that’s for sure.
Legislators make laws. It makes perfect sense that some if not most of them should be lawyers, who know what the law is and how laws work. Many of our FFs were lawyers. OTOH, there is no good reason whatsoever why any of our elected officials should be clergy – their clerical status of course does not disqualify them, but neither is it any kind of qualifying point, and being a lawyer is one.
Well, unless they’re Republicans.
I deal with lawyers all day, 5 days a week. I don’t like many of them, perhaps most. But I very rarely run across one that has a “problem” with adherence to the law. In fact, I don’t even know what you mean by this accusation.
Possible but I doubt it. Part of the job is being the administration’s attack dog. I don’t see him as being suited to that.
He’s much better suited to hosting a preaching show on cable and peddling quack medicine. And promoting those things via himself, his true career, is all his campaign is about.
But, wait!
There’s more!
Apparently, showing your support for a child molester is not a good political strategy.
http://www.alternet.org/culture/mike-huckabees-facebook-fans-tear-him-shreds-defending-josh-duggar
He’s an actual Christian. That’s too much even for most people who think they are Christian.
If you mean hate-filled and bigoted, I’ll agree.
Look at this. Huckabee says that sexual predators are more dangerous than drug addicts.
Unless, of course, they’re Christians who cover up the crime.
Is someone out there suggesting criminal charges for any member of the Duggar family? And going to the police isn’t exactly a coverup. Besides, this is Arkansas we’re talking about, where governors and sexual predation with the help of state troopers is considered normal.
You’ll need a mighty big crayon to connect those two dots.
The criticism of Huck here is that he’s standing by the family of a man who molested underage girls as a boy. It does not appear that the family swept it under the rug. Even accounting for their wealth and influence, there was no way a 14 year old was going to prison for these offenses. They dealt with the problem and he realizes that his behavior was inexcusable.
If Huckabee didn’t stand by them, he wouldn’t be much of a Christian. The sinner has repented.
Right, Murdoch and the brother Koch are just hanging out on the sidelines, not controlling a thing.
The GOP has done a good job of putting up Potemkin clubs of middle class voters, but the GOP is no more “controlled” by middle class voters than they are by the poor and indigent.
(Certainly, with the Republican shift to anti-science, anti-intellectual positions, they are catering to the rubes more, but that began with Reagan.)