Huckabee hates America

Mike Huckabee speaking last night:

The speech is filled with risible drivel like this. He also passed out anti-Mormon hate literature before the speech (which was given in Salt Lake City!).

He’s basically admitting that he wants to replace secular government with Jesus, is he not? If that’s not what he means, then what does he mean? Why so much overt hostility towards the American state? Why does he hate the Constitution.

People actually take this scumbag seriously as a candidate? Why? This is a guy who campaigned to free a rapist (who committed another rape and murder once he got out) simply because the rapist’s victim was a distant relative of Bill Clinton’s. He’s openly theocratic in his speeches. He thinks there were dinosaurs on the Ark.

This guy is even more dangerous and vicious than Bush, and possibly just as stupid (a high hurdle, I know). Does anyone want to defend this guy or explain why he gets a pass on his nutjobbery from the media. Howard Dean had one awkward “woo hoo” at a rally and the media played it over and over again and attacked him as some kind of unstable psychotic, yet no amount of anti-American, barking-at-the-moon, religious lunacy from Republicans ever gets a word of criticism.

Does anyone want to defend this idiot, Huckabee or explain why he gets any mainstream popular support at all. Has the conservative base really strayed that far from American principles?

Does your cite back up that statement? I find it hard to believe that he, personally, did that.

I kind of agree with the overall assessment, though. He comes across as very sincere, and very likeable, but if you listen to what he’s actually saying it’s pretty scary. Is he trying to be Commander-In-Chief or Preacher-In-Chief? And calling himself the “Christian Candidate” is down right unAmerican. The implication, of course, is that the other candidates aren’t “Christian”.

As he rises in the polls, let’s hope he gets more media attention shining some light on the ugly side of this message.

Fuck you.

What do you think I’m saying that’s hostile to you? My issues are not with Huckabee’s religious beliefs but with his overtly stated desire to institutionalize them as state policy.

If a politician said he got into politics because he wanted to wipe out Chrsitianity, how would you feel?

Why don’t you actually read what I quoted from Huckabee before jerking your knee.

From the article:

He stated no such desire. What pisses me off is the double standard demanded by some atheists. You can “fundie” this and “sky pixie” that, ridiculing every aspect of a person’s faith. But as soon as someone steps up and says that Christ is the solution to the world’s problems, you roar about your perceived oppression and the institutionalization of religion. Huckabee didn’t say he was going to require people to go to church in the manner that Hillary said she was going to take people’s property from them, and you don’t have one damn complaint about her. And when I did complain about a militant atheist who was using his daughter to carry out his personal agenda, where the hell were you with your support for my position? So, fuck it. I’ve been willing to go to bat for you people in real life, explaining how you’re moral and good and decent and all that. But then you have to fucking scream every time somebody mentions Jesus. And in your case, not only that, but you have to pull up “scholars” (meaning people who agree with you) to show how the Jesus they worship isn’t even real. So yes. Fuck you. I’ve had enough of it.

And while we’re at it — Huffington as a cite? You want Coulter as a counter-cite?

Given out at the convention. He was an attendee, not an organizer of the convention. Huckabee may have been behind the effort to hand out that material, but the article doesn’t give any evidence to support that claim.

I’m afraid Diogenes is quite wrong.

He left out in his OP that Huckabee was speaking to a group of pastors (of which, of course, he is one). It fell to us to discover that by heading to the link.

Now, it hardly needs to be said that politicians tailor their speeches to their audience. Proof of that is in this speech by President Clinton to a group of black preachers in 1993:

Now, I won’t go so far as to call the speeches interchangeable. They aren’t. But clearly they spring from a similar place in the American political tradition, and given the makeup of the audience, not out of place at all.

Catch Huckabee at any forum, and clearly he is quite modest and realistic both about what he intends to do with his faith and what he expects from believers. And while I don’t intend to vote for him in the primaries, the caricature being drawn of him is laughable at times.

Lib? You okay? The terse rejoinder does suggest it might be time for a week or two off now. Office being a pain?

I will admit that kind of speech scares me. I am a good citizen - I have a job and pay taxes, I own a house a pay propery taxes on it and have an interest in another property I pay taxes on. I don’t have a criminal record. I show up for jury duty as requested.

I am not a Christian. Worse, in the eyes of many Christians, I am a Pagan.

I am not criticizing Huckabee’s beliefs. I do, however, question his understanding of “separation of Church and State”.

What did he mean by saying he got into politics because the government had no answers and that “accepting Jesus” was the answer? If that’s not theocratic, what is it?

No I don’t. I only have a problem with it when they want to insert it into politics.

What did he mean by saying that the country’s problems can only be addressed by Jesus and not by the government? If that’s the case, then why is he running for President?

I don’t know what this refers to (taxes? guns?) but the Constutution does not forbid the government from collecting taxes or regulating guns, so why would I have a problem with that?

He was right. You were wrong. he was defending himself and his daughter and YOU against government theocracy. You should be grateful.

This is a lie in my case.

Here you go with your puling about Biblical scholarship again. It isn’t just “people I agree with.” It doesn’t work that way. There’s mainstream scholarship (and I seldom stray from the mainstream) and there’s non-scholarly (i.e… non-credentialed, non-peer-reviewed) apologia. You want me to accept the latter as equivalent to the former. That’s ridiculous.

Huffington posted the documents. Do you think they fabricated them?

His audience is irrelevant. It’s no less stupid to express an insane theocratic agenda to Baptist Pastors than to Rotarians.

I can’t see any comparison at all. Clinton did not disparage the ideal of a secular state in that speech, or express any unconstitutional opinions as Huckabee did.

Why did he say that he got into politics because Jesus has answers and the government doesn’t? What does Jesus have to do with running for office? If the government has no answers than why does he want to be part of it?

What Huckabee needs to realize is that there are some problems that are best left to Jesus and some problems that are best left to the government. The government isn’t go to get me into heaven and Jesus isn’t going to deliver my mail.

This sounds obvious. But if you’re picking a Postmaster General you look for who’s best at delivering the mail not who’s the best Christian. And if you’re picking a President you look for who’s best at running the government not who’s the best Christian. Huckabee’s not running for the office of Pastor-in-Chief.

I have no problem with him talking about religion as it relates to his own personal development. But if Jesus is the answer, what of those who don’t accept Jesus? And what of those who accept him, but in different way than Huckabee does. When he calls himself “the Christian Candidate”, he steps over the line, in my book. As Krauthammer pointed out in an editorial last week, wouldn’t there be outrage in the US if he were, for example, running against someone who is Jewish?

I don’t think he wants to establish a theocracy, but he’s dragging way too much religion into his candidacy. Not just with lots of references to God (or Jesus), but his seemingly exclusive reliance on Christ as the source of the answers.

But that’s exactly what he did say. Dio even quoted him and re-iterated it. Government ~(answers) :: Jesus (answers). How much more split apart could they possibly be?

All Huckabee did was tell a bunch of fellow Christian pastors how much he loves Jesus. Given that Dio pitted this, why don’t you ask him if his office is being a pain?

I’m sure this was an honest mistake, but why did you say Huckabee spoke last night and link an article nearly ten years old, Diogenes?

No, he said he got into politics BECAUSE only Jesus could solve problems, not the government. There is no way to parse that except to conclude that he wants to replace the secular state with Jesus. If you disagree, please tell me what he DID mean. If the government has no ansers, then why does he want to be part of it and what does Jesus have to do with. How dooes it make sense to say you want to be part of a secular governement because you think your religion has the answers.

From the linked article in the OP:

Lots of references in there as well to Jonesboro. Real timely.

I live in CA, but I usually start off my morning by reading an article written in the 1990s in an Arkansas newspaper. Don’t you? :slight_smile: