Huckabee has released an immigration plan. Based on his previous dealings with illegal immigrants, I half expected it to be “enthusiastically hump their legs.” His plan looks good, but its hard to trust him on the issue when he’s still defending free tuition for illegal immigrants. That’s someone who just doesn’t understand the issue at its core (like Giuliani and guns).
There’s a lot of talk about a Giuliani/Huckabee ticket. Do you think that would mean the best of two conservatives or the worst of two liberals?
What would it mean? APOCALYPSE!!
Also…
Amo Huckabees.
Perhaps Huckabee simply realized how freaking tone deaf he’s been on this issue and decided to find out what the people actually want. I like Huckabee, but his downright liberalness on this issue has been a weakness to his entire campaign. If he really has changed his mind on the issue, I can see him skyrocketing in the polls.
I want to trust him, but politicians are notorious liars. Hmmm…
Just a thought on that- The Bible requires adherents to obey the legal authorities, and requires the legal authorities to be just, but also to follow the law. While I can follow his argument about immigration being a federal issue, he did not have to contribute to the problem. Personally I liked IMAO’s immigration reform plan better!
The best of two or the worst of two? I suppose that depends on who is at the head, and who is giving us the shaft. If Giuliani played second fiddle to Huck, that might work but I don’t see it happening merrily the other way around. For all the “Huckabee isn’t a real conservative” banter around, he looks pretty far to the right of Giuliani on most issues, and seems a might bit more honest and straightforward than his philandering and gun-grabbing counterpart. Plus, he used to be really fat and it’s about time we had another Taft-esque fatty in the OO.
So we have a pro-abortion, anti-gun, egomaniacal dictator running with the ultimate nanny-stater who thinks that a “national smoking ban” by the Federal Government is a good idea while we adopt the children of anyone that can lie, steal, murder, rape or pillage their way into our country? Yup…I’m thrilled! I liked the line about the Huckster humping their leg! LOL!
I think it would be a positive and a negative and cancel each other out, which would leave us with zero. Seems to be trend…
But it does remind me that the VP choice is worth paying attention to since they’re the tie breaker in the senate.
Steadyrock, I just couldn’t see G-man playing second fiddle to anyone. I have the feeling he’d find it beneath him, especially to Huck.
RL, Rudy often finds things “beneath him” (Regina? Donna? Judith?) but that aside, I think you’re right that he wouldn’t be too interested in vicing up anybody else’s administration. I was just making the point that if Huck were the one calling the shots behind the rosewood desk, that combination might have a chance to work but if the roles were reversed, I think it’s a fast track to Dempublicanism.
Huckabee is a bad, bad man. I hear he worships satan and sacrifices babies. I hope Giuliani tire irons him.
Seriously though, Hucakbee is a no go in my book. I’d probably vote for him over a democrat.. but he is the only possible republican candidate who could force me to vote 3rd party. I find him overly religious, to willing to grant clemency, and weak on illegal immigration, and I question his integrity.
“Do you think that would mean the best of two conservatives or the worst of two liberals?”
Wouldn’t the two best conservatives be a Fred/F. Thompson ticket? Wouldn’t the worst liberal ticket be Paul/Huckabee?
Huckabee/Giuliani or Giuliani/Huckabee?
Maybe its time to start hoping Hillary actually does win the democrat nomination.
Interesting idea, AR. Does anybody know if there is a law on the books currently that would prevent a husband and wife from being President and VP together? I think Jeri would make a great veep. Of course, that leaves open the possibility of a HillBillary ticket as well but since that would certainly be the coming of the Pale Horse of the Apocalypse, I don’t think it’s going to happen just yet.
#11 – Posted by: steadyrock on December 6, 2007 02:26 PM
If you’ve been president for 2 terms you can’t be VP, since the role of the VP is to take over the presidency if something happens to the President and you can’t be president for more than 2 and a half terms.
Also, I’m 99% certain their is no law forbidding a Husband/Wife ticket.
What’s scarier – a thrice-married mayor from that Jooo hell-hole Jooo York, or a guy who thinks the world was created in six days and is only about 5,000 years old but hey, who loves the poor and wants to help them with a 27% spike in the cost of living?
Honestly, will you all please do a little homework on New York under Giuliani? He’s gonna be the nominee, so you better wrap your heads around it. And I’m here to tell ya, you could do a hell of a lot worse. The guy GETS THINGS DONE! And he gets them done against all odds. None of these hayseeds HAS A CHANCE against Hillary.
The problem with most of you is you think it’s US vs. THEM. But it’s not just THEM – it’s the THIRD of the electorate that don’t know what they think and like to call themselves Independents. Romney, Thompson, Huckleberry – none of them will bring in the Independents. Rudy can – and will. Couple that with a Republican base that will RISE FROM THE DEAD to vote against Hillary or Yomama, and you’ve got a recipe for a chance – A CHANCE – at winning The White House.
Look at the fundraising numbers – the Dems are beating the GOP 2 to 1. Republican senators are packing up and going home in alarming numbers. The party is, quite frankly, on the ropes. This is NOT the year to nominate some southern-drawlin’, Bible-thumpin’, holy-rollin’ hick. If Bill Clinton has taught us anything, it’s that most people don’t give two shits about character (they’re POLITICIANS, fer cryin’ out loud) – they’re more interested in COMPETENCE. And in that department, RUDY IS THE MAN!
#13 – Posted by: bunkerboy on December 6, 2007 03:32 PM
Rudy equivalent to a PaulBot? What should we call him? A Rudy Rebel? A Rude Robot? Rudy’s Rambunctious Rambler? I don’t know, but some kind of alliteration for sure.
Don’t get me wrong Rudy is my second choice, but wow, your language was un-needfully harsh.
Has anyone tried to check out his defense of his record? I thought it would be the polite thing to do before insulting him as a candidate.
So does Huckabee have to do the “Vagina Monalogues” as Rudy’s second?
It’s just Rudy-mentary politics, son…
Hey ussjimmycarter – is it any wonder Rudy dumped that See You Next Tuesday?
#15 – Posted by: Don’t kill me… on December 6, 2007 03:45 PM
Err… yes. In fact I was completely indifferent to him until his rise in the polls lead me to read more about him. If you are talking about Huckabee that is.
Personally, ussjimmycarter, I think you should run for POTUS. You win my all-time, continuous running, IMAO laugh-o-count-o-meter. Except for Harvey, of course.
If Rudy invites Huckabee “down” for the VP slot I recommend he change his name to Dick S. As in “Smoker”…
Remember the movie “As Good As It Gets” when Kinnear knocks on Nicholson’s door and Nicholson talks about Don’t ever knock on this door, sweetheart…even if we elect the first queer President and he’s having You DOWN for the weekend…”
Sounds like Hillary Clinton’s first cabinet meeting…
I like a lot of things about Huck, not the least of which is that he is a viable alternative to Mitt/Rudy. I also like that he appears to be a genuine Christian, and that he speaks plainly and doesn’t beat around the bush or politicize his answers in debates – he just tells you what he thinks. I staunchly oppose his record on immigration, and although his immigration plan looks OK on paper as others have mentioned I have big doubts as to whether he can actually accomplish it.
The thing that bothers me most about him, though, is his taxation policy. After doing some reading on the Fair Tax not only do I think it’s full of crap (the fairtax.org website uses misleading and grossly exaggerated figures to make its point, which is essentially that it’s going to increase tax revenue by hundreds of billions of dollars annually while drastically lowering taxes for everybody – in some cases giving a 28% negative tax BACK to the tax payers?? Bizarre.), but I think there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of getting anything like that passed. Remember that whole “Federal Government is bigger than just the President” thing? You know, checks and balances and all that? Doesn’t always work perfectly, but it surely would prevent something this ridiculous from being shoved into place. I believe that if Mike holds on to this idea (which he pretty much has to, now that he has hitched his wagon to it) it will become his rapid undoing in a general election.
#22 – Posted by: ussjimmycarter on December 6, 2007 05:32 PM
Let me get this straight: You’re calling somebody else gay, but you’re the one quoting “As Good As It Gets”, and “Sex and the City”? Really?? You’re killing me…
#23
Read the book before you jettison the FairTax. It’s set up to be revenue-neutral, not to boost federal revenue. It’s also a VAT, not an ad-valorem tax, so retail prices would remain about the same. Items are only taxed once, so Great Aunt Mabel won’t have to worry about the revenooers at her garage sale.
As it is, tax preparation is a major parasitic drag on the economy – by some estimates to the tune of $400 billion. Last year, our family business paid about $2000 more to file the taxes than we actually paid in tax. Crazy, baby! We need to simplify the tax code – really, really simplify it. Huckabee is the only one running on an idea to do that. It ain’t perfect, but it’s a start.
A flat-rate income tax is another good idea; the question with either plan is how to keep it simple once it’s enacted.
Ya know… the real solution to this would be a ticket that made sense, say, Hunter/Cornyn or Hunter/Chambliss, Thompson/Smith & Wesson…