(As a preface this article isn't about religious beliefs. It is about politics.)
As if we needed confirmation that Huckabee is playing the “Christians for Huckabee” Card.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071211/ap_po/huckabee_mormons_2
Note the subtlety of the attack. Note that Huckabee, as a Baptist Pastor, was and is well versed in the lines of attack on the Mormon Church. Lest we forget, his famous “take back America” quote was from a Baptist convention in Salt Lake City, Utah. Note that the SBC website has been engaged in a multipart series on Mormons:
http://www.sbc.net/redirect.asp?url=http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=...
Is there anyone out there who thinks Huckabee was simply being intellectually curious? This kind of dishonesty is even worse than the type of craziness that was displayed in this video:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/2007/12/mclaughlin_group_on_m...
Why you ask? One was being sincere (and crazy) while Huckabee is being uber slick in this attack. So slick in fact that most seculars wouldn’t even notice and most evangelicals would simply think badly of Romney without even thinking about the good Pastor Huckabee.
[UPDATE]
If the Huckster continues to be associated with this type of Anti-Mormon bigotry he could stand a good chance of losing a number of the mountain west states where Mormons are a crucial voting block. For a reference Utah is the most reliable state in the union for electing the candidate with the (R) and in the nineties Perot finished ahead of Clinton. Anybody think the several hundred thousand Mormons in Florida had anything to do with 2000?
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Why Conservatives will Abort Giuliani's Campaign
This revealing Youtube video will show a side of Giuliani that most conservatives are unfamiliar with. We will see how his liberal social views begin to be showcased. Public funding is the key to this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALDfwXIYUX0
I also enjoy this wonderful act of Giuliani's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb2y1IM17sM&NR
By far though, my personal favorite is this compilation of Rudy statements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM&mode=related&search
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALDfwXIYUX0
I also enjoy this wonderful act of Giuliani's:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb2y1IM17sM&NR
By far though, my personal favorite is this compilation of Rudy statements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM&mode=related&search
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Hillary's Lurch Left
It seems that Hillary is finely starting to run a "primary" campaign instead of simply coasting through the primaries like she has been for well over a year now. I can only assume that this change in direction has come about because Obama has been right at her heels in recent polling. It is amusing to watch her pander to the liberal left while trying to keep it hushed in the media. We'll see if this lurch to the left hurts her in the generals. More analysis of this development later.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_gays_4
WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton told the nation's leading gay rights group in an unpublicized speech that she wants a partnership with gays if elected president. Clinton also said she opposes the "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays in the military that was instituted during her husband's presidency.
"I am proud to stand by your side," Clinton said in a keynote speech Friday to the Human Rights Campaign. Neither Clinton's campaign nor her Senate office made any announcement that she would be making the Friday address.
Asked twice at a Monday campaign stop in Iowa why she did not publicize her speech to the group, Clinton said: "You'll have to ask my campaign."
In the speech, Clinton joked that she shares the same initials as the group, and pledged to maintain the same close working relationship that last year helped defeat the federal amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage.
"I want you to know that this is exactly the kind of partnership we will have when I am president," Clinton told the group. "I want you to know that just as you always have an open door to my Senate office, you will always have an open door to the White House and together we can continue this journey."
Clinton's husband Bill Clinton was president when the Pentagon instituted the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which says gays may serve in the military only if they keep their sexual orientation private. In 1999, as she prepared to run for the Senate from New York, Clinton publicly opposed that policy.
Previous to Bill Clinton's administration, gays were flatly forbidden from serving in the military.
Sen. Clinton said it would be safer for the nation if openly gay soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen could wear the uniform.
"This policy doesn't just hurt gays and lesbians, it hurts all our troops and this to me is a matter of national security and we're going to fix it," Clinton said.
Her chief rivals for the Democratic nomination, John Edwards and Barack Obama, also favor repealing the policy.
She also criticized the Bush administration for making political appeals based on gay rights issues, vowing that her presidency would mark "the end of leadership that has politicized the most personal and intimate issues."
Human Rights Campaign vice president David Smith said Clinton's comments were "very well received," though he added the group is not endorsing any candidate and does not anticipate making an endorsement "anytime soon."
Clinton spokesman Blake Zeff said Monday the candidate "affirmed her desire to have a strong partnership with the community as president," adding they were "delighted" the speech was available on the Internet.
Clinton aides said no announcement was made because the group's gathering is traditionally closed to the press. Video of the speech was posted on the group's Web site.
Smith said such annual board meetings have always been closed to the press, but it was the first time he could remember that a speech at such a meeting had been made public afterward.
"There's no contradiction," he said. "The event is always closed to the press and we wanted to make (the remarks) available for people to see."
Clinton spent Monday in Iowa, telling workers energy independence is critical to the country's future and similar to the U.S. fight against communism during the Cold War.
"Today we know that we have to move away from our dependence on foreign oil. Everyone says that," she said. "Our problem is figuring out how we would actually do it."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070306/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_gays_4
WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton told the nation's leading gay rights group in an unpublicized speech that she wants a partnership with gays if elected president. Clinton also said she opposes the "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays in the military that was instituted during her husband's presidency.
"I am proud to stand by your side," Clinton said in a keynote speech Friday to the Human Rights Campaign. Neither Clinton's campaign nor her Senate office made any announcement that she would be making the Friday address.
Asked twice at a Monday campaign stop in Iowa why she did not publicize her speech to the group, Clinton said: "You'll have to ask my campaign."
In the speech, Clinton joked that she shares the same initials as the group, and pledged to maintain the same close working relationship that last year helped defeat the federal amendment which would have banned same-sex marriage.
"I want you to know that this is exactly the kind of partnership we will have when I am president," Clinton told the group. "I want you to know that just as you always have an open door to my Senate office, you will always have an open door to the White House and together we can continue this journey."
Clinton's husband Bill Clinton was president when the Pentagon instituted the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which says gays may serve in the military only if they keep their sexual orientation private. In 1999, as she prepared to run for the Senate from New York, Clinton publicly opposed that policy.
Previous to Bill Clinton's administration, gays were flatly forbidden from serving in the military.
Sen. Clinton said it would be safer for the nation if openly gay soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen could wear the uniform.
"This policy doesn't just hurt gays and lesbians, it hurts all our troops and this to me is a matter of national security and we're going to fix it," Clinton said.
Her chief rivals for the Democratic nomination, John Edwards and Barack Obama, also favor repealing the policy.
She also criticized the Bush administration for making political appeals based on gay rights issues, vowing that her presidency would mark "the end of leadership that has politicized the most personal and intimate issues."
Human Rights Campaign vice president David Smith said Clinton's comments were "very well received," though he added the group is not endorsing any candidate and does not anticipate making an endorsement "anytime soon."
Clinton spokesman Blake Zeff said Monday the candidate "affirmed her desire to have a strong partnership with the community as president," adding they were "delighted" the speech was available on the Internet.
Clinton aides said no announcement was made because the group's gathering is traditionally closed to the press. Video of the speech was posted on the group's Web site.
Smith said such annual board meetings have always been closed to the press, but it was the first time he could remember that a speech at such a meeting had been made public afterward.
"There's no contradiction," he said. "The event is always closed to the press and we wanted to make (the remarks) available for people to see."
Clinton spent Monday in Iowa, telling workers energy independence is critical to the country's future and similar to the U.S. fight against communism during the Cold War.
"Today we know that we have to move away from our dependence on foreign oil. Everyone says that," she said. "Our problem is figuring out how we would actually do it."
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Why I support Mitt Romney for President
The following post is borrowed from:
http://www.paulallen.net/2007/02/13/why-i-support-mitt-romney-for-president/
I encourage all to read this interesting and convincing post. I include a few portions here.
"I am supporting Romney because I believe he will be the most capable administrator of the largest government in the world, and that he will tackle head on problems that traditional politicians have swept under the carpet for decades, postponing any solutions because they are afraid of the political fallout for rocking the boat."
"I truly believe that Romney’s approach to governing this nation will be solid and sound because it will be based on tried and proven business, leadership and financial principles, learned from very large-scale real world business experience — experience that no other candidate has."
"I believe Mitt Romney will form the most effective and efficient team of any president in modern history. I believe the national debt will be attacked head on."
"I believed in Reagan and I believe in Romney, and I’ve struggled to believe in between."
http://www.paulallen.net/2007/02/13/why-i-support-mitt-romney-for-president/
I encourage all to read this interesting and convincing post. I include a few portions here.
"I am supporting Romney because I believe he will be the most capable administrator of the largest government in the world, and that he will tackle head on problems that traditional politicians have swept under the carpet for decades, postponing any solutions because they are afraid of the political fallout for rocking the boat."
"I truly believe that Romney’s approach to governing this nation will be solid and sound because it will be based on tried and proven business, leadership and financial principles, learned from very large-scale real world business experience — experience that no other candidate has."
"I believe Mitt Romney will form the most effective and efficient team of any president in modern history. I believe the national debt will be attacked head on."
"I believed in Reagan and I believe in Romney, and I’ve struggled to believe in between."
The Coming Welfare State
Or shall we say the welfare state that is already here dragging the country down.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070225/ap_on_re_us/welfare_state_3
"The welfare state is bigger than ever despite a decade of policies designed to wean poor people from public aid....Nearly one in six people rely on some form of public assistance, a larger share than at any time since the government started measuring two decades ago."
This bit of not so surprising news highlights the importance of electing fiscally conservative leaders. Each day the size of government increases as Uncle Sam extends his reach into our lives every step along the way. Every year there are more government agencies and programs with ever bigger budgets donated from this country's taxpayers. It doesn't matter which party controls the budgetary committee in the House and it has certainly not mattered who controls the Presidency. We have seen this sad truth with both Bush I and Bush II. Both of them are supposed social conservatives but they are big government in every respect. G.W. Bush has convinced me that far more harm can come from electing a strong social conservative who is weak on fiscal policy than the other way around.
In the coming Presidential primaries, and generals, this should be something we think about as we consider who we should support. I, for one, support Mitt Romney because I believe he will do the taxpayers a better service than the others who are currently seeking the nomination.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070225/ap_on_re_us/welfare_state_3
"The welfare state is bigger than ever despite a decade of policies designed to wean poor people from public aid....Nearly one in six people rely on some form of public assistance, a larger share than at any time since the government started measuring two decades ago."
This bit of not so surprising news highlights the importance of electing fiscally conservative leaders. Each day the size of government increases as Uncle Sam extends his reach into our lives every step along the way. Every year there are more government agencies and programs with ever bigger budgets donated from this country's taxpayers. It doesn't matter which party controls the budgetary committee in the House and it has certainly not mattered who controls the Presidency. We have seen this sad truth with both Bush I and Bush II. Both of them are supposed social conservatives but they are big government in every respect. G.W. Bush has convinced me that far more harm can come from electing a strong social conservative who is weak on fiscal policy than the other way around.
In the coming Presidential primaries, and generals, this should be something we think about as we consider who we should support. I, for one, support Mitt Romney because I believe he will do the taxpayers a better service than the others who are currently seeking the nomination.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
The Globe and its rather obvious anti-Romney slant
The vast majority of the attacks towards Romney come from the sources I mentioned before. The Globe, the SL Times, and the Herald love to throw around the mud. The all important story today reveals that Romney great-great-grandfather(literally) had more than one wife. If that isn't a completely worthless biased story I don't know what is.
The following op-ed piece is typical of the Globe's outlook towards Romney. Although it is "opinion" we all know that their opinions permeate everything they report.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/24/taking_stock_of_the_2008_field/
"And speaking of Romney, the malleable Mitt has done so many reversals that the makers of flip-flop commercials will have a field day. Romney is also on the defensive as a Mormon, since many fundamentalists don't consider Mormons Christians. Almost half a century after the civil rights revolution, this should not matter, but that's right-wing politics for you. Romney is having trouble getting out of first gear."
They love to ridicule everything and everyone religious as the author so kindly demonstrates for us. That is simply one of many reasons for which the Globe hates Romney. Another is that he actively fought against the homosexual agenda which the Globe has strongly supported. There is no question whatsoever that the leftist media sources are actively campaigning against Romney in the primaries. GOP bloggers didn't start calling Mitt a "flip-flop", they didn't start polling people on the electability of a "Mormon", they didn't "reveal" different LDS beliefs, they didn't claim "fundamentalists" would never vote a Mormon, etc.................There are too many examples to even try to list them. The point is that the Globe and friends began these conversations. I suppose we should ask ourselves why? Perhaps it is because he is the only one of the top three that they feel is definitely "anti-them".
I believe that it is fine for conservatives to have concerns with Mitt but it is interesting that the liberals would spend more time searching his past than the Goppers. It kinda reveals how they feel about him compared to his opponents.
The following op-ed piece is typical of the Globe's outlook towards Romney. Although it is "opinion" we all know that their opinions permeate everything they report.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/02/24/taking_stock_of_the_2008_field/
"And speaking of Romney, the malleable Mitt has done so many reversals that the makers of flip-flop commercials will have a field day. Romney is also on the defensive as a Mormon, since many fundamentalists don't consider Mormons Christians. Almost half a century after the civil rights revolution, this should not matter, but that's right-wing politics for you. Romney is having trouble getting out of first gear."
They love to ridicule everything and everyone religious as the author so kindly demonstrates for us. That is simply one of many reasons for which the Globe hates Romney. Another is that he actively fought against the homosexual agenda which the Globe has strongly supported. There is no question whatsoever that the leftist media sources are actively campaigning against Romney in the primaries. GOP bloggers didn't start calling Mitt a "flip-flop", they didn't start polling people on the electability of a "Mormon", they didn't "reveal" different LDS beliefs, they didn't claim "fundamentalists" would never vote a Mormon, etc.................There are too many examples to even try to list them. The point is that the Globe and friends began these conversations. I suppose we should ask ourselves why? Perhaps it is because he is the only one of the top three that they feel is definitely "anti-them".
I believe that it is fine for conservatives to have concerns with Mitt but it is interesting that the liberals would spend more time searching his past than the Goppers. It kinda reveals how they feel about him compared to his opponents.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
