Top Stories

Open letter to readers: Today and tomorrow

By Lynda Waddington | 11.17.11

Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.

ACS lockout continues; plan emerges to repeal sugar protections

crystal_sugar_80
By Virginia Chamlee | 11.15.11

A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.

Cain campaign: Farmers know more about regulations than EPA

hermancain_80x80
By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 11.15.11

The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.

Mathis wins, Democrats maintain Senate control

Liz Mathis
By Lynda Waddington | 11.08.11

The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.

Press Release

PR: Nation should work to address veterans’ challenges

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

BRUCE BRALEY RELEASE — As US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan ends, it’s more important than ever that our nation works to address the challenges faced by the men and women who fought there.

PR: Honoring veterans, help in hiring

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

CHUCK GRASSLEY RELEASE — A difficult job market is challenging the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have protected America’s interests by serving in the Armed Forces.

PR: In honor of America’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

TOM LATHAM RELEASE — No one has done more to secure the freedom enjoyed by every single American than our veterans and those currently serving in the armed services.

PR: Honoring and supporting our nation’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

DAVE LOEBSACK RELEASE — Veterans Day is an opportunity to reflect on the service of generations of veterans and to honor the sacrifices they and their families have made so that we may live in peace and freedom here at home.

Mrs. Huckabee Acknowledges Husband’s ‘Limitations’ On Foreign Policy

By Douglas Burns | 12.30.07 | 6:20 pm

CARROLL — The wife of Iowa poll-topping Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee says her husband has “limitations” on foreign policy that can be overcome with solid staffing.

“What you do is know your limitations and if you have them, you surround yourself with people who excel and can serve you in the areas of your limitations and I think that’s what it’s really all about,” Janet Huckabee said in Carroll this weekend. “Ronald Reagan didn’t have any foreign policy experience. Bill Clinton, they said, the only experience he had in foreign policy was going to IHOP, the International Pancake House.”

What’s more, Janet Huckabee said in an interview with Iowa Independent and the Carroll Daily Times Herald that although pro-life, she didn’t want to see the day when policymakers set penalties for women who have abortions. “I hope we never get to that point,” she said.

In a wide-ranging interview, Mrs. Huckabee admitted she was “defensive” when responding to a reporter’s suggestion that Ambassador Alan Keyes had more foreign policy bona fides than Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor. Additionally, when pressed on one of her husband’s jokes about gays, Mrs. Huckabee, said, “I think that he’s very to open the lifestyle of the gay community. That’s not the issue. The issue is changing the definition of marriage.”

While her husband is a Baptist minister, Janet Huckabee also said it is “immaterial” whether people believe in Evolution or Creationism.With only days before the Iowa caucuses Mrs. Huckabee’s appearance at the most prominent venue in Carroll, Iowa — the Carrollton Centre — drew a handful of people. A nearly full plate of chocolate-chip cookies remained as she, and former South Carolina Gov. David Beasley, left after spending far more than an hour with us. In conservative western Iowa, in a Catholic community where anti-abortion messages sell like umbrellas in Seattle, it was indeed surreal to see this potential future First Lady talking to an empty room — particularly as the event came less than 48 hours before Barack Obama’s wife, Michelle, packed another restaurant down the road.

In the meet-and-greet moments following a visit with about a dozen western Iowans — including two members of the media and one state legislator — Janet Huckabee, the woman Iowans may vault into the national limelight in four days, spent about 10 minutes debating a lone, liberal Democratic voter, one on one, about abortion and other topics. Only two people asked Janet Huckabee a question in the session.

During a speech, Mrs. Huckabee hit campaign talking points. “What you see on TV is what you’re going to get at home,” she said of her husband. “He’s a man that doesn’t have many faces.”

She talked of advocating childhood immunizations and said she has been a strong proponent of motorist prepardness for inclement weather. Mrs. Huckabee wanted to make sure the people listening to her in Carroll had flashlights and blankets in their cars in the event they are stranded due to weather. “Do you carry those things with you?” the would-be future First Lady a room of mostly hardy Iowans.

Referencing the efforts people will go to find lost kids Mrs. Huckabee said, “The life in the womb is just as important as the life in the woods.”

Following her event, Mrs. Huckabee sat down for an interview with Douglas Burns of the Carroll Daily Times Herald and Iowa Independent.

Here is that exchange:

Iowa Independent: With all due respect, Governor Romney has been in our community twice. He’s fielded questions from hundreds of people. Why should people in our county even consider your husband considering the fact that he hasn’t been here. Other candidates have. They’ve been coming here for months. There is a respect factor and your husband for whatever reason hasn’t shown us enough respect to show up in the county in person.

Mrs. Huckabee: Well, I don’t think it’s a lack of respect for the county. I don’t think that’s it at all. One, Mitt Romney, whom you spoke of, he’s been running for 2-1/2 years. Mike didn’t get into the race until just this year. We’ve tried to cover a lot of ground in a short period of time. I think he’s done it very well. We’ve been to Iowa numerous times. Whether the planning got us here or not, I don’t think it is anything to disrespect the county. Iowa is much like Arkansas. We’re very rural. There’s a lot of small communities out there. I think we’ve been to every pizza ranch in all of Iowa. It’s a one on one. We’ve tried to do the best we can to cover the state. That’s why I’m here today is to hit some of the places he hasn’t hit.

Iowa Independent: In your remarks you said that life in the womb is as important as life the woods. You were referencing a situation if a kid was lost in the woods and something may have happened. If a kid were murdered in the woods in certain states such as your’s the death penalty would be a possibility. If your view on abortion prevails and abortion in fact does become illegal, what should the penalty be for a woman who has an abortion or a doctor who performs the procedure?

Mrs. Huckabee: I can’t answer that. I’m not the policymaker, first of all. Second of all, I don’t like to do hypotheticals. It’s hard to decide and know what a nation would do. Would it go back to the states or would it be national? It’s hard to know. I can’t answer that. I hope we never get to that point.

Iowa Independent: But if those lives have equal value then wouldn’t the person who performs the abortion be just as bad as the person who murders the kid in the woods?

Mrs. Huckabee: I can only answer from a personal standpoint and it would seem to me that if you take a life of anybody it’s a serious situation.


Iowa Independent: You ran for secretary of state in Arkansas. Was your husband supportive of that?

Mrs. Huckabee: He was supportive of that but he was also at the same time running for governor. It was a very, very, very difficult situation. I had the party people come and ask me if I’d consider it. We didn’t have anybody. The choices were very slim. I thought that I should be open to it. We thought about it. We prayed about it. We discussed it. He was supportive in it. The big downside of it was I didn’t have his undivided attention, not did he have my undivided attention because he was running for governor at the same time I was running for secretary of state.

Iowa Independent: Would there be any concern with having two constitutional officers at the highest level who were married, that there might be some conflicts of interest there?

Mrs. Huckabee: I mean we have brothers that serve in our legislature and we have fathers and sons.

Iowa Independent: But they aren’t constitutional officers.

Mrs. Huckabee: Yeah, but they don’t interact. They don’t interact.

Iowa Independent: As the assassination in Pakistan showed, foreign policy is extremely important. On the Democratic side we have had three candidates here just in the last 48 hours and there have been questions, that are legitimate, that have been raised about Barack Obama’s foreign policy experience and he’s on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Your husband has really no foreign policy experience. In these times can we afford to trust a governor with absolutely no foreign policy experience?

Mrs. Huckabee: What is foreign policy experience?

Iowa Independent: I’ll let you define what it is.

Mrs. Huckabee: You’re asking the question.

Iowa Independent: I would define it as someone who has had experience in some official capacity representing the United States before foreign entitities.

Mrs. Huckabee: So you’re saying only a person who has been in Congress?

Iowa Independent: It could be somebody in the State Department. I would say Ambassador Alan Keyes has more foreign policy experience than your husband. Wouldn’t you say that’s fair?

Mrs. Huckabee: I don’t know what kind of policy experience he’s had. You know, my husband’s traveled to countries extensively. He’s dealt with people.

Iowa Independent: Has he negotiated a treaty with another country?

Mrs. Huckabee: Not treaties. I don’t know anybody who has negotiated a treaty. He’s dealt with people in business dealings, trying to get people to come and do business in Arkansas. He’s spoken with heads of state. He’s done a lot of things. I don’t think any one person is going to be your perfect candidate in all areas of life. There’s just not a perfect man — or woman. What you do is know your limitations and if you have them, you surround yourself with people who excel and can serve you in teh areas of your limitations and I think that’s what it’s really all about. Ronald Reagan didn’t have any foreign policy experience. Bill Clinton, they said, the only experience he had in foreign policy was going to IHOP, the International Pancake House. So how do you really judge a person for his lack or participation in dealing with treaties. I don’t think that’s how you eliminate someone. I think Mike has more executive experience than anybody else on either side running for president. So do you eliminate everybody else because they don’t have executive experience? Yes, foreign policy is very, very important, but I think it’s something you can do. You can surround yourself with smart people, people who do excel in that area, recoginzing that you do have limitations and you can make up for them by bringing in the right people from those positions, those jobs. He’s a smart man. I think he can lead us well, not just in our country, but our country to get along with the rest of the world in other countries. I probably get a little defensive when people say he doesn’t have any foreign policy because I think he does have more than they think. It just to me is not your only qualification.

Iowa Independent: Your husband was quoted as saying when he was asked about gay marriage that “until Moses comes down with two tablets from Brokeback Mountain and says he’s changed the rules” that your husband would maintain his opposition to it. Now, most people would recoginize that it’s respectful discourse if somebody would just say I’m opposed to marriage in situations that don’t involve a man and a woman. Is this the kind of rhetoric that brings people together? Does he need to say things like that or is this just hostile toward a certain segment of the population?

Mrs. Huckabee: Mike is very humorous in a lot of different ways.

Iowa Independent: But that’s humorous at the expense of homosexuals.


Mrs. Huckabee:
People don’t always understand his humor. I’m not going to say his choice of words is always the right choice of words. I’ve been married to him 33-1/2 years but we don’t agree on everything. But I think that he’s very to open the lifestyle of the gay community. That’s not the issue. The issue is changing the definition of marriage. The definition of marriage to Mike is to between one man and one woman and we can’t change that. The Koran says that. The Bible says that. Was that a mistake? I don’t know. Did it hurt someone’s feelings? It could have. I don’t think he did it intentionally. I truly think his leadership is a leadership to all the people and not just some of the people — not just the Baptists or, you know, a certain segment of the population. He wants to be the people’s president.

Iowa Independent: I was watching the GOP debate in New Hampshire and your husband said, “If anybody wants to believe they are descendants of a primate they are welcome to do so.” Apparently he doesn’t think that. How do you fall on that?

Mrs. Huckabee: I wasn’t there when God created man. I really have no idea. He could have done it that way. I don’t know and I think that’s what he’s saying. If you want to believe that God created you through the steps of Evolution so be it. The difference is really not how we believe it happened and how we believe God did it. I think he important part is that we believe there was a creator and that were created by that creator. How he did it is immaterial.

Comments

  • Connie

    Fred Thompson Message to Iowa Voters is Politics As It Should Be I hope Iowans will take the time to listen to Fred’s message to you. His beliefs are the core beliefs that have made America the most wonderful nation on earth.

    http://www.youtube.c…

    Please share Fred’s uplifting message with fellow Iowans!

  • seekeronos

    A vote for Fred Thompson is… … a vote for smaller government, and a vote for someone with the foreign policy know-how who knows who is what side of the borders of Pakistan, and also knows that Pakistani illegal immigration is hardly the equal of that coming out of Red China or a number of other Central American “other than Mexican” and Pacific East Asian nations.

    I also believe that a man who was able to stand up to a cranky debate moderator will be more than able to stand up to the likes of the North Korean Dictator Kim Il Jong and President Hu Jintao of Red China, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran.

    Who will you want to stand up for your America – any candidate who equivocates and tringualtes every word they say, or a man who shoots straight, tells it like it is, and actually knows what he is talking about?

    It is time for Iowans to decide. I’ll stand with Fred Thompson.

    http://www.fred08.co…

  • Angela

    Huckabee may have an R by his name, but he’s not conservative. Conservatism isn’t soft on immigration. Conservatism does not promote an ever-expanding nanny-statism. Conservatism is not weak on our national defense. Conservatism respects the 10th amendment and state’s rights. Conservatism seeks lower taxes AND lower spending. Conservatism does not believe the expansion of the welfare state is compassionate – to the contrary, the manner in which it creates dependency and disincentivizes productive behavior is a grave disservice to those on the receiving end.

    Almost all of the candidates in the Republican primary this year fall short of conservative ideals, in one area or another.

    Except for one, and that man is Fred Thompson. (Well, OK, maybe two – but Duncan Hunter just isn’t doing it for me

  • David Alan

    Serious consideration of Mike Huckabee Vs. Ron Paul : who earns your vote ? Boy, could she could give Hillary a run for the money !  Good interview – she’s learned much as Mrs. Gov. Arkansas, clearly.

    OK – alot to ‘unpack’ here. I’ve spent copious time & energy investigating “HUCK vs. RON PAUL”. 

    In fact, I just finished writing this article, so I’ll post it here as a comment. 

    -Questions: I can be reached at: Psalm2@safe-mail.net -

    HUCKABEE VS RON PAUL: WHICH MAN AT THIS CRUCIAL HOUR ?

    By David Alan

    If you look into Huckabee’s record in Arkansas, he runs ‘right’ and governs ‘left’ – any liberals who wish for a big expensive nanny state have little to fear from him. 

    He fashioned Arkansas into a ‘sanctuary state’ for illegal aliens.  He encouraged the Mexican Government to build a consulate in Little Rock – even gave them Arkansas Govt building rent free while they built it – really !

    I would not have believed this until great friends who lived there explained this firsthand.  Sounds unbelievable, eh ? 

    Sounds like a move Hillary or Ted Kennedy would be proud of !

    Maybe this is why the media has been so happy to give him plenty of ‘face time’ recently – he’s really ‘one of them’ if you scratch the surface. 

    If you’re looking for a President that will protect your God given right & limit the size & scope of government, better keep looking. 

    I know many evangelicals are enthused about Mr. Huckabee, especially when he seems more genuine than “Rudy Mc Romney”, and he speaks more forthrightly – a refreshing change.

    But look deeper.  Consider what, fundamentally has become amiss in our culture, and look at his record in Arkansas.

    If you do, I think it will be apparent that Mike Huckabee lacks both the discernment & wisdom to steer America correctly, favorable impressions notwithstanding.

    It was enjoyable seeing someone question the reigning paradigm of PC ideology, as Janet Huckabee did in a recent interview in the Iowa Independant…but note that she eneded with a whining equivocation, instead of a convincing refutation, which the man who would lead America forth must be able to do.

    The next President will have to confront challenges that threaten the very foundations of our civilization: 

    The concept of marriage, undeniably a resounding fundamental building block of all civilization, is under relentless attack today. 

    Consider the irony of “gay” marriage advocacy. 

    Does anyone pause, for a moment, to consider the fact that if the “gay” advocates got their way, fell swoop, if ‘gay marriage’ became the default choice, humanity would die out in 1 generation ?

    Or if that their parents had chosen the self destructiveness way of ‘gay marriage’, in preference to heterosexual, reproducive marriage, – they wouldn’t even exist to ask the question ?

    Or that evolution (if it had happened), would have ‘de-selected’ any & all of those who practiced Sodomy ?

    This goes to the heart of the Huckabee duplicity: they want to thump the Bible for votes, but they don’t want to go ‘all the way’.  They want to win, but not badly enough to go all out.

    In other words, in the above interview, I hear (former Baptist preacher) Huckabee ‘playing to the home crowd’ by mentioning – very lightly – Biblical truths.  Just enough to get ‘recognized’ as ‘one of you Evangelicals’, but not enough so they actually deny the patently false premises of the Pro-Sodomy crowd. 

    The result ?  Christian crowd pleasing sermons on Sunday, and Bible affirming, flag waving speeches abound – SYMBOLS.

    However, funding and governement legislation continues to war on behalf of Sodomy and against fundamental Truths, such as the crucial importance of heterosexual marriage & procreation -(without which our society cannot long survive) – SUBSTANCE. 

    Could it be any clearer, where this leads us ?

    Christians want to play patty cake with the Truth.  We take such vain comfort in our SYMBOLS, that we allow the enemy to win the debate & define  the – SUBSTANCE.

    We want to please God, but we’re unwilling to displease men. 

    We’re afraid Truth will offend.  It will.  So be it.  At least be consistent. 

    So, to tip my thesis: I think the difference between Gov Huckabee & Dr. Ron Paul is similar:  SYMBOLS VS SUBSTANCE. 

    To bolster the argument:

    A case in point is exaclty what Gov. Huckabee did in Arkansas, he pointed out the errors of Darwinian Evolutionary Myth – not hard to do – but then continued to fund it with big government money, which is completely goofy.

    The Arkansas taxpayers voted overwhelmingly through the legislature to defund state-mandated Darwinian myth, but Gov. Huckabee, his eye on the White House bid & afraid of being pegged by the ACLU types as a ‘hick Pro Creationist’ Southern Gov’ – vetoed it. 

    Nice, he killed the Truth, continued funding Darwinian myth, and denied the Arkansas taxypaying Citizens (huge majority of which are Christians) relief from funding, or having their children learn trendy Darwinian lies.

    Look, if some people want to tell Darwinian dreams to their children that rob them of hope & help ruin their future, is not for civil government to deny them. 

    But, for goodness sake, let them fund the lies on their own dime.

    Mis-use the taxpayers money to indoctrinate children with the vain idea that their ‘first father was a monkey’ – and then wonder why society becomes aimless, dependant & dispondent in 2 generations: the news headlines confirms that.

    [Believing lies about God, His world & our place in it NEVER has good results !]

    Darwinain evolution is so manifestly unplausible it’s a bad joke – it’s failed philosophy masquerading as serious science – it could only survive this long with Government funding via State Funded High Schools & Universties. 

    Time to pull the plug.

    State funded, compulsory Evolutionism should go first:
    http://www.lewrockwe…

    Now we come to Ron Paul.  You can tell he’s a man who’s comfortable, in his own skin, with the truth. 

    He doesn’t pull back – no equivocation – like you get with a neo-evangelical such as Gov. Huckabee. 

    He’s fully witnessing of the truth. 

    Ron Paul threatens to end this foolish gravy train.  He, in mellow, respecful but intelligent fashion, calls Americans back to our roots of Truth & Liberty.

    Not with central government mandates, either. 

    He’s aims to get the Federal Government out of the education business, which will help send the message:
    the various states (AR,IA,CA,TX,etc) shouldn’t be in it either. 

    Which can make public schools, once again, locally controlled.  Schools should draw their values from the community, to integrate with that community. 

    Schools would be far healthier, as under local community control, there would be no ‘edu-ocracy’ to spread bad ideas system wide. 

    You may get error, but it can’t travel state or nationwide like it does now.

    If you disagree on the standards taught in your local schools, go ahead & educate them at home.

    As the growing Home-School movement attests – over 3 million now schooled at home – we do that for our 5 children, too.

    RP on homeschooling: http://www.ronpaul20…

    In any case you should not pay for an education you are not using – schools should be, like life, ‘pay as you go’. 

    Use them, pay for them. 

    Dr Ron Paul doesn’t do interviews, declaring to an interviewer the evils of Unconstituional government power, then out of the other side of his mouth, promise greater welfare benefits to the crowd.

    He tells Politicians : stop stealing our money thru taxes & inflation (the hidden tax). Stop pandering – lying for votes – to the Demopublicans & Republicrats both.

    He tells graft hungry Voters: stop expecting government to pay your way.  Stop demanding theft to fund your lack of drive & determination. Stop expecting transfer payments via welfare, food stamps, free student loans, Socialist Insecurity,

    He tells Corporations: corporate welfare is terminated.  Send the lobbyists on permanent vacation.  No more ‘government contracts’.  No more endless wars, from which you profit greatly & greedily.

    Now you gotta stand on your own merits !

    To quote RP:  “It’s not the Governments job to clothe, house, feed or educate anyone !”

    To which a thoughtful person could reply: then whose job is it, then ?

    “It’s the job of families, individuals, churches & private aid associations, not civil government, to show mercy and help needy folks for these things…..”

    The growth of the “Almighty State” (and it’s resulting Welfare & Warfare promotion), come at the expense of other ‘governments’:

    Self
    Family
    Church
    Private Associations: 
    (Boy Scouts, Elks, Knights of Columbus, Gideons, etc)

    Thus, the Ron Paul Revolution isn’t simply about electing a ‘savior’ who then makes all things right.

    It is about getting behind a man who posseses the Character & Integrity to embody & envision these Principles. 

    Principles that were declared, explicitly at our beginning, to be founded upon ‘unalienable rights’ based upon a recognition of the “laws of Nature & Nature’s God”, [hence America's basic recognition & foundation of Biblical premises].

    As citizens we’re called to our duty, in light of these truths, in our personal & familial relations.

    If we do our Duty, the Ron Paul Revoltion won’t just be a campaign slogan, it can become reality.

    I trust many will appreciate the vast difference between what these two men stand for – and what that difference portends for the future.  Once you look closely, it’s clear:

    http://www.RonPaul2008.com – official site
    http://www.LewRockwell.com – intellectual capital
    http://www.ChristiansForRonPaul.com – indepth look at Dr. Paul
    http://www.DailyPaul.com – grassroots site, good updates

    Ron Paul is the only man running who’d be able to hold an intelligent conversation with the Founding Fathers. 

    Huckabee will be GWB 2 – he’s has slick appeal, but is shifty in his ethics & application – do we need more of that ?

    David Alan

    Sorry, I realize this article is is a bit long for a comment – been mulling this deeply for two months now – I couldn’t miss the chance to tell my fellow Americans why our family has decided to get fully behind Ron Paul – there is, perhaps, more at stake than any of us realize.

  • Connie

    Foreign Affairs naivete is a huge minus Dealing with foreign countries is one of the few jobs of a limited federal government. The idea that we could elect a President who needs on the job training and a class in International Affairs 101 in the middle of a global conflict scares me to death.

    Voters must also consider how bin Laden and Zawahiri would perceive the election of a former preacher. It would give credibility to their view that this is a Christian war on Islam, a perception that the Bush Administration has wisely side-stepped for the reason that it would only embolden the terrorists.

    Mike Huckabee’s naivete in the arena of foreign affairs must be considered in this election.

  • Connie

    Foreign Affairs naivete is a huge minus Dealing with foreign countries is one of the few jobs of a limited federal government. The idea that we could elect a President who needs on the job training and a class in International Affairs 101 in the middle of a global conflict scares me to death.

    Voters must also consider how bin Laden and Zawahiri would perceive the election of a former preacher. It would give credibility to their view that this is a Christian war on Islam, a perception that the Bush Administration has wisely side-stepped for the reason that it would only embolden the terrorists.

    Mike Huckabee's naivete in the arena of foreign affairs must be considered in this election.

  • David Alan

    Serious consideration of Mike Huckabee Vs. Ron Paul : who earns your vote ? Boy, could she could give Hillary a run for the money !  Good interview – she's learned much as Mrs. Gov. Arkansas, clearly.

    OK – alot to 'unpack' here. I've spent copious time & energy investigating “HUCK vs. RON PAUL”. 

    In fact, I just finished writing this article, so I'll post it here as a comment. 

    -Questions: I can be reached at: Psalm2@safe-mail.net -

    HUCKABEE VS RON PAUL: WHICH MAN AT THIS CRUCIAL HOUR ?

    By David Alan

    If you look into Huckabee's record in Arkansas, he runs 'right' and governs 'left' – any liberals who wish for a big expensive nanny state have little to fear from him. 

    He fashioned Arkansas into a 'sanctuary state' for illegal aliens.  He encouraged the Mexican Government to build a consulate in Little Rock – even gave them Arkansas Govt building rent free while they built it – really !

    I would not have believed this until great friends who lived there explained this firsthand.  Sounds unbelievable, eh ? 

    Sounds like a move Hillary or Ted Kennedy would be proud of !

    Maybe this is why the media has been so happy to give him plenty of 'face time' recently – he's really 'one of them' if you scratch the surface. 

    If you're looking for a President that will protect your God given right & limit the size & scope of government, better keep looking. 

    I know many evangelicals are enthused about Mr. Huckabee, especially when he seems more genuine than “Rudy Mc Romney”, and he speaks more forthrightly – a refreshing change.

    But look deeper.  Consider what, fundamentally has become amiss in our culture, and look at his record in Arkansas.

    If you do, I think it will be apparent that Mike Huckabee lacks both the discernment & wisdom to steer America correctly, favorable impressions notwithstanding.

    It was enjoyable seeing someone question the reigning paradigm of PC ideology, as Janet Huckabee did in a recent interview in the Iowa Independant…but note that she eneded with a whining equivocation, instead of a convincing refutation, which the man who would lead America forth must be able to do.

    The next President will have to confront challenges that threaten the very foundations of our civilization: 

    The concept of marriage, undeniably a resounding fundamental building block of all civilization, is under relentless attack today. 

    Consider the irony of “gay” marriage advocacy. 

    Does anyone pause, for a moment, to consider the fact that if the “gay” advocates got their way, fell swoop, if 'gay marriage' became the default choice, humanity would die out in 1 generation ?

    Or if that their parents had chosen the self destructiveness way of 'gay marriage', in preference to heterosexual, reproducive marriage, – they wouldn't even exist to ask the question ?

    Or that evolution (if it had happened), would have 'de-selected' any & all of those who practiced Sodomy ?

    This goes to the heart of the Huckabee duplicity: they want to thump the Bible for votes, but they don't want to go 'all the way'.  They want to win, but not badly enough to go all out.

    In other words, in the above interview, I hear (former Baptist preacher) Huckabee 'playing to the home crowd' by mentioning – very lightly – Biblical truths.  Just enough to get 'recognized' as 'one of you Evangelicals', but not enough so they actually deny the patently false premises of the Pro-Sodomy crowd. 

    The result ?  Christian crowd pleasing sermons on Sunday, and Bible affirming, flag waving speeches abound – SYMBOLS.

    However, funding and governement legislation continues to war on behalf of Sodomy and against fundamental Truths, such as the crucial importance of heterosexual marriage & procreation -(without which our society cannot long survive) – SUBSTANCE. 

    Could it be any clearer, where this leads us ?

    Christians want to play patty cake with the Truth.  We take such vain comfort in our SYMBOLS, that we allow the enemy to win the debate & define  the – SUBSTANCE.

    We want to please God, but we're unwilling to displease men. 

    We're afraid Truth will offend.  It will.  So be it.  At least be consistent. 

    So, to tip my thesis: I think the difference between Gov Huckabee & Dr. Ron Paul is similar:  SYMBOLS VS SUBSTANCE. 

    To bolster the argument:

    A case in point is exaclty what Gov. Huckabee did in Arkansas, he pointed out the errors of Darwinian Evolutionary Myth – not hard to do – but then continued to fund it with big government money, which is completely goofy.

    The Arkansas taxpayers voted overwhelmingly through the legislature to defund state-mandated Darwinian myth, but Gov. Huckabee, his eye on the White House bid & afraid of being pegged by the ACLU types as a 'hick Pro Creationist' Southern Gov' – vetoed it. 

    Nice, he killed the Truth, continued funding Darwinian myth, and denied the Arkansas taxypaying Citizens (huge majority of which are Christians) relief from funding, or having their children learn trendy Darwinian lies.

    Look, if some people want to tell Darwinian dreams to their children that rob them of hope & help ruin their future, is not for civil government to deny them. 

    But, for goodness sake, let them fund the lies on their own dime.

    Mis-use the taxpayers money to indoctrinate children with the vain idea that their 'first father was a monkey' – and then wonder why society becomes aimless, dependant & dispondent in 2 generations: the news headlines confirms that.

    [Believing lies about God, His world & our place in it NEVER has good results !]

    Darwinain evolution is so manifestly unplausible it's a bad joke – it's failed philosophy masquerading as serious science – it could only survive this long with Government funding via State Funded High Schools & Universties. 

    Time to pull the plug.

    State funded, compulsory Evolutionism should go first:

    http://www.lewrockwe…

    Now we come to Ron Paul.  You can tell he's a man who's comfortable, in his own skin, with the truth. 

    He doesn't pull back – no equivocation – like you get with a neo-evangelical such as Gov. Huckabee. 

    He's fully witnessing of the truth. 

    Ron Paul threatens to end this foolish gravy train.  He, in mellow, respecful but intelligent fashion, calls Americans back to our roots of Truth & Liberty.

    Not with central government mandates, either. 

    He's aims to get the Federal Government out of the education business, which will help send the message:

    the various states (AR,IA,CA,TX,etc) shouldn't be in it either. 

    Which can make public schools, once again, locally controlled.  Schools should draw their values from the community, to integrate with that community. 

    Schools would be far healthier, as under local community control, there would be no 'edu-ocracy' to spread bad ideas system wide. 

    You may get error, but it can't travel state or nationwide like it does now.

    If you disagree on the standards taught in your local schools, go ahead & educate them at home.

    As the growing Home-School movement attests – over 3 million now schooled at home – we do that for our 5 children, too.

    RP on homeschooling: http://www.ronpaul20…

    In any case you should not pay for an education you are not using – schools should be, like life, 'pay as you go'. 

    Use them, pay for them. 

    Dr Ron Paul doesn't do interviews, declaring to an interviewer the evils of Unconstituional government power, then out of the other side of his mouth, promise greater welfare benefits to the crowd.

    He tells Politicians : stop stealing our money thru taxes & inflation (the hidden tax). Stop pandering – lying for votes – to the Demopublicans & Republicrats both.

    He tells graft hungry Voters: stop expecting government to pay your way.  Stop demanding theft to fund your lack of drive & determination. Stop expecting transfer payments via welfare, food stamps, free student loans, Socialist Insecurity,

    He tells Corporations: corporate welfare is terminated.  Send the lobbyists on permanent vacation.  No more 'government contracts'.  No more endless wars, from which you profit greatly & greedily.

    Now you gotta stand on your own merits !

    To quote RP:  “It's not the Governments job to clothe, house, feed or educate anyone !”

    To which a thoughtful person could reply: then whose job is it, then ?

    “It's the job of families, individuals, churches & private aid associations, not civil government, to show mercy and help needy folks for these things…..”

    The growth of the “Almighty State” (and it's resulting Welfare & Warfare promotion), come at the expense of other 'governments':

    Self

    Family

    Church

    Private Associations: 

    (Boy Scouts, Elks, Knights of Columbus, Gideons, etc)

    Thus, the Ron Paul Revolution isn't simply about electing a 'savior' who then makes all things right.

    It is about getting behind a man who posseses the Character & Integrity to embody & envision these Principles. 

    Principles that were declared, explicitly at our beginning, to be founded upon 'unalienable rights' based upon a recognition of the “laws of Nature & Nature's God”, [hence America's basic recognition & foundation of Biblical premises].

    As citizens we're called to our duty, in light of these truths, in our personal & familial relations.

    If we do our Duty, the Ron Paul Revoltion won't just be a campaign slogan, it can become reality.

    I trust many will appreciate the vast difference between what these two men stand for – and what that difference portends for the future.  Once you look closely, it's clear:

    http://www.RonPaul2008.com – official site

    http://www.LewRockwell.com – intellectual capital

    http://www.ChristiansForRonPaul.com – indepth look at Dr. Paul

    http://www.DailyPaul.com – grassroots site, good updates

    Ron Paul is the only man running who'd be able to hold an intelligent conversation with the Founding Fathers. 

    Huckabee will be GWB 2 – he's has slick appeal, but is shifty in his ethics & application – do we need more of that ?

    David Alan

    Sorry, I realize this article is is a bit long for a comment – been mulling this deeply for two months now – I couldn't miss the chance to tell my fellow Americans why our family has decided to get fully behind Ron Paul – there is, perhaps, more at stake than any of us realize.

  • Connie

    Fred Thompson Message to Iowa Voters is Politics As It Should Be I hope Iowans will take the time to listen to Fred's message to you. His beliefs are the core beliefs that have made America the most wonderful nation on earth.

    http://www.youtube.c…

    Please share Fred's uplifting message with fellow Iowans!

  • seekeronos

    A vote for Fred Thompson is… … a vote for smaller government, and a vote for someone with the foreign policy know-how who knows who is what side of the borders of Pakistan, and also knows that Pakistani illegal immigration is hardly the equal of that coming out of Red China or a number of other Central American “other than Mexican” and Pacific East Asian nations.

    I also believe that a man who was able to stand up to a cranky debate moderator will be more than able to stand up to the likes of the North Korean Dictator Kim Il Jong and President Hu Jintao of Red China, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran.

    Who will you want to stand up for your America – any candidate who equivocates and tringualtes every word they say, or a man who shoots straight, tells it like it is, and actually knows what he is talking about?

    It is time for Iowans to decide. I'll stand with Fred Thompson.

    http://www.fred08.co…

  • Bob

    Thompson, the only choice Anyone who will take the time to read Fred Thompson's conservative views should realize that he is the one true Conservative in the race.  Like Fred says, I've always been conservative in the past, I'm conservative now and will be conservative in the future.  What you see is what you get.

    He is one man who sincerely wants to be President for the right reasons, not because he has a career goal to garner the job.  http://www.fred08.com</br>

  • Angela

    Huckabee may have an R by his name, but he's not conservative. Conservatism isn't soft on immigration. Conservatism does not promote an ever-expanding nanny-statism. Conservatism is not weak on our national defense. Conservatism respects the 10th amendment and state's rights. Conservatism seeks lower taxes AND lower spending. Conservatism does not believe the expansion of the welfare state is compassionate – to the contrary, the manner in which it creates dependency and disincentivizes productive behavior is a grave disservice to those on the receiving end.

    Almost all of the candidates in the Republican primary this year fall short of conservative ideals, in one area or another.

    Except for one, and that man is Fred Thompson. (Well, OK, maybe two – but Duncan Hunter just isn't doing it for me

  • David Alan

    Fred Thompson a Real conservative ? Proof, please…. Your post sounds like 'Campaign Boiler Plate'.

    Do you actually have anything, besides bold self assertion, to back that up ?

    I'd be real curious to hear you give a proof text of Fred Thompsons Conservative credentials. 

    By what standard is he a 'Conservative' – compared to a advocate of socialism such as Hillary ?

    The term 'Conservative' has ceased to be an accurate measure of anything. 

    What, exactly, are todays self-proclaimed 'Conservatives' trying to conserve ? 

    The most recent gains of the last Democrat administration ? 

    The usurpations of the Supreme Court ? 

    You see, one can claim to be a 'Conservative' by resisting the next socialist innovation, while blitely & ignorantly accepting the prior gains of the socialists, which in turn will be adopted, as the next innovation is proposed.

    Ergo, the line of demarcation is constantly moving leftward, towards ever increasing, “Almighty State” with clueless Democrats cheering, and mindless Republicans listlessly resisting, then finally giving in to the pull.

    So, I agree, Fred Thompson is like the latter, he can say he objected to SOME liberal ideas, as a 'reactionary Conservative'.  So can half of Congress.

    Notice, it hasn't stopped the Federal Juggernaut one bit.

    The real test is to ask if he has not only resisted them at their base & root, but does he have a plan to seriously scale back the 'welfare & warefare State' ?

    If not, what is the point of his candidacy ?

    This distinction belongs to one man, Ron Paul.  If other canidates wish to join him, bravo. 

    May the voters have discernment that Congress has lacked, of late.  God make it so !

  • http://www.yocowholesale.com/ Wholesale Korean Fashion

    Wonderful article, just added the site to my favorites. Thanks so much.

  • http://www.yocowholesale.com/ Wholesale Clothing

    Wonderful article, just added the site to my favorites. Thanks so much.

  • http://www.yocowholesale.com/ Wholesale Clothing

    Wonderful article, just added the site to my favorites. Thanks so much.

  • Bob

    Thompson, the only choice Anyone who will take the time to read Fred Thompson’s conservative views should realize that he is the one true Conservative in the race.  Like Fred says, I’ve always been conservative in the past, I’m conservative now and will be conservative in the future.  What you see is what you get.
    He is one man who sincerely wants to be President for the right reasons, not because he has a career goal to garner the job.  http://www.fred08.com

  • David Alan

    Fred Thompson a Real conservative ? Proof, please…. Your post sounds like ‘Campaign Boiler Plate’.

    Do you actually have anything, besides bold self assertion, to back that up ?

    I’d be real curious to hear you give a proof text of Fred Thompsons Conservative credentials. 

    By what standard is he a ‘Conservative’ – compared to a advocate of socialism such as Hillary ?

    The term ‘Conservative’ has ceased to be an accurate measure of anything. 

    What, exactly, are todays self-proclaimed ‘Conservatives’ trying to conserve ? 

    The most recent gains of the last Democrat administration ? 

    The usurpations of the Supreme Court ? 

    You see, one can claim to be a ‘Conservative’ by resisting the next socialist innovation, while blitely & ignorantly accepting the prior gains of the socialists, which in turn will be adopted, as the next innovation is proposed.

    Ergo, the line of demarcation is constantly moving leftward, towards ever increasing, “Almighty State” with clueless Democrats cheering, and mindless Republicans listlessly resisting, then finally giving in to the pull.

    So, I agree, Fred Thompson is like the latter, he can say he objected to SOME liberal ideas, as a ‘reactionary Conservative’.  So can half of Congress.

    Notice, it hasn’t stopped the Federal Juggernaut one bit.

    The real test is to ask if he has not only resisted them at their base & root, but does he have a plan to seriously scale back the ‘welfare & warefare State’ ?

    If not, what is the point of his candidacy ?

    This distinction belongs to one man, Ron Paul.  If other canidates wish to join him, bravo. 

    May the voters have discernment that Congress has lacked, of late.  God make it so !

Categories & Tags: | |

Switch to our mobile site