So Georgia Fredheads

Who you gonna support now?

[UPDATE:] BTW, to answer your questions, I still intend to vote for Fred Thompson. He’s the only conservative in the race and I’m a conservative before I’m a Republican.

182 comments

  1. Inside_Man says:

    Please god let it be Ron Paul so we aren’t the only other state to give Mike Huckabee a win. Our state embarrasses itself enough.

  2. Chris says:

    I’m thinking McCain. Haven’t decided for sure. McCain is the devil I know. I have no idea what Romney might end up doing.

    Smuckabee will be like the other guy from Hope.

  3. jsm says:

    :*(

    I’m disgusted with this whole election season. Republicans have no idea what their candidates have done to them. Most are whistling along like little lemmings thinking the world is gonna be hunky-dorey if someone with their social standards gets in the Oval Office. All the while, socialist entitlements are choking this Nation.

    Our only hope is that one of these moderates gets in office and has some kind of epiphany about smaller government, less spending, etc., etc. Greater miracles have happened.

  4. ChuckEaton says:

    Unfortunately Thompson seemed to be the only one sounding the alarms on the social entitlements. I like Huckabee, but worry there might be some bleeding heart in him.

  5. StevePerkins says:

    The more interesting question is who might FRED support now? John McCain is one of Fred’s best friends and allies… I’ve wondered from the start whether Fred’s candidacy was largely a political favor to McCain. Fred muddied the waters… and split the racist religious wackos who despise McCain for keeping the filibuster and not hating Mexicans.

    Huckabee got robbed of a much-needed S.C. win, and is running out of gas financially. Guiliani has one shot in Florida, and if he misses it’s over for him. Romney is the only man left for McCain to beat now, and the level of enthusiasm he’s generating here seems to be, “Well, I’m not voting Paul so what choice do I have?”.

    Fred NEVER seemed all that interested in running. By jumping in, he bogged down the Bible-thumper candidate and the tax cuts candidate… and his buddy McCain was able to break out of the pack. I’m not so sure that’s just serendipity. Will Fred go so far as to endorse McCain now to seal the deal?

  6. Bill Simon says:

    JSM,

    If my memory serves me (according to my recollection of one of the original Ian Fleming 007 novels) those men who cannot whistle at all are gay. Can YOU whistle? 🙂

  7. shep1975 says:

    My turn:

    Gov. Romney praising Ted Kennedy on working together for Socialized Medicine:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4r9dMP21hM

    Romney/Kennedy debate 1994:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI

    Romney Misrepresenting his record on immigration:
    http://www.factcheck.org/tough_guy_on_immigration.html

    Romney misrepresents his record in MA on taxes:
    http://www.factcheck.org/more_mitt_malarkey.html

    The ad says Romney “cut taxes” in Massachusetts. While he did cut some taxes – for example, enacting business tax credits – tax rates remained unchanged. Plus, Romney raised state revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars per year by increasing fees and closing corporate tax loopholes….

    We also find the ad’s claim that “Romney cut taxes” to be misleading. It is true that Romney proposed some income tax cuts that the Democratic-controlled Massachusetts Legislature rejected. And he did succeed in cutting some taxes – for example, he enacted property tax relief for seniors and approved business tax credits – but overall tax rates remained the same. The conservative Club for Growth said his term included “some solid efforts” but that “overall, Romney’s record on tax policy is mixed.” Indeed, he increased state revenues significantly.

    Technically, Romney’s often-repeated boast that he didn’t raise taxes is true, but it’s also misleading, as we discussed in our critique of the second Republican presidential debate back in May. In 2003, to help close a big budget gap, he pushed through a number of increased state fees that brought in $400 million in their first year. For example, he doubled fees for marriage licenses and other court filings. He also quintupled the per gallon delivery fee for gasoline (money that is supposed to be for cleaning up any leaks from underground fuel tanks). Romney also “closed loopholes” in the corporate tax structure, a move that generated another $150 million in increased revenue.

    Romney also shifted some of the state tax burden down to the local level, by cutting local aid revenues. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, representing the state’s cities and towns, said Romney’s cut “forced communities statewide to cut services and raise local taxes and fees.” The exact amount of the local increases hasn’t been determined, but Romney at least partly avoided increasing state taxes by forcing Massachusetts cities and towns to raise theirs.

  8. RobertC says:

    Anyone but the candidate Eric Johnson supports. Classless move by a classless loser.

    McCain is the only choice i can see.

  9. debbie0040 says:

    Rudy has no chance in Georgia and Romney is the closest to Fred left.

    Also Romney was not named one of the top ten most corrupt politicians in 2007 by Judicial Watch like Rudy and the Huckster were.

    Well since you started it Jason…..

    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/huckabees_attack_ad_runs_after_all.html

    January 3, 2008
    Updated: January 4, 2008
    His attack ad appears on four Iowa stations. We find it somewhat misleading. Another ad makes misleading claims about tax cuts.
    Summary
    The ad Huckabee said he decided not to run has now appeared at least three times in Iowa anyway. It accuses Romney of being “dishonest” but shades the facts in the process.

    Update, Jan. 4: The ad ran at least 10 times on four different stations in Davenport and Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The Huckabee campaign called those airings a mistake.

    In another ad Huckabee claims to have signed the most broad-based tax cut in Arkansas history. But as we’ve noted repeatedly, he signed bigger tax increases than cuts.

    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/huckabee_cut_crime_and_taxes.html

    Huckabee Cut Crime and Taxes?
    January 2, 2008
    The truth is that violent crime was higher at the end of his term than when he took office, and he raised taxes more than he cut them.
    Summary
    In the run-up to the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, Huckabee is running a TV ad featuring graphics that claim he was “tough on crime” and “brought Arkansas’ crime rate down,” and that he “cut taxes over 90 times as governor.”

    In fact, the violent crime rate was higher at the end of his tenure than it was the year he took office. And the tax cuts he claims credit for were minor compared with the large increases he approved, which included an increase in the state sales tax.

    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/huckabees_fiscal_record.html

    Huckabee’s Fiscal Record
    November 21, 2007
    Under fire from conservatives, the former Arkansas governor misrepresents his tax hikes, and cuts.
    Summary
    Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has been hit with criticism over his record on taxes as governor of Arkansas. The faultfinders have been members of his own party, who take issue with tax increases he enacted. In recent interviews on Fox News, Huckabee responded to some of these questions, but we found him to be misleading and incorrect on several points:

    Huckabee claimed that a speech in which he implored the state Legislature to raise taxes was in response to a state Supreme Court order to increase education funding. But he specifically said in that speech that he would address the education matter at a later date.
    He said a tax on beds filled in nursing homes was a “fee” not a tax, despite the fact that he himself has called it the “bed tax.”
    Huckabee claimed a gasoline tax was only passed after 80 percent of voters approved it. Not true. The tax was enacted before a referendum vote on highway repairs.
    He frequently says he cut taxes “almost 94 times” but leaves out the 21 taxes raised during his tenure. In the end, he presided over a net tax increase.
    Also, we find that former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson stretched the truth in claiming that Arkansas’ spending had doubled under Huckabee. It didn’t increase that much, and Huckabee left a sizable surplus. Analysis
    Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has drawn fire from fiscal conservatives who accuse him of pushing for tax increases. It’s an issue that has garnered plenty of back and forth in the blogosphere – and, as Huckabee’s campaign has gained ground in Iowa, from the Republican presidential candidates themselves. A CBS News/New York Times poll shows him winning approval from 21 percent of Republican likely caucus-goers in Iowa to front-runner Mitt Romney’s 27 percent – with a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percent.

    In recent interviews on Fox News, Huckabee responded to some of the sniping with inaccurate and misleading descriptions of his actions as governor. The campaign of one of his rivals, Fred Thompson, sent out an e-mail this week disputing some of Huckabee’s recent remarks. We also find the Thompson camp to be wrong on one of its criticisms.

    Bluffing on Tax Increases

    A recent YouTube video, first posted by a conservative Arkansas blogger, shows about one minute of a May 2003 speech in which Huckabee encourages the Arkansas Legislature to pass tax increases. In a Fox News interview, Huckabee said that portion of the speech was taken out of context:

    Huckabee (Fox News, Nov. 14): That was in the context of a [Arkansas] Supreme Court order that we had to fund education at a higher level. The legislators had come down to the special session and there was all kinds of talk about, well, this tax increase or that revenue possibility is out of the question, dead on arrival. … Now we were at the point, with a court order over our heads – we were going to have to improve our schools.

    Getty Images
    Huckabee also invites listeners to “look at the whole speech, if you can stand it,” claiming that it shows a very different message from the one that clip implies. We have pretty strong stomachs here at FactCheck.org, so we called Huckabee’s bluff. (The entire speech is available in two parts.) We found that the full speech does indeed show a different message. But it’s Huckabee who’s out of step with the facts.

    It is true that in November 2002 the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that the state’s funding of its public schools violated the equal protection clause in the Arkansas Constitution. Public schools in poorer parts of the state were being underfunded. The court gave the state until Jan. 1, 2004, to correct the problem. So Huckabee is correct in claiming that he was under a court order to increase public school funding.

    But that is not why Huckabee was in front of the Arkansas Legislature in May 2003. Even without the court order to increase public school funding, Arkansas was facing a budget shortfall. For the fiscal year that ended June 2002, that shortfall was $209 million, according to the state Department of Finance and Administration. The fiscal year 2003 gap was $66.7 million. Huckabee’s plea for a tax increase was aimed at covering these revenue shortfalls. But don’t take our word for it. Here’s Huckabee earlier in that same speech:

    Huckabee (state Legislature, May 2003): But the issue that brings us back to this Capitol on this day cannot wait any longer. The urgency of passing budgets for various state agencies is critical, but just as critical is passing a revenue stream that will fund these budgets and provide an adequate level of service, particularly in the areas of Medicaid [sic], as well as the Department of Corrections.

    The line that really got our attention, though:

    Huckabee: The business of education, we’ve decided to let that wait until the fall.

    We take no position on Huckabee’s call for tax increases. But we do suggest that bluffing on a busted hand is a bad move in the YouTube age.

    A Tax By Any Other Name …

    On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Huckabee about several taxes for which the conservative organization Club for Growth has lambasted the governor, including one on nursing home patients. Huckabee played with semantics in his response :

    Huckabee (Fox News Sunday, Nov. 18): Well, we didn’t raise them on nursing home patients. That was a quality assurance fee that was supported by the industry.

    Huckabee backed and signed into law a 2001 bill requiring a “quality assurance fee,” which was a $5.25 fee per bed, per day for nursing homes designed to increase funding for the state Medicaid program. Arkansas media outlets and state legislators dubbed it the “bed tax,” and in fact, Huckabee himself has called it that on at least one occasion. In discussing a controversy over the subsequent hikes in prices charged to private-insurance patients (those who personally pay their bills), he said:

    Huckabee (quoted in Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, July 19) : Many of them told their patients that it was directly resulted from the bed tax. What we have shown you is that is not true; some of these increases are not the result of the bed tax.

    Whether the governor calls it a tax or a fee, the money charged was to be adjusted annually so that nursing homes would pay an annual fee “equal to six percent (6%) of the aggregate annual gross receipts,” according to Act 635 of 2001. The legislation also stipulated that nursing homes could not list the fee as a separate charge on billing statements to patients.

    It is true, as Huckabee said, that the industry strongly supported the measure. The president of the Arkansas Health Care Association said the group was “ecstatic” that the governor signed the bill into law, according to the Democrat-Gazette. Huckabee had vetoed a bill that would have raised the funds through a tax on tobacco products.

    Huckabee also told Fox News that the bed tax “increased the quality of care by increasing the staffing requirements.” The tax may have led some homes to hire more employees, but a separate piece of legislation specifically increased the staffing requirements. Despite that law, a 2003 congressional report by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that many of Arkansas’ nursing homes didn’t meet federal staffing recommendations.

    Increases with Voter Approval?

    Huckabee has similarly been playing loose with the facts about gas tax increases. In 1999, the Arkansas Legislature approved – with Huckabee’s support – a 3 cent per gallon increase in gasoline taxes and a 4 cent per gallon increase in diesel fuel taxes. Huckabee has claimed in campaign appearances and on Fox News that these increases were part of a statewide referendum that passed with 80 percent voter approval. Here is an exchange with Fox News’ Sean Hannity:

    Hannity (Nov. 16): You talked about cutting taxes and balancing budgets. You know, what was the net result? You did support some tax increases, but some tax cuts. Can you explain that?

    Huckabee: Yes, I did. Certainly, there was an issue that involved road building and infrastructure on roads and bridges, and I did support that. We added $1 billion to our economy, 40,000 jobs, went from having the worst to the best roads. When we put that out there for the people to decide whether they wanted to affirm it, they did by an 80 percent vote, I would call that leadership.

    We would call that not true. Huckabee is right that about 80 percent of Arkansas voters approved a referendum to increase funding for highway repair. But the referendum happened after the gas tax hike had already become law.

    Huckabee seems to be describing the plan he wanted rather than the plan he actually supported. In Huckabee’s initial proposal, a tax increase on diesel fuel would be used to finance bonds that would, in turn, be used to repair major highways. The higher diesel fuel tax would have taken effect only if the bond initiative passed, according to the Associated Press. Huckabee’s plan, however, met resistance from Democratic lawmakers, many of whom were from rural districts that did not have major highways but that did have roads badly in need of repair. Their proposed alternative was to add a gasoline tax hike to the bond referendum.

    But Huckabee actually campaigned against sending the gas tax proposal to the voters. Eventually he supported a plan under which the gas and diesel tax increases would take effect regardless of whether the bond passed.

    Championing His Tax Cuts

    The former Arkansas governor is fond of saying – in debates, on his Web site and in that Nov. 18 Fox News interview – that he cut taxes “almost 94 times in my state.” (On his site, he rounds up to “nearly 100 times,” adding that he saved “the people of Arkansas almost $380 million.”)

    That turns out to be far from the whole story. The Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration found that 90 tax cuts were enacted in legislative sessions from 1997 through 2005, while Huckabee was governor, and those cuts reduced tax revenues by $378 million. But Huckabee fails to mention the 21 tax increases that occurred under his watch and that raised revenues by substantially more. The total net tax increase under Huckabee’s tenure was an estimated $505.1 million, says the Department of Finance and Administration’s Whitney McLaughlin, adding that the figure has been adjusted for inflation.

    The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette combed through a list of those 90 tax cuts, finding that a number of them pertained to very specific taxes and relatively small amounts. (We asked the Huckabee campaign for its tax tally, but we didn’t get a response.) The newspaper does give Huckabee credit for spearheading “one of the largest tax cuts in Arkansas history,” an income-tax cut that amounted to $90.6 million in one year alone.

    He Obeys the Law, Too

    In that Fox News Sunday interview, Huckabee said that he balanced the state budget “every single year of my 10.5 years as governor,” a boast that he has repeated on the campaign trail. What Huckabee forgot to mention is that the Arkansas Constitution has a balanced budget requirement. The state can run a deficit only if a majority of voters approve such a move in a statewide election. To his credit, Huckabee does sometimes acknowledge the balanced budget requirement. But to our ears, trying to claim credit for obeying your state’s constitution is a bit like bragging that you obey the law of gravity.

    Hey Big Spender

    Huckabee’s critics, however, have done some exaggerating of their own. That press release from former Tennessee Sen. Thompson accuses Huckabee of more than doubling state spending, from $6.6 billion to $16.1 billion at the end of 2006. But those numbers aren’t correct. When we talked to Mike Stormes, the administrator of the Office of Budget for the state of Arkansas, we discovered a different story. In fact, after adjusting for inflation, we found that spending in fiscal year 1998 (the first budget for which Huckabee was responsible) was actually $10.4 billion, while spending at the end of 2006 was $15.6 billion. That’s a big increase, but it’s a far cry from doubling state spending.

    It’s worth noting, too, that Huckabee, despite facing a $200 million shortfall in 2002, ended his term with a surplus of $844.5 million. A billion dollar turnaround is, we think, a noteworthy accomplishment.

  10. Inside_Man says:

    I wonder, did he return any of that $844.5 million to the people to whom it belongs? Huckabee believes in the power of government to promote his social agenda, just like the majority of the GOP.

    Shelbinator,

    I would much rather suffer the “humiliation” of being principled than heaping forced adoration on the guy I can stomach the best. Enjoy your money while its still worth something and the rest of your liberties while they are being stolen out from under your nose.

  11. LoyaltyIsMyHonor says:

    “Debbie, that last post is about as long as the Longest Thread.”

    Does anybody actually read those long cut and paste posts?

  12. Doug Deal says:

    Buzz,

    It’s getting desperate, but don’t count Rudy out until after Florida. As for me, I will support either of those two over the Huckster or Captain Queeg.

  13. shep1975 says:

    Debbie…I did snipits.

    A vote for Romney IS a vote for Socialized Medicine. You might as well just go a head and support Hillary then.

    You’re older than me Debbie…that idea should scare the ___ out of you. I have seen how older people with health issues are treated in countries with socialized medicine, remember, my wife’s from one of those.

    All of you “Mitt is a conservative” folks seem to forget his “voluntary” health insurance plan is nearly bankrupting Mass.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/healthscience/stories/DN-MedSidebar3_22bus.ART.State.Edition2.376f0a3.html

    Devon Herrick, a health economist with the National Center for Public Policy Analysis, a Dallas-based conservative think tank, said Democrats’ plans for universal health coverage might not immediately affect the average person getting insurance through an employer. “But in the long run you’d see insurance costs go up.

    “Look at the states that have done this, like Massachusetts,” he said, referring to the rise in insurance costs there since the state enacted universal coverage when Mitt Romney was governor.

    And you want to talk about a gift registry and attack ads? And Romney has not launched any attack ads? Fact Check is chalked FULL of the distortions he’s putting up with his money.

    A tiger doesn’t change his stripes and if you think in the 2 years he actually governed Mass. was enough to have a conservative about-face, you are scarily in denial of the truth.

  14. Hank Reardan says:

    I bet our parties are better than the other Republicans I mean where can you get pro business , pro life ,hard core Libertarians and anti war people in one room. All you guys talk about a big tent I and here is your chanace.
    Of the candidates left which one would vote like Reagan.
    I say it is Ron Paul.
    Huckabee would get half of it right just the wrong half.
    Romney would get it right if he thought it would gethim another win in a primary
    Rudy would not get claose but his parties might be as good as Ron Paul’s
    McCain might would come close except I do not belive he understands free speech
    So Fred Heads please join our fight for fredom and Liberty

  15. CHelf says:

    You gotta love when facts are presented discrediting a candidate (Shep’s on Mitt) and the only response from supporters of that candidate is not to disprove those items but to attack another candidate (Debbie’s on Huck). Does that mean Debbie has no means to disprove them AND she has no problem with her candidate taking those positions? Debbie, can you not defend your guy? I mean against the claims made about him…not attacking some other candidate.

  16. Still Looking says:

    Fred’s foreplay is better than his act.

    Fred Heads can now savor one of the worst campaigns in history. Fred’s numbers were great when he was teasing us with his entrance in the race, and promptly fell like a stone after he started campaigning.

    The pick-me-up for Thompson supporters might be watching Rudy’s strategy crash and burn. Here’s a guy who was leading in the national polls, campaigns all over NH and gets 4th, slightly above Ron Propeil. Now he is all in (Florida). In a very tight race, it will be difficult if not impossible to breakout into a frontrunner again. He blew it.

  17. In the loop says:

    Today, I announce that I will form a committee to advise me on whether I should form an exploratory committee to consider commenting on Fred Thompson’s withdrawal.

  18. GOPeach says:

    Now that Fred Thompson has dropped out of the race, the National Right To Life should endorse the true pro-life candidate, Mike Huckabee. The Georgia Right To Life always endorsed Huckabee, not Thompson.

  19. waterboy says:

    Debbie’s posts are awful long, but worth a scan.

    I don’t read anything that is from Shep or Gopeach….why bother?

    I am glad to hear today that many Thompson supporters are going to Romney.

  20. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf, people that live in glass houses should not throw stones like Huckabee supporters do about Mitt. Mitt did flip flop about positions but at least he did not lie about his position changes and pretend they never existed like Huckabee did.

    Robert Bork did endorse the Mittster and say he was the only candidate that could keep the Reagan coalition together.

    Still looking, just how familiar are you with Fred’s foreplay?

    I can tell you that I watched the returns Saturday night with Fred heads from all over the South . Everyone applauded and cheered when it was announced that McCain beat Huckabee.

    http://www.numbersusa.com/index

    Anti-Amnesty Romney Leads Poll in Next Primary in FLORIDA
    (January 22) Rasmussen’s most recent polling on Republican candidates shows the anti-amnesty Governor Mitt Romney leading the pro-amnesty Sen. John McCain 25%-20% in Florida. View ratings in 16 immigration categories at NumbersUSA President Roy Beck’s Presidential Grid.

    NumbersUSA does not endorse candidates.

    What has been the previous record of immigration actions while in elected office?

    ABYSMAL — John McCain
    BAD — Rudy Giuliani
    BAD — Hillary Clinton
    BAD — Barack Obama
    BAD — John Edwards
    BAD — Mike Huckabee
    GOOD — Ron Paul
    GOOD — Mitt Romney

    “Governor Romney Vetoed In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants. “Romney also vetoed a number of outside sections of the budget, including:…A plan that would have permitted illegal aliens to pay the same in-state tuition rate at our public colleges and universities as Massachusetts citizens.” May 18, 2007;

    Governor Romney Opposed Efforts To Give Driver’s Licenses To Illegal Immigrants. “‘Those who are here illegally should not receive tacit support from our government that gives an indication of legitimacy,’ the governor said, echoing arguments that opponents have voiced in the Commonwealth and in other states considering similar license measures. ‘If they are here illegally, they should not get driver’s licenses,’ he said.”

  21. GrandOleDawg says:

    Shep, knock it off. To say Romney’s plan is “socialized medicine” is willful ignorance of the facts. His plan was a market based solution that was drawn up by the Heritage Foundation. Instead of a big government “single payer” health insurance it used those funds to help only the poorest citizens purchase their OWN PRIVATE INSURANCE PLAN.

    Whether we (conservatives) like it or not, government funds for healthcare are not going away. I would rather have a market based solution like this in each state, than a top down European style federal mandate.

    So knock it off Jason. You’re killing the little credibility you have with these knee-jerk, bumper sticker attacks.

  22. debbie0040 says:

    Romney has had experience turning around failing enterprises and he will be a huge asset to help turn this economy around. Other candidates do not have this expertise.

    Tell us how you really feel Erick 🙂
    http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/for_a_diet_guru_huckabee_serves_up_serious_empty_calories_to_the_public

    For A Diet Guru, Huckabee Serves Up Serious Empty Calories to the Public
    Is this man retarded?
    By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (31) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
    I’ve decided Mike Huckabee is an economic retard.

    You can see his total principles here, but if you want the real highlights, look no further than this synopsis of his economic stimulus plan. It’s a keynesian recipe for big government. Liberals will love it — complete with anti-war canards.

  23. debbie0040 says:

    Shep said “A tiger doesn’t change his stripes and if you think in the 2 years he actually governed Mass. was enough to have a conservative about-face, you are scarily in denial of the truth.”

    The same can be said about the Huckster except in Arkansas. He was a tax and spend big government RINO while Governor of Arkansas. Taxes and spending rose whiel he governed. He raised taxes ten times more than Bill Clinton.
    He supported the Senate Amnesty Bill last year and supported a path to citizenship for illegals. Huckabee supported college tuition for children of illegals. In 2005, Huckabee called a bill un American that would require proof of citizenship for those registering to vote and that would deny state benefits to illegals. Then there are the pardons and commutations. Just like you said Shep, a tiger doesn’t change his stripes ..

    I can assure you that I would rather have a President with Romney’s record than Huckabee’s. John McCain even looks good compared to the Huckster.

    Club For Growth rates Romney much higher than the Huckster.

    The economy is going to be a huge issue in the general election. We need a nominee with business experience and experience in turn arounds.

  24. Bull Moose says:

    We can’t have more conservative judges, more tax cuts, less government spending, and so forth if WE DON’T WIN IN NOVEMBER.

    The best candidate who can win in November (where it actually counts – remember) is John McCain.

  25. Anybody have the latest Georgia polls? I’m in the anybody-but-McCain camp. I want to vote for the best competitor against McCain. I’m voting by absentee ballot, so I have to figure it out soon.

    If I had my druthers, Romney is my next favorite — but my disdain for McCain far exceeds my affinity for any remaining candidate.

  26. souldrift says:

    Wow, I feel like I’m reading FRedState.

    I’m just glad one of the Three Stooges has dropped out. When Romney and Ghoul-iani follow, it’ll truly be a good day.

  27. I’ll post this both here and under the post “Was It Over When The Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor”… Feel the need to vent, i suppose…

    ______________

    “Farris” must be German for ‘don’t say die’.

    The Fred Thompson campaign has been mishandled from Announcement Day 1. It’s been nothing but a total failure of the candidate and the campaign.

    I was in Charleston, SC for their Primary (I go there about once every 2 weeks, grew up partially there). The TV ads STUNK. The ‘differentiation’ message stunk. The whole thing stunk — except for the VOTERS who understood WHY we needed a candidate like this. No wonder the campaign only took 16% of the vote.

    Icarus, I think the 10,000 marbles were already purchased when Fred announced…

    …On Election Day for SC, the Thompson campaign had, as it’s schedule listed on its’ website, “walk around Greenville”. No kidding! WHAT was that?

    Then they listed a visit to the local newspaper in Spartenburg, and other nonsense. It may be a great paper…but not a lot of publishing was going to happen at midday on the day of the election.

    There were no election day rallies. There were no major media events (other than Glenn Beck). This was a hodgepodge of how NOT to close a campaign.

    And then on Election night? The Election Night Party was entitled ” The Post Election Party”…. really. Not a Victory Party — even though this was the Do-Or-Die primary.

    You get the picture.

    This was the worst-run campaigns since Bush 92. Our liberal friend, Chris is Hardcore, is smiling tonight somewhere in Decatur. I, on the other hand, frown at the Taco Mac in Duluth.

  28. DMZDave says:

    I was at Fred’s first event, the one where Fred and Mrs. Fred paused to speak to Erick and he swooned from the attention. I was not as taken. I paid my money and went there hoping to be excited. In my heart I was afraid Fred may still be the same ole Senator Fred who was too lazy to take it to Clinton over the whole Chinese contribution and espionage scandal. Fred could ahve saved us all from Hillary and even Monica if he had done his day job back then. But then as now, Fred was all fore play as Chairman of Government Operations and the investigation went no where. We knew that but we still hoped he had it in him and had learned his lesson.

    That evening in Atlanta, Fred rambled on and could not present a coherent reason why he was running for president. At the time, it seemed like he hadn’t actually thought about what it means to run . At one point he actually said “people tell me you have to be crazy to run for president and I tend to agree with them.” What? You’re crazy?

    His performance in his run for president was a reprise of his performance as Chairman of the Goernment Affairs Committee. Loved the title – hated the work. Fred, it’s too bad, ya coulda been a contender.”

  29. SFrazier says:

    Any Christian backing Romney should be ashamed of themselves for selling out
    Christ for a few dollars and/or moments of earthly political power. The fact is those who follow the lies of Smith and the Mormon cult will die and go to hell.

  30. SFrazier says:

    The Mormon cult has some elements of the false religion of Islam in that they believe all non-Mormons are an abomination and they will one day rule the earth.

  31. SFrazier says:

    Listen, Mitt Romney has the right according to our laws to run for President. I have the right according to those same laws to oppose him because of my religious beliefs. And my primary problem with Romney is the fact that he clearly is trying to mislead Christians into thinking that Mormonism is another Christian denomination when your own cult teaches that actual Christianity constitutes “the great apostasy” or “total apostasy”, that actual Christianity is a lie and that God raised up your freemason “prophet” to restore the true faith that died when the last apostle died (except for the three Nephites … are you one of those that claims to have seen or been given assistance by them?

    So go try your deceits with someone who thinks that “values” makes you a Christian and is impressed by your works and legalism. But those tactics are not going to work here.

  32. GOPeach says:

    RoMONEY gave Club for Greed Growth over $500Million…. hummmmm

    I wonder why he got a better score than HUCKABEE…

    The White House is not for Sale!

  33. Bull Moose says:

    Ladies and Gentlemen who call yourselves a Republican and a Conservative:

    I ask you to think about WINNING in November. Think of what we all are Republicans AND Conservatives for. It means nothing if you vote and nominate someone who is clearly going to lose in November.

    John McCain worked to ensure Conservative Judges could be confirmed in the Senate. Yes he worked with Senators across the aisle. Republicans lacked 60+ votes and that’s what it takes to get things done.

    As President, John McCain will pursue pro-growth economic policies! He believes in simplifying the tax code, keeping marginal tax rates low, and pursuing free trade policies to increase American prosperity and competitiveness. Look at his advisors. Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm. Come on!

    In addition, John McCain also believes that tax cuts work best when tied to spending restraint! Don’t we all agree with that? Higher taxes and runaway spending discourage entrepreneurship, foster wasteful tax-planning and slow long-term economic growth.

    For his entire career in Washington John McCain has been a leader against wasteful spending by big spenders in Congress. As President, John McCain Will Fight to Reform Government. John McCain will fight to cut runaway spending in Washington, DC, eliminate earmarks and expose pork barrel spending.

    Finally, McCain can win in November, everything we believe, everything we have worked for, everything we desire as Republicans will mean nothing if we nominate someone who just cannot win.

  34. ConservativeCaucus says:

    Debbie,

    Again, your distortion of Huckabee’s record is noted:

    He never supported last year’s McCain-Kennedy bill. But please don’t let your venom for Huckabee get in the way of facts.

    Sfrazier, there are many reasons not to support Romney, but please, I beg you, leave his faith out of this.

  35. GOPEach:

    What is your source for this? You wrote:

    “RoMONEY gave Club for Greed Growth over $500Million…. hummmmm”

    Where is the evidence of this? Please clarify. It’s news to me.

  36. CHelf says:

    Debbie,

    You still never answered my question about Mitt. How can you still support Mitt when he is as “guilty” on the issues as some of those you’ve attacked. How can anyone actually support Romney when he’s never been consistent on any issue? How has Mitt proved he is a conservative? Surely not just by saying so on the campaign trail.

  37. eburke says:

    For me the choice I have is McCain or Huckabee. Nothing I have read here has changed that, in fact the more I hear about Romney, the less I like him. The more Debbie posts about Huckabee, the more I like him. If Huckabee is still in by Feb 5, he gets my vote. He is the only one with any real reform of the tax code, he is from the South and has executive experience. He is right on the social issues and is not a latter day convert to the right to life and pro-family position.

  38. waterboy says:

    The freakish way Sfraz and Gopeach slander Romney makes the case for him all the stronger.

    Bull is at least trying to sway folks in a respectful manner.

    I’ll take Romney over McCain and Huchabee – I hope others will as well. Thanks to those that are willing to support their candidate of choice respectfully instead of posting piles of crap.

  39. Bull Moose says:

    So, Romney spent more than ALL the other candidates combined in South Carolina and came in 4th place.

    The tone of this dialogue is getting pretty nasty and that’s unfortunate.

    What is also unfortunate is that there are those out there who are so called conservatives who say they will not support McCain even if he is up against Hillary Clinton.

    Who are they? Tom DeLay. Rick Santorum.

    That’s disturbing rhetoric and is not rhetoric that we as Republicans say openly and to the media.

    The extremes of partisan need to have a reality check.

  40. ConservativeCaucus says:

    waterboy,

    Your comments reflect my sentiments as well:

    Make your point for or against your candidate on the issues, not based on religion (for or against). That is why I continually ask Peach and now Frazier to speak to the issues concerning Romney, not his religious beliefs.

    I like Huckabee on the issues. Do I like Huckabee’s religious beliefs? I do. But religious beliefs alone are not qualification enough for me.

  41. CHelf says:

    Any Republican who gets praise from Barney Frank for opposing Bush tax cuts is scary in my book. Too bad Mitt had to then deny he ever felt that way. I just think it’s lousy to go from opposing the tax cuts, to attacking McCain for opposing them, and then deny he ever opposed them. Moving to the Right on issues is one thing. but to come out and attack someone for doing the same thing you did and then deny you ever had that position is pretty sketchy. It speaks volumes for what someone will do and say to get elected.

  42. GOPeach says:

    Mark:

    Here goes …

    Truth Squad: What Does $585,000 Buy You?

    Question: What does $585,000 buy you?

    Answer: It bought Mitt Romney backers a smear job against Mike Huckabee orchestrated by Beltway Insiders.

    The Club for Growth has an affiliated 527 group, Club for Growth.net, running anti-Mike Huckabee ads in early primary states.

    – At least $585,000 in contributions from Mitt Romney financial backers.

    – Club for Growth has spent $750,000 against Governor Huckabee in Iowa, South Carolina and Michigan.
    Here are donors that have donated both to Club for Growth.net* and Mitt Romney:

    Name: John Childs**

    Contribution to Beltway Group
    $100,000 on 11/16/07

    $100,000 on 12/31/07

    Contribution to Mitt Romney
    $2,100 on 1/8/07

    Name: Bob Perry

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $200,000 on 12/12/07

    Contribution to Mitt Romney
    $2,300 on 3/13/07

    Name: Kristen Hertel

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $25,000 on 12/21/07

    $25,000 on 1/02/08

    Contribution to Mitt Romney
    $1,000 on 2/6/07

    Name: Muneer Satter

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $25,000 on 12/21/07
    $25,000 on 1/02/08

    Contribution to Mitt Romney

    $2,300 on 2/6/07

    Name: Michael Valentine

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $40,000 on 1/3/08

    Contribution to Mitt Romney

    $2,300 on 4/4/07

    Name: Travis Anderson

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $25,000 on 12/19/07

    Contribution to Mitt Romney

    $2,100 on 2/8/07

    Name: Richard Gaby

    Contribution to Beltway Group

    $20,000 on 12/19/07

    Contribution to Mitt Romney

    $1,000 on 2/12/07

    * Only represents donors that contributed more than $20,000 to Club for Growth.net in 2007/2008.

    ** “Boston investor John Childs, who donated $2,100 to Romney in 2007, recently gave 100,000 to the Club for Growth.” [Morain, Dan. “Huckabee foes open their wallets for attack ads,” The Los Angeles Times. 1 January 2008.]

    *** All contributor information obtained from Federal Election Commission’s electronic database at http://www.fec.gov.

  43. Rick Day says:

    Now that I am at the end of the thread, my observation is that I am not sure any Republican candidate can garner more than 29-33% of the election.

    This splintering…wow..

    PS again to Peach: Paul is so PRO LIFE he has PROfessionally delivered thousands of babies safely into LIFE from the nasty nether regions of female sin infested areas (according to your peoples).

    He swears to overturn RvW.

    Give. Me. A. Break. Hucks a ‘Thumper and you have been Stepforded to blindly follow The Lord ™.

    Teach your pony another trick, this one is stale.

  44. GOPeach says:

    Ricky –

    The Cross is not magic.

    The CROSS is where God casted a vote for you, Precious. 🙂

    You can keep running your race or drop out – It’s your CHOICE . 🙂

  45. jackson says:

    Can anyone show me a single poll where Romney or Huckabee beat Hillary OR Obama? Its not going to happen.

    I dont like everything McCain has done. But he IS conservative, he’s not making it up, and he’s kept those positions for a long time. He doesnt just change his views on abortion, etc. because he is running president.

    Romney is not a bad guy. I like some of the things he talks about and I like his business background. IF he won the nomination, I would vote for him. But do you Reed/Christian Coalition folks actually believe he cares about social issues? Seriously? Heres a news flash. He doesn’t. Not one bit. He’s a shrewd business man, anda shrewd campaigner. But he doesn’t connect with the real America.

    Huckabee is not a bad guy either. I like the fact he seems genuine, has a strong faith, and hacks off the powers that be. IF he won the nomination, I would vote for him. But he has NO (make that ZERO) chance of beating Hillary OR Obama. In fact, I would bet my House AND car that if he wins the nomination, he won’t win in November. He can’t. The same reason that he is doing OK in these primaries is the EXACT reason why he wont win. America is TIRED of the whole Southern/Baptist thing. (I am not saying they hate Christians or anything like that).

    Guiliani is done. Paul, God bless him and I want to get rid of the IRS too, is done.

    We need a win in November, and a guy that has the guts to really say NO to big spending when it matters and is a pro-life conservative. I didnt support McCain in 2000 and I wasnt sure who I would support in this election. But it is clear that he is the one that can win in November and represent most of the things the conservatives car about.

    One other thing, the chance of the next President “getting rid of all the illegal mexicans” is about as plausible as getting all the Troops out of Iraq by the end of the year. Its not gonna happen. Demagogue and race-bait all you want, but the reality is “they” are here to stay and we need to figure out a way to deal with it, realistically. And before Debbie and GOPeach say anything, remember, I am a right wing conservative. (Oh, and Debbie, you still owe me a steak dinner.)

  46. jackson says:

    ****(Oh, and Debbie, you still owe me a steak dinner.)****

    Sorry, if you forgot,this was from after mercilessly trashing Casey Cagle and calling pretty much the scourge of the earth, you promised Ralph Reed would win the election. Sound familiar?

    And GOPeach, you dont owe me a steak dinner. You should get one for yourself though.You need to get out more often.

  47. jackson says:

    Sorry, last thing, since I am up at 6am I wanted to be the first to point out that GOPeach, Romney SUPPORTERS giving $500 THOUSAND to the Club for Growth/Greed is much different than Romney PERSONALLY giving $500 MILLION. (Worse, you can’t say it was an accidental zero when you spelled out Million).

  48. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf, I did answer your questions above on why Romney is better than the Huckster. Immigration is a huge issue with me. The fact Romney has the expertise to assist with the economy.

    Romney has a much better record on immigration than Huckabee does.

    Club For Growth has also been somewhat critical to some extent of Romney but not like Huckabee. Ridiculous for anyone to infer they are doing Romney’s dirty work for him. They have been critical of him as well. Check it out yourself.

    Then there is Cato Institute, Romney does have a better rating than Huckabee. C for Romeny F for Huckabee.

    http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa581/reportcard_table.html

  49. debbie0040 says:

    “ConservativeCaucus // Jan 22, 2008 at 10:50 pm

    Debbie,

    Again, your distortion of Huckabee’s record is noted:

    He never supported last year’s McCain-Kennedy bill. But please don’t let your venom for Huckabee get in the way of facts.”

    I guess there was another Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas that gave this interview during the debate over the Senate Amnesty Bill . Don’t let facts get in the way of your spin. You made that same statement on AJC Political Insider a month ago and I posted this interview to rebut iyour statement so you do know your statement is false.

    Go to the link to read the entire article.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/22/AR2006052201237.html

    Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R)
    Interview With The Fix’s Chris Cillizza and The Post’s Dan Balz
    washingtonpost.com
    Tuesday, May 23, 2006; 6:00 AM

    washingtonpost.com’s Chris Cillizza and Washington Post reporter Dan Balz interviewed Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) on May 16 as part of an ongoing series of conversations with potential 2008 presidential candidates. A transcript of the interview is below:

    Where are you on the debate that rages here between the House approach on immigration and what seems now to be a consensus approach in the Senate, particularly on the issue of a path to legal status or citizenship for at least quite a few of the 11 to 12 million who are here illegally?

    I tend to think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship. You shouldn’t ignore the law or ignore those who break it. But by the same token, I think it’s a little disingenuous when I hear people say they should experience the full weight of the law in every respect with no pathway, because that’s not something we practice in any other area of criminal justice in this country.

    We have everything from plea bargainings to suspended sentences to probation to clemency. There’s a whole gamut of ways in which there are lesser than the full penalties applied for a whole variety of reasons — everything from jail overcrowding to non-violent offenses.

    To think that we’re going to go lock up 12 million people, or even round them up and drive them to the border and let them go, might make a great political speech, but it’s not going to happen. What should happen, however, is exactly what I think the president has proposed, and that is that we create a process where people make restitution for the fact they have broken the law.

    It’s not an amnesty, and I know that there are some who think that anything less than essentially grabbing them by the nape of the neck and tossing them over a fence, real or imaginary, is amnesty. But I think that’s ridiculous. And whether it’s Patrick Kennedy, Rush Limbaugh, or an illegal immigrant, there ought to be some rationality in how we apply our law. We do that every day.

    I would imagine if any of us checked the record of prosecutors in my state or yours there are far more sentences that are plea bargained than actually go to trial. And that it’s pretty darn rare that a person even convicted at trial gets the maximum sentence on every charge brought. It’s just not always the way we do it.

    Suddenly to say that these people that came over here to pluck a chicken, pick a tomato, or make a bed should suffer the full consequences of the law as if somehow they’ve totally violated our peace and prosperity, is absurd. Now, should they have to pay some type of fine? Should they have to get in line behind the ones who are going through the legal process? Sure. That’s quite appropriate. But criminalizing beyond what they’ve already been criminalized, I mean, they’ve already broken the law. But to make them felons and in essence to say we’re going to put our heel on their head, what’s the point of that?

    Why do you think there are so many people in your party and in the leadership of the House of Representatives … feel so strongly in a different direction on this?

    I honestly don’t know. I mean, I wish I could tell you I knew the answer to that. I’ve done a lot of town halls. I’ve done a lot of call-in talk shows, both on radio and television, in my own state. And I’ve done a lot of Q&A formats in states all over the country, from one end of the coast to the other.

    And I find that there’s a certain segment of the population that is truly exercised about this and virtually nothing but this. And they’ve gone to seed on it. You can’t get them off of it, and you can’t have a discussion beyond the classic, “what part of illegal do you not understand?” I understand it correctly. I know exactly what that means.

  50. debbie0040 says:

    Jackson, during the 1988 Primary season the polls also showed that George H.W. Bush could not defeat Dukakis or any of the other Democratic candidates either.

    We kept hearing talk about how the odds were against a sitting Vice President being elected President.

    Economy will be a big issue and we need someone that can articulate very clearly plans to deal to turn the economy around. I trust Romney to do that. He has turn around various enterprises and I have faith that he can come up with a plan and carry it through to turn the economy around.

  51. Painterman says:

    Hillary has a 48 – 50% negative rating, a good candidate takes her out. Obama is the wild card, he lacks experience, and I think his name will actually be hard for people to vote for while we’re fighting Islamic terrorist, but a young Obama against the ancient McCain will be trouble for us as will Obama’s lack of experience against Hucabee’s which sort of cancel each other out.

    If we have a Candidate who is pro America, against amnesty, is pro tax cuts and supports the war on terror and finishing the job in Iraq then we will do well in Nov. Sadly McCain, Rudy nor Huckabee can fit the bill. The best Candidates have dropped out. I wish I could vote for Fred, but there is too much at stake Feb 5th for me to waste a vote. I’m going to vote for Romney

  52. jsm says:

    Paul is so PRO LIFE he has PROfessionally delivered thousands of babies safely into LIFE from the nasty nether regions of female sin infested areas (according to your peoples).

    Rick, your ignorance continues to astound me.

  53. CHelf says:

    Debbie,

    No you didn’t answer my question and it was NOT about Huckabee. It was about all of the problems Mitt has. He has a history of inconsistency on issues. He has NO proven conservative track record and somehow people are convinced he is conservative. I’m not sure how you can place faith in someone to be conservative just on what is said in stump speeches. He has completely flipped his position on almost every major issue. He did not support the Bush tax cuts but calls McCain out for doing the same. Mitt was even praised by Barney Frank with his not wanting to be a “cheerleader” for taxcuts he didn’t agree with. And then in an answer to Huckabee in a previous debate, he had the stones to say he ALWAYS supported the tax cuts. He was once pro-choice but now he’s pro-life, once gun control and now gun rights, once independent and not wanting to be considered Republican and now wants to be the party’s champion, distanced himself from being a Reagan fan and now claims to carry the torch for Reagan, etc. etc. As Erick said a while back, it’s great if he did convert on these causes. But do we really want to hand control of the party AND the nation over to someone who just walked into the “Big Tent”? With all of the issues we face in a very trying time, do we trust so much to someone so ‘young’ in the philosophy?

    So back to the original point, Debbie, your reaction to claims against Mitt is to divert to Huckabee. I asked you whether you had a response about Mitt’s problems or had the means to disprove any of them. Without mentioning Huckabee or any other candidate for that matter, can you respond to the problems Mitt has with his past?

  54. debbie0040 says:

    Chelf learn to read. I told you plainly why I supported Mitt over the Huckster. It may not have been what you wanted to hear, but I did. Just look in my postings above.

    btw, Do you have any response to the Hucksters problems?

    Romney is not the only one with inconsistency on issues. McCain, Rudy, and Huckabee all have problems.

  55. debbie0040 says:

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/22/america/repubs.php

    Romney pins Republican campaign hopes on business experience
    By Brian Knowlton and Elisabeth Bumiller Published: January 22, 2008

    E-Mail Article

    Listen to Article

    Printer-Friendly

    3-Column Format

    Translate

    Share Article

    Text Size

    WASHINGTON: Amid extraordinary global financial turmoil and increasing competition among American presidential candidates to offer economic stimulus plans, Mitt Romney played what he sees as his strongest card Tuesday, focusing on the economy and displaying his business experience.

    Romney, a former venture capitalist and the Republican presidential contender with the most experience in the business world, raised the possibility of a solvency crisis at U.S. banks.

    “We have to make sure these institutions have sufficient capital,” he told Reuters, while stopping short of predicting that some banks would face the risk of insolvency.

    The former Massachusetts governor said he saw a worrying trend as growing numbers of U.S. banks sought capital offshore.

    A “solvency crisis,” he said, was “obviously a very fearful perspective and hopefully one that does not rear its ugly head in reality.” But, Romney added, “people are talking about institutions having difficulty maintaining their level of capital.”

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080122/D8UB6LH00.html

  56. debbie0040 says:

    Peach, you used to obsessed with fantasies of Buzz in gym shorts and now it appears as though you have switched to Mitt in magic Mormon underwear.

    Are you two timing Buzz and Jace?

  57. Jace Walden says:

    Peach, you used to obsessed with fantasies of Buzz in gym shorts

    WHAT????

    First it was Bobb Barr, then Clayton, and now Buzz???? Oh yeah, and not to mention your husband…Peach, if you’re going to continue down this road of infidelity then I’m afraid I’m going to have to break things off. It’s either me or them.

    JSM,

    Rick is hilarious, man. You need to lighten up. He’s just baiting you, and it’s working.

  58. CHelf says:

    Debbie,

    I’m not sure you still understand my simple question. I clearly know how to read. Go back to my question and respond. Also, again, can you answer without bringing up Huck? I’m not a Huck supporter so I cannot answer for him. And I’m not asking about Huck. I’m not asking you why you support Mitt. I will repeat it in case you clearly cannot follow but can you please tell me your response to Mitt’s problems? Can you refute them? Are you saying you have NO problems with Mitt having no conservative credentials? Do you have no problem with him switching almost every major position? Again, this is not about Huckabee so try your absolute hardest to bury the deep urge you have to mention him in a post. This is completely and solely about you and Mitt. This is not why you support him. This is about his problems. I’ve focused this tightly for you to try to block out the urges to rant about Huckabee.

  59. Jace Walden says:

    Mitt is a loser. Republicans are drifting to Mitt because that’s what Republicans do. They compromise their values to achieve power. See years 2000-2007 for more information on this subject.

    Republicans haven’t elected a Republican with “Conservative Credentials” since 1984. It’s been 20 years. They’re not going to magically turn around and vote for a conservative. It ain’t gonna happen.

  60. debbie0040 says:

    I have problems with all the candidates that are left. I have the least problems with Mitt because of his business experience and record on immigration.

  61. jsm says:

    Rick is hilarious, man. You need to lighten up. He’s just baiting you, and it’s working.

    Okay, I bit. It seems that every comment from him has the same type of rhetoric, and I took him at face value.

  62. Jace Walden says:

    That’s because too many people are willing to comprise their values for Romney or McCain.

    In a general election Paul vs. Clinton. Paul would win going away.

  63. GOPeach says:

    DUNCAN HUNTER ENDORSES MIKE HUCKABEE!!!!

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — California Rep. Duncan Hunter, a former presidential candidate, announced Wednesday he is endorsing Mike Huckabee’s White House bid.

    “I got to know Governor Huckabee well on the campaign trail,” Huckabee said in a statement. “Of the remaining candidates I feel that he is strongly committed to strengthening national defense, constructing the border fence and meeting the challenge of China’s emergence as a military superpower that is taking large portions of America’s industrial base.

    “Along with these issues of national security, border enforcement and protecting the U.S. industrial base, I see another quality of Mike Huckabee’s candidacy that compels my endorsement,” he added. “Mike Huckabee is a man of outstanding character and integrity. I saw that character over the last year of campaigning and was greatly impressed. The other Republican candidates have many strengths and I wish them all well.”

  64. GOPeach says:

    It’s look better by the minute!

    Fred drops out

    Duncan Hunter endorses Huckabee

    Sam Brownback’s supoorters come with Huckabee

    MO!!!

    HuckaMomentum!!!!!!!

  65. GOPeach,

    That’s pretty weak logic, and you should refrain from it. It affects credibility on other statements when you make that kind of weak connection.

    — you stated that Romney gave “over 500 million”. That’s pretty specific, and it was pretty darn wrong. One might say you were off by about… 500 million.

    Further, Romney didn’t make any of those contributions, now by your own admission with your evidence.

    Gotta say peach — you overreached to ‘out of bounds’. What you wrote appears untrue.

  66. CHelf says:

    I guess Mitt’s not aiming to get a nod from Dubya:

    “I will not need briefings on how the economy works. I’ve been there. And I think it’s time we have a president who understands the economy, understands jobs, knows why jobs come and go, knows how we can be competitive around the world.”

    Take that Dubya. Mitt’s not thrilled with your economic performance. I guess the Harvard Business School MBA alumni network doesn’t apply?

  67. Bill Simon says:

    Wow..Duncan Hunter and Sam Brownback endorse Huckabee.

    I can hardly wait for Tom DeLay and Trent Lott (and, any other number of irrelvant politicians) to publicly endorse the Huckster.

  68. debbie0040 says:

    Senator Thad Cochran Endorses Governor Mitt Romney
    PRINT EMAIL DIGG DEL.ICIO.US FACEBOOK Email this Page To:
    Multiple addresses seperated by commas From:
    Subject:
    Message :
    Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    CONTACT: Kevin Madden (857) 288-6390

    Boston, MA – Today, Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS) announced that he was endorsing Governor Mitt Romney and his candidacy for President of the United States. Senator Cochran joins a Romney for President team that includes Senators Robert Bennett (R-UT), Wayne Allard (R-CO), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Judd Gregg (R-NH) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT).

    “It is an honor to join Governor Romney and his campaign for our nation’s highest office. At this moment our nation faces unprecedented challenges, and Governor Romney has the experience, vision and values needed to strengthen our country for future generations,” said Senator Cochran. “Governor Romney is a man of outstanding judgment and strong character. I look forward to working with him and helping to implement his conservative vision when he is elected our next President.”

    Welcoming Senator Cochran’s support, Governor Romney said, “Senator Cochran has been a strong voice for the State of Mississippi and our conservative values in the United States Senate. He has been dedicated to improving the quality of life of all Americans while defending this great country from foreign threats. I am proud that he has joined our campaign to strengthen our military, our economy and our families.”

  69. debbie0040 says:

    Huckabee supporters, I know this is painful to realize, but the only thing Huckabee is competing for is to be the leader of the evangelical wing of the party.

    Elvis could come back from the dead and endorse Huckabee and it would make no difference at this point.

    Rudy looks to be dead as well. He is tied for third in Florida .

    It will be a race between McCain and Romney. Pick which you prefer.

    Haven’t you noticed that I have not attacked Huckabee since this morning? That is because I don’t believe in kicking someone while they are down…

  70. GOPeach says:

    IF BISHOP MITT GET’s THE NOMINATION….

    I will leave the Republican REPROBATE Party!

    So will millions of CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS.

    You will fall flat on your face in NOVEMBER….

    Hide and watch!!!!

  71. GOPeach says:

    MARK –

    You are right.

    I MEANT to say CLUB for GROWTH ROMNEY BACKERS… gave over $500, oooo to SMEAR Huckabee.

    So… Thank you for making that correction!

    The ROMNEY MACHINE is a bit over the top.

  72. GOPeach says:

    Let’s see when he swears in … will he use the Bible (which he does not believe is valid) or the Book of Mormon which is a Sci-Fi Book?

    Oh who cares???? It doesn’t matter…. It’s all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  73. GOPeach says:

    FRED SUPPORTERS WELCOMED AT THE HUCKABEE CAMPAIGN:

    I just wanted to say that Fred Thompson was the only other true conservative in this race, and we understand yalls frustration with the way this race is shaping up. One of my best friends, as well as a good friend from church are Thompson supporters, and I’m sure they didn’t want him to drop out of the race.

    I would ask for your support of Gov. Huckabee. I believe they are so very close on many of the issues. For many of you it may too early to support another candidate, and that is understandable. But being on this forum, you must be at least looking at Gov. Huckabee. Just know that we here at Huck’s Army (for the most part) are a loving bunch, and truly want what is best for our country. We welcome your input or any questions you may have.

    Jack

  74. CHelf says:

    To those who insist Mitt is conservative can anyone tell me when he “converted”? I seriously ask this because back in 2003 he endorsed probably one of the most left wing mayors out there. Feel free to watch this video at the link below and then look at the Wiki entry for the candidate Mitt endorsed.

    http://www.voterocky.com/spots/Mitt_small.mov

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Anderson

    Is it not odd that someone who had a past like this guy would be endorsed by Mitt and this guy would in turn endorse Mitt for governor?

  75. Holly says:

    I supported Fred Thompson for his federalist positions. There is only one other candidate who has those leanings.

  76. Bill Simon says:

    Peach,

    You’re a member of the Gays-are-all-going-to-Hell crowd, so WHY do you bother inserting their commercials into YOUR support of a candidate?

    If a gay person talked to you now, you and your fellow radical nutcases would scream about the importance of the “sanctity of marriage” and demand a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage.

    You continue to demonstrate you are NOTHING but a flaming hypocrite, just like your hero Ralph Reed.

  77. Bill Simon says:

    Anyone can read them after you’ve posted them…every single one of your posts is marked with a Date and Time STAMP, and can be read at any time, and by anyone.

    See ya, Peach. I am not going to post anymore tonight.

  78. GOPeach says:

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — Congressman Duncan Hunter, R-California, who is running for President, called on Mitt Romney, another GOP candidate, to take a public stance on the proposed partnership between the private equity firm Romney founded and a Chinese-based company.

    Before running for Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, Romney was the CEO and founder of Bain Capital Partners, a highly successful venture capital and investment firm based in Boston which currently manages more than $50 billion in assets, according to the company’s website.

    Last month, Bain Capital and China’s Huawei Technology purchased 3Com in a deal valued at $2.2 billion. The deal gave the Chinese company a minority stake in 3Com, an internet security company.

    Hunter says that 3Com has contracts with the U.S. Dept. of Defense. However, Bain Capital tells CNN 3Com does not contract with the U.S. government directly, and the Chinese company will not have access to sensitive U.S.-origin technology or U.S. government sales as a result of this transaction.

    In a letter addressed to Romney, provided to CNN by Hunter’s campaign, Hunter claims the Chinese company has ties to Saddam Hussein and the Taliban and asks Romney to come forward with a “clear statement” in opposition to the deal sealed last October.

    The Bain Capital deal in question “can only be characterized as irresponsible,” Hunter said in a written statement.

    In September, other Republicans in the House called on the Bush administration to block the merger and proposed a resolution that says the deal “threatens the national security of the United States and should not be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.”

    Romney’s campaign provided CNN the following statement in response to the request from Hunter, “Governor Romney is no longer involved in Bain Capital and their investment decisions.”

    http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1920305/posts

  79. debbie0040 says:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/NATION/8463148/1001

    Huckabee alienates GOP in Arkansas
    By Stephen Dinan
    January 24, 2008

    BATTLE-READY: As Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee succeeded at advancing his causes and was willing to fight anyone who didn’t agree, state Republicans said. (Associated Press)

    ——————————————————————————–
    LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — Jake Files was a newly elected representative when all two dozen Arkansas House Republicans met for their first caucus in 1999. They had doubled their numbers in elections two months earlier, and were ready to join Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee in pushing for conservative government.

    That was when Brenda Turner, the governor’s chief of staff, entered.

    “Just walked in, shut the door and said, ‘There’s two kinds of people in the world: those who are for Mike Huckabee and those who are against Mike Huckabee. I’ll do everything I can to help the first group. I’ll do everything I can to hurt the second,’ ” said Mr. Files, who left the legislature after two terms.

    And that’s the way it was.

    “Not only would he not help you, he would go out of his way to do things in opposition to you,” Mr. Files said.

    For the 10 years he was governor of Arkansas, Mr. Huckabee was at war with much of his party.

  80. debbie0040 says:

    http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/top-thompson-fla.-fundraiser-joins-romney-2008-01-24.html

    Top Thompson Fla. fundraiser joins Romney
    By The Hill Staff
    Posted: 01/24/08 12:01 AM [ET]
    One of Fred Thompson’s top fundraisers in South Florida has taken her talents to the campaign of Mitt Romney now that the former Tennessee senator is out of the race for the GOP presidential nomination.

    Anita Mitchell told The Hill she decided to back the former Massachusetts governor Wednesday, citing her concerns about the economy and Romney’s record as both a businessman and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympics.

    Mitchell said she decided to go with Romney after she was contacted by the other GOP campaigns. She said she will likely start raising money for the former governor after she meets with him Sunday.

    Mitchell said she thinks “a lot of the people I brought to the table for Fred will go with Romney.”

  81. GOPeach says:

    MITT ROMNEY – Winter Olympics CEO -GLOBALIST ….

    Duncan Hunter said of MIKE HUCKABEE…

    “Of the remaining candidates I feel that he is strongly committed to strengtheningHunter national defense, constructing the border fence and meeting the challenge of China’s emergence as a military superpower that is taking large portions of America’s industrial base.”

  82. debbie0040 says:

    The former Southern Baptist pastor-turned-politician took control of the governor’s mansion in 1996 with expectations that he would lead the kind of Republican ascension in other states of the Deep South. But he left office last year by turning over the governorship to a Democrat and with Republicans bitterly divided over his legacy for his party.

    “He destroyed it,” said Randy Minton, a former state representative whom Mr. Huckabee worked to help get elected but who later clashed repeatedly with the governor. “We had one U.S. senator, we had two congressmen, at the tops we had 37 out of 135 legislators in the House and Senate. Now I think there’s 32 in the legislature, we have no U.S. senators and we have one congressman.”

    In both on-the-record and private conversations with Republicans in Arkansas, the picture that emerges is a governor who succeeded at advancing his causes and was willing to fight anyone who didn’t agree.

  83. debbie0040 says:

    I have just posted a snip it. Go to the link and read it the entire post.He lists very good reasons Fred Heads should support Romney.

    http://www.redstate.com/blogs/republicanroots/2008/jan/23/from_a_former_thompson_state_political_director

    Richard Rios
    [email protected]
    former California Political Director, Fred08

    Founding Director Arizona for Fred Thomspon, Nevada for Fred Thompson, Oklahoma for Fred Thomson grassroots organizations

    Friends and supporters of Senator Thompson;

    By now you have been inundated with the news of Senator Thompson’s decision to not pursue the office of the President of the United States. I have received many emails and phone calls asking what the next steps for Senator Thompson are and who is the best candidate to support?

    As far as Senator Thompson plans I cannot answer for him. Nor do I have any information that indicates what he will do next. Perhaps the premise of this blog will brighten my day on Saturday. But this is what I do know.

    The conservative movement is based on several tenants. These include fiscal conservatism, social conservatism and support of a strong military. These principles that are the base of the Reagan coalition live beyond any single candidate or presidential term. The soundness of their doctrine will continue to provide a light for generations to come.

    With the departure of Senator Thompson we as conservatives must focus on who is promoting those principles we hold dear and put aside any bias we have held in the past or hear in the main stream media. It is my belief and opinion that Governor Romney is the only candidate in the race that can carry that torch.

  84. CHelf says:

    Debbie,

    What do you think of Mitt campaigning for his good friend Rocky Anderson? Is this something a conservative does? Again, refrain from Huckabee comments. I am specifically asking your opinion on Mitt’s endorsement for one of the most liberal mayors in the US.

  85. Doug Deal says:

    GOPeach,

    I see no statement in Duncan Hunter’s comments to suggest that Huckabee will reduce the Federal deficit, shrink the size of government, give Federal power back to the states or lower taxes. If the issues he did mention are the priorities for both candidates, how can anyone call them “conservative”?

    Huckabee, the socialist who believes in God.

  86. Doug Deal says:

    CHelf,

    Perhaps Romney makes friends with people who are not perfect replicas of himself, unlike so many posters here. I have many friends that are more left leaning than I am, and I would support them for election to office because I trust their judgement.

    I imagine Romney is the same way.

  87. CHelf says:

    So friendships override the fact this guy brings Planned Parenthood into Salt Lake City to fight Utah’s tough laws on abortion? Or him pushing Kyoto ideology on his city? Or ending the DARE program? Or protesting a veterans convention and demanding impeachment of Bush? Or standing side by side with Cindy Sheehan?

    Let me get this straight. Mitt’s people and many arguing against John McCain argue that McCain works on bipartisan legislation with Democrats, but when Mitt spends the time to endorse this guy farther to the left than about 90% of the Democratic Party it’s all about friendship?

    Doug, friendship is fine. But when someone is out there arguing that candidates are cozying up to people of the other party to actually come to bipartisan agreements but then running campaign support ads for a guy who stands side by side with Cindy Sheehan and demands Bush stop this “oppressive war” killing thousands, there is a difference. If Mitt’s buds with this guy come out and claim it. Don’t run from it and then hit someone else for being friendly with someone on the other side as well. It’s as bad as opposing Bush tax cuts and then saying how bad McCain was for doing the same thing. Don’t apply a standard to someone else you yourself cannot measure up to.

  88. debbie0040 says:

    My opposition to McCain is McCain-Feingold, which Romney pledges to appeal, and to the McCain-Kennedy Immigration bill McCain tried to ram down our throats.

  89. Icarus says:

    “Demanded a BORDER the whole time he was in CONGRESS”

    He didn’t make enough on a congressional salary that he had to demand a roommate as well? WTF?

  90. Icarus says:

    Well, we have border bash every year in Augusta when UGA plays South Carolina. Hunter wants to build a fence to stop that?

  91. Icarus says:

    You know, you can usually get a few good South Carolina grads outside Home Depot if you need some cheap help with odd jobs. I don’t know why someone named Duncan would have a problem with that.

  92. debbie0040 says:

    The Gang of 14 did bother me but not as much as the other two. Love the fact Romney has pledged to repeal McCain-Feingold..

    Hunter must have been rich in order to build a fence that big. Wonder how much it cost?

  93. rugby fan says:

    “DUNACAN HUNTER ALREADY had a fence built in San Diego.”

    Good to know he is a handy man.

    His repairs have probably added $10-15k to his home.

  94. UGAkid says:

    Hate him or love him, Republicans need a candidate that can win in November. At this point, with the nation’s view of Republicans and how the nation is ready for “change,” I think we need to stop worrying about each of the candidate’s postions and start worrying about who can beat the Dems in November.

    I would like to encourage you guys to look at a few links…..(before you say to yourself, “polls mean nothing anymore,” this website’s polls have almost matched the actual outcome in all of the primary states thus far, on both sides of the ticket.)

    The first two are links where McCain BEATS the two Democratic candidates.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_clinton-224.html

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

    Now these next few links are where Huckabee, Romney and Guliani all LOSE, respectively.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_huckabee_vs_clinton-515.html

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_huckabee_vs_clinton-515.html

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_clinton-227.html

  95. Doug Deal says:

    UGAKid,

    Perot once lead Bush in the polls who was ahead of Clinton by large margin. Dukasis once outpolled Bush by double digits. Carter was beating Reagan as late as October. How did those turn out?

  96. Jace Walden says:

    I have a question for any of you who are troubled by the Gang of 14:

    How did you expect to get any of your right-wing judges confirmed without it?

    By doing away with the filibuster? That would have really helped the Democrats who control the House and Senate now. Sometimes I’m not sure that establishment Republicans really think things through.

  97. Icarus says:

    Jace,

    I had no problems with the gang of 14.

    But, with the exception of IndyInjun, very few people confuse me with an establishment Republican.

  98. Doug Deal says:

    Jace,

    My opposition to the gang of 14 was not in what they accomplished, as I like the fillibuster to forstall bad legislation. (I would love to see a constitutional amendment to require 60% of both houses for passage of any new measure and %50 for repeal of any passed measure).

    However, it is the way McCain and the other notorious RINOs in the gang operate. The issue seemed more as an excercise of ego on McCain’s part (SHOCK) and for the rest of them it was the per usual immasculization of the Republican party.

  99. Doug Deal says:

    Jace,

    And have the Democrats elevated? I vote Republican 100% of the time because of how god awful the Democrats are, not because of how good Republicans have been.

    I wish the Democrats would field candidates that are worth anything more than class warfare, higher taxes, even more spending, manufactured interpretations of the Constitution, and rewarding the worst of society at the expense of the best.

    There is an expression, don’t let the “perfect be the enemy of the good”. In the case of Republicans and Democrats, let me suggest “don’t let the acceptable be the enemy of mediocre and the friend of the disastrous”.

  100. Jace Walden says:

    Oh Lord have mercy, no. The Democrats most certainly have not elevated. Other than social conservatism, however, there is no discernable difference between the two parties.

    Many social libertarians are leaning toward the Democratic party because they will at least stay out of your bedroom.

    Both parties want more of my paycheck. Why would anyone want to vote Republican?

  101. Doug Deal says:

    Jace,

    If you see no difference between wanting X percentage of your income and X+Y percentage of your income, please enroll in a math class.

    As bad as the Republicans are, the Democrats are completely reckless in just about every proposal, plan, idea or action they have proposed in the last 15 years.

    It might not be great, but having a leaky life boat is a much better fate than swimming the icey Atlantic.

  102. Holly says:

    The Republicans spent more of my money under Bush than under Clinton.

    I wonder what it’s like with the Democrats under Bush? Is it better, worse, or indifferent? Anyone know?

  103. Icarus says:

    Anyone care to look back to 1993-94, the last time the dems had both the presidency and Congress.

    And remember, that was under a president who was elected as a “centrist/moderate”.

    There will be no claims to moderation with a Hillary or Obama, especially with a Speaker Pelosi in charge.

  104. Doug Deal says:

    Jace,

    Much of the spending under Bush was a result of the war effort (a power that the Federal government actually has). The spending the Democrats propose are for direct bribes payments to voters the “disadvantaged”.

    What party has demigauged every tax cut and attempt at deregulation, as starving children and throwing poor people out on the streets.

    What party is it that wants to eliminate the right to bear arms?

    What party is it that works to make owning a small business nearly impossible with the red tape, taxes and regulations?

    What party wants the Constitution to be viewed solely as advisory in nature and interpreted to meet whatever end they desire.

    What party supports making the firing striking employees illegal?

    You know which one it is, and you willfully ignorant if you think there is no or even a little difference between the two.

  105. Jace Walden says:

    Doug,

    The Cato Institute did a study a while back that basically said even if you discounted the military spending, what is left was still a record amount.

    The answer to all of your questions, Doug, is of course “The Democratic Party.”

    But that doesn’t make the Republican Party worthy of my vote. I would rather vote for the party on its own merit, rather than the demerit of the Democratic Party.

    When you convince me that the past 8 years have been better for this country than the previous 8 years, then we’ll talk.

  106. Doug Deal says:

    I am not saying that the Republicans are worthy of anyone’s vote. They are trash as a party nationally. But I still chose trash over disease.

    In our system of elections, there is no option for third party voting. Third party voting leads to the exact opposite result as the third party intends.

    Let’s say that there are 1000 voters in a district and there is a race for dog catcher. Further, lets say that 600 voters are pulling for conservative dog catching practices and 400 are pulling for liberal dog catching principles. But, the conservative dog catcher was unpopular with half of his base due to his stance on dry or canned dog food, so they spin off to form a third party. What happens to the vote?

    Horatio Q. Liberal – D – 400 Votes
    i-Norman P. Conservative – R – 300 Votes
    Ron Paul – I – 300 Votes

    With the “first past the post” method used in almost all elections, the will of 60% of the voters is thwarted because people demanded 100% purity in their candidates.

    Until ALL elections require a majority vote to win, third parties are for suckers.

  107. Jace Walden says:

    Doug,

    That’s kind of the point. I hope that the GOP does lose because of protest voting. Perhaps it will encourage the party to reform.

    But do you what doesn’t enourage the party the reform? Voting for it just because the other guy is worse. If Norman P. Conservative knows you’re going to vote for him just because Horatio Q. Liberal is worse, what incentive does Norman have to change his stance on dry food?

    The same goes for the GOP. If the GOP, as a party, knows that people are going to vote for it because the Democratic Party is “worse”, then what incentive is there for the GOP to produce quality candidates.

    In fact, in both scenarios, both Norman and the GOP are actually more inclined to promote the “Liberal” Boogeyman even more, in order to rally the base.

    Well, to be frank, I’m not scared of the Liberal Boogeyman. I’m more scared of a party that will use me for my vote and then piss on my beliefs. At least with the Dems (who I’m not voting for) I know what I’m getting.

  108. Doug Deal says:

    Jace,

    Only the opposite would happen. The leaders of the party would simply conclude that they didn’t do enough of the failed garbage they always do and boot more of the people out of the party.

    The only way anything will happen to the two major parties to change their direction is major electorial reform. Sadly, that will only happen with a highly favorable and drastic supreme court decision on the two party oligarchy as people in power have very little motivation to kick themselves out in the name of better elections.

    Unfortunately the Supremes are, under their robes, Republicans and Democrats themselves.

  109. Bill Simon says:

    Jace,

    Is that like choosing who your cellmate would be in lockup? Like (if you had a choice to be locked-up for all eternity), choosing a murderer over a thief because the thief will continue to rob from you, and the murderer’s one crime was an act of unbridled rage over his wife cheating on him, and likely would be an honest cellmate?

Comments are closed.