The only thing that I'm surprised about is that it has taken this long for people to pay attention to Huckabee. He's likeable and a great speaker that lights up a room with candid humor. I think he suffered from the packed field of candidates and has recently benefitted from Brownback's departure.
That said.......I can't stand him--he's less self-righteous than Brownback was, but the only thing he brings to the table is that he is a certified evangelical.
Lately and expecially after the last GOP debate, (which I admit are way too many) I am surprisingly impressed with Mike Huckabee. Though my ultimate choice for the nomination still lies with Romney, I see Huckabee as a very viable candidiate.
Coming from the Clinton political machine state of Arkansas, he seems to be one who could beat Clinton. We are going to have to face the reality that Clinton will get the democratic nod. So the question now becomes, who will be able to beat Hillary for the White House. Huckabee could do it. He comes from a Baptist background having been a Baptist minister. Though some of the Baptist views are different from mine, he isn't running with that as his mind set. He has very clear motives and reasons for his White House bid. He is not a one platform candidate. He is strong on immigration, healthcare, family values, and the detriment of big government. I think as the American people start to see and hear him a little more often, he will break into the top tier. He could have a little more popularity than Romney just becasue of the religion card. Baptist in the White House isn't nearly as scary as a Mormon in the White House, for whatever reason.
Huckabee was the Governor of Arkansas, as was a Clinton. But this Governor has a lot more to show for his stint in that seat than does Clinton. I have been really impressed with his responses in the debates. he had an interview recently with Glenn Beck and was amazing. Glenn actually said," I wanted this interview so that I could write you off as a candidate for the presidency, I cannot do that now." Youtube that interview and you will see what I mean. This thing ain't over till it's over...
The study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, to be released Monday, also portrays the political press as a hidebound institution out of touch with the desires of citizens.
Among the findings:
• Stories focused more on fundraising and polls than on where candidates stood on the issues, despite a public demand for more attention to the policies, views and records of the candidates.
• The public's attention to campaign news is higher now than it was at similar points in the past two elections, but that interest is only shared by less than one in four people.
• Five candidates — Democrats Clinton and Barack Obama and Republicans Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain — received more than half the coverage. Elizabeth Edwards, the cancer-stricken wife of Democrat John Edwards, received almost as much media attention as her husband.
• Democrats, overall, got more coverage — and more positive ink and airtime — than Republicans.
• Obama enjoyed the friendliest coverage of the presidential field; McCain endured the most negative. That was due in part to the media's focus on fundraising; Obama raised more than expected and McCain raised less.
A recent story was interesting enough for me to pull myself out of blogger cold-storage and post something.
I like to think I am at least semi-literate. I might kid myself into thinking that I am halfway intelligent. But at least I can pronounce Sarkozy without a phonetic guide. And I didn't even attend an Ivy-league school, nor am I the leader of the free world.
How embarrassing.
By the way. This is post #100.
He doesn't understand that soldiers are real people.
He doesn't understand the difference between friend and foe.
He's clumsy discussing nuclear warfare.
He doesn't understand geography.
Our military is having success in Iraq......what does Obama want to do? Take them out of course.........no, not home necessarily, but to Pakistan, a nation of 170 million muslims who would make Iraq look like a walk in the park. Obama would successfully crush the morale of our armed forces more than the Dems already have.
Pakistan is working with us. Instead of threatening our allies, why can't he promise support? I appreciate Mitt Romney's comments stating that Obama wants to have tea with our enemies and blow up our friends, going from Jane Fonda to Dr. Strangelove in one week.
When asked about using nucs....Obama was absolutely clumsy in stating his policy.....it was like he never even thought about it before (see "Obama the Orator" below). How can anybody want this guy as CIC? Honestly?
Does Obama have a clue about the importance of Pakistan? How does he think we get supplies to our armed forces in Afghanistan? Through Iran......a teleporter perhaps......FedEx?
Madame Hillary has never looked so good.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons «in any circumstance.«I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,» Obama said, with a pause, «involving civilians.» Then he quickly added, «Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That's not on the table.
As Charles Mitchell from EFM (Evangelicals for Mitt) said..........."huh?"