The Iowa bounce
Another huge puff of a feature piece on that warm and funny candidate from Hope, Mike Huckabee, this one on the front of the feature section in the Washington Post.
Even more treacly is this from a Des Moines Register columnist who finds The Huckster a man with "no stomach for personal attacks." And more of the credulous acceptance of his fair tax baloney. This is starting to look bad, folks.
Comments
Everyone take out your crying towel.
Apparently the conservative dominated/monopolized news conglomerate is having a difficult time in identifying (irregardless of qualifications) just one candidate from a un-diversified mile-wide but inch-deep field of all heterosexual white male look a-liker's, believe a-liker's, believe in God a-liker's, God intended white heterosexual male only occupy the oval office a-liker's, etc.
It doesn't take an Einstein long to realize there is only a thin line that separates the boys but you have to give credit to old Huck-a-bee for he seems to have found a niche, albeit suavity, that sets him apart for the time being but it want take long for the average Jo to see him for what he is -- just a 19th century politician
Posted by: BWC![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 07:22 AM
So, what's wrong with the 19th century?
Posted by: Don Keyhotay![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 08:06 AM
From what I've read, it seems like a politician could be from ANY century and still be the same, good or bad. Being a politician certainly qualifies as a contender for one of the world's oldest professions (and just about as reputable as those more recognized public servants, prostitutes).
If you were to switch politicians from the 1st and 21st centuries, I doubt it would take either one very much time to get back into the swing of things. I'm sure they'd both recognize lobbyists, special interest groups, and could tell immediately who was the back-slapper and who was the back-stabber.
Posted by: Jake da Snake![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 08:45 AM
Huck's bounce comes from the luck of being included in the worst group of unelectable losers ever fielded by the Republican Party.
Try this little experiment tomorrow morning....right after your bowel movement, toss a marshmallow in the toilet, stand back and ask yourself, what do I see that looks delicious? And now you understand the Huckabee bounce.
Posted by: Deathbyinches![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 11:00 AM
A Hillary/Bill ticket v. Huck/Janet ticket would be very sweet...and I thought I was going to be sick of the presidential race by the time it finally rolls around. Huck's silver tongue and preacher ways may be enough to set him above the current crop of pitiful Republican presidential hopefuls; but to the rest of the country he's just another bible thumping Republican whose politics speak more of war/hate than peace/love.
The sad truth is that Huck probably is the best the Republicans have to offer the country...guess stealing elections is the only way.
Posted by: zelda![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 11:10 AM
Huck's bounce comes from the luck of being included in the worst group of unelectable losers ever fielded by the Republican Party. Posted by: Deathbyinches
Small comfort, given that we are now governed by the least of a former worst group of unelectable loosers ever fielded by the Republican Party.
Posted by: Polecat![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.arktimes.com/blogs/arkansasblog/nav-commenters.gif)
|
August 31, 2007 09:42 PM