Mike Huckabee: For states' rights before he was against states' rights
FLIP FLOP ALERT! CALLING ROMNEY OPPO TEAM!
Earlier today, we linked coverage of The Huckster on Fox News, where he couldn't have been clearer that he opposes a state-by-state solution to abortion. This is to differentiate himself from Fred Thompson, who's taken that approach and thus, in effect, would permit abortion to remain legal in at least some states, regardless of how the Bush court might rule someday on Roe v. Wade.
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee rejects letting states decide whether to allow abortions, claiming the right to life is a moral issue not subject to multiple interpretations.
"It's the logic of the Civil War," Huckabee said Sunday, comparing abortion rights to slavery. "If morality is the point here, and if it's right or wrong, not just a political question, then you can't have 50 different versions of what's right and what's wrong.""For those of us for whom this is a moral question, you can't simply have 50 different versions of what's right," he said in an interview on "Fox News Sunday."
Ah, but that was today. Get a load of this interview with Right Wing News: (emphasis supplied)
John Hawkins: Switching gears again, do you think we should overturn Roe v. Wade?
Mike Huckabee: It would please me because I think Roe v. Wade is based on a real stretch of Constitutional application -- that somehow there is a greater privacy issue in the abortion concern -- than there is a human life issue -- and that the federal government should be making that decision as opposed to states making that decision.
So, I've never felt that it was a legitimate manner in which to address this and, first of all, it should be left to the states, the 10th Amendment, but secondly, to somehow believe that the taking of an innocent, unborn human life is about privacy and not about that unborn life is ludicrous.







Comments
does Huckabee ever contrast himself with, or say anything critical of, Julie-Annie ?
i find it most curious that Huckabee seems to fire all of his arrows at Mssrs. Romney and Thompson.
kudos MB, let us hope that this "news" gets out
Posted by: muleboy303
|
November 18, 2007 07:19 PM
I've heard him say, several times, he beat the Clinton machine 4 times in Arkansas.
WHEN WAS THAT????
I must have been frozen then waiting for my new transplant.
Posted by: jazzy
|
November 18, 2007 07:44 PM
if the Romney campaign can't get many miles out of Huckabee's flip-flop (and dare i say, "innoculate" himself from similar charges) then he will not be the GOP nominee.
there'll be no former governor of MassachUtah versus the jr. senator from New yArk.
Posted by: muleboy303
|
November 18, 2007 08:37 PM
I can't decide whether he doesn't listen to himself or he doesn't think anyone else listens to him.
Posted by: widj
|
November 18, 2007 08:52 PM
i highly suspect that Huckabee's "boomlet" has peaked, or will shortly (within the next three weeks)
and benefits mostly Julie-Annie, who has a vested interest in reducing Romney's showing in Iowa and New Hampshire (and NH hasn't even set their primary date yet)
ironically, a Giuliani-Huckabee ticket would only lose to Hillary by 6 or 7 %, whereas a Romney-Huckabee ticket would be the strongest by the virtues of fidelity, fiscal responsibility, and compassionate (far more than W) conservatism, and only lose by 3 or 4 %, in a two-way race.
it is even conceivable that a Romney/Huckabee ticket could win, if an anti-war candidate, or two, can take 3 to 8 % of the vote away from HRC (and imo, Richardson as VP) as the conservatives will be energized by HRC's nomination, and perhaps Romney's fiscal expertise plus Huckabee's populist and religious connect-ability.
time will tell, but my money says HRC in a walk (done-deal imo)
Posted by: muleboy303
|
November 18, 2007 09:02 PM
Wory not.. Romney is still down there at snake belly level
<<<<<<<
As president, Romney told Headline News talk show host Glenn Beck, he would reduce federal highway funds to any state that issued driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
The former Massachusetts governor got in a dig at GOP rival former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee while explaining his view on tuition breaks for undocumented workers.
"If you have a state like Mike Huckabee's state in Arkansas that fights to give people a tuition break if they're an illegal in their state, you say, 'no, you're not going to do that,' " Romney explained. "If you do that, we're going to cut back on higher education funding."
CNN (at my name)
Posted by: Eureka Springs, AR
|
November 18, 2007 09:07 PM
This is so much pissing in the wind. Come Nov 4, 08 any R will soon be forgotten. Romney and Huck are both young enough to try it again and again.
Posted by: eLwood
|
November 18, 2007 09:54 PM
"imo, Richardson as VP"
From your lips to Hillary's ears, muleboy.
Posted by: Vegan4Hillary
|
November 18, 2007 10:24 PM
Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a more blatantly biased and immature article associated with any newspaper. The author could at least try to be professional and write like an adult and not a giddy teenager.
I'm beginning to understand what Huckabee means when he talks about the challenging political environment in Arkansas. I think I respect him even more now for what he was able to accomplish in such a hostile state.
http://prodeoetpatria.wordpress.com
Posted by: Caleb
|
November 18, 2007 11:19 PM
Wow, isn't it past your bedtime, Caleb?
This is a blog, not a newspaper article; but the Arkansas Times does have, in both its print and online editions, numerous articles in which Huck's many indiscretions and misdeeds are discussed at length, since the informality of the blog seems to offend you. They even have a few articles in which they are, in my opinion, overly generous with praise for the few instances when Huck actually did something that would benefit the citizens of Arkansas, not himself or his family or benefactors. Please feel free to use "search" at the upper right.
And we in turn would be ever so grateful if you would list the many fine accomplishments which Huck has told you that he was able to perform while governor of this state. We're interested because, while most of Huck's claims are, to put it mildly, not fact-based, the more outlandish ones are quite entertaining.
It is interesting that you are offended by someone pointing out Huck's tendency to flip-flop on issues, depending on which crowd he is trying to impress. I believe he has opposing positions not just on abortion, but on gay marriage or civil unions, on immigration, taxation, government-provided health care, and probably several more of which I am unaware. He promises all things to all people, but any benefit usually only goes to him. If you are a member of his "God wants you to be rich, and doesn't care if you take it from the poor" type of faith, you will have no problem with this. But if you genuinely want to use your faith to help people, not hurt or deceive them, you should open your eyes and mind and just watch what Huck is all about. You will find it enlightening.
Posted by: Vegan4Hillary
|
November 19, 2007 01:22 AM
Wonder what's become of James Boulder? He used to be the regular Huckabee stoolie on here.
Posted by: eLwood
|
November 19, 2007 01:44 AM
Caleb, Brantley and the Times have never forgiven Huckabee for the way he came to the governor's office. The paper shed plenty of tears for poor ole Jim Guy Tucker, when he was rode out of town on a rail for his corruption. But I've never understood the almost pathological Huckahate on display here. It seems to be very personal for Max.
Posted by: Prouster
|
November 19, 2007 01:57 AM
Uh er Prouster, AT and Max are not the only statewide publication to humiliate Huck. The ADG did it several times. John Brummett, who primarily writes for Stephens Media, joined in a time or two. And you glaringly omit that Huckster denied AT news releases and said it wasn't really a newspaper. So if Huck is ready to make nice, send photos, etc perhaps Max has good reason not to. If Huck cannot take the heat get the hell out of the kitchen. Bush should have enough operatives embedded in the FCC to continue dangling the carrot of media consolidation long after he leaves. Kiss what was once America goodbye is another wingnut gets to appoint the director of the FCC. A media beholden to a political party serves no one for long. Perhaps Huck has already cut the media conglomeration deal with Murdock who continues to toss him softballs at every opportunity.
Posted by: eLwood
|
November 19, 2007 02:09 AM
eLwood, I read in this very blog that Alice Stewart was granting Max the same access as they do to other journalists. But I have to say, if I were in Huck's shoes, I probably wouldn't care whether the Times got access or not.
John Brummett is the crazy old uncle in the attic of Arkansas journalism. I haven't read a thing he wrote in years. It's all used-car dealers and arrows anyway. I know Max likes to pimp him out around here to boost his numbers, but honestly? I think he should be put out to pasture.
The ADG I give credit to.
Posted by: Prouster
|
November 19, 2007 02:55 AM
Thompson's team put out a fact-check on Huckabee's performance yesterday
(pretty quickly for an old/slow guy)
but they did not address Huckabee's flip-flop on the 10th Amendment
YET
Posted by: muleboy303
|
November 19, 2007 06:34 AM
First of all Christian with Horns, like Mike, want us to believe they are first and foremost fundamentalist Christians and abide by nobody's laws except their Gods -- and we all know how many interpretations that permits.
It's obvious that Mike is taking full advantage of that and probably the reason he feels he can readily and morally lie & flip-flop and we can't hold him accountable.
Personally they scare the hell out of me!
H.L.Menchen said it best referring to them as "Homo boobiens" writing bluntly that a person was a fundamentalist for the precise reason he is uneducable (And) no amount of proof of the falsity of their beliefs will have the slightest influence on them.
Let's by all means remember that Mike, pro-life or not, supports President Bush but we know what his interpretation of pro-life is -- Senator Stark clarified that for us
"He doesn't have money to fund the war or children," But he'll spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."
Posted by: BWC
|
November 19, 2007 07:12 AM
Well, duuuuh. It took me long enough, but I think I finally figured out the Huckabuck comment of running against the Clinton machine four times in Arkansas. Seems Da Judge Ellen Brantley and Hillary Clinton are buds from way back. So when Max took a notion to snoop a bit and take umbrage at some of the huckabucking and a few other two bit shenanigans, well, there you have it -- the Clinton machine, Max "Boss Tweed" Brantley.
Posted by: Doigotta
|
November 19, 2007 08:36 AM
How can the Huckabites say Max the Tax never hearts Huckabee? Max endorsed every Huckabee tax hike and opposed the removal of the sales tax on food, just like Tax Hike Mike. Max endorses, nay, promotes the same government nanny state fosterd by Huckabee. It's just that Huckabee is lying to get back on the government dole that's got Max pissed.
Posted by: charlie parrot
|
November 19, 2007 09:36 AM
Anyone interested in what Huckabee is really like face to face should try this funny (but it actually happened) column:
http://goupstate.us/index.php/lanefiller/2007/11/02/title_14
Posted by: lanefiller
|
November 19, 2007 09:48 AM
lane,
the problem with Huckabee (besides some of 'beliefs' and policies) is NOT that he isn't a 'regular guy'
he is, (or has had more experience being a 'regular guy' than all the other candidates)
the problem is that he is becoming a JAP (Just Another Politician) like the rest.
methinks, Huckabee has learned too fast and too well, things that would've been best left unlearned.
Posted by: muleboy303
|
November 19, 2007 10:03 AM
Wow. Max is the mastermind behind the vast left-wing conspiracy. Who knew? I feel honored to be in the company of kings.
Posted by: devilsadvocate
|
November 19, 2007 10:25 AM
Nice catch, Max.
I didn't see that and I'm glad you did, because it was very good.
Posted by: Hank
|
November 19, 2007 10:36 PM
You can always tell when Prouster is on the losing end of an argument. He just ignores hte message or your arguments and just cantankerously denigrates the messenger, usually by a not so subtle hint that you're not quite right in the head nor able to write something better than an elementary essay. Dumas, Brummett, and Brantley may not be in your corner politically but there ability to write a well documented and factually supported opinion remains far above the capabilities of most of us here and most often over the heads and abilities of the ADG editorial staff.
Considering that Prouster has to reference himself to his own relatives and their quirks, it helps explain his inability to make a rational argument. The people he had to live with would not have understood reason and logic.
No, Prouster just has a bad habit. His foot goes into this mouth when he tries to debate. If he were to wiggle his toes, they would tickle his tonsils.
Posted by: Jake da Snake
|
November 20, 2007 05:40 AM
That link to Rightwingnews doesn't have a date on the interview with Huckabee. All it says is at the bottom, referring to the copyright period of the entire website: "Copyright 2001-2007 John Hawkins".
It might make a difference if the interview was in 2001 versus 2007...not to mention the fact that any journalist/interviewer should identify when the interview was done. Folks do continue to think and evolve their thinking, is all I'm saying, but of course, that isn't justifying a total 180 turn.
Ok, I did a little googling of his site and it appears here, http://www.rightwingnews.com/archives/week_2006_04_09.PHP#005548 , in the archives for April 14, 2006, so the interview had to have taken place at least before then. But we still don't know when exactly.
Kudos to you for the post. MH clearly did say states should decide abortion laws again as they once did pre-Roe. However, it isn't really as huge a flip-flop as it seems, nor as harmful. It wasn't, fundamentally, a total 180 turn on the issue of abortion itself, unlike other candidates. I'd call it a flip-flip perhaps. After all, he does say in the very same section this: "but secondly, to somehow believe that the taking of an innocent, unborn human life is about privacy and not about that unborn life is ludicrous."
...which when looked at closely and really thought through, ALSO precludes states from deciding what's privacy and what's human life or not. He could be faulted for not having thought THAT through as the incongruous-to-states-rights thought it truly is.
I'm not favoring the guy--yet--but am glad to have found your site, venomous and hateful as it is. I'd like to know more actual facts and links like this one --but from both sides--of the Arkansan thinking on their former Guv. Still doing homework on all of 'em, but I'm one of the few Connecticut Yankees who's Republican and while you may have it bad for taxes there, you haven't yet got it as bad as this state.
I at first thought I might like Thompson, but he's lost me. If a Republican candidate gives a damn about life issues, as s/he ought, s/he ought to educate him/herself on the damn things before opening his/her mouth. IMHO, FT blew it on Schiavo and has generally looked like he didn't read his script.
Posted by: Annie B.
|
November 26, 2007 07:56 PM