Friday, August 04, 2006

Huckabee so Left, Liberals Use Him Against Hutchinson and Holt

Governor Mike Huckabee has turned out to be far more statist and big government than most Arkansans ever imagined. I was aware that he was a "big-government Republican", but something happened today that really brought this in focus: Democratic candidates for both Governor and Lt. Governor used Huckabee to try to marginalize Asa Hutchinson and Senator Jim Holt on the same day!

That is right. Democrats Beebe and Halter are using the words and positions of the Republican Governor against both the Republican candidate for Governor (Hutchinson) and Lt. Governor (Holt)in an effort to show that both men are too far right. All it actually highlights is that Mike Huckabee is too far left. Far enough left to be of use to the most liberal and secular ticket the Democratic Party has ever offered up to the people of Arkansas.

(continued- click on FRIDAY below and scroll down for the rest of the story, or if sent straight here just scoll down).


Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

First, here is what Beebe said in today's news....
"During the same event, Mike Beebe renewed his opposition to using distance learning as a way to support local schools in meeting curriculum standards. Beebe says that distance learning should “never be utilized to take away from what the standards are that the Legislature, the court and Gov. Huckabee have already determined are essential for an adequate education.” Since when did Beebe ever look to Huckabee for guidance?

See how Beebe uses Huckabee et al to try to paint Asa as extreme? The reality is that the courts are extreme relavtive to the people they are serving. The legislature acted under compulsion from the courts, and so did Huckabee if you hear him tell it! Beebe wriggles that around so that somehow all three of those are in agreement. Baloney! The courts bludgeoned the ledge into this deal with Huckabee's help. It sure wasn't their idea.

But never mind all that, Asa only wants to add distance learning to the educational arsenal, not get into it with the courts. Still, I sense that Beebe and Halter have a plot here. A pattern is developing that Hutchinson and Holt better get a cure for.

On the same day, Halter spokesman Bud Jackson lambasted Holt using Huckabee as a club. When Holt complained that he was being misrepresented by some on his bill that would deny taxpayer funds to illegal aliens for NON-EMERGENCY health care, including pre-natal care, Halter Spokesman Bud Jackson shot back, “must have us confused with Gov. Mike Huckabee, who called [Holt’s proposal ] ‘inflammatory... race-baiting and demagoguery.’”

“While Jim Holt is checking his facts with Mike Huckabee, he can also ask Gov. Huckabee if he believes that he is a Socialist for supporting pre-kindergarten, the minimum wage and prenatal care,”

Huckabees "race-baiting" comments were straight out of the liberal playbook, where they try to stop any serious discussion of illegal immigration by playing the race card and making personal attacks on the messenger rather than debating the facts of the issue.

Neither Holt nor I need to check with the Governor on the other items Mr. Jackson lists. Holt is not against pre-natal care, he is against automatic access to your pockets to pay for the routine prenatal care of illegal aliens. Let them have all the prenatal care they want so long as they don't demand we pay for it. Holt does not take issue with the product (prenatal care), only with the PRICE and who is stuck with it.

Is Pre-K socialist? Once again, it is not the PRODUCT Holt objects to, but the PRICE and who pays it. If parents want to enroll their children in some sort of pre-school or day care program they have every right to. It is not the government's business SO LONG AS THEY PAY FOR IT. It is not Pre-K he is opposed to, but government funded Pre-K where group "A" gets the services while group "B" is handed the bill. Meanwhile the government grows and grows.

But let's examine Mr. Jackson's question of whether Halter's brand of Pre-K is socialist: Is it socialist to take from one group of citizens to provide benefits to another group of citizens in a way that expands government? In a way that gives incentives for taking little children out of their homes to be socialized by a government institution? Of course it is socialism. We don't need to ask Huckabee or anyone else about that.

What about raising the minimum wage? Is it socialist for the government to set prices for goods or services, in this case labor? Yes. That is just what socialism is.

Will doing so violate the laws of economics and cause pain to other people? Of course. It will lead to loss of jobs and inflation that hurts people on a fixed income, as well as reward those who cheat with illegal labor. Does Halter know this? Of course, but he does not care. He knows the minimum wage issue is big among economically illeterate voters so HE becomes exactly what his spokesman implied about Holt- a demogouge.

So here we have several issues where liberals are advocating liberal positions and using Huckabee as a stick on Hutchinson and Holt. Those two can't take the bait and fire back at Huckabee unless he gets stupid and says some more. They have to fire back at the ideas themselves or find other ways of dealing with it. It is a very shrewd move by the Dems to do this, a move only made possible by this one fact; Mike Huckabee is a statist liberal, but most people think he is a moderate conservative. It is the misperception of what Huckabee really is that allows them to use him as leverage. "Gee, if you are right of Huckabee, you must really be extreme right" is their line.

The truth is that you don't have to be very conservative to be more conservative than Mike Huckabee. Most Democratic voters in this state are more conservative than Mike Huckabee.

1:00 PM, August 04, 2006  
Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

I guess I better learn how to spell "illiterate", but you get the idea.

1:04 PM, August 04, 2006  
Anonymous rob_star said...

You are delusional if you think Huckabee is a liberal or anywhere even remotely close to any definition of the word. This is a great example of how far to the right the bushanistas have taken this country. With your logic, people like Pat Buchanan, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George Bush the first, and Bob Dole are all first rate liberals. You have ingested too much of the Kool-Aid, Mark. I would suggest that Huckabee is a strong right of the center conservative and it is you that has strayed from the Rep. Party's true platform. The Bush supporters of the country, what is left of them, are not conservatives at all. What they are is radicals who have put this country in serious jeopardy of becoming a neo-facist state and just because Huckabee makes some sense sometimes does not make him a liberal or even a moderate conservative. As much as I hate to admit it, sometimes Huckabee has a well thought out idea. Now I know that thinking outside the box and taking lessons from history are strictly forbidden in today's republican party but if you guys don't want to lose every bit of power that you have obtained then you need to get off the unbridled capitalism bandwagon because people don't want to go back to the 1920's. Folks have seen that movie and they don't want to live it themselves. I know you won't believe me but I don't want the Democrat's to take complete control of this country like the Rep. have done over the past 12 years because one party rule, no matter which party, is a bad thing. The best times we have ever had in this country are when power is split up between the two partys and basically nothing gets done without compromise. If you guys keep up with what I call rapture politics we are going to have one party rule again and soon except this time your team will be the one watching from the bench and neither one of us wants that.

3:55 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Mark M said...

Ok, I'll bite. Please name for me any policy besides abortion that Huckabee has been a conservative on.

5:16 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...and he had not made much of an issue of that.....

8:08 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rob you are such an idiot if you believe Huckabee is a far right conservative. He raised taxes once while he was in office and the recent Clean Air Act is nothing more than expanding government into the private lives of individuals. But liberals just LOVE doing that. The reason why Republicans lose is because they try to get along too much with the liberal Democrats and compromise instead of sticking to their core conservative principles. This is the exact same reason the Democrats keep losing elections. They party has been hijacked by the far left wing of the party and any moderates or the few conservatives that are left in the party have no place there. The truth is, conservatism wins every time it's implemented and liberal socialism has NEVER worked and it won't ever work. But I wouldn't expect a clueless liberal like you to understand this.

11:19 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All Beebe and Halter's statements will do is get the Republicans who have been disgruntled by Huckabee's leadership and who might be thinking about voting for Beebe as an act of spite, to vote for Asa because he IS more conservative than Huckabee. The only issue I disagree with Asa on is raising the minimum wage. It's nothing more than a tax on businesses and it's wrong.

11:24 PM, August 05, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the problem is not Republicans, but independents and people not paying attention that view Huckabee as a moderate conservative, and thus think anyone to the right of him is "far right"

7:58 AM, August 06, 2006  
Blogger rob_star said...

My point exactly. Just because a guy raises taxes once, he is automatically a liberal. Ronald Reagan raised the FICA tax, George Bush the first raised taxes, and I will finish this thought with a quote from Richard M. Nixon from the first Nixon-Kennedy debate. The question was asked, and I am paraphrasing, how to balance the federal budget after the previous four years of unheard of deficits (a couple billion dollars-ha ha).

Nixon's response:
MR. NIXON. Yes. I think what Mr. Novins was referring to was not one of Senator Kennedy's speeches, but the Democratic platform, which did mention cutting the national debt.
I think, too, that it should be pointed out that, of course, it is not possible, particularly under the proposals that Senator Kennedy has advocated either to cut the national debt or to reduce taxes. As a matter of fact, it will be necessary to raise taxes.

Now, with that being said by Dick, I think you have proven my point for me. Nixon and the rest of the aforementioned conservatives would be labeled as liberals in today's Republican Party. If I had time I could go in to all sorts of wacky liberal ideas that Nixon had, like more funding for social programs, gasp! Taxes need to be lowered sometimes and they need to be raised sometimes. We are currently living in a period of record deficits and a national debt approaching $9,000,000,000,000 while we are in the middle of two wars and about to start another one. Let me ask you this, is there any circumstance under which you folks WOULD advocate a tax raise? Is it going to take the complete collapse of the dollar or possibly another depression, I'd like to know. We can't pay for the stuff we are buying so we borrow money from the Red Chinese communists and the despotic dicatatorship of Saudi Arabia yet you are calling Huckabee a liberal and at the same time advocating what amounts to welfare for the richest Americans. How VERY un-American of you to do so. We aren't giving these people tax refunds what we are doing is borrowing money from our children to give it to already wealthy Americans, if I can even call them Americans, so they can sock it away in trust funds for their children who will never have to work and probably never will.

10:59 AM, August 06, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Huckabee's not a liberal simply because he advocates tax increases- he's also a big spender too!

We had that discussion here about Matayo. These neo-pubs like to talk about how they vote against tax increases, but they never find a spending bill that turns them off. That goes for our current prez...

3:42 PM, August 06, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One more time....THE RICH DON'T GET TAX CUTS!!!!!! In the last report on the economy where every "expert" was surprised that the national debt was being cut so quickly (though it is still very high), the report even stated that a good majority of the revenue came from *gasp* the wealthiest of Americans. So the liberal talking point of "tax cuts for the rich"
is getting rather tired and boring.

8:10 PM, August 06, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hutchinson seems to have found a cure. He is repeating that he wants to stay on the same course as Huckabee. I only hope he does not mean it, which is a terrible thing to hope for.

5:20 AM, August 07, 2006  
Blogger rob_star said...

You anonystaffers have still not tackled the meat of what I laid out which is that Nixon, Reagan, Buchanan, and Bush I would all be considered too far to the left for the taste of today's Republican Party. Critical thinkers like these men are not welcome in the homogeneous party of the GOP anymore. Another explanation I am waiting to hear is how you can justify borrow and spend economics especially when the borrowing is from a communist country. Wasn't is just a few years ago that the communism was the EVIL in the world and it had to be stamped out. It amazes me how maleable your opinions are depending upon what your leaders are spewing at the time. Wake up! Communism is still a threat and it is growing with every job we send them and every dollar we borrow from them. Once again, the Republican Party is taking a nation, like China, and enabling them to become a threat. I guess 20 years from now when China really is trying to take over the world you folks will forget who caused the problem and vote for some other war monger Republican who claims he can fix things for you.

7:33 AM, August 07, 2006  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

I agree with your communist funding analysis, but I disagree that today's Republican party is right wing. They merely do a good job of sounding right wing, but even you recognize that they aren't opposed to big spending and foreign intervention at the drop of a hat. How are those right wing policies!?

Buchanan and others call these fascists Bush boot lickers "neocons" in order to distinguish them from the traditional conservatives who do not buy into the aformentioned things. Today's Republicans think Buchanan is RIGHT wing, not left. Remember, it's the current administration that declared that the days of the Republican party standing for small goverenment are over. They are definitely moving leftward toward statism.

8:55 AM, August 07, 2006  
Anonymous Mark M said...

It is not my job to defend the Republican party. Buchanan and Reagan were fairly conservative, but Nixon? Good grief, the man advocated wage and price controls! How can he be considered a conservative? He started whole new departments of government. Roe slipped by him without a whimper of protest.

The reason I complain that some of these men who the establishment claims are conservatives are not really conservative is because it is the truth. It just the truth. Conservatives have been taken for a ride as the system puts one phoney after another up that gets the benefit of the mantle of conservative but never gets around to even advocating conservative policies, much less getting them done.

4:37 PM, August 08, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Is Pre-K socialist? Once again, it is not the PRODUCT Holt objects to, but the PRICE and who pays it. If parents want to enroll their children in some sort of pre-school or day care program they have every right to. It is not the government's business SO LONG AS THEY PAY FOR IT. It is not Pre-K he is opposed to, but government funded Pre-K..."

Then it would stand to reason that Holt is also against the public school system in general. Is this his stance?

3:17 PM, August 13, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

no, because the legally the constitution he has sworn to uphold mandates public school. also, kids 3-4 years old don't need specialists to teach them, they are supposed to learn by playing.

5:25 PM, August 13, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enjoyed a lot! film editing classes

5:13 AM, March 17, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home