Mike Huckabee - Impressive

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Bulldawg182, Oct 25, 2007.

  1. Bulldawg182

    Bulldawg182 Active Member

    6,126
    2
    38
    After watching the Republican debate last week, I've got to say I was impressed with the views and presentation of Mike Huckabee. To be honest, up until that debate, I was totally unfamiliar with him. Here's his stance on 2nd Amendment and Gun Laws from his web site www.mikehuckabee.com:


    2nd Amendment Rights
    Send to a friend

    * The Second Amendment is primarily about tyranny and self-defense, not hunting. The Founding Fathers wanted us to be
    able to defend ourselves from our own government, if need be, and from all threats to our lives and property.
    * Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. I oppose gun control based on geography.
    * I consistently opposed banning assault weapons and opposed the Brady Bill.
    * As Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from frivolous law suits.
    * I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license.

    No candidate has a stronger, more consistent record on Second Amendment rights than I do. Our Founding Fathers, having endured the tyranny of the British Empire, wanted to guarantee our God-given liberties. They devised our three branches of government and our system of checks and balances. But they were still concerned that the system could fail, and that we might someday face a new tyranny from our own government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, and that's why they gave us the Second Amendment. They knew that a government facing an armed populace was less likely to take away our rights, while a disarmed population wouldn't have much hope. As Ronald Reagan reminded us, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction." Without our Second Amendment rights, all of our other rights aren't inalienable, they're just "on loan" from the government.

    Other candidates say gun control doesn't affect hunting. Now I'm a very avid hunter, but the Second Amendment isn't really about hunting. It's about tyranny and self-defense. The Founding Fathers weren't worried about our being able to bag a duck or a deer, they were worried about our keeping our fundamental freedoms.

    I once saw a bumper sticker that said, "Criminals prefer unarmed victims." Criminals will always find a way to get guns. By disarming our law-abiding citizens, we take away the strongest deterrent to violent criminals - the uncertainty that they don't know who is helpless and who is armed. Our law enforcement officials can't be everywhere, all the time. Lawfully-armed citizens back them up and prevent robberies, rapes, and the murder of innocents. Right after Katrina, with law enforcement non-existent, many victims were able to protect their lives, their homes, and their precious supplies of food and water only because they were armed.

    Other candidates believe gun control should be determined geographically, but Second Amendment rights belong to individuals, not cities or states. Your Second Amendment rights don't change when you change your address.

    Other candidates filed frivolous law suits against gun manufacturers. When I was Governor, I protected gun manufacturers from exactly those types of suits. I allowed former law enforcement officials to carry concealed handguns and removed restrictions on concealed handgun permit holders. I was the first Governor in the country to have a concealed handgun license, and of course I'm a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.

    Other candidates have supported banning assault weapons. When the federal ban on assault weapons expired in 2004, I said, "May it rest in peace." It won't be returning in the Huckabee Administration.

    Zealously protecting your Second Amendment rights is another way that I will lift all law-abiding Americans up, by consistently championing your right to defend yourself.
     
  2. luke0927

    luke0927 New Member

    754
    0
    0
    He's also supporting the Fair Tax
     

  3. VolGrad

    VolGrad Tactical Statistician

    According to SelectSmart.com Huck also .......

    "Mostly supports amnesty/permanent legalization for illegal aliens."
     
  4. Bulldawg182

    Bulldawg182 Active Member

    6,126
    2
    38
    According to his policy page on his web site Mike Huckabee, that's not the case:

    " * My number one priority is to secure America's border.
    * We have to know who is coming into our country, where they are going, and why they are here. We need a fence along our border with Mexico, electronic in some places, and more highly-trained border agents.
    * Those who are caught trying to enter illegally must be detained, processed, and deported.
    * Illegal immigrants already living among us who commit crimes must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and incarcerated or deported.

    I opposed the amnesty bill that was defeated by the Senate in June. I support the $3 billion that Congress recently appropriated for border security. These funds will be used to train and deploy 23,000 more agents, add four drone airplanes, build 700 miles of fence and 300 miles of vehicle barriers, and erect 105 radar and camera towers. They will be used to end "catch and release" by providing money to "catch and detain" those caught entering illegally and to crack down on those who enter legally, but overstay their visas. These border security provisions will stem the tide of illegals, which is what we must do before we can turn the tide and deal with those who are already here. Before you fix the damage in your house caused by a leaking roof, you stop the leak, which is what this legislation will do.

    My number one priority is to have a secure border. Right now, we have too many people entering the country illegally, and this must stop. We can't turn the tide until we stem the tide. We need to know who is coming into our country, where they are going, and why they are here. We need to create a process to allow people to come here to do the jobs - plucking chickens, tarring roofs, picking fruits - that are going unfilled by our citizens. They must have a tamper-proof, scannable I. D. with a finger or retinal scan, so that their employers know they belong here.

    Besides stopping terrorists, we must weed out those with a criminal background or a communicable disease. We have to build a fence along our border with Mexico, parts of which will be electronic. We need more well-trained border agents and cooperation agreements with local and state law enforcement officials, so that we have a clear and consistent approach by all jurisdictions.

    Those who are caught trying to enter illegally must be detained, processed, and deported. Illegal immigrants who are already living among us and commit crimes must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and incarcerated or deported."
     
  5. VolGrad

    VolGrad Tactical Statistician

    Interesting, that differs from what is on the site I referenced. Wonder what else is wrong? Maybe, Hillary wouldn't be so bad after all........:rotfl2:
     
  6. commodore_dude

    commodore_dude Active Member

    2,568
    0
    36
    Sounds good, but the fact that he came out and said he doesn't believe in evolution at the first debate (I am like 99% sure he was one of the 3 that did so, please correct me if I'm wrong) is a deal breaker for me on par with supporting affirmative action or opposing the 2nd Amendment. I just can't take him seriously if he doesn't take science seriously.
     
  7. Bulldawg182

    Bulldawg182 Active Member

    6,126
    2
    38
    I have to agree with you on the evolution thing.....though I have no idea if he ever said it or not. But, that would be a deal breaker for me too.
     
  8. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    Huckabee was one of the three who raised their hands to acknowledge their belief in creationism. He truly believes that the world is approximately 6000 years old and that evolution is not a valid answer to human existence.

    I think he is wrong, and I find his intentional blindness on this subject to be worrisome and an indicator of how much authority the evangelical right would have under a possible Huckabee administration.

    I was raised in an extremely strict religious household by family members who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, much as Huckabee does. As a matter of fact, my raising within a strict Church of Christ household initially imbued me with many of the same beliefs that Huckabee's Southern Baptist beliefs brought to him. To people who believe this way, creationism is the truth and evolution is a scientific fantasy. The world was really completely inundated by a flood with all of the creatures of the earth being saved in an ark. The Earth was created in a literal six days approximately 6000 or so years ago. And if dinosaurs really existed at one point in time, they lived alongside humans.

    People who believe this way and believe in the rightness of their belief system see the imposition of their beliefs on others as a necessary and fundamental aspect of their christianity. They perceive a compromise in their beliefs to be the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in the school system as an acceptable alternative and anything less than that is a violation of their rights. Removal of christian symbolism or Biblical passages from public buildings is a persecution of their beliefs. Ultimately, any rejection of their belief system is validation to them that they are being subjected to persecution on their Lord's behalf and only inspires them to greater efforts to redeem the "sinners" all around them by forcing their religious doctrine on us all.

    You may consider me to be cynical, but I have lived this life and know it intimately. I considered it my duty to push my dogma on others and even spent time as a missionary and teacher in order to do so. I am well qualified in knowing the driving force behind someone who holds to evangelical christian beliefs.

    While Huckabee has many good qualities and I agree with him on several policy issues, in the end he will be ruled by his belief system. And that belief system is of the evangelical hard right wing within the Southern Baptist religion. In the end, if Huckabee won the nomination and election, he would have to use the presidency as a bully pulpit for his religious beliefs, which include active attempts at conversion. Anything less and he would be violating that which makes him what he is.

    So, while I respect the man and his beliefs, I am simply too wary of a christian theocracy gaining that level of power within our political system.
     
  9. tace

    tace New Member

    1,981
    0
    0
    I worked for Southern Baptist Convention in a past lifetime. They were all extremely nice folks and upstanding citizens. In fact they were so nice that I would NEVER wanna see any one of them as The President of The United States of America.
     
  10. jgullock

    jgullock Active Member

    1,700
    11
    38
    http://www.betterimmigration.com/candid ... res08.html


    "I didn't sign the 'No Amnesty' pledge because it was a silly piece of campaign propaganda cooked up by Tancredo. Candidates don't make pledges for each other to sign, and he knows that."
    August 4, 2007; LibertyPost.org

    "I don't want to have an amnesty program. You can't let people break a law and say 'hey we're going to look the other way, don't worry about it, we're going to let you in, no problem.' People have to make restitution, there's got to be a penalty paid for the crime committed. But it ought to fit the crime; you don't put somebody in jail for ten years because they came across the border to make a living.

    You make them pay something, you make them go through a process, you may put them in the back of the line for the process, but you create a process that's realistic. You don't say the back of the line starts and for the next 12 years you're going to be filling out paperwork.

    What you do say is you're going to pay the fine, we're going to have a system that can be done in an orderly fashion, and you'll be able to be legal but we're not going to let you off scot free. That's important."
    March 27, 2007; RealClearPolitics.com

    "We shouldn't have amnesty where we just say, 'Fine, everybody's good, we're going to let it go.' We should have a process where people can pay the penalties, step up and accept responsibility for not being here legally. But here's the point. The objective is not to be punitive. The objective is to make things right. Right for us. Right for them."
    February 7, 2007; ABC News

    "Illegal immigrants who commit crimes 'must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and incarcerated or deported,' he said. He is opposed to amnesty and believes that 'those who came here illegally years ago and are now law-abiding taxpayers must pay a significant fine as admission of their guilt and have a choice of deportation or a rigorous process toward legal status.'"
    July 16, 2007; Des Moines Register (Iowa) (scroll down for this position)

    "'One of the great challenges facing us is that we do not commit the same mistakes with our growing Hispanic population that we did with African Americans 150 years ago and beyond. We're still paying the price for the pathetic manner in which this country handled that,' Huckabee said at a meeting of the Political Animals Club in Little Rock. The club meets monthly to hear from political figures and experts.'I think frankly the Lord is giving us a second chance to do better than we did before,' Huckabee said."
    December 6, 2006; Newsmax.com

    "When it comes to illegal immigration, do you think we should allow illegal aliens currently in the country to become citizens or at least give them the opportunity to or the opportunity to stay as guest workers, or do you think they should have to leave the United States?

    Mike Huckabee: Well, I'm not as sure that leaving and then coming back is as important as it is to acknowledge that what they've done is illegal, pay a fine, and then get in line behind the people that are going through the process of being here legally. It's important that we have a legal process.

    We can't just ignore our laws. We either change them or enforce them for clearly this land is a land that is dependent on more workers than we currently have for many of the jobs that Americans honestly don't want. So there is, I think, a reality that we shouldn't just sort of look the other way. I don't believe in amnesty. That's not a good idea, but creating a pathway where people can have a form of restitution to make things right, to understand that laws have to be obeyed or some consequences have to be applied. That makes more sense than trying to deport 12 million people or build a 700 million, ehr...700 billion dollar fence."
    2006; RightWingNews.com

    "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?"
    May 16, 2006 Washington Post interview

    "'I would hope that no matter who we are, or where we are from, that America should always be a place that opens its arms, opens it heart, opens its spirit to people who come because they want the best for their families ...,' Huckabee said as the largely Hispanic (LULAC Convention) audience gave him a standing ovation."

    "'Pretty soon, Southern white guys like me may be in the minority,' Huckabee said jokingly as the crowd roared in laughter. He told the LULAC delegates that their presence in the state's capital city was very important because Arkansas has one of the fastest growing Hispanic populations in the nation. 'Your gathering is so very significant for our state,' Huckabee said. 'We are delighted to have you.'"
    June 30, 2005; Arkansas News Bureau

    "For decades, we treated our state's (Arkansas') African-American population poorly. The Hispanic influx gives us a second chance to prove what kind of people we really are."
    November 8, 2003; Governor Huckabee's Radio Address

    "You know, when people say, 'they're taking our jobs' - I used to hear that as Governor - and I started asking this question, 'can you name me any person, give me their name, who can't get a job plucking a chicken or picking a tomato or tarring a roof that would like to do that work? In fact, I won't ask, I'll challenge you: give me their name and their phone number by five this afternoon and by eight o'clock tomorrow morning I can have them at work.'

    And I'd hear 'well, it's a lot of people,' and I said, 'no, no, don't tell me it's a lot of people, don't tell me you heard, or that your friends have said, or that you have this uncle. Tell me their names. Take a few hours. Go get them. Give me their names.'

    I never, ever, had a person who could come up with the name of a person who could not get a job because an illegal immigrant had stepped in front of them because it was either a job that person didn't want to do or didn't exist. I'm not saying there aren't folks out there like that, but so much of it was more about emotion than it was about the reality of saying 'gee, I can't get a job because somebody was in front of me.'"
    March 27, 2007; RealClearPolitics.com

    "We need to create a process to allow people to come here to do the jobs - plucking chickens, tarring roofs, picking fruits - that are going unfilled by our citizens.'"
    MikeHuckabee.com

    "[Huckabee] wants unauthorized immigrants to register with the government and receive guest permits and IDs, and pay a 'significant' fine. They would have a choice of deportation or a "rigorous process" to achieve legal status. 'They must not be allowed to cut in line ahead of those who have followed the rules,' Huckabee said."
    July 16, 2006; Des Moines Register (Iowa)

    "Let me ask: if an illegal alien couple has a child in Arkansas and he becomes a citizen, can they get benefits that way?

    Mike Huckabee: They would be able -- the child would.

    Right, but, ok...

    Mike Huckabee: But, the child is a citizen. That child is not illegal."
    2006; RightWingNews.com

    "Since I became governor more than seven years ago, I've meet hundreds of Mexican natives who've migrated to Arkansas towns such as Danville, Decatur and De Queen. Percentagewise, Arkansas has the fastest-growing Hispanic population in the country. Arkansas industries, especially our burgeoning poultry industry, have offered jobs that often are filled by immigrants from Mexico. The rapid growth of our state's Hispanic population has led to complex social issues. Heavy migration can increase the demand for state services. But most of those who've moved to the state in recent years are hard-working people with strong family ties. They've made a contribution to our economy and revitalized parts of numerous Arkansas towns that previously were dying."
    November 8, 2003; Governor Huckabee's Radio Address
    Worker Verification


    "Gov. Mike Huckabee says he's not afraid of risking his political future by speaking out against a recent immigration raid at an Arkadelphia poultry plant even though calls to his office have been 'about 1,000 to one' against his stance ... 'How is our government benefiting from an abandoned 1-year-old? I'm thinking as a parent, if I was in that position and my only crime was plucking a chicken to feed my family. I didn't hurt anyone,' he said. 'It would be different if the crime was robbing a bank with a gun or making methamphetamine.'"
    August 5, 2005; The Associated Press via ALIPAC
    INTERIOR ENFORCEMENT


    "Let me ask you about one bill I heard about - in Arkansas. I understand you opposed a bill that would deny illegal immigrants state benefits. Is that the case and can you tell us a little about that?

    Mike Huckabee: I think it's a bill that one of our state senators who really was baiting this issue, got on, and it did something that we don't do any way. We don't give benefits to illegals and it was a bill really to inflame passions, not to solve anything. When I asked him could he name me one person anywhere that was getting a welfare check, food stamps, or getting benefits who was illegal, he could not do it.

    I asked him did he know of anyone who could give me the name of anyone and I told him if he could, then he needed to be reporting it -- because it was already against the law in our state -- and could he tell me what this bill would do that our current laws didn't already do -- and he couldn't tell me. The point was that this was not to fix something that was wrong, this was to get attention, which it did for him. It created an enormous amount of rally for people who wanted to be angry at somebody, but he couldn't produce any evidence whatsoever because we don't allow benefits to be given..."
    2006; RightWingNews.com

    Gov. Mike Huckabee Thursday denounced a bill by Sen. Jim Holt that would deny state benefits to illegal immigrants as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life ... Senate Bill 206, filed Wednesday, also would require proof of citizenzhip to register to vote and would require state agencies to report suspected cases of people living in the country illegally ... 'Even if benefits to people who are in the U.S illegally could be stopped, 'I don't understand how a practicing Christian can turn his back on a child from this or any other state,' Huckabee said ... Huckabee said he took exception to characterization of immigrants in the bill and by its supporters as exploiters of social programs. 'They pay sales taxes on their groceries,' Huckabee said. 'They pay fuel taxes. If they're using a fake Social Security number, they're paying Social Security taxes and will never receive any benefit ... Something that's not worth sharing is not worth celebrating,' Huckabee said. 'This is the kind of country that opens its doors. This bill expresses an un-American attitude.'
    January 28, 2005; Arkansas News Bureau
     
  11. Dan H

    Dan H New Member

    1,075
    0
    0
    There is a simple solution to all this discussion:
    Just vote Ron Paul :D
     
  12. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,427
    113
    I am not a Southern Baptist, but I do not take evolution seriously, even though I believe I take science very seriously. In fact, taking science seriously is probably a good reason for not taking evolution very seriously.

    The last thread I put any time into on this issue ended up segregated and then disappeared, however, so . . . :lol:

    Odd that you would think his view on evolution would somehow affect his ability to sign bills with which you agree or veto bills with which you disagree. What business does the federal government have passing laws pertaining to beliefs on evolution? That is not within the powers of Congress the last time I checked.
     
  13. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    This may too if it turns into theological debate.

    Keep the topic about Huckabee.
     
  14. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,427
    113
    :lol:
     
  15. fallison

    fallison Guest

    895
    0
    0
    I am not a Southern Baptist, but I do not take evolution seriously, even though I believe I take science very seriously. In fact, taking science seriously is probably a good reason for not taking evolution very seriously.

    The last thread I put any time into on this issue ended up segregated and then disappeared, however, so . . . :lol:

    Odd that you would think his view on evolution would somehow affect his ability to sign bills with which you agree or veto bills with which you disagree. What business does the federal government have passing laws pertaining to beliefs on evolution? That is not within the powers of Congress the last time I checked.[/quote:2yilmi0e]

    +1
     
  16. Thorsen

    Thorsen New Member

    4,226
    0
    0
    I didn't think anything that was said had anything to do with a theological debate. I clearly stated that the man, because of his beliefs, will not be able to seperate national policy from his religious beliefs. And that, whether you like it or not, is a fact.
     
  17. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    I didn't say what you posted was or that what anyone post had, I was saying if the topic moves from the man to debating the pros and cons of evolution vs intelligent design then I will start deleting posts.

    I will also not hesitate to delete a post that calls a religion or followers of that religion and what they beleive any bad names, whether I agree with it or not. Again, not directed at you specifically, it is at anyone reading this topic and thinking about posting.
     
  18. blind_shake

    blind_shake Well-Known Member

    5,357
    27
    48
    With all do respect, we all know the forum rules about certain topics, we are all adults here. Please keep the preemptive moderator threats to a minimum and not stoop to the level of BARFCOM and others.

    GS1 your intentions are honorable and I respect your stance but it is a pet peeve of mine. If you're going to censor someone [which is your right, no 1AM rights on private forums] maybe you can warn posters privately thru PM or something.

    If it gets posted and its against the rules then delete it, everyone knows the rules but we don't need to be reminded of it like on other forums. I like this forum just for that reason.

    If I offend anybody then you have the right to be offended is all...
     
  19. Gunstar1

    Gunstar1 Administrator

    8,460
    5
    38
    Its a pet peeve of mine to have to do it, yet I still do it.

    You are right, I should not have to do it. But lets count the reasons why I do.

    • * I don't know if everyone reading this topic knows the rules as there are new people joining all the time.
      * Not everyone that can post here is an adult, legally or sometimes mentally.
      * People sometimes forget the rules when a hot topic debate gets going
      * Users know I am watching what they say, without posting they may try to slip something by
      * less work, a warning post to everyone that takes 10 seconds is a better use of my time than spending 10 or more minutes PMing anyone involved about the rule violation and deleteing the offending posts. I am not online all day and a hot topic can have 3 or more pages before I even see it.

    I hate sending them as much as you hate reading them, however they will continue.
     
  20. blind_shake

    blind_shake Well-Known Member

    5,357
    27
    48
    I respect your reply, I promise to adhere to the rules. Keep up the good work. GPDO is the best forum I have come across in years. :wink: