Monday, November 26, 2007


LINK TO ARTICLE is a respectable website whose motto is "Exposing and Combating the Liberal Media Bias". I decided to set them straight. Some people were complaining about candidates of not being Reagan-like. I thought I should also set them straight too about Reagan's record. Don't get me wrong, I admire Reagan a lot, I just don't deify him as the God of Conservatives.


The real media bias here is that ABC turned this interview into propping the center-right positions of a republican candidate and making him look like a liberal.
I am a supporter of Gov. Huckabee and what is being missed in the media, both in the MSM and especially in conservative websites like is his conservative positions. I really don't believe that an unfair attack on a fellow republican should be the purpose of this website.
Let me go into detail about illegal immigration: If anyone honestly want to learn Gov. Huckabee's positions on Illegal immigration you can go here. He is very strongly against illegal immigration. http://www.mikehucka...

Do you want more assurance? Act 2210 of 2005 was signed into law by Governor Huckabee. The legislation made it illegal for a driver’s license to be issued to anyone who could not prove legal residency in Arkansas. http://roebuckreport...
On the tuition breaks, the governor only supported the measure that applied to those who met the academic qualifications and applied for legal citizenship. The measure didn't pass. Governor Huckabee stressed that any student would simply be treated as any other graduate of an Arkansas High School, and not given any special consideration.

UPDATE: Gov. Huckabee has come out with a 9-point Secure America plan. Very strong plan.

I really want to challenge my fellow friends who commented here about candidates not being Reagan-like. Reagan was a human being and he too wasn't perfect on conservative issues. For example, Reagan had no choice but to raise taxes in California, and Reagan approved blind amnesty to everyone and he didn't do anything to build the border. Let's not forget that. We claim to be conservatives and under the Reagan and Bush 43 administrations the national debt went up big time. What Reagan was known for was his sunny optimism and his ability to connect with all Americans, hence the term Reagan democrats came into existence.

Gov. Huckabee is not for blind amnesty and he has said time after time that the border must be built and that is the first solution to the problem of illegal immigration. He is correct in stating that the problem of illegal immigration is due to the failure of the federal government in building the border. Someone above commented about someone breaking in a house = to illegals crossing the border. You know what, there is no door, its an open field that anyone can cross through easily. Let's build the border and then discuss what happens to those who came here illegally.

Democrats are set to win congress next year and most republicans are just twittling their thumbs. It's almost like we are letting them win. Very unfortunate.


How come these conservatives aren't attacking Romney nor Rudy on immigration? Why just Huckabee? I think it's very clear that Rudy was for sanctuary cities in NYC. Here is Romney's past statements and his record in Massachusetts when it comes to illegal immigration and how he has flip-flopped on this issue (like many others).

Romney Supports McCain-Bush Immigration Bill, Saying They Are "Quite Different" From Amnesty. According to the Boston Globe, in November 2005 Romney spoke "approvingly of efforts by McCain and Bush to solve the nation's immigration crisis, calling them 'reasonable proposals.[Boston Globe, 3/16/07]

Gov. Mitt Romney expressed support yesterday for an immigration program that places large numbers of illegal residents on the path toward citizenship… 'I don't believe in rounding up 11 million people and forcing them at gunpoint from our country,' Romney said. '[T]hose that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship, as they would from their home country.[Lowell Sun, 3/30/06]


Winghunter said...

Fine, when you get done reading all these and crawl out of your denial...;

On 2/12/95 an article Ralph Z. Harlow from the Washington Times wrote under the caption "Conservatives Hold Fire On Abortion" the Huckster said this:
"In the spirit of federalism, the proposed GOP revision also would replace the abortion amendment with a statement saying the issue should be left up to the individual state legislatures to deal with as each sees fit. 'That's exactly what we have looked for, and if it's left up to the states, more of them are going to put some restrictions on abortion,' Arkansas Lt. Gov. Mike Huckabee said in an interview after appearing on a conference panel yesterday."

On 4/ 2006 in an interview with John Hawkins on RightWing News the Huckster was talking the same talk:

"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."

BUT then on 11/19/07;
Huckabee Rejects Letting States Decide Whether to Allow Abortions,2933,312107,00.html

"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."

"But my surprise was nothing compared to the surprise of people across America who had been faithful supporters of right to life, said Huckabee, who is challenging Thompson’s claim that he is the most reliable conservative in the GOP field.

So, not only did the Huckster reinvent himself to be pro-life amendment merely to say what some people wanted to hear but, he then mindnumbingly ridiculed Fred for holding the same Federalist position the Huckster himself had taken not but a year ago...and all because the NRLC saw through the Hucksters con artist scheme and rightly awarded it to the best conservative candidate.

Think long and hard about who you're trying to protect.

Justin said...

First of all, I wish you would be able to debate in a way that is respectful devoid of calling ugly names like 'Huckster'.

Anyways, let me respond to what you said.

Here's part of the Huckabee statement:
"Gov. Huckabee agrees with Thompson that life begins at conception and that abortion is the taking of human life. He also agrees with Thompson that Roe v. Wade is based on an illegitimate application of the Constitution and that the federal government has no right to allow or prohibit abortion."

Huckabee hasn't said that Fred isn't pro-life. The point that the Huckabee campaign is trying make is that Fred adamantly said no to a Human Life Amendment on Meet the Press. Fred could've left that option open, but it he seemed to close it entirely because he is a Federalist. Go figure.

Now, I would agree that it would be a flip-flop if Gov. Huckabee said in the past that he was adamantly against a Human Life Amendment because it goes against federalism. Just because he supported repealing Roe vs. Wade doesn't mean that he stood against the Human Life Amendment.
He agrees its a good thing if Roe v. Wade is repealed and states would be able decide, but at the same time he says that the best solution is to have one definition when it comes to protecting life.

Interesting to not, you pulled up a quote from 1995. A few years before that Fred was representing Pro-Abortion groups.. and you accusing me of being in denial. Right.