The more any candidate brings up his or her own faith, the more scrutiny that faith will get.

If Huckabee doesn't want people to ask questions about his faith, he should stop bringing it up constantly.

Yes, Mr. Mike "Wolf in Sheep's Clothing" Huckabee. There are consequences for people's actions.

Like when a "Christian Leader" takes money from Big Tobacco, so he can campaign against cigarette taxes.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/74469/page/7

"There seems to be a great deal more attention on – really an intense scrutiny on – the details of my faith, than there is on anybody else's, including Mitt Romney's,'' Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas and an ordained Baptist minister, who is running well among Iowa's potential Republican caucus-goers, said in an interview with National Public Radio today".

That's because you're freaking crazy.
The Huckster really is a change agent. He would love to change every advance we've ever made as humans since the Inquisition.

Wow, this elections version of Republican Presidential candidates is god awful:

Huckabee's opinion on gay marriage is out there, but we should also be publicizing Huckabee's opinions on heterosexual marriage. Specifically, what he believes about a women's role in a marriage.

In August of 1998, Huckabee was one of 131 signatories to a full page USA Today Ad which declared: "I affirm the statement on the family issued by the 1998 Southern Baptist Convention." What was in the family statement from the SBC? "A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ."

The ad wasn't just a blanket, "we support the SBC statement," but rather highlighted details. The ad Huckabee signed specifically said of the SBC family statement: "You are right because you called wives to graciously submit to their husband's sacrificial leadership."

Add "graciously submit" to his "Take back the nation for Christ" statement, and if the media does its job, he's well on his way to being toast.

On relations with Iran, Huckabee had this to say: “All options have to be on the table, but before we bomb them we ought to bankrupt them.

In both these scenarios, the people of Iran are punished. How Christian of Huckster

We need a new line that gives the choice of "Any Atheist" on the election ballot in addition to "None of The Above"...

I'm so weary of the holier-than-thou, more-Christian-than-thou baloney. All these questions come because the so-called "Christians" have proved to be anything but with their actions.

Huckabee is talking sense when he says we should bankrupt Iran rather then use military force.
It is also the case that the government exists to improve living standards of everyone in the United States and we should therefore not place too much emphasis on religious beliefs or attitudes to sex as these are such grey areas to every individual.

I can't wait for this all to boil over within the Republican party, and I guarantee you it will.

Right now it's only non-Christians that they are against, although Mormons are starting to rank right up there.

Given the number of Catholics that are involved in all of this, and the Pope's statements about other religions, I can see when they'll start pushing for Catholic only Presidential candidates. No Protestants allowed.

I used to be concerned about the Republicans, but I truly feel they are only steps away from self destructing over all of this.

The more I hear from this guy, the more I am embarrassed for him. His interview in the New York Times Magazine was a laugh. I can only see bigoted prejudice as the only reason that anyone would vote for this guy. He cannot back up anything he says. He is a full out hillbillie. At least Romney can talk and sound educated. He did get degrees from the Harvard business and law schools. Viewing Huckabee makes me run over to Romney or to the democrats. Romney seems like utter perfection compared to this fool. I like the fact that he appears too perfect with his perfect family, being the richest candidate running, and his perfect background. He would be great to show off to the international community, especially after Bush. Enough Said.

Hooeee! That man SHORE do sound like Ron Paul when he talks about small government - I wonder WHY? He used to serve GOD and now he serves CORPORATIONS - I wonder WHY? He supports the FairTax, where only the very rich pay not tax - I wonder WHY? He likes to set murderers and rapists free - I wonder WHY? One thing ol' Huck says is ABSOLUTELY correct - there are CONSEQUENCES for people's ACTIONS. So, what should be the consequesnce for an idea-stealing, God-leaving, corporation-loving, Fair-Taxing (corporations don't pay), criminal loving so-called pastor? Hmm?

Ever since Huckabee raised his hand saying(being honest enough to say) he does not believe in evolution..he has been taking all the heat- but no big deal because any thinking person knows the big bang is a BIG LIE - you can' get something from nothing unless you are an american on welfare. Go Governor Huckabee - don't let the Negative naysayers get you down- people have been counting Huckabee out the whole time...whatever

He is sounding more and more like a mental light weight.

As far as questions about his religion go; Sure he should be asked the details about his beliefs.

Why?

UpChuckAbee, and others in the last 25 years or so, have gone beyond the circumstantial or collateral benefits of belonging to a certain religion, and have actively used their 'faith' to not only garner votes, but attack their opponents and large portions of the American public as well.

This makes their religious beliefs fair game. I think every voter in America needs to know which candidates believe they are going to Hell. I certainly would like to know.

Seriously, would you vote for someone that believes you are damned?? Now perhaps Mr. Hucksterbee doesn't think Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Hindus, nominal Christians, non-practicers, are going to Hell. If not he should say so.

Let's see, hmmmm, why might he not make that statement??

Poor little Mike. Everybody is picking on him. Perhaps he is just getting what he deserves. After all, he is the one who ran commercials in Iowa calling himself "the Christian candidate". He sounds a bit hypocritical to me.

"There seems to be a great deal more attention on – really an intense scrutiny on – the details of my faith, than there is on anybody else's, including Mitt Romney's,''
(Mike HuckserUpChuckAbee)

.....further, this statement from Mike is precious; Poor poor white, male, protestant, being persecuted in the land of white, male, protestants, by other white, male, protestants.

Grow up you sniveling, sleazy, glad handing, dirt bag politician.

This is SO fundy-Christian; 'We are victims'.

This is the easy overview of the FairTax proposal that is already before congress and is picking up steam with the media attention that Gov. Mike Huckabee has been giving to it.

I will give a couple of reasons why it is imperative that this proposal passes.

The tax system as we know it has only been in existence since 1913. It used to be against the constitution but our government pushed it through the states to ratify the constitution and make it legal.

The government made a good case for an income tax saying that only the rich people would be taxed.

Sadly that was wrong because rich people don’t pay taxes they just make you pay more for their product or get a good lawyer to put their funds places that will not be taxed.

The FairTax.

Abolishes the IRS – The IRS will no longer be around to audit you and take your property.

Implements a 23% nationwide federal sales tax on things that you buy or pay for – Because of all the corporate taxes there is an estimated 27% - 31% imbedded taxes on everything that you buy. Because we live in a capitalistic (competitive) society when those imbedded taxes are gone the cost of the product will drop by that much. For Example: If you bought a loaf of bread right now for $1.00 and paid a local tax of 6% you would pay $1.06 for that loaf of bread. Now if the FairTax is put in place that loaf of bread would drop from $1.00 to $0.73 you would then have a 23% Federal Tax and a 6% Local tax your total would be $0.95 that is including your local tax-------you pay less.

Gives a Pre-bate on all taxes up to the Poverty level for all U.S. citizens. For Example: If the poverty level for 4 people is $10000.00 a year then that family would receive $191.66 a month even if they don’t need it.

No more Income tax, Social Security tax, Medicare tax. What you make before taxes is what you bring home.

The only time you will get taxed is when you buy something. No more taxes on dividends, no more taxes on retirements, etc.

I do not have any affiliations with the FairTax people other than that I support this plan. If there are any inaccuracies in what I have told I apologize in advance because there was none intended.

The best option to find out more about the FairTax is to go to www.fairtax.org , pick up the book at your local bookstore or there is some information on www.mikehuckabee.com

Mike Huckabee accepted more than 90 gifts from 21 Arkansans he appointed to state posts during his decade as governor, a Politico analysis of state public records found.

Since setting his sights on the White House, those supporters, their families and their companies have kept on giving. They contributed nearly $161,000 to a pre-presidential campaign account and Huckabee's official campaign committee since late last year, according to state and federal campaign finance records.

Huckabee’s gifts became issues in his two gubernatorial campaigns as his opponents tried to stoke voter doubts about his judgment and ethics. As he surges in Iowa and nationally, Huckabee’s primary rivals are expected to make similar arguments.

Huckabee is expressing what many Christians feel...that there is bigoted arrogance against them from the mainstream media and from the secularists of the left and some from within the REP party. Christians understand what Huckabee is experiencing...the bigotry of those who feel better if they can "show the ignorance" in those that actually try and live up to a moral standard. This cynical "scrutiny" will only bond Christians closer to him.

Louis N,

Fair Taxing; kinda like Clear Skies, Right to Work, or Healthy Forests,, and on and on and on.

It's called framing the argument.

Huckabee never finished the seminary, so I can KINDA believe him when he said he didn't know about Romney's religion. Of course, comparative religion is a sort of low level class, but give him the credit for not being studious and drop it. He DOES believe in creationism, so at least he was awake PART of the time. I wonder how he does on other religions stuff. I know he got his Baptist girl friend Diane O'Connell a government job even though she had no experience. Cost Arkansas 1.6 million, so I guess he fails at not lying. Let's see, he stole $60,000 out of the taxpayer fund so I guess he missed that class about not stealing. He tried to pay himself as a consultant in his own Senatorial election, so he missed that class on not cheating too. He opened a wedding registry at Target and Dillard's while he was governor so his grateful subjects could buy him presents when he and his wife renewed their vows. Hm - guess he missed that class about not coveting his neighbor's possessions too. Wait - maybe there's a simpler explanation. Maybe the Huckster thinks YOU'RE stupid. After all, he DOES support the FairTax, which doesn't tax corporations AT ALL, and millionaires and up at the same rate as someone who is near poverty level - i.e. less than 5%. Here's the thing - religious people really ARE religious. Who among them wants any truck with THIS devil?

"He would be great to show off to the international community, especially after Bush. Enough Said.

Posted by: JD Alder | December 14, 2007 5:10 PM"

JD A,

Yeah, I agree, but Bush was found 'likable' by the American people, therefore electable.

A majority of Americans said they would rather have a beer with Bush over Kerry. Never mind that Bush can't hold his likker. (Some brite bulb retroactively changed the question to 'beer OR COFFEE' at a later date in the campaign out of fear of 'the base' and a realization that Geo no can drinkee.

Anyways, this 'Elmer Gantry' look alike could win the election. American voters have proved it again and again.

The Fair Tax is the most preeminently fair tax ever devised. Everyone gets $25k in free spending at the beginning of the tax cycle to use for necessities. After you use the $25k, you begin to pay tax on what you buy. Rich, poor, everyone alike. So you see that if you don't have a large income and/or you don't have large credit lines, you aren't going to pay alot of taxes because you don't spend alot. The rich consume a lot, so they will pay a lot in taxes. Simple, yes?

Mike Huckabee didn't devise the Fair Tax. But he saw the advantage of the Fair Tax and has endorsed it.

Huckleberry, Romney and the rest of the Republic pygmies brought this on themselves. (Ron Paul excepted)

Making religion some sort of litmus test invites these sort of questions. It also automatically eliminates them from being ever considered by non believers.

Tim makes a point by accident; If you reject evolution you reject science in general, calling into question astro-physics, geology, micro-biologic medicine, lots more.

This cynical "scrutiny" will only bond Christians closer to him.

Posted by: Cameron Smiley | December 14, 2007 6:35 PM

Heavens....lets not "embolden" the Christians.

HUCKABEE DOES NOT HAVE A DEGREE IN THEOLOGY!

Here you go...http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59222

I can't see why people are so enamored with Huckabee. I want my taxes raised. To save money we should let the criminals free. Let the murderers free after they talk to their pastors, especially if they work in the Govenor's office. The argument about not penalizing the children of immigrants is stupid. Illegals come here to get a better life for themselves and their families. Giving away free education will only encourage them to come. Just like the born in the US automatically makes you a citizen regardless if your parents snuck across the border just before giving birth. You can thank a lot of free health care for your spiraling health care costs. If you are rich and can afford to pay more taxes go right ahead and vote for Huckabee, or Hillary for that matter.

Gallup polled Republicans back in May and found that fully "35%" were essentially Pro-Choice. Rudy is the First Choice for Pro-Choice Republicans. Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are acceptable, as well.

But Huckabee is clearly not. His "fiscally liberal/socially conservative" views are offensive to the Party's libertarian wing.

His nomination would drive a stake through the heart of the longstanding GOP "Leave us Alone" coalition.

Thankfull, we libertarian Republicans have somewheres to go if Huckster get it: Into the arms of the Libertarian Party.

THE ULTIMATE HUCKABEE REALITY CHECK (PART I)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhCuwamYi1o

Ed Rollins is a master at campain strategy. This guy knows what he is doing. It's not by luck that Ronald Regan won all but one state out of 50.

With Mike Huckabee skyrocketing in the polls and now picking up Ed Rollins, his HUCKABUS is going to go from HUCKABOOM to HUCKABAMBOOM!!!

I can see a movie in the making here, Mike Huckabee coming out of no where sprinting pass the competition like they were stuck on honey.

This is an incrediable success story in the making. You are going to see everybody and their brother wanting the rights to make this movie about Mike Huckabee's charismatic success.

Look out world, America is back in the running! Mike Huckabee is going to steer this big ship of ours and he has the masses supporting him. Just as a rockband of supporters cheering on Mike now... GO MIKE GO, GO MIKE GO, GO MIKE GO!!!!!

With Mike's super ability to connect with people, he will connect with national leaders. The Earth will shift, I can hear the rutters start to grind and turn now, an amazing amount of force is coming.

The evil terrorist will be stomped on like a pancake, the poor will become richer, the sick will become healther, the economy will become brighter. This is an amazing historical time for America on the horizon.

Don't lose this opportunity, let's rally behind Mike Huckabee. Tell all your friends and family about him. Go vote for him. Be a part of the success story to pass on to generations that you were part of the making of this historic success. He's depending on you.

Skyrocketing polls from HUCKABOOM to now HUCKBAMBOOM!!! Let's raise the bar one more time again and let the light shine!!!

Skyrocketing polls from HUCKABOOM to now HUCKBAMBOOM!!! Let's raise the bar one more time again and let the light shine!!!

Posted by: Tony | December 15, 2007 12:58 PM

When the Repubs most mainstream candidate is a wack job like Huckabee, you know the Repubs are in trouble.

Mike Huckabee, strong conservative, not a crook or a weirdo (Giuliani) or a Mormon (Romney). Let's leave it at that. Okay? Okay...watch and learn if you don't believe him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuWUdUDUIDQ

And now it turns out that America's clergy is giving to Dem's over republitards by a decent margin. I guess all those values voters decided live Americans, through SCHIP and the end of the illegal occupation in Iraq, are more valuable than all the signing statements and leaked secrets and torture the current occupants offer.

Read and weep connies. Then trot out your 26%, head in the sand, dead ender, faux (We tell you how to think, you agree) noise, limpo, falfafel boy (BTW - does everyone have their tickets to the newest opera mackris vs oreilly http://www.mackrisvoreilly.com/), coultergeist hatred propaganda. "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries."

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13919.html

I think some brite bulb, in the next Republic debate, needs to ask all those retrogrades if they believe in, Einstein's theories of relativity, Maxwell's equations, Planck's quantum mechanics? How about Newton's differential calculus?

I think some brite bulb, in the next Republic debate, needs to ask all those retrogrades if they believe in, Einstein's theories of relativity, Maxwell's equations, Planck's quantum mechanics? How about Newton's differential calculus?

C.Morris:

You seem to be quite the bright bulb yourself. So, why don't you favor us with an explanation as to why rejection of the theory of evolution is the same as rejection of all science – especially mathematics and physics. In particular, explain why rejection of evolution isn't simply rejection of a conclusion (i.e. the “theory”), rather than a rejection of any scientific process or method. Help me out here, because I don't follow the logic of your argument, if there is any logic to it.

Ok, first off, stop using the "theory" comment to deny evolution. Gravity is a theory too, but I don't see people floating off into space. Being a theory does NOT mean it can't be true. A theory is an argument, and it is proven or not based on evidence collected over time, independently of the theory. A real theory is one that can stand the test of time and still be relevant many decades later, as evolution is constantly proven to be. And there is a lot of evidence proving evolution. Just because evolution doesn't fit into some conservative American traditional thinking of how the earth and people came to be doesn't mean that calling it a theory makes it disputable.

Next, mathematics and physics are similar to anthropology in that they constantly test the ideas at the foundation of the concept. And when there are empirical examples of how theory in any of the above disciplines has discovered conflicting examples, people involved revise accepted rules, protocols, standards and tests, to allow for the new information to be allowed to affect research, reporting and development. This is the scientific theory, and it has worked well for a long time.

People that believe there was a creator, on the other hand, accept one version of the story of human/earth creation, based on a book written in various forms of Aramaic, translated into Latin by a bunch of English theologians appointed by a King, and then translated into American English decades later. And they believe there is only one version of their truth, and that any variation is a blasphemy against their principles. And that there is no other possible solution but that suggested in myth by said book.

So if you are looking for logic, I suggest you are looking in the wrong place for it. Because any myth contained in any book that proposes to suggest it is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, cannot be the truth, except to those inclined to believe that their world view is the only correct one. Many people think that way. Islamofascists. Timothy McVeighs. Hitlers. Stalins. Vice President bu$h. All have been proven wrong over time, and they will eventually be proven wrong again.

rncbs:

I suppose you are right that I am looking for logic in the wrong place, but not for the reasons you think. Your answer was almost perfectly non-responsive to the question asked and, in the process, you indulged not a few logical fallacies. Let me give you a small taste as to why you went astray.

First, science has been both developed and accepted by Christians who accept the Bible as the truth. Sir Francis Bacon, Sir Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and Max Planck, for example, were all distinguished scientists and Christians. There have been (and are) many others, too numerous to mention. They viewed the world as created. Yet, this fact never once put a dent in their zeal for, or appreciation of, the scientific method. In fact even Einstein believed in a “created” universe; he just couldn’t accept the notion of a “personal” God. When Newton was faced with a conflict between his ideas and those of the Bible as taught, he resolved the issue in his own mind by determining that the Bible and his ideas were correct, and that it was only the interpretation of the Bible that was incorrect. Therefore, you have indulged a categorical fallacy (the “either/or fallacy”) by assuming all people who believe in the Bible must, of necessity, either reject science and its methodology, or a big chunk of it.

Second, some people dispute the theory of evolution for reasons entirely apart from its supposed contradiction with the Bible. Even Darwin saw some weakness in his own theory. He pointed out that the existence of a “complexity” (e.g. an organ or biological system) that could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications in the process of selection and mutation, would make his entire theory break down. [And these are almost his exact words from “The Origin of Species.”] This principle has raised factual disputes regarding certain organs and systems (e.g. eyes, ears, flagella, blood clotting mechanisms) which are, accordingly, claimed to be too complex to be explained by evolution for the reasons given by Darwin himself; and there is no relenting on either side of the debate. There are other particular points of dispute, namely, how it is that we could have evolved from apes and/or other proto-primates while having a different number of genes (since all sexually reproductive animals pass on half of the same number of genes to their offspring); or how it is that both man and lower primates could exist side by side if selection is necessary to evolution. Yes, there is some evidence to support the theory of evolution; but it has its legitimate detractors as well. As theories go, it is far from flawless (unlike gravity). As such, you have indulged a second (and related) categorical fallacy of assuming that all those who disagree with evolution do so purely out of religious conviction. That’s simply untrue.

Instead, I believe it is possible, without the contradiction suggested by C. Morris, to reject the theory of evolution in its undiluted form – as under-proven – while still believing in the scientific method and all other scientific disciplines – regardless of whether one also has religious convictions inconsistent with the “theory.” [And I KNOW what a scientific theory is, thank you.]

I’m still waiting for someone to tell me why evolution is so damn important that it must be taught in schools. I mean, tell me one scientific advance or social improvement that would not or could not have come about were it not for the theory of evolution. I can’t think of any. Can you?