Difference between revisions of "Mike Huckabee"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Video: more on the constitution) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* {{dkosopedia}} | * {{dkosopedia}} | ||
* {{sourcewatch}} | * {{sourcewatch}} | ||
| + | * [http://huck-hearts-gothard.true.ws/ Mike Huckabee's Ties to "Cult of Character" Evangelist Bill Gothard] | ||
| + | |||
===Filed Links=== | ===Filed Links=== | ||
{{links.tagged}} | {{links.tagged}} | ||
| + | ===Video=== | ||
| + | * '''2008-01-15 (upld date)''' [[youtube:onHkywYc_1M|Huckabee: Amend Constitution to Reflect God's Standards]]: "I have opponents in this race... who do ''not'' want to change the [[US Constitution|Constitution]]. But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living [[God]], and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family." | ||
| + | ** ''There are so many problems with this quip that I know I don't have time to do it justice... {{woozle.init}}'' | ||
| + | ** And yet, from [http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=28 Huckabee's web site]: "I firmly believe that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a "living Constitution." The meaning of the Constitution cannot be changed by judicial fiat. The powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution come from "We the People," and judges have no right to prohibit the people from passing democratically-enacted laws unless we have explicitly authorized them to do so." He starts out sounding like he doesn't think the Constitution should be changed, but then he clarifies a little bit by saying that judges (presumably including those on the [[US Supreme Court]]) shouldn't have the right to interpret the Constitution, and only the people should. So, who decides, when there's a conflict? What if "we the people" vote for something which clearly violates the original meaning of the Constitution? ''This sounds an awful lot like he's trying to clear the way for certain well-to-do religious groups to popularize some very un-Constitutional changes to the Constitution... maybe starting with that "unpopular" [[separation of church and state]]. -{{woozle.init}}'' | ||
| + | ** '''2008-01-15''' [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/01/15/geist-take-away-charm-huckabees-crackpot Geist: Take Away the Charm and Huckabee's a Crackpot]: right-wing website stops just short of criticizing Huckabee, and instead turns it into a criticism of media "[[hypocrisy]]" for not pointing out that [[Barack Obama|Obama]] had done "something very similar, going into a church to preach his political word". ''I'm sorry, but those two things are in no way equivalent. -{{woozle.init}}'' | ||
Latest revision as of 13:42, 22 January 2008
Overview
Mike Huckabee is a Republican running for president in 2008. He won the Iowa caucus in January 2008, and is currently the Republican front-runner.
Huckabee supports the proposed FairTax.
Links
Reference
- Wikipedia
- Conservapedia
- dKosopedia
- SourceWatch
- Mike Huckabee's Ties to "Cult of Character" Evangelist Bill Gothard
Filed Links
- redirect template:links/smw
Video
- 2008-01-15 (upld date) Huckabee: Amend Constitution to Reflect God's Standards: "I have opponents in this race... who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family."
- There are so many problems with this quip that I know I don't have time to do it justice... W.
- And yet, from Huckabee's web site: "I firmly believe that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a "living Constitution." The meaning of the Constitution cannot be changed by judicial fiat. The powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution come from "We the People," and judges have no right to prohibit the people from passing democratically-enacted laws unless we have explicitly authorized them to do so." He starts out sounding like he doesn't think the Constitution should be changed, but then he clarifies a little bit by saying that judges (presumably including those on the US Supreme Court) shouldn't have the right to interpret the Constitution, and only the people should. So, who decides, when there's a conflict? What if "we the people" vote for something which clearly violates the original meaning of the Constitution? This sounds an awful lot like he's trying to clear the way for certain well-to-do religious groups to popularize some very un-Constitutional changes to the Constitution... maybe starting with that "unpopular" separation of church and state. -W.
- 2008-01-15 Geist: Take Away the Charm and Huckabee's a Crackpot: right-wing website stops just short of criticizing Huckabee, and instead turns it into a criticism of media "hypocrisy" for not pointing out that Obama had done "something very similar, going into a church to preach his political word". I'm sorry, but those two things are in no way equivalent. -W.