mike huckabee: Page 1
Amnesty author Mike Pence for president? Dick Armey, Club for Growth, others hype him (UPDATE: he's out) - 01/21/11
Back in 2006, Indiana Congressman Mike Pence proposed his own "compromise" amnesty plan. He may have gotten the idea for that plan from a proposal by billionaire heiress Helen Krieble, and also in 2006, Krieble, Pence, and Dick Armey of Freedomworks appeared at an event to promote comprehensive immigration reform.
The latest bad idea from their general camp is to try to draft Pence to run for president. Those backing the idea include Armey, Chris Chocola of the Club for Growth (known around here as the "Club for Profits at Any Price"), former Rep. Jim Ryun, and Brent Bozell.
“What I see across the board, especially with the party activists, the energetic people, is a sharp division between those personalities you would call ‘old news’ personalities and newcomers... And almost anybody, if you said, ‘who will be on the field for the presidential sweepstakes from the Republican side,’ all the names you would name today - (Newt Gingrich), (Mike Huckabee), Sarah Palin and (Mitt Romney) - these are all old news names and, quite frankly, I don’t think they have much of a chance.”
While Jonathan Martin and Kasie Hunt of the Politico try to claim (link) that the appeal to Armey and Chocola is due to the claim that Pence "is viewed as a politician who would actually govern as a social and fiscal conservative" and that the "Draft Pence coalition can be best described as a group of insiders that prefers outsiders - and especially those focused on social issues like abortion and gay rights".
It's more likely that Armey and others in the "Profits at Any Price" school don't really care all that much about social issues; the tea parties - a group more or less controlled by Armey, the Koch family, and other "fiscal conservatives" - have deliberately avoided social issues. Rather, Armey et al see Pence as a salable commodity who'd be "good for business" (if you know what I mean).
1/29/11 UPDATE: Pence has decided against running for president. Whether he'll run for something else isn't yet known.
Max Blumenthal is a low-level far-left enforcer of political correctness, frequently calling those to the right of him "racist" in the pages of The Nation and other publications. Now, let's take a look at a couple of interesting items from his Twitter feed (I took screenshots in case either disappears).
At 8:40am on 2/2/2010 he tweeted (twitter dot com/MaxBlumenthal/status/8548913520):
File under goyisherkop: http://tinyurl.com/yf762uk
That links to a Jerusalem Post interview with Mike Huckabee (youtube.com/watch?v=4syfZK4QY9k) and - whatever explanation he wants to give - his tweet is a bigoted comment about Gentiles. "Goyisherkop" (or "goyishe kop") is a Yiddish term meaning "the head of a Gentile", i.e., stupid. Blumenthal's comment was retweeted by Justin Elliot of TPM (twitter dot com/elliottjustin/statuses/8549044637) and by Larisa Alexandrovna (twitter dot com/larisa_a/statuses/8548967872).
And, at 11:11am on 1/29/2010, he tweeted (twitter dot com/MaxBlumenthal/status/8380020841):
heading to Salt Lake in search of holy underwear.
That's the equivalent of someone saying that they're going to Tel Aviv looking for beanies, and one can imagine the outrage that would result. The Mormon church has specifically addressed those like Blumenthal who would make light of their traditions:
Garments are considered sacred by Church members and are not regarded as a topic for casual conversation.
While it would certainly serve Blumenthal right if, due to comments like those above, he becomes as toxic as those he's smeared, the reader has to be careful not to fall near his low level and to avoid engaging in tu quoque arguments. Use quotes like the above to show that the arbiters of what can be discussed can't be trusted, not to try to silence them like they try to silence others.
Clueless: Lee Fang of ThinkProgress doesn't even understand how liberals play the race card (Steele comments) - 05/27/09
Lee Fang of the Center for American Progress' ThinkProgress site offers "Days After Steele’s Racist Attack On Obama, C-SPAN Airs Video Of Steele Denouncing Racism" (thinkprogress.org/2009/05/27/steele-racism-malcolmx) about two recent sets of comments made by RNC chairman Michael Steele. The first set is discussed here; the second here. See both links for the context. Of the first, Fang says:
...last week, Steele employed the same "rotten" racist stereotypes to attack President Obama. ThinkProgress reported that Steele suggested that Obama won the presidency because of his race. “He was not vetted, because the press fell in love with the black man running for the office,” Steele said...
The weekend following Steele’s racist smear against Obama, Mike Huckabee praised Steele for being “effective in challenging” Obama because “no one is gonna be able to use the racism charge.”
The only part of Steele's comments that dealt with Obama himself were the "what does he stand for? What does he believe?" parts. The rest was an attack on the mainstream media. Steele wasn't attacking Obama in any way, much less a racist way. The only possible racism in his comments is the assumption of white liberal guilt among the media and related elites, but that's hardly racism since it's a continuously demonstrated fact by those groups. And, nothing in Steele's comments was a "stereotype"; those Steele was discussing are in fact almost all archetypes of what he discussed.
Here's the roundup of virtually everything important that happened in 2008. The message this year, as in every year: "If only they'd listened to me". Some of the mistakes made by Obama opponents are described here. If, instead of making those mistakes his opponents had pushed this plan or my non-partisan list of reasons to oppose him, Obama might not be president. The word "idiot" is used below.
The first is "Barack the Magic Negro" (link), a take-off on Al Sharpton based off of a Los Angeles Times guest editorial from David Ehrenstein called, ta da, "Obama the 'Magic Negro'" (link). MSM sources bury the genesis of the song at the end or pretend that the genesis is only what Saltsman says rather than what is clearly the truth. And, this has also caused the formation of a circular firing squad and caused Saltsman to go on the defensive and issue PC pieties. For examples of all those, see "RNC Chairman Candidates Split on Charged Stocking Stuffer" (link) from Michael Shear of the Washington Post. This quote from Saltsman is buried at the end:
"Liberal Democrats and their allies in the media didn't utter a word about David Ehrenstein's irresponsible column in the Los Angeles Times last March. But now, of course, they're shocked and appalled by its parody on 'The Rush Limbaugh Show,' " Saltsman said in a statement today, referring to the op-ed article that reportedly inspired the song lyrics... "I firmly believe that we must welcome all Americans into our party and that the road to Republican resurgence begins with unity, not division. But I know that our party leaders should stand up against the media's double standards and refuse to pander to their desire for scandal."Another track is "Star Spanglish Banner". The lyrics for that are below and you can hear it here. I assume that the person who made that video is unaffiliated with Saltsman or Shanklin, but the images are fitting considering that the topic of the song is political support for illegal immigration. About the only thing somewhat offensive about the song is the kindergarten-level pun on "Jose"/"O say", and perhaps the somewhat inaccurate use of the word Spanglish; regarding the last, see Cheech and Chong.
The rest of the song is a satire on uninvolved citizens and on politicians who support illegal activity, and so because of that it's easy to see why the MSM, the Democrats, and some Republicans would want to portray it in a bad light.
UPDATE: Jim Acosta of CNN offered a report on the "controversy" that completely failed to mention the LAT piece. Not only that, but it included less-than-flattering stills of those involved, and rolling video of a raging Rush Limbaugh without providing any sort of context. And, that's not all: it included Karl Frisch of Media Matters for America referring to the song as "hate", and implied that rightwing radio was full of "hate". But, wait Acosta had even more: he offered a highly edited quote from Saltzman; presumably he cut out any sort of effective defense Saltzman had provided to CNN.
Continuing the idiocracy, the titular MSNBC host said she wouldn't find it funny if someone referred to her as "Tamron Hall the Magic Negro Anchor Lady". Obviously, whatever argument she's trying to make is fallacious, given - once again - the original LAT piece that kicked everything off. Needless to say, idiots are trying to resell her illogical comments, including [[ Nicholas Graham]] of the Huffington Post (huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/29/msnbc-anchor-i-wouldnt-fi_n_154107.html) and Ben Armbruster of ThinkProgress (thinkprogress.org/2008/12/29/tamron-hall-magic-negro).
In March, [Ashley Todd] was asked to leave a grass-roots group of Ron Paul supporters in Brazos County, Texas, group leader Dustan Costine said. He said Ms.
Former Arkansas state representative Joyce Elliott - after November a state Senator - has signaled that she'll re-introduce legislation to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens. This will have the impact of taking college educations from U.S.
Mike Huckabee has launched his own Political Action Committee (PAC) called, euphonically enough, "Huck PAC" (huckpac.com), saying:
"Our goal is to secure a better future for our country by changing our punitive tax system, standing firm for the sanctity of life and traditional marriage, and protecting our borders and giving our veterans the blood-bought benefits they deserve.
Over a year ago, Congress passed a law to spend over $7 billion to build a fence to secure our Mexican border.
Readers who oppose illegal immigration often complain that The Post has too much sympathy for those living in the United States illegally and too little for those who oppose this...
...A review of immigration stories, mostly local, over the past year and several months, showed that the coverage was mostly straightforward and informative...
Earlier today, the New York Times offered "The Immigrant Vote" , promising wrath and ruin upon those who dare stand in the way of corrupt businesses profiting from illegal activity:
Nevada is the first state on the election calendar with a sizable Hispanic vote, and among them will be a substantial number of immigrants. We don't know who they'll choose, but we do know they are anxious. They have endured the racially tinged rhetoric used to sink immigration reform; they have witnessed Republican candidates exploiting the xenophobic nastiness. Families have been torn apart as illegal immigrants have been deported, leaving their citizen children behind.
According to the
exit entrance polls from the Nevada caucuses (link), among Republicans identifying themselves as Latinos: Mitt Romney got 41%, followed by Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee with 9% each, Rudy Giuliani with 8%, Duncan Hunter with 6%, and Fred Thompson with 1%. The only openly pro-amnesty candidate, John McCain, got 25%. Rudy supports an amnesty, he just doesn't push it that much. But, to be fair let's add them together and come up with around a third selecting someone who's in favor of amnesty. And, other factors may have come in to play with that third.
Meanwhile, over on the Democratic side, among Latinos Hillary Clinton got 64% vs. Barack Obama's 24%, and he's slightly more pro-illegal immigration than She  is. Unlike Her, he supports driver's licenses for illegal aliens, and he also marched at 2006's pro-illegal immigration march in Chicago, the one that was organized by several people linked to the Mexican government. Of course, other factors which are not to be discussed may have played a role with some number of those who voted for Hillary. And, Bill Richardson is apparently still on the ballot and got 0%.
UPDATE: Numbers are crunched here.
 Generally speaking, there should be no such thing as the "immigrant vote", since anyone who can vote (at the federal level at least) must be a citizen and thus, even if they're a naturalized citizen they're no longer an "immigrant". A minor point? Well, yes. But, it goes to the already abysmal credibility of the New York Times.
 I'll be using the royal capitalization from here on out.
Apparently "attrition" - the plan to enforce our immigration laws and thereby encourage many or most illegal aliens to go home and discourage future illegal immigration - has the New York Times scared, namely because they think it would work.
Jonathan Weisman of the Washington Post offers "For Republicans, Contest's Hallmark Is Immigration":
...And just days after he delivered a passionate defense of the humanity of undocumented children in a Republican debate, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee presented one of the most punitive immigration platforms seen in this campaign season, rejecting legislation to provide the children of illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they finish high school, at
Joy Lin/CBS News sneers at Mike Huckabee concern over possible terrorist infiltration (Pakistan) - 12/28/07
The Washington Post doesn't appear to be sore losers about the failure of immigration "reform". They recently published a vile column from Harold Meyerson and a similar editorial. Now comes Dana Milbank with "Hasta La Vista" (link) about Rep. Tom Tancredo dropping his presidential bid. The problems start with the title, a childish attempt at irony. The running theme throughout is that Tancredo is angry; in fact he uses that word four times. Why is he an "angry man"?
We know this because he has proposed dropping bombs on Mecca. We know this because he sang "Dixie" at a South Carolina gathering full of Confederate flags and white supremacists. And we know this because he wants to expel 12 million people now living in the United States.
The first sentence was only the ultimate response to nukes having gone off in several U.S. cities. The second is discussed here and here. The third might imply that he supports mass deportations, when in fact he doesn't. Milbank then goes on to mock the fact that there were only 18 supporters when he made his announcement. Then:
In response to questions, he admitted he was pulling out to help defeat somebody he dislikes more than an undocumented Mexican in the desert: former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, the new Republican front-runner here with what Tancredo called an "abysmal" record of "inviting" illegal immigrants.
I don't think Tancredo would actually "dislike" someone who's trying to cross the desert into the U.S., he just doesn't want them to do it. On the other hand, the Washington Post's support for illegal immigration plays a part in encouraging people to try to cross the desert, despite the fact that thousands have died while trying. And, of course, Huck has promoted and enabled illegal immigration such as by helping Mexico to build a consulate in his state. Then, it's on to a lie:
Never mind that Huckabee was tough enough on immigration to win the support of the border-vigilante Minuteman Project.
The support only came from Jim Gilchrist himself, not any groups using that name. After discussing an admittedly stupid video that Tancredo released (youtube.com/watch?v=n5GUCQAdlxg), it's Milbank's turn to admit why he's the one who's angry:
"It's beyond anybody's wildest expectations that we have been able to, with the help of America, really, get our national leaders to pay attention to the issue," declared Candidate Two Percent... He boasted, with some validity, that his candidacy helped lead "nearly every Republican presidential candidate to commit themselves to an immigration plan that calls for securing our borders." It's true: As his rivals coopted his nativist positions -- even if just rhetorically -- Tancredo became a victim of his own success.
UPDATE: The technicalities of the Gilchrist endorsement are described here:
it is important to note that the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (MCDC), the nation's largest Minuteman organization, is a 501(C)4 non-profit organization and cannot and does not endorse any candidate for public office. MCDC is not associated with Mr. Jim Gilchrist, who today endorsed Mike Huckabee for president. Jim Gilchrist's erstwhile Minuteman Project is itself an organization which by its own representations as a non-profit civic group cannot legally endorse candidates. It does not have any volunteers who observe illegal border activity. It has no border fence building projects. Jim Gilchrist here speaks only for Jim Gilchrist, he does not speak for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, nor is he nationally representative of most patriots in the "Minuteman movement" – who under no circumstances could ignore the failed record nor endorse the duplicitous "plan" recently rolled out by candidate Mike Huckabee. The national media needs to recognize that Jim Gilchrist's endorsement is his own personal statement, nothing more.
A private citizen in Arkansas (Jim Parsons) is suing the former governor of that state, Mike Huckabee, over his role in helping the Mexican government establish their latest consulate there (link). The main claim is that Huckabee used public funds to offer discounted office space to the consulate, and that per AR's laws he was forbidden from doing so.
But it's on their policies concerning immigrants where Republicans -- candidates and voters alike -- really run afoul of biblical writ. Not on immigration as such but on the treatment of immigrants who are already here. [Biblical "stranger" references; those are answered here and here]Very few people want to actually punish illegal aliens. And, in fact, some such as Ruy Giuliani or Mike Huckabee are supporters of amnesty. The most that others support is attrition, which is designed not to punish illegal aliens but to reduce the jobs and benefits magnet so that many will go home and many fewer will try to come here.
Yet the distinctive cry coming from the Republican base this year isn't simply to control the flow of immigrants across our borders but to punish the undocumented immigrants already here, children and parents alike.
And, supporting illegal immigration is not humanitarian in the least.
You can leave comments at the WaPo, or send him an email explaining why he's wrong to meyersonh *at* prospect.org
However, the better option in the long term is to go to appearances by those religious leaders who make the same "stranger" arguments, publicly point out how they're wrong using the last link, and then upload the exchange to video sharing sites. If we could completely discredit someone like Roger Mahony or Jim Wallis it would prevent people like Meyerson from making similar false arguments.
Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist says he will have to reconsider his endorsement of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee after learning the Republican presidential candidate favors allowing illegal aliens to wait only days to receive documents allowing re-entry into the U.S...
"I'm going to have to follow up on this," Gilchrist said.
Bush hack turned Washington Post hack Michael Gerson - at that link trying to push for Bush's immigration "reform" by calling the GOP base names - offers "Homespun Meets Hard-Line". Like yesterday's WaPo editorial he turns on Mike Huckabee because of the latter's new (supposed) tough stance on illegal immigration.
The Washington Post offers a vile, spittle-flecked editorial called "The Immigration Swamp/As the presidential campaign intensifies, so does the nativist ferocity." They turn on Mike Huckabee for changing from a strong supporter of illegal immigration into someone who (supposedly) wants illegal aliens to return home within 120 days:
The idea that
To address the question of what we should do about immigrants who entered the country illegally, I propose starting with the highest law of human behavior: do unto others as you'd have them do unto you.
Mike Huckabee cannot be trusted on immigration matters.
David Broder wants McCain-Huckabee ticket (because of immigration; retransmits Huck lie?) - 12/02/07
David Broder offers the completely clueless "Republicans would be wise to tab McCain and Huckabee" (link). He wants that ticket explicitly due to their immigration stances. And, Broder not only fails to do his job but he may be spreading Huckabee misinformation and he's being misleading about a program Huckabee supported:
What sets McCain and Huckabee apart is most evident in the way they treat the contentious issue of illegal immigration.
Part 1 is here.
At last night's debate, CNN gave Mike Huckabee so much time to demagogue college discounts for illegal aliens that they didn't give Mitt Romney enough time to make the essential point that what Huckabee supported would have deprived U.S. citizens of college discounts.
They also failed to do their research and realize that there's already an existing federal law (Title 8, Chapter 14, Sec.
Mike Huckabee: in-state tuition for "the children of illegal immigrants" (2005; actually for illegal aliens themselves) - 11/25/07
1. The discounts were for students who were themselves illegal aliens. The immigration status of parents doesn't necessarily imply the status of their children; parents who are illegal aliens could have U.S. citizen children for instance.
The mainstream media has been working feverishly to promote Mike Huckabee, as have various low-level Democrats. Are those completely unrelated, or is the MSM taking their marching orders from the Democratic Party? And, is The Huckster being promoted because:
1. They're simply reporting on what's happening...
2. They just need something to write about...
3. They're trying to give "them" an acceptable candidate...
4. They support him due to, for instance, his support for illegal immigration...
...In its first six months, the Mexican consulate based in Little Rock has seen the number of citizens it serves a day rise from 50 to 120, said consul Andres Chao.
I have no real idea who Kevin Tracy is, but the many widgets on his site lead me to suspect that he's a strong fan of Mike Huckabee (it's just a feeling I get). Yesterday he posted "Huckabee Immigration Facts" (ktracy.com/?p=587), which almost entirely consists of a Huck-supplied list of his current positions on the matter.
Mike Huckabee defends Mexico consulate deal (businesses agreed to pay Mexico's bills; law violated?) - 10/31/07
A lingering controversy over the role former Arkansas Gov.