Am I a Minority on this site?

[Sammie13]

Blondsurfer, you're not completely alone. I know it's just assumed that if you're gay, you have to be a Democrat, which is serious stereotyping. I voted for Huckabee on Super Tuesday. People on these boards try to paint him as some wacko minister. He was a Baptist preacher back in the 1980's. Big deal....everybody has to have a job. Most of my family is Baptist, so that doesn't spook me. Frankly, I was very undecided, and found most of the candidates were saying and doing anything to win. He had very little money, but sold himself off his authenticity. I attended two rallies and the guy talks real people politics, which I liked. He's not the greatest candidate ever by any stretch of the imagination, but his message and wit resonated with me. He's the first Republican I've ever voted for President dating back to my first election in 1984. And, who knows, I may vote Repub again in November unless the Dems quit finding so many ways to spend our money and drop the socialized medicine rehetoric.

It's unfortunate that we have this two party system because I lie somewhere in between and it's hard to find a fit. The candidates rarely deviate from their party's platform and when they do, like McCain in this election, they hang you out to dry.

My ideal candidate would be:
*pro-abortion and gay rights
*tough on terrorism prevention, esp at home
*moderate on defense build-up
*Iraq was a huge mistake....but we can't just pull out and cause unrest which, essentially is now our fault; we must have a plan to get out but it can't be abrupt
*pro death penalty
*low taxes and incent companies thru tax cuts to grow and keep jobs here
*Deficit reduction
*NO to universal healthcare (socialized medicine)
*Pro stem cell research
*Reduce welfare dependency
*Reduce Pork and institue line-item veto
*Allow immigration work visas and certain paths to amnesty

No one candidate really fits this criteria for me. But I do think, low taxes and a strong defense benefit all of us. People need to move on as we know George Bush didn't deliver on his promises. He's the worst president in the last 100 years. But that doesn't mean that a different Repub can't deliver....but, in reality, Bush was so bad that a Democratic sweep could be America's answer to his ineptitude.

 

[Jannus]

Blondsurfer, you're not completely alone. I know it's just assumed that if you're gay, you have to be a Democrat, which is serious stereotyping. I voted for Huckabee on Super Tuesday. People on these boards try to paint him as some wacko minister. He was a Baptist preacher back in the 1980's. Big deal....everybody has to have a job. Most of my family is Baptist, so that doesn't spook me. Frankly, I was very undecided, and found most of the candidates were saying and doing anything to win. He had very little money, but sold himself off his authenticity. I attended two rallies and the guy talks real people politics, which I liked. He's not the greatest candidate ever by any stretch of the imagination, but his message and wit resonated with me.

Huckabee certainly sounds like the ideal Republican candidate! No wacko minister here!

Huckabee's Gay Comment Sparks Controversy

“I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal,” he said. “Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.”

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080118/30901_Huckabee\'s_Gay_Comment_Sparks_Controversy.htm

This is not the first time the former preacher turned politician has come under fire for comments about the gay issue. In 1992 while running for the U.S. Senate, Huckabee had described homosexuality as “an aberrant, unnatural and sinful lifestyle.”

Recently, the comment was dug up to pressure the rising Republican contender to recant the politically incorrect statement. However, Huckabee said he still stands by those remarks.

“If we didn’t have that [relationship between a married man and woman having children] as the ideal, we wouldn’t have a civilization that was able to perpetuate,” he said in a December interview with Fox. “So, rather than read into something incredibly out of line, just read into the fact that I believe that the ideal relationship is one man, one woman, pro-life.”

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080118/30901_Huckabee\'s_Gay_Comment_Sparks_Controversy.htm

Huckabee Refuses to Take Back AIDS, Homosexuality Remarks

WASHINGTON - Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee recently ended his honeymoon with the media and was handed some tough questions about statements he made in 1992 about AIDS and homosexuality.

He had called for steps to “isolate the carriers of this plague” during his failed run for a U.S. Senate seat from Arkansas 15 years ago, according to CNN.

Huckabee would not retract the statement.

“I had simply made the point – and I still believe this today – that in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, when we didn’t know as much as we do now about AIDS, we were acting more out of political correctness than we were about the normal public health protocols that we would have acted,” Huckabee told Fox News on Sunday.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention concluded in 1985 that AIDS was not transmitted by casual contact. But Huckabee contends that at the time, “there were other concerns being voiced by public health officials.”

He rejected the idea that he called for people infected with HIV to be quarantined, but did not explain what he meant by the word “isolated.”

http://www.christianpost.com/articl..._to_Take_Back_AIDS,_Homosexuality_Remarks.htm

His past comments on AIDS were among 229 answers he offered in a questionnaire during his first run for political office. On the issue of homosexuality, Huckabee described it as “an aberrant, unnatural and sinful lifestyle.”

On Monday, Huckabee said he still stands by those remarks.

“Let’s understand what sin means,” he said. “Sin means missing the mark. Missing the mark could mean missing the mark in any area. We’ve all missed the mark.”

He described the “proper relationship” as one between a married man and woman having children.

“If we didn’t have that as the ideal, we wouldn’t have a civilization that was able to perpetuate,” he said. “So, rather than read into something incredibly out of line, just read into the fact that I believe that the ideal relationship is one man, one woman, pro-life.”

http://www.christianpost.com/articl..._to_Take_Back_AIDS,_Homosexuality_Remarks.htm

Mike Huckabee: Gay Marriage will End Civilization

Among all the Republicans vying for their party's nomination to be president, Mike Huckabee is the one most in line with the desires, fears, and agenda of "the base."

"There’s never been a civilization that has rewritten what marriage and family means and survived. So there is a sense in which, you know, it’s one thing to say if people want to live a different way, that’s their business. But when you want to redefine what family means or what marriage means, then that’s an issue that should require some serious and significant debate in the public square. And if you look at states that have had it on the ballot—I know in our state it was a 70-percent-against issue. Most states are similar to that."


http://atheism.about.com/b/2007/12/18/mike-huckabee-gay-marriage-will-end-civilization.htm

Huckabee: Gay Behavior a Choice

MR. RUSSERT: But when you say aberrant or unnatural, do you believe you’re born gay or you choose to be gay?

GOV. HUCKABEE: I don’t know whether people are born that way. People who are gay say that they’re born that way. But one thing I know, that the behavior one practices is a choice. We may have certain tendencies, but how we behave and how we carry out our behavior–but the important issue that I want to address, because I think when you bring up the faith question, Tim, I’ve been asked more about my faith than any person running for president. I’m OK with that. I hope I’ve answered these questions very candidly and very honestly. I think it’s important for us to talk about it. But the most important thing is to find out, does our faith influence our public policy and how? I’ve never tried to rewrite science textbooks. I’ve never tried to come out with some way of imposing a doctrinaire Christian perspective in a way that is really against the Constitution. I’ve never done that.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/12/huckabee_gay_behavior_a_choice/

Huckabee: Gay Marriage Equals Bestiality

GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee says if we're going to allow men to marry men and women to marry women, we might as well amend the Constitution to allow people to marry animals. In an interview with Steven Waldman, Beliefnet's editor-in-chief, and Dan Gilgoff, Beliefnet's politics editor, the former Arkansas governor said, "The constitution needs to be amended to meet 'God's standards,'" according to Beliefnet. "I think the radical view is to say that we're going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal."


http://www.diversityinc.com/public/2944.cfm

Wave the Confederate Flag? Huckabee Says Let S.C. Decide


GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee says that South Carolina should decide whether or not to fly the Confederate flag, a symbol of racism to some and Southern pride to others, reports The Associated Press. "You don't like people from outside the state coming in and telling you what to do with your flag," Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, told supporters Thursday in Myrtle Beach, S.C. "In fact, if somebody came to Arkansas and told us what to do with our flag, we'd tell 'em what to do with the pole, that's what we'd do." Arkansas' flag has a connection to the Confederacy as well. A star above the word "Arkansas" stands for the Confederacy, according to the state code. Huckabee refused to say if he finds the Confederate flag offensive.


http://www.diversityinc.com/public/2939.cfm

On Evolution

Huckabee, in a conference call with reporters the morning after the debate, explained how he would have responded if given a chance to elaborate on the question:

"If you want to believe that you and your family came from apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't happen to think that I did."

As for what should be taught in public schools, Huckabee said he wants "schools to acknowledge that there are views that are different than evolution."

Huckabee downplayed the role evolution should have in the election. "Is a president going to sit in the Oval Office and really make a decision on what's being taught in a third-grade class in Dubuque, Iowa, on creation or evolution?" he said. "The answer is no."

http://presidentialpolitic.blogspot.com/2007/05/huckabees-evolution-beliefs.html

 

[Kurn]

I mean come the fuck on people. It was Bill Clinton and the Democrats who pushed the Defense of Marriage Act through during his administration which says two things:

This is totally bogus, guy. Bill Clinton never pushed DOMA. The Republican Congress of the day were the ones who pushed it and the President merely acquiesced with their legislative fiat.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

 

[Kurn]

As for blondsurfer's concern, yes, I think the anti-war rhetoric is a little bit one-sided. But that doesn't mean that the over-all position is wrong.
Bush's policies have NOT optimally strengthened our Defense. Far from it.
Bill Clinton is criticized for reducing military spending. This, however, was never anti-military. This was done for the over-all purpose of reducing our fiscal deficit.
Reducing our deficit is a way of freeing-up our country from the weight of obligations and is in itself conducive to a stronger national defense.

But the conservatives couldn't and still can't understand that.
If you want a stronger defense, Hillary is the person we want in the Oval Office.
The country that can defend itself without bankrupting itself is at a profound advantage.
Centuries of military history would agree unanimously with that.

 

[LaloGS]

I have to say that I pretty much that those in the gay community tend to vote democrat, I could be wrong. Most of the issues that are the concerns of the gay community are usually addressed by the Democratic party and not the Republican party- ie same sex marriage. The gay community tends to follow more liberal policies. But I'm and always have been a Conservative and have always gone the ways of the Republican party- Now don't crucify me for that, but that is the way I am and the way I was brought up. I'm against abortion for one, I believe in having a strong National Defense and I keep thinking the Republicans can do something to change the tax structure or tax codes. The issue I worry about the most is terroism which might be the one issue driving my vote and what may happen when we leave Iraq. Saw a show on Vietnam the other day, This country thought when we pulled out that the South Vietnamese Government and armed forces were prepared to handle themselves against the North Vietnamese- they weren't obviously. I worry about seeing a repeat of this- which could be much worse than the capture of Siagon. So go ahead call me an idiot, but these are the issues that worry me. So far both Hillary,Obama and even Ron Paul talk about bringing the troops home, but they do not mention how are they going to stabalize the region and pertect us and the rest of the world from terroism

If you've always been a conservative, and always gone the way of the Repuglican party, then you must not be paying attention to your party's platform. They are the least conservative of any of the parties that operate in the American political arena.

They start expensive and fruitless wars, they run up massive debt, they do everything in their power to subvert the Constitution, they pass laws to take away our human rights, they don't support what the rest of the world has recognized as important for saving our planet from global warming, they have insinuated Religious hatred into the political process of the country, something our founding fathers thought to be a negative, and not least they wreak havoc on our own economy with their thoughtless consideration of the poor and middle class in America, in favor of the rich.

So if those are your core values, then YES, you are in a minority here, and hopefully everywhere else, because Repuglican values are just fucked up and inhuman evil.

This applies to all of you so called Conservative Repuglicans who post on this board.

 

[Sammie13]

Huckabee certainly sounds like the ideal Republican candidate! No wacko minister here!

I was fully aware of all the excerpts that you found on Huckabee. And frankly, in the world I reside, 80% of the folks I know fully agree with his stands. The only one that I think is "over the top" was wanting to isolate those with AIDS as recently as the late '80's and early '90's (had it been the early to mid 80's, his argument would have been more understandable as there were alot of unknowns about the disease then, but the years he referenced that would have been a naive statement).

Otherwise, most of his viewpoints are how the majority of Southerners think and that has nothing to do with him being a "wacko minister." If he were an accountant and a Baptist, he might likely have those same viewpoints. I guess, what I'm saying, is I've had a lifetime of hearing those Biblical arguments about homosexuality and his view are completely in line with things I hear all the time.

So, he's against gay marriage...that's not wacko considering I don't hear Hillary and Obama pushing for it. In fact, I recall John Edwards, the ultimate liberal, candidly discussing his lack of comfort with gay marriage. It's a cultural, Southern thing and when you live in the South, these viewpoints are part of the tapestry (For the record, I favor gay marriage, but have become cynical enough to have lost interest in it ever happening or even being a necessity; hence, the issue no longer predicates my vote). I recently heard Obama say a marriage should be exclusively between a man and a woman....Huckabee feels the same way but went further in typical GOP-style of saying if you let 2 men marry, then why not 2 men and one woman or a man and an animal....

I have Baptist gay friends who feel their gay "behavior" is a choice. These two friends agree with Huck that while they don't feel they chose to be "gay" that they did choose to practice the sin of homosexuality. Again, I've heard this stuff all my life.

Your excerpts are part of what I do find refreshing about Huckabee is that he is honest. He talks a language I've heard all my life and so I don't have the discomfort as perhaps you and others have in hearing his forthright viewpoints. I understand what he's saying and where his heart is in every single excerpt (except the AIDS one). And people like Huckabee and those that share in his Biblica views are not crazy or full of hate; in fact, many are very comfortable with gay people, but they believe in their interpretation of the Bible.

I do not subscribe to their beliefs and I am not a Baptist. But I do understand where they're coming from after years of resenting these type of people. I am comfortable walking among them now.

There is a cultural disconnect here no doubt. That was clear back on Super Tuesday when the South stood up against the grain and chose Huckabee over McCain and Romney....and, yep, even the media pundits don't quite "get" this region. Huck is really a throw-back to the "yellow dog" Democrats I grew up with in the South. In the 70 and 80's, almost all southern politicians were Democrats, but their ideology was almost identical to Huck. In the '90's, the South turned over to the GOP, but the ideology was the same. Dems have a hard time winning here on the more liberal ideology of the Northeast and West. If this were 1978 or 1988, Huckabee would be a Democrat.

 

[JackFTwist]

Are you trying to be Alfie?
That ploy was immature and foolish when he did it; it doesn't get any better when you do.



Really?

Please give us a link to show where the Republicans had 67 or more seats in the Senate and 290 or more in the House of Representatives.

Hey, I think that anyone who says the war is right, America was attacked, should have served in the military because only a real ____________________ would say America was attacked, someone else fight for America because I have other priorities, let others die while I sit at home at a porn site

and you know what - I felt that way long before I ever heard of General Alfie, since I have felt that way my whole life, in the years of my war and in the years of my son's once and continuing Active Duty service in the Marines which has put him in and out of Iraq - what do these stay-at-homes believe anyway? If America was attacked, if the cause is right, then fight - don't send someone else off if our country is in peril while you sit at home watching porn - so my question is very relevant

And foir your second question: a bill is passed by the House, by the Senate, signed by the President - from 2001-2007 all of those were in Republican hands - and so I assume that the sober responsible Republicans slashed spending, continued the budget surpluses of Bill Clinton's years, redid the tax code (and didn't they?) and solved the problems they complained about