Mike Huckabee is the real deal.  Since he's been moving up in the polls there is a lot of misinformation out there.  The following websites have information on them that will help sort out the issues.

rightsmart.blogspot.com
www.hucksarmy.com
www.mikehuckabee.com

To Cedric who wrote this...

Atheism requires at least some faith, because no one can prove there is no God.

This is a complete straw man argument.
Do I need faith to know that dragons don't exist?
Do I need faith to know that purple humans don't exist?

Scientific inquiry is based on the assumption of doubt. It is normal to be skeptical about that which there is no evidence for.
Thusly, it is not up to rational skeptical humans to prove God(s) don't exist, but up to "believers" to provide evidence that (T)he(y) do.

Where we have previously discussed scripture before here it is not applicable. I would need some form of observable reality as evidence. To quote scripture to show that God exists would be like referring to the Matrix to prove Neo is the one.

Desperate & Cedric= Hitchens & Sharpton

People should be curious as to why so-called social conservative leaders are shunning Mike Huckabee.    They are looking for a puppet, who will pander to them irrespective of the validity of their positions.

I would support Mike Huckabee if I vote in a Republican primary.

Desparate-

I should clarify my statement about "not caring about religous beliefs" just a bit.  I suppose I look at it from my point of view, where I could vote for people I disagree with if I agree with other positions.  For instance, I'm pro-life, and against gay marriage,  though I'm for civil unions.  Here, Hillary Clinton and Obama are 1 for 2 with me.  But as an Afr. Amer. I appreciate their support of issues like affirm. action., and at least the sentiment of universal healthcare (don't know how practical it is, but it's not an evil proposition.)  Their religion may inform some of their beliefs, or it may not, but I make my decision on whether I agree on that issue.  R's s--k on the issue of race in general.  So no party is perfect from my point of view.  

I'm a Christian who's voted for Clinton, Bush, and Nader (admittedly a protest vote-i'd have voted for Bush again most likely if he hadn't supported the case challenging affirmative action at U. of Michigan in 2003.)  To be more accurate, I should say that I don't solely make voting decisions based on whether a person agrees with me on everything, like the influence of religion in their life. Just because a person doesn't share all of my convictions doesn't mean I won't vote for them.  So if an atheist shares my view on the issues, I could vote for that person.  There are a lot of conservative Christians who don't seem to be very sympathetic to Afr. Amer. issues, specifically as they are exacerbated by history.  I still agree with them on abortion though.  So religion is not a litmus test for me, and given how many people believe in God, it shouldn't be a litmus test for others, in my opinion.

Desperate: Atheism and Theism are both "straw men."  They are constructs of culture and the limitations of human intelligence.
What we don't know is far more compelling than any eternal verity, including those faith statements of mathematics and the physical sciences.

What is observed is always subjective and removed from the immediacy of whatever "reality" might be.


Words like atheism and God are just that: little words we make up to cover our nakedness.

CNN just released a new poll in NV, huge lead for Clinton.

Clinton 51
Obama 23
Edwards 11

Van

desperate-

You certainly need faith to apparently concede that everything is created, and then deny a creator.  

Evidence is, well, relative.  What's required to convince you might not be required to convince me.  Things have happened in my life that I attribute to God's intervention.  You haven't had these things happen to you.  Doesn't mean it didn't happen to me.  Again, any view you hold that you can't prove is a belief.  So in a sense, I feel we are both believers.  It is fair to debate the likelihood of an event, but at the end of the day, the degree of likelihood is all that will be resolved.

Beliefs persist because of their validity.  There are millions of people who have had their lives positively altered by the influence of religion. I will not deny people the validity of the experiences they've had, or obviously not had in many cases, with God.  This is as offensive, to me, as Obama insinuating that Rev. McClurkin is in error because he believed he was gay when he was young and feels God delivered him from the lifestyle (As much as I like Obama, how does he know whether the man has genuinely changed or not- if I were McClurkin it'd be hard to continue to campaign for him given Obama's stance on this issue.)

As for the arguments, this is a simplistic one and the shorter of the 2 I could make:  A minority of people are atheist.  At the very least, there is a great deal of contention over the idea of God.  There is virtually no contention over dragons or purple humans (how many times have I seen this sort of argument...)  Also this assertion of yours is a straw man- the probability that there is a God has no bearing on the probability of purple humans or dragons.  To the specific God questions, the purple human/dragon question is a non-sequitur; those questions have no bearing of the God questions. If there are, or are not such things, God still might exist.  

The amount of argument over God varies directly, I'd submit, with the general degree to which people have acknowledged he/she/it might exist....

Doubtless many have interpreted scripture in terrible ways to justify terrible things.  But as time goes on, we (ought to) come into better and better understandings of how scripture is applicable to our (christian) lives.  As for apocalyptic literature, what I would say is that in the Bible God changed his mind on several occasions in the OT- for example when the Jewish people revolted against Moses' leadership, God told Moses he would destroy the entire group and start over with him (Exodus 32:10) Moses asked him not to do this, and actually talks God out of it.  So if Christians are doing their job, we are trying to avert the apocalypse by following the commands of Christ: "go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost" (Matt 28:19).  Which is why Christians are supposed to be polite, but make it clear that are obligated to speak up because we believe we've been commanded to pipe up by something far more powerful than man.

Finally, you say you don't believe me than I'm an independent - so who do you think I support then?  Do you think I'm a Republican or a Democrat?  Do you think I support Obama? Paul? Edwards? Dodd? Huckabee?    I'd love to hear this...
Shadow, Hamden, CT (Sent Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:00 PM)
666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666

Well WHO really, really cares!!

"Shadow, Hamden, CT", cheers, I found your analysis quite thoughtful.

As for "jerry/corpus christi texas" saying, "I challenge the intelligence...", I can't think of posts more unintelligible, misinformed, misguided, and poorly written than his. Please, Jerry, cease and desist on the mindless, flag-waving cheerleading. You're giving conservatives a bad name.

Mike Huckabee is real. He's genuine. He's an articulate speaker. He shares my values. He's moving up in the polls. He's top tier.. President Mike Huckabee. I like Mike. He beleives in what he says, and says what he beleives.

Just say NO to Ron Paul and drugs.

It sure makes it hard to ignore Mike Huckabee, doesn't it Mr. Romney?  
In regards to Mr. Guilani's record on New York City cleanup, couldn't be too hard when the criminals put one of their own in charge.

The democrats will underestimate likeability to their own peril. The mean smug, condescending, know it all types are why the Democrats keep losing ...Bill Clinton was the only one of them that was ever likeable enough to win-I have to give him credit(although I didn't vote for him). My mom and Dad live in Ark..told me about Huckabee ..I thought his name and his lack of $ backing word hurt him ...but I am realizing those liablities are turing into assets-- peope are sick of the $ backed candidates buying the elections ..Huck is certainly not doing that.. People in politics who like to call names and brand people who disagee with them-will find that this will backfire on them(some democrats(see rolling stone article- VERY MEAN SPIRITED) They would have been a great catholics back in the day- watch the MSM go on a witch hunt because he was a pastor...or because he believes in the "MISSING Link" They will try to do their inquisitional brand jobs and overlook that he was a Governor for 10 years!!!!! Longer than Hillary or Barack have been in office. Finally a "REAL" populist Republican.
Go governor Huck!

I was a Fred fan, but got bored when he wasn't really doing very well and didn't excite very many people.  And then my cousin told me about Mike Huckabee.

I read stuff from his website, and watched some interviews with him (Glenn Beck, Chris Wallace), and I was SOLD.

www.mikehuckabee.com
www.hucksarmy.com

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):