Friday, July 27, 2007

Huckabee On Home Schooling, Pastors and Pews, and Campaigning In Iowa

Videos Posted Today at at “Newsroom,” Videos,” of Huckabee On Home Schooling, Pastors and Pews, and Campaigning In Iowa.

· Homeschooling

Mike Huckabee talks about homeschooling

Author: explorehuckabee
Keywords: Mike Huckabee Homeschooling
Added: July 27, 2007

· Pastors and Pews

Speech in Des Moines, Iowa

Author: explorehuckabee
Keywords: Mike Huckabee Pastors and Pews Speech
Added: July 27, 2007

· Gov. Huckabee In Southeast Iowa

Wes Westmoreland shares why he "Likes Mike", Governor Huckabee tells a story about Freedom, and gets a standing ovation.

Author: explorehuckabee
Keywords: mike huckabee iowa president
Added: July 27, 2007

Huckabee On Health And My Discussions On National ID and Minimum Wage

Things are piling up and much is already written or under construction. But, I was listening to an interview with Mike Huckabee on health care at The Kaiser Foundation that I thought a lot of people should and would want to hear: . He is askrd at one point if he thinks the government has the responsibility to step in and “be the driver” on health matters. He immediately says that we certainly don’t want government control and relative to what some think of as “free government health care” quotes P.J. O’Roarke saying that nothing is more expensive than when it’s free, and that includes not just in dollars but in quality of service and anything else.

As usual, Huckabee stresses consumer control. Government may advise and may be able to pull together help, with a larger and broader scope and reach. But, the consumer must always remain the driver, with the option to choose. And state, not federal government should be the primary recourse for help. Check out the interview, and be sure to download the podcast!

I’ve also had discussion today with a contact who asked about national ID and The Constitution , which I will expand on and post, and with Blogger Byron Harvey on the subject of minimum-wage which unfortunately, the Democratic Congress has just passed an increase of.

But, be sure to read online discussion of The Ame, Iowa Straw Poll, including what I posted this morning below, and think about it.

Larry Perrault


"I found it on Buy Pro-Life!" -- Family Safe Search & Shop

50% of Buy Pro-Life Retail Earnings is donated to CPCs.


Ames Iowa Straw Poll Approaching/Strong Showing For Huckabee And Paul?

Though not physically, I’ve been away this week. I’ve just been thinking about other things. I want to say some more about Christopher Hitchens and God, and about some thinking I was doing after reading more of scientists who are actively anti-creationist and anti-intelligent design. Actually, though it isn’t, they tend to regard the second as a disingenuous Trojan Horse for the first.

But, I was reading on the web about the Ames Straw Poll, coming up, now just two weeks from tomorrow (Saturday). Of course, everyone says that they think they are gaining, but I really expect Huckabee is, probably because he’s been working all over Iowa, he’s a true sober Christian conservative with optimistic ambition, and Iowa has always rewarded that among Republicans and shaken “expectations.” And Huckabee’s easily the most engaging speaker in the field.

Also, there’s been some mixing it up among candidates jockeying for attention. Most specifically, Brownback has been dogging poll-leader Mitt Romney with jabs about the genuineness of Romney’s conservatism. Actually, I think that there are very reasonable questions in that regard. But, I don’t see Brownback as an able messenger. Though he sports conservative positions, he isn’t particularly charismatic and he appears to not be going about questioning Romney in the right way: focusing negatively on Romney, more than portraying his own positives perspective. I can easily hope that scuffling between Romney and Brownback will benefit…neither of them, but others.

And, perhaps seeing Huckabee as getting traction with social conservatives, Tom Tancredo has run a radio ad falsely fingering Huckabee for supporting the failed immigration bill. His strategist, Bay Buchanan holds to the ad’s legitimacy and says it won’t be pulled. With immigration as Tancredo’s signature issue, Tancredo is indeed the most dark candidate on immigration: nothing but “build a wall and “trow da bums out!” You can see how he attracted a Buchanan. While he opposes amnesty and believes the border must be controlled first, Huckabee’s theme on immigration is not a drone against immigrants, but a focus on the failures of American policy. From the campaign, today: We have a great new video up on YouTube of a few citizens sharing their testimonies, as well as of the Governor telling his views on immigration.” We must control the border and when we do we should invite the positive labor of orderly screened and processed immigrants, as America always has.

Anyway as I said, Huckabee is the most engaging and charismatic candidate. And prior to the poll, candidates will give speeches. Romney can do that, but he tends more to talk at you while Huckabee tends to talk with you. If the speeches are to have an effect, as they should, they should help Huckabee. The Iowa crowd should be over 2/3 social conservatives and polls suggest this population isn’t terribly excited with the anointed “frontrunners.” After Giuliani and McCain pulled out thinking they could not win but only lose, Romney sopped up the polls shortly thereafter. I think he can only go down, the farther the better, but he still should win. He’s got problems if he doesn’t. Fred Thompson will be on the ballot,, but not at the poll. With media celebrity, his polls have been fairly high, so why get in and risk getting hurt? He’s still not in the race and it looks like he won’t be until at least, September. Giuliani and McCain should only slip farther with the conservative and snubbed Republican crowd. I’m thinking Ron Paul will surprise with the open poll not being strictly Republican, and he has a strong Republican following, too. I’d be real interested if it weren’t for his head-in-the-sand (tail in the air?) posture on Iraq and foreign policy in general. Tommy Thompson has put so much stock and effort into Iowa, if he doesn’t pull out closer to 10 than 5 percent, I can’t see how he goes on.

I took particular interest in Huckabee bloggers MA For Huckabee and Kevin Tracy . Massachusetts for Huckabee has been running lead-up notices and instructions for Huckabee campaigners all week. And Kevin
Tracy posted an explanation and outcome prognostication yesterday, before submerging himself in work for a while. His post made sense to me, also acknowledging Huckabee’s inherent personal advantages and other important trends and obstacles: mainly that Huckabee’s speech needs to dampen the celebrated-but-absent Fred Thompson’s showing. Looking at
Tracy’s predictions and injecting my cock-eyed optimism (I’m terrible at predicting or even understanding how and why other people behave), I tweaked the numbers a bit and imagined a positive scenario. But, I’m not posting it yet. Plenty’s sure to happen in the coming days that will likely prompt more tweaking. At bottom, it would be nice if this straw poll flushes a lot of people out of the race, consolidating around one, or two if you count Romney, conservative(s). I’d take a head-on Romney-Huckabee matchup. May the best man win: there goes that cock-eyed optimism, again.

Larry Perrault


"I found it on Buy Pro-Life!" -- Family Safe Search & Shop

50% of Buy Pro-Life Retail Earnings is donated to CPCs.


Friday, July 20, 2007

Home School Solutions for Huckabee/Real Not Phony "Consensus" Candidates.

Here is a home schooling blog on the Huckabee blogroll. Home School Solutions

Of course, The Home School Legal Defense Fund has also endorsed Huckabee, Like this blogger, I saw Huckabee speak, 9 years ago for me, and have liked him since. Actually, it was at a Christian Coalition dinner at a Republican state convention, in Ft. Worth.

Anyway, you can also look up the HSLDF web site to find their endorsement. For me, Huckabee isn’t just my favorite option among the current presidential candidates. He is the ONLY option for people who deeply care about the things we value for the nation.

I know: the supposed experts still act as though there are only three or four choices. I just heard Bill Krystol on Michael Medved’s radio program doing the McCain (though he’s inclined to think McCain won’t make it)-Giuliani-Romney-Thompson cha-cha. Bill Krystol is a conservative commenter and magazine editor and a Washington insider. And he buys the “pop” consensus hook, line, and sinker.

Now the largest constituency in the Republican Party is mostly Christian social conservatives. McCain has spoken disparagingly of social conservatives in the past and shown no philosophical coherence on these and other large matters. Giuliani is a serious and assertive administrator, but he’s pro-choice, pro gay marriage, and pro-gun control! In themselves of course, these things demonstrate serious specific problems. But on the whole, it’s obvious that he has no coherent traditionally American context from which to develop his positions: one has no idea what is next. Mitt Romney has been all over the map to where now, he just happens to be exactly where polls of dissatisfied conservatives suggest he should be. Coincidence? You’ll have to decide. But he also is historically a strong salesman. I’m not signing up. He’s shown me nothing of Huckabee’s Christ-like motivation.

Speaking of which, I know it’s not supposed to be appropriate to consider, but Romney’s a Mormon. Let’s just be frank about that. They are generally clean-living people of pretty positive community values, and I know a lot of good and respectable Mormons. And I wouldn’t rule out the best candidate only because he or she was Mormon. I don’t even insist that a candidate be a Christian. I can name some Jews that I would support enthusiastically, for example. But, I think the biggest attraction of Mormonism to a lot of people is exactly those positive community values, and not necessarily an intimate relationship with Jesus Christ. Mitt Romney has said, “Jesus Christ is my personal savior” and I think we should be very slow to contest that assertion on doctrinal terms.

But, though most Mormons don’t dwell on or even delve into doctrine, for the Mormon hierarchy who do, Mormonism involves a lot of really bizarre stuff, either on a secular or a Christian basis, including the defiance of some bare Christian essentials. But, I would guess that Mitt Romney isn’t deep into that. As I said, if he were the best candidate, I wouldn’t rule him out, just for that. But, he isn’t the best candidate! I don’t feel at all comfortable about what drives him at his center. Given that mine is as close as you can get to Mike Huckabee’s priority of representing and emulating the grace of Jesus Christ with respect to everyone! It isn’t even near a close call. And Fred Thompson is also unclear in his expressions, most notably in his history regarding abortion and his enthusiasm for McCain-Feingold’s patent defiance of the 1st Amendment.

So, what’s up with these guys being supposedly the only Republican candidates, when there are 6 (until recently 7) other candidates? It’s really simple: non-conservative anti-Republican people are defining who will be the leading Republican candidates. And, Republicans are falling for it. It was the same in 2000: at the beginning of the cycle, there were 14 Republican candidates. In terms of their philosophical clarity, the worst two were the ones who made it farthest in the campaign. George Bush of course, had an ex-president father named George Bush and was governor of a large state, Texas. But, John McCain wasn’t even a blip in the 1999 Ames Straw Poll. He became a star with the media because he was a Republican heretic. Bush’s money came from his name and his office. But McCain’s momentum came from the media circus about a “Straight Talk Express” with nearly constant coverage. The media wanted to make this 1999 nobody-inm-the-polls into the Republican nominee, and they almost did it. In the end, they had to settle for the second worst.

You can’t blame money because money comes from celebrity and celebrity comes from positive coverage. It amazes me that people don’t see that the media has power to make a celebrity of anyone. I’ll go this far: It wouldn’t have happened because he was a conservative former chairman of the Republican National Committee, but otherwise, If Jim Gilmore had come out with some liberal position like supporting gay marriage or Roe v. Wade or even tax increases, he wouldn’t have dropped out of the race, this week. The media would have focused on him like a laser, his contributions would have increased, and he’d have been on a charge like McCain was in ’99-2000, picking up Independent support for New Hampshire’s open primary, for example. Mike Huckabee, on the other hand, will have to do it all, himself.

Again, conservatives must spread the word to ignore the media and do your own homework!

Larry Perrault


"I found it on Buy Pro-Life!" -- Family Safe Search & Shop

50% of Buy Pro-Life Retail Earnings is donated to CPCs.


Tuesday, July 17, 2007

More Comments On The Electoral Herd Instinct And Jim Gilmore's Withdrawal From The Republican Race

I wrote the below comment on Jim Gilmore’s withdrawal yesterday, and never got around to posting it. But I think it goes at an important point that I have emphasized for a long time. We need to choose who and what we favor, not who we think (looking at others words) “has a chance.” The public does the electing. So, why does the public let a tiny sliver of the public tell them “who has a chance?” When I say that we should choose who and what we favor, people say, “But, everyone won’t do that.” Your mother must have said, If everyone jumped off a cliff, would you do it, too?”

But, it’s even worse than the simple herd instinct. It’s a herd instinct that a decidedly non-representative tiny element of the population leads. It’s like a looooong herd of cows that the less than one percent of the people in media leads by prodding the lead cow with a very coarse and uniformed stick. Unfortunately, the media have pictures and pictures have unrepresentative power with people. As they say, “A picture’s worth a thousand words.”

But still worse, the mindset is a self-fulfilling one: the more people who vote believe there’s no chance, the more there’s no chance. So, a lot of people go that way. I’m not going to do something idiotic because other people do it. I don’t even buy the “Well, it’s better than a Democrat” line. Is a Democrat being elected worse than a Republican Party whose principles are dissipating? Do you ever ask yourself why some things decline regardless of who is elected? Do you ever ask yourself why federal spending grew way faster under a Republican president and a Republican Congress, and neither have done anything to alert the public to its social problems?

We are electing Republicans who are incapable as statesmen to lead the society. Politicians are generally more concerned about politics than progress. I sincerely believe that the net effect would have been more conservative if Al Gore had been elected with a Republican Congress in 2000, even though I think Al Gore is an inept crackpot. A Republican Congress wouldn’t have let most of his goofy ideas through. In fact, even if he proposed the exact same expansions of the education department and entitlements as Bush did, they would have been blocked or dramatically modified, simply because he’s a Democrat. They rolled over for Bush, because he’s a Republican.

I even think that Al Gore would have acted against Iraq after all intelligence here and everywhere else put the information in front of him and the military diplomats warned of the danger. The big difference is that the media wouldn’t have painted it as evil and deceptive. No war for oil. No greedy corporate contractors. 3500 dead in four years would then have been a miraculously low cost! It is a historically low-grade military engagement after all: just a fraction of the cost in lives of any historic military engagement except Reagan’s invasion of that fearsome giant, Grenada. If Gore had done nothing and there'd been another attack, the calls for impeachment would have been more shrill than they are, today.

The Constitution gives the American population the power to elect our leaders. The tiny and clueless contingency of the media have usurped the authority to decide who is “legitimate.” And the public has rolled over with its feet in the air.. I’m not going there. To me, that kind of behavior is a dereliction and a sin. The power belongs to the people and the access to information is ever more available: now barely limited at all. USE YOUR TOOLS AND USE YOUR POWER! The sovereign of a nation are responsible to God for the authority they are given. In America, “We The People” are sovereign. Don’t bury your talent.


Of course, it's good to see the field winnow down a bit as Governor Huckabee can use every breath of the available attention and money that can be found.

However there is something very sobering, though unsurprising, about Gilmore's failure to even get any air at all in the race. And that fact is this: In terms of sobriety and experience that people like to talk about (actually they only talk about it when they want to make a question of it), Jim Gilmore was a more competent and prepared candidate than many others. He was a Virginia governor, a national chairman of the Republican Party, chairman of a congressionally appointed Committee on counter-terrorism. And, he was sober and informed and a more consistent conservative than any of the supposed "top tier." Not to mention that governors have feet-on-the-ground executive experience that congress-people have none of.

Governor Huckabee has captured some attention with his common-sense and his engaging presentation style, which is, as he would explain, largely driven by his conviction about Christian duty, which I think the nation sorely needs to experience.

But, Jim Gilmore and Tommy Thompson are better equipped to be president than most of the others. What makes Fred Thompson formidable in the overestimated but supposedly all-so-important polls? An actor and a one-term Senator PLUS media clamor that he is the "true conservative" that conservatives who are dissatisfied with "Rudy McRomney," as Gimore named them, are supposedly looking for.

But Fred Thompson isn't that at all. I can't speak for his sentiments, but he is philosophically ambiguous. McCain-Feingold, which he championed, is a blatant defiance of the 1ST Amendment to The Constitution. And his dubious history about the right-to-life at the foundation of America is no accident. I agreed with him about Scooter Libby. But some jobs don't require only good feelings. There are plenty of jobs that we are all unprepared for just because we have good intentions.

I've said it a thousand times: Conservatives must stop letting a clueless media that they supposedly disagree with, tell them who their viable candidates are. I want to see this on a popular web-site one day after a major poll or election: "American Voter Tells Media To Stick It In Their Ear!"

Larry Perrault


"I found it on Buy Pro-Life!" -- Family Safe Search & Shop

50% of Buy Pro-Life Retail Earnings is donated to CPCs.


Monday, July 16, 2007

Stuff About The Republican "Fron-trunners"

Be sure to read and watch everything available on the web about all of the candidates. Incidentally, you won’t find any (convenient) conversions of Huckabee. But, here are a few notes on the “front-runners.”

Read Joseph Farah, the editor of WorldNet Daily, On Mitt Romney.

And here’s a video of Romney at YouTube, that I linked to from FOX:

BOSTON — A new video posted on both YouTube and the Internet by Democrats includes a montage of political moments in which Mitt Romney repeatedly downplays his Republican Party affiliation while running for governor of heavily Democratic Massachusetts in 2002.

"I've been very clear, I think, to people all across the commonwealth, that my 'R' didn't stand so much for 'Republican,' as it does for 'reform,"' Romney said in a Sept. 21, 2002, interview with WBZ-TV.

• Click here to view the video.

This Huckabee blogger has a lot posted and linked about Fred Thompson.

Scroll down on the same blog to the video on the right side: “John McCain vs. John McCain” Nut is it even necessary, anymore, to talk about John McCain?

If you support Giuliani, I don’t know what to say to you: I actually kind of like him, personally. But, he can’t lead this nation out of the Egypt it is in.

Larry Perrault

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

National Review: What’s So Bad about Planned Parenthood?

National Review article considers Planned Parenthood support of Giuliani and Ann (Mitt's wife) Romney:

Sunday, July 8, 2007

Fred Thompson Lobbied for Abortion-rights Group

Thanks to my friend Tuffly Ellis for forwarding this article.

Fred Thompson lobbied for abortion-rights group, it says - Los Angeles ...

Read this. I should say a couple of things:

1) 1) I can accept the reasonable possibility that, as Thompson says, the abortion issue “has meant a little more to me since the sonogram of my…daughter”. But, even that were true it would suggest that in terms of principle, he was not clear-headed about the sanctity of life before there was some personal consideration for him, which would be perfectly consistent with his constitutionally oblivious support of McCain-Feingold and its blatant defiance of the 1st Amendment freedom of speech. At best, Thompson is a gullible nice good ol’ boy. A principled and clear-headed leader he is not.

2) 2) Actually, though Mike Huckabee does, I myself don’t advocate for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning abortion. If I thought it would stop abortion, I would favor it. I would favor an amendment to the US Constitution that reaffirmed the American right to life and charged states to enforce it, just as they do with any killing, and just as abolition reaffirmed the American right to liberty. But, I think it would be defied and repealed at first reports of “harms and deaths from illegal abortions,” even if it could be rarified by 2/3 of the states and enforced, both of which seem dubious prospects.

The federal government might deny benefits and eventually even American statehood (in the Northeast and in California, for example, it would probably come to that) to states who fail to do so. But, the idea of any agency of the federal government prosecuting individual violations is utter folly. Best I think, to elect leadership like Mike Huckabee who can inspire and challenge the American people do see and address the problem with the catastrophe that is the practice and tolerance of abortion.

Larry Perrault

Monday, July 2, 2007

What To Make Of Joe Lieberman

In the feeds I get, a link to one article read, “Lieberman: George Soros' Views 'Anti-American' Discussing “Liberals To Love,”I have written how Joe Lieberman’s willingness to defy his party’s base and ultimately sacrifice his party’s re-nomination for Senator for the sake of A) his convictions and B) American and global security, is laudable and worthy of uncommon respect, and I expressed such respect. Now, I know that many people reject the idea that engaging the struggle in Iraq does not in fact, enhance security but rather makes security more precarious. Much of the left believes that and so apparently does Ron Paul. And such an argument is not irrational even if I think it’s incautious: If you believe that and act on it, and you happen to be mistaken, the cost could be HUGE! That’s one big reason why though I respect Paul and a President Paul who represent a radical revolution that would be the stuff of dreams, I don’t endorse his candidacy for the Republican nomination for president. I think he’s smart and means well, but if he’s wrong…, it could be catastrophic.

But, this article touches on the other dangerous tendency that I warned about: the temptation of Republicans to solicit Lieberman’s switch to the Republican Party. If The Republican Party embraces the fiscal and social left of Joe Lieberman, what then becomes the Republican “center?” As it is, few in the party cling to standards, reacting only to sentimental and/or political provocation. Regardless of how you judge his prudence, Ron Paul is a Republican who is the purest example of adherence to principles. A relative handful of others even make any kind of effort to choose what is “right” over what is politically expedient.

If Lieberman becomes the “left” of The Republican Party, manifestly Washingtonized and tainted minds like John McCain and Trent Lott will be decidedly right of a center which would be what…Gordon Smith and George Voinovich? I have said that the party has surrendered its identity if Rudy Giuliani is its “leader.” With Lieberman on the left wing, Rudy Giuliani can now run as a “mainstream conservative.” Endorsing abortion is now not just “tolerant,” but of no more significance than differences on trade or tax reform. First Amendment-busting McCain and Fred Thompson would be radical right-wingers. Lincoln Chaffee and Olympia Snowe are now comfortably “moderate” anywhere, not just in the vocabulary of the media. Merely in terms of diction, this is not a party that it in any way recognizable as “republican.”

I like Joe Lieberman as the “Independent” replacement for Jim Jeffords.

Larry Perrault