Hillary vs. Huckabee

Chuck Norris wrote an interesting article on WorldNetDaily that makes Huckabee as the one and only candidate who can stand up against Hillary Clinton.

Sitting at another full-throttle World Combat League event in San Antonio, Texas, on Friday night, I caught myself momentarily reflecting back upon the previous two days of campaigning with GOP frontrunner Mike Huckabee. As the contestants combated in the WCL ring, I thought to myself, "The fight of the century would be Hillary vs. Huckabee in the presidential ring."

Unless Barack Obama's surge shatters everyone's expectations, or he manages some strategic alignment with John Edwards as a dynamic duo, it seems Hillary will win the nomination. And the question that continues to loom on everyone's mind will remain: Who can beat Hillary? Which GOP candidate has the background, experience and savvy to wage war against the Clinton machine?

I know unequivocally who that man is. It is Mike Huckabee. I'll tell you why.

The problems with other GOP punches

I've trained fighters for nearly four decades now. I was a six-time world champion. I pretty much know what it takes to create a winner. And I believe there are similarities between making winners in the fighting ring and the presidential one – only the strong survive.

Right now the Clinton machine (which Huckabee calls "the sausage grinder") is planning how to slice and dice each of the GOP candidates if they make the nomination.

Ron Paul would battle Hillary with substance, but I believe he would ultimately bow to her shrewdness. Her prowess would prey upon his constitutional cries. He simply lacks the finesse to handle her fortitude.

Fred Thompson is a good man with a fairly conservative record. However, I believe the Clinton-malevolent marketers would aim at his lack of personality or passion and score a direct hit with the public.

John McCain would put on a strong battle against Hillary, though I fear he would be crippled simply on account of the age factor (72 in August). If the presidency ages one at 3-1 year rate, one term could advance McCain into his 80s.

Rudy Giuliani, if he survives this strategy to jump start his campaign in Florida, would be sized up and found wanting as the "New York senator vs. the New York mayor" battle began. Trumping his 9/11 apprentice through trite compliments, Hillary will accuse him of being more Democrat than he is Republican and undervaluing middle America by ignoring the initial primary states.

Mitt Romney might be able to match Hillary's advertisement monies, but the Clinton character assassins will shoot at the series of flip-flops in his platform. And who better to understand how to attack a waffler than one married to Bill Clinton!

Mano a mano from Hope

The person the Clinton sausage grinder fears most is Mike Huckabee. Why? Because …

1) He has the longest and largest executive experience running government among GOP candidates – three years a lieutenant governor and 11 years as governor of the State of Arkansas – more experience than even Bill took into office.

2) Hillary can't belittle Huck's origins because they are theirs too – Bill and Mike were both governors, both from Hope, Ark.

3) Mike has far more passion and personality than Hillary, and he is the only one who can persuasively outlast, outplay and outwit her in any debating ring or campaign arena.

4) Mike has a record she can't punch. She can't even swing at the false allegations against Mike on immigration, taxes or pardons, primarily because the Clinton legacy has a record of condoning illegals, raising taxes and releasing criminals!

Though I'm sure Bill is now regretting the compliment he offered Huckabee when Mike was nowhere near the top tier of candidates, let me remind the world. Bill said Mike was the "only dark horse that's got any kind of chance … He's the best speaker they've got."

The fact is Mike is the best opponent to fight Hillary, because, most of all, as he has reminded us in many occasions, "I've already taken on the Clinton machine and beat it twice."

The only resource Clinton has that could combat Mike is more money – and in this ring we all know the muscle in that fist. But we can prevent that, and must by financially joining Mike's army before it's too late.

So can a man who was raised in a poor background from Hope, Ark., become governor then president? As Mike says, "Our country has already proven that!" What I would say is: Give Hope another chance! This time they want to send in the real cavalry.

Keep Hope alive! Join my wife Gena and me in electing Mike Huckabee!

The One Candidate Who Is and Always Was Pro-life

On January 21, 2008, Mike Huckabee gave a moving speech at the American Family Association's "Rediscovering God in America" conference. Below is the 4-part speech.

Huckabee: The Conservative Choice?

Nathan Tabor of The Conservative Voice wrote an insightful article to recap the race thus far.

After the South Carolina primary and the subsequent withdrawal of Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter’s presidential bids, the Republican field has narrowed considerably. Barring a Giuliani victory in Florida, the nominee will almost certainly be Romney, McCain, or Huckabee. As none of the remaining candidates can lay full claim to the conservative mantle, how do conservative voters select from among these three without splitting the party and dividing the base?

In the past, the various factions that compose the GOP made common cause based on a set of principles; a muscular foreign policy, free market economics, and promoting a culture that values life. After spending decades in the political wilderness, Republicans chose Ronald Reagan to turn these principles into policy. The order of events was no accident; the man (Reagan) met the moment (the Cold War and the supply-side boom) once Republicans were united in purpose.

In 2008, party unification (and subsequently, electoral victory) hinges on one thing: internalizing the lessons of the past. It is for that reason that conservatives and Republicans must approach the primaries from a different angle. Rather than viewing a choice between the current candidates as a series of trade-offs (Huckabee the social conservative vs. Romney the economic conservative), we should look at the principles beneath the positions. In that light, the current choice is between two conservatives (Romney and Huckabee) and a moderate who leans right on foreign policy (McCain).

In order for the GOP to usher in four new years of conservative governance, its voters must have one priority: to pick the candidate who 1) best embodies conservative principles and 2) is able to put those principles into practice so that they fully address the needs of the nation and its citizens.

For this reason, Mike Huckabee deserves a second look by primary voters who have written him off as “the social conservative candidate” or “an economic populist.” While he has drawn heat from a number of prominent conservatives for his attacks on the Club for Growth and the fact that he raised taxes while governor of Arkansas, there is more to Huckabee than meets the eye. While it is true that he raised taxes five times as governor, he also lowered them ninety-four times.

Additionally, polls indicate that the middle class is trending Democratic—largely over economic issues. While tax cuts are excellent for stimulating economic growth, they do nothing for job security. Huckabee’s overtures to Americans concerned about their jobs have not abandoned the principles of free-market economics; they still emphasize empowering individuals over expansion of government power. Rather, they are an attempt to answer the needs of the voters without resorting to the socialism-lite offered by the Democrats.

The fact is that America in 2008 faces different problems than in 1980, and while principles should not change, solutions must change where necessary to effectively meet America’s needs.

An avowed supporter of the pro-life movement and traditional marriage, Huckabee also offers a fresh perspective on the culture of life. By speaking on the genocide in Darfur and the slaughter of the unborn in America in the same breath, he has effectively linked America’s responsibility to the unborn and its responsibility to champion freedom and protect the innocent abroad.

This moral clarity is vitally important.

To those in the party who would like to put the issue of abortion on the back burner in favor of economic and foreign policy issues, Huckabee’s rejoinder is, why choose? All life is sacred. At the same time, it is an eloquent rebuttal to those Americans who are suffering from Iraq-induced fatigue and prefer a “non-interventionist” foreign policy. As President Bush noted, the terrorists began this conflict, but we’ll decide how and when to finish it.

Though the slate of Republican candidates is smaller than ever, conservatives need not despair. There is more than one candidate remaining whose platform is rooted in conservative principles. If, however, conservatives are looking something more—if they are looking for a candidate who can utilize these principles to craft new policies to meet our current challenges, they could not do better than to consider Mike Huckabee. The man from Hope is selling his own brand of optimism to voters—which makes him Reaganesque in more ways than one.

Governor Huckabee Responds to an Open Letter

The whole article is well worth the read if you're unsure where the Governor stands on the economy, fair tax, vouchers, national security, immigration, smoking and the environment.

On January 14, Frank Pastore wrote an open letter Mike Huckabee Titled: “Dear Huck: You’ve Won Our Hearts, Now Win Our Minds Too.” Below are Pastore’s Original Questions with the Response from the Huckabee campaign.

Frank Pastore: 1. You’re accused of advancing “liberal economic policies” because you raised taxes in Arkansas. If elected, what do you want to increase social spending on and why? Most conservatives don’t define “limited government” in terms of “no government.” We want government to help those who truly need it. We want to help the single mom down the street that’s struggling. Unlike Democrats, we don’t measure the success of social programs by how much we spend on them, but by whether the people we claim to be helping actually get helped.

Governor Mike Huckabee: First, I am a fiscal conservative. I have signed Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform “no tax” pledge. When I was Governor of Arkansas, I cut taxes 94 times, including the largest broad-based tax cut in the history of my state. I doubled the standard deduction and the child care credit, eliminated the marriage penalty, indexed tax brackets to prevent bracket creep, reduced the capital gains tax for both businesses and individuals, and eliminated the capital gains tax on the sale of a home. I reduced welfare rolls by almost 50 percent.

When I left office, the tax rates remained exactly the same as when I began almost 11 years earlier: the tax rate was 1 percent for the poorest taxpayers and 7 percent for the richest. Having inherited a $200 million budget shortfall from my Democrat predecessor, I left office with an $844 million surplus, letting my successor follow my lead to get the sales tax on food eliminated.

I share your goal of wanting to help those who truly need it. I will undertake a top-to-bottom review of all programs to eliminate waste and duplication. Right now there are many different programs dealing with things like hunger and job training. I will consolidate and streamline to get the most out of every tax dollar. I will reduce the federal work force by not replacing many of the baby boomers who will be retiring.

I will fight against pork and fight for a line-item veto that passes constitutional muster. I will also look for ways to accomplish our goals through block grants to the states. Governors at the state level are the ones who know their people and their needs better than the federal government and, since they have to balance their budgets, know how to get the most out of a dollar. We also need to measure performance and demand better accountability. We have to stop throwing money at problems without following up to ensure that they are actually achieving solutions. I will insist that programs and the people running them justify their existence. I will never just assume that because a program was funded last year, it should be funded next year.

Read the rest of the article here...

$25 times 10,000 is what it is.

The one incredible thing that baffles the media about Mike Huckabee's campaign is his climb to first tier -- having "come from nowhere" and with very little money. Who would have thought that he’ll be on the top in the January 17 Rasmussen Poll? But as the man himself has said, "It's the last lap that counts, not the first one". We can help maintain the momentum.

Please pledge $25 and join The Momentum Project. Ask others to do the same. No money will be collected unless and not until we become 10,000 strong. Imagine the difference we can make – together. Click on the pledge icon on the right now and pledge your $25 support.

Side note: I was so impressed by the idea of this project being a supporter with limited means. After some correspondence, I learned that the founder of the project who is also hosting the website is a home educated young man who loves the Lord. Not a surprise there.


* * * * * * * * * * * * *

A response to Romney's attack add

Mitt Romney is airing his attacks on Mike Huckabee's gubernatorial record on drugs, clemency and pardon. These untruths-and-half-truths are effective that I consider this posting important.

TRUTH: Governor Huckabee was tougher on methamphetamine manufacturers than Governor Romney
In a new attack ad released today, Governor Romney attempts to contrast his position on drugs with that of Governor Huckabee. The ad says that Romney got “Tough on Drugs Like Meth,” while Governor Huckabee “Reduced Penalties for Manufacturing Meth.” What Romney fails to mention is that — even with the reductions — Governor Huckabee was tougher on methamphetamine manufacturers than Governor Romney was.

* The “reduced penalty” in Arkansas was a requirement that meth manufacturers serve 50 percent of their sentence rather than 70 percent before being eligible for parole. In Arkansas, the average meth dealer spends an average of 10 years in prison.
* In contrast, the source quoted in the Romney ad that claimed Romney “got tough” on drugs notes, “The punishment would be either 2 1/2 years in jail or five years in prison.”

Let’s compare: Under Huckabee, 10 years; Under Romney, 5 years

The ad also states that Romney “never pardoned a single criminal.” But this begs the question: how many clemency cases did he actually review while he was governor of Massachusetts? Or did he simply avoid his responsibility as chief executive of the state to review clemency cases and give petitioners a fair hearing?
The ad also points out that Governor Huckabee granted more clemencies than the “previous three governors…combined.” It doesn’t mention that two of the previous three governors were Bill Clinton and convicted felon Jim Guy Tucker. Governor Huckabee’s clemency rate, however, was in line with other governors who have served the state.

This article is informative about the difference between pardon and clemency.

Read the rest of the article here.

Huckabee Momentum

* * * * * * * * * * * * *