http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=610

Herb

According to Chuck Norris' website, he "decided to become a Huckabee endorser because he has seen first-hand what a tremendous difference this candidate makes to anyone who wants to build muscle, lose weight, boost cardio endurance, and increase overall fitness."

Uh...wait, that's his endorsement for the Total Gym. Never mind.

Won't happen Herb... Get on the Rudi band wagon asap......

There is no perfect candidate.

That having been said, FOR THE PRIMARY, at the moment my #1 choice is Mike Huckabee.

My back-up for the primary is Alan Keyes.

My back-up back-up for the primary is possibly John McCain. He's not an ideal candidate, but he's a true war hero, is excellent on defense issues and is pro-life.

I agree with those three candidates on most of the more important issues in that order. But I also have some disagreements, too.

If Huckabee doesn't win the Republican nod, he would make a GREAT VP, as would Mr. McCain...but John McCain would be the perfect guy for Secretary of Defense. Alan Keyes kind of likes to fly solo, but he would also be a good VEEP.

I wonder if any Nixon descendants have considered a bid.

Herb

I have a hard time picturing McCain in the #2 slot. As many times as he has run, I don't think he would be willing to step down to that position.

"I wonder if any Nixon descendants have considered a bid."

Checkers for President?

A dead dog could upstage our current President in the intelligence dept.

And yet, he beat the best the demos could put up against him, in 2 gov races and 2 presidential races.

If I were a republican or had the oppurtunity to vote in the Republican primary I would back Romney before Rudy.

Huckabee is admirable to me for two things.

First he is from Hope Arkansas (Can presidential luck strike that city twice?)(How many times did Bill run before he won?)

Second and more importantly he is an inspiration to anyone who has struggled with being morbidly obese. He won that battle by undergoing Gastric Bypass surgery.

For me personally as a morbidly obese person who has seriously considered GB. I look more highly upon his success than the various celebs who have had it done.

Would you be more or less likely to vote for McCain if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate child who was black?

Are we talking hypothetical? Mr. McCain has publicly taken responsibility for what he has deemed personal mistakes, including his failed first marriage, along with his more political mistakes, like friendship with the Keating people.

Herb

Do you not recognize that particular push poll question?

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/03/21/the_ anatomy_of_a_smear_campaign/

There are many, many reasons to vote for Mike Huckabee. Here are some good ones from the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/19/opinion/19brooks.html?_r=1&n=Top/Opinion/Edito rials%20and%20Op-Ed/Op-Ed/Columnists/David%20Brooks&oref=slogin

Herb

There might be Herb, but until he has some momentum and MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars behind him............
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!
Sorry

Hey...they said Mr. Nixon didn't have a chance, either.

Like Mr. Nixon, this guy Huckabee is not a crook, either.

Herb

"Like Mr. Nixon, this guy Huckabee is not a crook, either."

*snickers*

I won't touch the Nixon part with a 10-foot cattle prod.

Huckabee strikes me as a likable enough guy, unlike Nixon, who came across as pompous and paranoid. (And you have to admit Herb, he WAS pompous and paranoid!) That said, he's simply unelectable, and those "family values" you so covet are being tossed to the side by mainstream Americans.

I'll touch it. Nixon WAS a crook, that's why he resigned in DISGRACE. Non-crooks stick around to defend themselves.

Brian, you mean family values, such as: cheating on your wife, soliciting gay sex in public bathrooms and then lying to police, bribery, and bigotry towards minorities and gays?

"And you have to admit Herb, he WAS pompous and paranoid!"

Because communist-sympathizers despised him so much given Mr. Nixon's fight against the pinko Alger Hiss, I'll give you the paranoid part...but that was probably a reasonable response against those who wished to destroy Mr. Nixon.

The pompous part, I'm not so sure of.

Herb

Nixon would have benefited from SSRI's that's for sure. Or some Psychotropic drugs. That way he would have had to RESIGN in disgrace.

Hah this just in: **BOTH** sides are guilty of "traditional family values" such as cheating on their wives, and bribery for sure.

The ironic part is that it's the ones who are so dead-set AGAINST gay rights, doing everything in their power to ensure that gay folks are second-class citizens, are the ones doing their best Fred Astaire impersonation while "taking a growler" ... for a little gay fun. It's the Religious Right that is being caught red-handed in their own lies and "sins" instead of just admitting who and what they are. It's the ultra-right that is hellbent on introducing bigotry and intolerance back into the Constitution of the United States of America, even though we've spent some 200 years REMOVING those amendments and laws off the books.

Yessir, that's the GOP of today. Sounds like "mainstream America" to me, doesn't it? Doesn't it to you too?

"Because communist-sympathizers despised him so much given Mr. Nixon's fight against the pinko Alger Hiss, I'll give you the paranoid part...but that was probably a reasonable response against those who wished to destroy Mr. Nixon.

The pompous part, I'm not so sure of."

So people in his own Cabinet wished to destroy him by leaking personal matters to the press? (Like what has happened under every other Presidental Cabinet in modern history?) You have stated that you have read the Nixon memoirs ... I have too and he went into great detail about his mistrust of even his closest advisors, to the point where the ONLY person he listened to or trusted whatsoever was Kissinger. So don't give me this "reasonable response" against those who wished ill on Nixon because most of it came from within his inner circle. Get your facts straight.

And, all you have to do is watch footage of Nixon speaking, or any debate, or ANYTHING with him in public, to see the arrogance. You have your head too far up his dead backside to see anything different I guess.

Brian said>>>
The ONLY person he listened to or trusted whatsoever was Kissinger.

No wonder he resigned in DISGRACE. I wouldn't piss in Kisser's ear if his brain was on fire. Too bad they didn't have Prozac back when Nixon was committing heinous crimes against America because it probably wouldn't have happened. Or maybe he wouldn't have listened to the KISSer.

Well heck Trixter, they were two peas in a pod. Both very secretive and paranoid ... both committing criminal acts while in office (allegedly) ...

You guys forget that this all happened over time.

Mr. Nixon trusted these guys plenty when he brought them onboard, or he wouldn't have brought them onboard. You honestly think that he would have brought serial perjurer John Dean into the oval office if he had known how weasely the guy was?

You guys make good revisionist history, though.

Herbert Milhous

You know, you are the first to note that Nixon was flawed. " Deeply flawed " you have said.

But whenever any flaw is pointed out, you defend it. Which begs the question; If he has so many flaws, why can't you just admit that the ones noted are, in fact, flaws? I mean, if you know he is SO flawed, name your top 3 flaws so we can compare notes at least.

Naw, he had plenty of flaws.
Just not the ones some guys point out.
It's a great question, though. I could go on for a long time about his strengths.

First, let's agree that he had, as all presidents do, the world's hardest job from a variety of standpoints.

That having been said, here are several that come to mind, even though plenty of others may not agree with me:

1. Mr. Nixon was a kind of tit for tat kind of person. This is a person who was an eye for an eye.

2. The guy was calculating. That's no more flattering for Mr. Nixon than it is for Hillary.

3. He held grudges.

Herb

Yeah, I'm glad that you took the time to answer that one. It's another example of why I press people to actually define what would seem like an obvious answer - but lo and behold! - we disagree on what would be a common example of someone being flawed. So no more " chickenjuggler, come on man, you are asking for a definition of something that is blatantly obvious to define."

Take Herb's top examples of what made Nixon viewed as " deeply flawed." Those are NOT the same reasons that constitute being flawed by others who hold him in less regard than you, Herb.

I've always suspected that Herb, you go along, reluctantly with the notion that Nixon had problems. It's a tough one to dispute - but you do it. Your talk about him has always smacked of " Look, I can call my sister ugly - you can't call my sister ugly." While I appreciate that - and can truly relate to it - deep down, you know that your sister is ugly.

Some of your examples also read like lousy interviews I have had with prospective employees;

Me: Name some of your flaws that I may see should you be employed here.

Prospective employee: Well, I am a perfectionist.

Interpretation: I am going to tell you what SOUNDS like a flaw, but in reality shows no humility or ability to correct or assess a situation correctly. Maybe you won't notice - and if you do, hopefully you'll think to yourself " Oh, well, if THAT'S the worst thing he can say about himself, then I want this guy! "

Yeah. I don't fall for that anymore. If I can't ask that question and deal with a potential honest response, like, " I will need direction." or " Early morning meetings will not be fully enjoyed by me " then I am expecting too much and shouldn't be an employer. Or at the very least, I shouldn't be conducting interviews.

Anyway, I got off on a rant there about a pet peeve. Sorry.

So a sincere thanks for listing those. I STILL do NOT hold that against you. It won't be used as ammo against you by me. You were as honest as you could be and I HATE kicking someone like you ( Trixter, back off ) when you have met me half way.

Now, about that Stella...

Herb wrote:

Like Mr. Nixon, this guy Huckabee is not a crook, either.

I'll bet you say that about all the conservatives.

Ah yes...Stella Artois..on draught, no less.

Well, to address your most recent post, yes Mr. Nixon was imperfect and flawed.

Now here comes the inevitable however:

However, flawed compared to what? I could cite so many bad things that other presidents have done that matter so much more.

But I won't.

Mr. Nixon WAS deeply flawed. No argument there.

Herb

" However, flawed compared to what? "

Compared to how much better of a person/leader/President/citizen he would have been had he not had those flaws. I'm not looking for perfection in ANYone. But sometimes a person in that position needs to exhibit as fews flaws as possible. Mistakes are one thing. Character flaws that have a significant impact on hundreds of millions are another thing.

A moee recent example would be Bush and his penchant for being stubborn. Not to bend to the will of Democrats. I'm talking about refusal to make timely shifts in strategy or policy that would make himself MORE effective. Not less. His unwillingness to deal with reality in HOPES of changing things has proven to stem directly from his being so stubborn to actually act on constructive critisism. He believes much of what he does. He has proven to believ wrong on too many things.

"I'm talking about refusal to make timely shifts in strategy or policy..."

I don't understand. He replaced Rumsfeld and his AG, among others.

Herb

If I may:

1) Rumsfeld was a correction, but was far ffrom timely.

2) Gonzales was a mistake he shouldn't have made in the first place, so undoing that mistake shouldn't count as a 'shift in policy'. What will indicate a shift for Bush at the Justice Dept. will be in who he nominates to replace Gonzales. Does Michael Mukasey indicate a 'shift' for Bush?

Herb said>>>
Mr. Nixon WAS deeply flawed. No argument there.

WOW!

Herb also said>>>
You guys make good revisionist history, though.

As do you.... The EXTREME RADICAL RIGHT always re-writes history.

"The EXTREME RADICAL RIGHT always re-writes history."

Naw. And if you want to continue defending these goons, Trixter...you're in the shrinking minority:

http://breitbart.tv/html/6912.html

At least there was enough pressure for a retraction. But it shows how far over the edge your moveon.commie pals are and will cost you the election, Trixter.

Herb