Bring It On! National News

Mike Huckabee is not as innocent as he would like you to believe. Apparently, the former Governor of Arkansas has a very colorful past and he’s trying to out run it by pretending yesterday does not exist once you cross the state line. With his front runner so called political status comes the price of not just one organization looking at his past but millions.

Bribe, as defined by the dictionary is money paid in order to influence opinion of someone in a position of trust. No matter how you spin the facts of money passing from one person to the checking account of Mike Huckabee it’s still a bribe. Over at the New York Times they have this to say on some of the Governors past…

In its three-year life span, the organization, Action America, collected $119,916 from a dozen or so donors. Among them were former Senator Bob Dole’s political action committee, an Arkansas cotton gin owner who had been jailed for stock fraud, and R. J. Reynolds, the tobacco giant that had opposed the Clinton health plan. As for Mr. Huckabee, he ended up with $61,500 for his efforts before becoming governor in July 1996 and shuttering the group. - New York Times

Is this the vast political experience that he will bring to the White House if he is elected President? I believe the nation has had enough of “This White House for Sale” tactics and policy. Always in search of truth and justice I Google searched Huckabee Ethics Violations and was amazed to see some of the things this politician aka man of the cloth has been accused of.

Huckabee Depletes Emergency Fund, Destructs Government Property as He Leaves Office.
“Former Gov. Mike Huckabee depleted the governor’s office emergency fund in the final weeks of his administration in part to pay for the destruction of computer hard drives in his office. That left Gov. Mike Beebe, who replaced Huckabee on Jan. 9, with no emergency funds for the last half of fiscal 2007. Documents that the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, describe the destruction of the computer drives, as ordered by Huckabee’s office, and Huckabee complaining strongly about his cell phone and Blackberry not working” [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 1/19/07]

Snip-a-bee

Why do you suppose the good Reverend aka Governor would have all of those hard drives destroyed? Was the Governor’s office doing something it was not supposed to be doing? Maybe they wanted to hide the fact that they were all bad spellers! Then again they could have been slackers and spent the entire time Huckabee was in office online shopping? Ya, that must be it!

Huckabee Defended Parole of Convicted Rapist Who Later Committed Murder.
Governor Huckabee found himself defending the “parole, during Huckabee’s governorship, of convicted rapist Wayne Dumond, who later committed a murder in Missouri. Huckabee said he regretted Dumond’s actions but denied playing a proactive role in the release decision by Arkansas’ parole board, and claimed that most of the board’s members had been appointed by his predecessors.” [New York Times, 1/29/07] - Democrats.org

How dare those pesky Democrat’s try to lambaste the Governor. You can never trust them as a realistic source for news about HACK-a-Bee so off I went to Fox News and there was even more about him taking “Gifts”.

Two of the complaints against Huckabee pertain to unreported gifts — the canoe and a $200 stadium blanket received by his wife, Janet. Two stem from cash the governor or his wife received but did not initially report. The panel also ruled in 2003 that Huckabee’s campaign violated state law when it used its funds to pay for an event during the summer of 2002 called Gospel Fest

During his tenure, Huckabee accepted 314 gifts valued overall at more than $150,000, according to documents filed with the Arkansas secretary of state’s office. (He accepted 187 gifts in his first three years as governor but was not required to report their value.) - Fox News

What Fox News didn’t tell us is that the $150,000 could have all been in the form of Weight Watchers coupons. He has lost a few pounds recently. It could have happened that way! Maybe…

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

A few days back, the inestimable Blue Gal did a great post about sexism, harassment, and what constitutes those things. It referenced a series of posts (more here, here, here, and here) about whether a pencil sharpener with the body of a woman doing it doggie style with a pencil was simply a pencil-sharpener or a full-fledged attack against women.

I’ve never seen one of these posting threads that didn’t quickly disintegrate into commenters taking sides, heading to the fox holes, and preparing for pop-culture Armageddon. This thread is no exception. These posts generally play out after no one has changed sides and everyone is exhausted, or simply stunned, by the effort spent on something a stupid as a pencil sharpener with a yellow No. 3 stuck up it’s butt.

I’m Anti-Social
I’m not a feminist, nor am I a men’s rights (masculinist?) advocate. I’m not anti-racist, pro-bigotry, anti-religion, pro gay-rights, or anti-wiccan - hell, I’m even OK with most Republicans. I’m not a joiner of exclusivist groups because, quite frankly, I’m anti-social and don’t play well with others. Instead, I’m a “peopleist” who believes life is a dark ride and everyone gets the shaft in some way. I’m dedicated to understanding problems rather than crashing a server farm with posts about pencil sharpeners (although I seem to be doing just that right now).

(more…)

The enemy of Corporate Capitalists is regulation. The freedom to do whatever needs to be done to make a buck is the most efficient way to make that buck. Regulations, by the very nature, put a roadblock into that process. On the other hand, the goal of regulation is to protect the weak that do not have the strength to fight someone who chooses an efficient way of making money that also damages the society. Regulation is by its very nature a method to prevent efficiency.

My mother used to always say that moderation is the key to life. Obviously moderation does not rank high on the agenda of modern American society. People rush to embrace the latest fad, and then they drop it and rush on to the next fad a month later. There is no moderation in this behavior.

With regulations it is a similar love - hate relationship. People want to fix a problem and fix it “real good.” This results in regulations that don’t just fix a problem, they slam the problem real hard. Sometimes these slams can really hurt the efficiency of the process, and force capitalists to create new ways to make the process work. On the other hand, capitalists can permanently see the easiest solution is to remove the existing regulations to make the process work more easily. For the benefit of society lawmakers need to play the role of moderator of the regulations.

Unfortunately lawmakers are paid by campaign contributions from groups on both sides of the regulations divide. The result of this is that we never have a group of moderate lawmakers that realize the necessity of regulation as well as the danger of over regulation. The extremists populate the government and proudly push their agenda.

To make matters worse, the enforcement of regulations is the key to making them work. Enforcement is the jurisdiction of the executive branch of government. For the most part the enforcement of regulations can easily be curtailed by funding cuts. If there are no people to inspect and enforce regulations, the result is a policy that is the same as if there were no regulations at all. If no one follows up on a report of violations, then the criminal gets away with the crime. If the people given the duty to enforce the laws are selected because of their incompetence, the result again will be little enforcement of the laws. The truth is that it is difficult to enforce these laws even when we have competent people trying to enforce the laws.

Regulations are meant to protect society.

Yesterday I was listening to a right wing radio station. A caller was complaining that China was poisoning our children. It is quite understandable that we should be concerned with lead or other toxins in our products. One way to fight this is to require regulations. But, even more importantly we need to enforce regulations that protect us. The right wing talk show host pointed out that the government should not be required to do this job. And, we shouldn’t have regulations placed on our corporations, because that would be too costly for our American companies who distribute goods that are manufactured in China. I began to wonder what this guy was going to suggest to protect our society.

I was not only surprised, but shocked when the right wing radio talk show host suggested that we should let market forces protect America. If people get injured or die from poorly made products manufactured in China, then Americans will vote with their wallets and stop buying the poison. I wish I knew who this guy was, but the radio began to fade out while I was listening. Of course, I thought to myself, the market will fix all of our problems, even if a few people need to die in the process.

I began to think about Europe. Europe has an enormously complex set of regulations. I know a few of these regulations because I have designed products to be sold in Europe. The reason that Europe came to the conclusion that it needed these regulations was because Europe wanted to expand its market. It wanted regulations in one country to match regulations in another country. Obviously if one country had lax regulations it could manufacture less safe products at a cheaper price, just like China is doing in today. But, the US does not have a uniform set of regulations in which a product is marked as compiling with. It isn’t until a harm is found before a product is forced to be taken off the market.

What is the difference between Europe and the USA that makes for the differences in this attitude toward regulation? Why is the US government so careless about the potential problems with new products, while the European governments care about potential harms? I would suggest that the main difference is that Europe actually has a broad health care system. So, if there are widespread health problems caused by a defective product, then the government will end up paying the cost. The government is thereby motivated to prevent harms to society. (This sounds a lot like letting the market solve the problem.) Therefore the governments are motivated to create regulations that protect the people. And, the government is also motivated to enforce those regulations. Isn’t it wonderful when problems are left to the market?

So, I would suggest that Universal Health Care would not only help get health care to those who can not afford it, but it actually motivates the government to protect the people from things like toxins in our toys, and food. It might cost a little more, but what is the cost of your health? Isn’t there an old saying that asks: “If you haven’t got your health, then you haven’t got anything.” Surely a corporate capitalist can understand that little saying.

—————————————————–

Don’t forget what Stephen Colbert said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit

Reflection

Calling hours are two to four PM and six to nine at the State Penitentiary on Saturday. Burial will be private at the Governors request. In lieu of flowers please send donations to the New Jersey Democrat Party.

Never having been a big fan of the death penalty I don’t think that I will attend the memorial service. In some respects it is a relief that New Jersey has abolished the death penalty. There are far to many chances that the wrong person can be put to death even with overwhelming evidence. One innocent prisoner executed is one to many. In the past I have had strong emotions regarding putting to death someone that has brutally harmed and killed a child, or killed anyone in a police uniform capacity. In hindsight I have seen that two wrongs will never make it right for the families left behind.

With the latest technology and DNA testing there have been far to many near misses when it comes to throwing the switch or injecting the lethal dose to end a convicted but innocent persons life. Over at MSNBC they have this to say about Jersey’s decision to end the death penalty…

N.J. Legislature votes to abolish death penalty
State is first to legislatively outlaw capital punishment MSNBC News ServicesTRENTON, N.J. - New Jersey Thursday became the first U.S. state to legislatively abolish the death penalty since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976.
Lawmakers in the Democrat-controlled state Assembly voted 44-36 in favor of a bill to scrap the death penalty and substitute it with life in prison without the possibility of parole for those found guilty of the most serious crimes.

The vote follows approval by the state Senate on Monday, leaving as the last step the signature of Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine, an opponent of capital punishment.

Snip a Noose…

A special state commission found in January that the death penalty was a more expensive sentence than life in prison, hasn’t deterred murder and risks killing an innocent person.
“It’s time New Jersey got out of the execution business,” Democratic Assemblyman Wilfredo Caraballo said. “Capital punishment is costly, discriminatory, immoral and barbaric. We’re a better state than one that puts people to death.”

Among the death row inmates who would be spared is Jesse Timmendequas, a sex offender convicted of murdering 7-year-old Megan Kanka in 1994. That case sparked a Megan’s Law, which requires law enforcement agencies to notify the public about convicted sex offenders living in their communities. -MSNBC

If someone was found guilty with overwhelming evidence of harming one of my kids or God forbid killing one of them, I’m sure that my opinion as a father might be swayed momentarily as pro death penalty. For that matter I might even want to find my own vengeance and perform the task myself. In the long run I would prefer that the guilty serve hard time with a lifetime of thought on why they are serving that time. Always in the back of their mind why they are in prison. Not just sitting in some cell with cable television and a radio to be entertained with. That is no different than living in a hotel in a bad neighborhood. I’m sure the hotel room is cheaper by the day though.

Maybe the solution to the problem of crime in this nation is to stop building these glorified Club Med for gang members and start making crime a real punishable offense. Whatever happened to hard labor and taking ten ton boulders and making beach sand out of them? We don’t do that anymore because that is supposedly inhumane but isn’t that the reason why the prisoners are behind bars in the first place? What we need to do is stop baby sitting these animals of society that have been irrefutability convicted and make doing time for the crime a real sentence.

Might it be possible to build a national prison system where the scum of the earth that have killed children, police officers and IRS agents that cheated on their taxes serve time in a prison with the sole mission of breaking down the Rocky Mountains and moving the beach sand to the Grand Canyon as fill? How about instead of drilling for oil in Alaska we have them dig for oil and all the oil goes to the poor in America? Then again we run the risk of them tunneling to true freedom in China so that idea may not work out after all.

Until we as a society make the alternative of any crime committed against the innocent a real deterrent then gross negligent crime will continue. Till then we have the revolving door of the gang members equivalent of the Super 8. They get a roof over their head, clothing, three meals a day and all the free time in the world to plot out survival and retribution against the man.

Killing them is far to easy. Lethal injection is the most widely used option for the death sentence and falling asleep as if getting a tooth pulled and never waking up is just not punishment enough for my liking. Then again, the electric chair or the gas chamber is just brutality up there with the worse forms of torture. I’d prefer a life long sentence of hard realistic labor.

If I were a family member of someone murdered for any reason I simply would want to know that the guilty persons life is equal to the pain I would have in my heart for the rest of my life. The death penalty is a tough issue and both sides have legitimate logic behind the thought process. I’m erring on the side of caution when there is a remote possibility that the death of my innocent loved one is the result of proof proven false years down the road that put another innocent to death. I would not wish that on anyone’s conscience.

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk…

Separated at birth is our current Commander in Thief and the Grinch who stole Christmas. If you took the time to compare the two it might not be as far off a thought as you think. With his hefty and mighty veto crayon he swiftly cast the medical care of 10 million kids in the “Do Not Recycle” bin out in the back of the White House today… AGAIN!

His rationalization for vetoing the bill is that it is the beginning of socialized medicine? Maybe the President has not visited an emergency room in any city in America lately. Socialized medicine is already here! It’s just the most expensive form of medical health care there is and we all pay for the poor using the Emergency Room with every payment to our HMO provider whether we like it or not.

If there ever was a clear cut example on what not to do as an American President then this guy is going to be mentioned more times than anyone else. He clearly fit’s the phrase from the movie The American President where it was said “For someone that loves America but clearly can not stand American’s”. Rough paraphrase but it fits W to a tee.

Bush vetoes children’s health bill a second time
Wed Dec 12, 2007 7:02pmBy Caren Bohan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday vetoed a bill expanding a popular children’s health care program for the second time, angering Democrats who are locked in a fight with the administration over the budget and spending.

Pushed by the Democratic-led Congress but also supported by many Republicans, the bill was aimed at providing health insurance to about 10 million children in low- and moderate-income families. Taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products would have been increased to pay for the aid.

Bush vetoed a version of the bill in October but Congress quickly passed another one that included some changes but not enough to satisfy the White House.

“Because the Congress has chosen to send me an essentially identical bill that has the same problems as the flawed bill I previously vetoed, I must veto this legislation too,” Bush wrote in a message to the House of Representatives.

The fight between Congress and the White House over the health bill is one in a series of clashes over spending that have arisen as Bush approaches the start of his final year in office. -Reuters

One of the obvious problems with the bill is how it was to be funded and those funds discharged. There was no money in it for the “Bush Too” crew of political hacks. If Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi had linked some (more than half) of the money from the bill to be directly paid back to any oil company or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia then it might have had a chance at passing.

It is very obvious that this President does not care one iota about his own peoples health care. He does not even care about our own military wounded soldiers coming home for care in our military hospitals unless the Washington Post blasts the negligence across the front page to embarrass him. Even then he only tosses a white wash over the issue and moves on to where the money is.

Sometimes I wonder if he has CADD, that would be Conservative Attention Deficit Disorder. Federal programs that don’t send money his friends way just can not seem to hold his attention span long enough. Out comes the veto crayon and he tries his best to color within the lines but those pesky flash bulbs always make him mess up.

Back to the emergency room kids. Socialized medicine? Ridiculous!

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk…

Cross posted at MichaelLynnJones.com

If you aren’t a vegetarian (I’m not either), this grossout story might change your mind. Please put away all food and beverages before reading on.

We’re going to visit Quality Pork Processors Inc. in Austin, Minnesota. They have a work area called the Head Table. This is where workers cut the pigs’ heads open (hopefully AFTER the pig has already been slaughtered). Then they shoot compressed air into the skulls to get the brain matter out.

Severed pigs’ heads are processed at the Head Table at the rate of 1,100 per hour. Workers slice off the cheek and the snout and then insert a nozzle into the skull. The compressed air causes the brain matter to come blasting out of the base of the skull.

In addition to being gross, this process is a health hazard. Eleven workers from this plant — and all of them were employed at the Head Table — have developed severe numbness and other neurological symptoms. Five of these workers have been diagnosed with a rare immune disorder — Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) — which attacks the nerves. It produces numbness, tingling and weakness in the arms and legs. And the damage is often permanent.

Two neurologists from the Mayo Clinic think these illnesses were caused by inhaling airborne brain matter.

Mmmmmm… Yummy yummmm. Big steaming plate of ham, anyone?

Ahh, Pig Brain Mist — l’essence de L’Oreal.

Quality Pork Processors Inc. supplies their products to Hormel Foods Inc.

Minnesota health officials are saying the public is not at risk. And the Titanic is unsinkable.

On a related note: California might have a 2008 ballot initiative that would ban some of the most inhumane Factory Farm practices. The organization has until this February to collect enough signatures to qualify for the November 2008 ballot. There’s nothing treehugging or touchy-feely about this initiative. Basically it would require that farm animals in cages have enough room to stand and turn around.

There’s no online petition to click on, but if you’re a California resident or would like to forward this information to anyone you know in California, here’s their website.

As much as I hate to say this, Democrats are every bit as hypocritical as their Republican bottom-feeding cohorts. After being elected on a promise to clean the swill from the halls of government, all they’ve done is take out big mops and liberally spread it farther.

Not surprisingly, nearly every day brings some new allegation of egregious behavior from the Pipsqueak-in-Chief or his Coalition of the All Too Willing in Congress. The Democrat response is a call for one more investigation to join the dozens already underway. The Republicans hurl charges of playing politics and wasteful spending on the unnecessary investigations. And you know what? The Republicans are right - except for that “unnecessary” part.

If Congress isn’t going to do anything with the testimony and other evidence, they shouldn’t bother. Just tell the people your pussy is bigger than Jenna Jameson’s and you’re too skeered to force the issue. If you subpoena someone, don’t embark on endless negotiations over what they will deign to reveal. Take the arrogant asses to court where they belong. Remember, we’re supposed to be a nation of laws and that means Karl, Harriet, and all the rest of the WH vermin. When the Dunderhead-in-Chief threatens a veto, break out the crayons and let him scrawl right ahead.

I’m not an idiot. I’m quite aware the Dems don’t have the votes to override vetoes or even get much legislation to the floor, but they’ll never get any help from the people if all they do is put on two-faced Harry Reid/Nancy Pelosi masks and say, “Gosh darn it Mr. President, we’re sorry about not proposing exactly what you want. It won’t happen again. Really. Would you like some soda to go with those pretzels? We wouldn’t want you to choke.”

The Dems are afraid they’ll be cast as “soft on terror” or “obstructionist”, which are pretty specious claims when you consider the Republicans are scared of a cave-dwelling hermit (NSFW) who shoots amateur terror porn and are twice as obstructionist now as they ever were while in power.

Congressional approval is in the toilet because a majority of the electorate wants Congress to do the job they were sent to do. Yes, they’ll be pissed that many important pieces of legislation may not pass, but not one-tenth as pissed as seeing the Dems cower like cornered rats. The Democrats need to get a notion of principle, and fast. It’s better to try to do the right thing - and fail - than to sit around eating bon bons and ignoring the masses who put you there.

Nancy, Harry, et al, that face you see in the mirror really is a crapweasel wearing a Bush mask. It’s not some hangover you got after partying hard with Congressional pages. It truly is you and you should be ashamed.

See other fine hypertext products at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!

I was listening to a lecture yesterday by an expert on teenagers. He concentrated on the dangers that teenagers face as the mature. He was telling the audience about the dangers of drugs and alcohol when he took a moment to explain why some people become addicted to drugs and alcohol more easily than others. Obviously some drugs manifest in physical addictions, while other drugs manifest in psychological additions. At one time I recall being told that some people are more susceptible to psychological additions, and these people were said to have addictive personalities. Yesterday, the speaker went into a little bit more detail about this addictive personality.

The speaker yesterday spoke about obsessive behavior. He told us how a person with and obsessive personality has a higher probability of becoming addicted to drugs or alcohol. For example, an obsessive person might become obsessed with a multitude of different things before they even try alcohol. They might become obsessed with things that are overall very positive, or overall very negative. At some point along the way a person might realize that an obsession has taken over his or her life. And, because the obsession is an obsession the person is unable to make a break with the obsession. Obsession is a selfish behavior, because the obsession has a higher priority than any other issue or relationship in the person’s life. In many cases the inability to control obsession results in embarrassment in minor cases and self-hatred in the worst cases. At some point these feelings of self-loathing lead to self-medicating with drugs or alcohol in an attempt to “feel better.”

Once the person with the obsessive personality has self-medicated it isn’t long before self-medication itself becomes an obsession.

The speaker told us about obsession and insecurity and fear drive obsessions. Immediately I began to think about the authoritative personality that I wrote about on Friday. It seems that fear and insecurity also feed the authoritative personality. In fact, as I considered the authoritative personality and the obsessive personality I realized the authoritative personality might just be a form of the obsessive personality.

Think of the goal of the authoritarian. They tend to seek order and control. Obsessive personalities have very little control over their obsessions and they eventually seek to control them. An obsessive person will be tempted when he his trying to fight an obsession. An authoritarian personality makes rules and punishments in order to dissuade himself from the temptation. Ambiguity in rules lead to temptations. Ambiguity makes it more difficult to fight an obsession. A rigid framework with all the answers laid out for the obsessive person tries to take away the ambiguity, the free time and wishfully the temptation. But, the reality is that only the obsessive person can make the obsession go away by realizing that no obsession can be the answer.

Many groups tend to offer replacement obsessions as a solution. And, authoritarian frameworks offer a replacement obsession. An obsessive person will easily fit into a framework with a firm unambiguous set of rules and regulations. An obsessive person will seek comfort and security in continuously following these rules and regulations. An obsessive person would also find compulsion in making sure that every other member of the group is also following the rules and regulations. A large network of these obsessed people continuously following the rules and regulations and furthermore enforcing them results in a self-regulating structure provide comfort and security for its obsessive members. However, anyone from outside the structure is a threat to this security.

The fear of abandonment is high on the list of potentially destructive threats to the network. If members abandon the group the group shrinks and potentially withers. Those who abandon the group might prove that survival without the group is possible and perhaps even better. This image might lead to the unthinkable concept that the group is not the salvation of the members.

So, it seems reasonable to suggest that joining a authoritarian cult might be a response of an obsessive personality. Then again many of the things we do are responses to our natural tendency for obsession. I might even suggest that writing this very blog is an obsession of sorts. Waking up at 5:00 AM to go work out every morning is an obsession. Eating breakfast every morning and dinner every evening are equally obsessions. But, the point is that some obsessions are healthy and some obsessions are unhealthy and sometimes even dangerous. All of this goes back to free choice and freedom to choose “good” obsessions and avoid the unhealthy ones.

How do we determine which obsessions are healthy and which obsessions are unhealthy? I would suggest that the subject of the obsession would be one consideration. And, the intensity of the obsession is the other. For example, eating breakfast every day is a healthier obsession than drinking your lunch every day. However, eating 3,000 calories for breakfast every day isn’t healthy either. Similarly following rules and regulations are normally considered a wise practice. Even the occasional reminder to a passerby might help remind someone of the rules they may not be thinking about. However, demanding laws that take away a person’s freedom and liberty might be pushing the limits, like gun control or abortion rights. The obsession that some people have for controlling others is certainly an obsession that needs to be constrained.

The message here is simple. Obsessions in general are not horrid in themselves. Some people tend to have obsessive personalities that are prone to obsessive behavior. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. If the obsessions that one chooses is a healthy moderated obsession it could be a good thing. However, if a person chooses unhealthy obsessions, it could harm the person, and perhaps it could harm our society.

—————————————————–

Don’t forget what Stephen Colbert said, “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.”

Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit

Reflection

Don’t get me wrong because for the most part I think Mike Huckabee is probably one of the more genuine candidates over on the Republican side of the election. His sense of humor is realistically enough suited to him when it comes to the non stop religious questions thrown at him. Being a Republican candidate for President you pretty much need to be wearing your religion on your sleeve and if you are not then you better be explaining yourself. Which brings me to the thought process of why Mike Huckabee is not giving a JFK speech like Mitt Romney did just a few days ago? After all, Mitt is only a Mormon faith member, he was never a religious leader of his flock like Mike Huckabee was.

Is Mike Huckabee not concerned about all the people of the Jewish faith that just might also be a Republican. How about all them Catholic Republican’s like Bill O‘Reilly? Skip the Catholic’s, we gave up on Bill O’Reilly when he signed his pact with the devil but don’t tell anyone. Everyone knows that being a Catholic and a Republican too is like taking scuba diving lessons by jumping out of a plane at ten thousand feet, those two things just do not go together.

Is it possible for a preacher to go from the religious pulpit to the Presidential podium? Granted Huckabee was Governor of Arkansas but that is in the midst of the bible belt and in those states having the right religion can be the gold card of politics.

Over at MotherJones.com they have this very interesting read on just this subject…

Huckabee Hides His Full Gospel? Washington Dispatch: Is Mike Huckabee the presidential candidate shunning Mike Huckabee the preacher? Before entering politics, he was a pastor at two Baptist churches. Now his campaign tells Mother Jones it won’t make his sermons available to the media and the public.By David Corn and Jonathan Stein
December 10, 2007
Now that he has his moment in the political spotlight, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee does not want his days at the pulpit to be scrutinized.

As Huckabee has surged to the front of the Republican pack in Iowa, his religious views have drawn media and voter attention. After all, Huckabee, a former Baptist pastor, has been campaigning as a “Christian leader.” But he has vacillated on how far to interject faith into politics. At an early debate, he indicated he does not believe in evolution, but at a more recent debate, when he was asked by Wolf Blitzer if the creation of the Earth occurred six thousand years ago and only took six days, as stated in the Old Testament, Huckabee said, “I don’t know. I wasn’t there.” During a question-and-answer session with students at fundamentalist Liberty University last month, he asserted that his rise in the polls has an explanation that is “beyond human” and is due to the power of his supporters’ prayers. Afterward, he backtracked slightly, adding, “I’m saying that when people pray, things happen…. I’m not saying that God wants me to be elected.” (At a victory rally held after Huckabee won a 1993 special election for lieutenant governor, Huckabee told his supporters that he had only won because God had intervened, according to the Texarkana Gazette.) - MotherJones.com

It perplexes me why the topic of religion is so heavily debated among the Republican’s in the race for the Presidency and it never ends. Fractures in the political party of the current President are rampant from state to state and it will not end until the last vote is cast. If the thinking behind the votes cast is solely based on a candidates religious belief then the voters do not see what politics is really all about. Being President is not about what God you believe in or how many times you attend services. It’s about making decisions for the greater good of all of our people. Current President exception. There are decisions to be made that frankly, yes religion and your personal faith can and will have a bearing on but there is also the fact that as President you have to defend the Constitution of the United States of America to the best of your abilities over any other vow you have ever taken in your life. There is no exception written into the oath that you must take once elected President of this nation. Again, current President exception.

Thou shall not kill, one of the biggies of the ten commandments is pretty relevant if you are the Commander in Chief of our nations military. Can the preacher break this commandment by using military force where many lives could be lost as President of our country to defend our people? If not, then how does he defend our nation and prove that America is not to be messed with by all the little dictators that think they are the next toughest kid on the block? Could he direct the CIA to find and kill terrorist leaders around the world that are intent on the ultimate destruction of America? Could Huckabee put the bible down to make these kind of decisions and live with it or not?

There is a large difference between a Sunday sermon and the highest political office in the land. Sermons are easy enough, running a nation is not about words and phrases that can roll off the tongue. It’s about actions that President’s have to take and in some instances it runs counter to whatever religion you have under your belt. Once more the current President exception.

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Cognitive Dissonance is that uneasy feeling you get when you have two deeply-held beliefs that conflict with each other.

Tens of millions of Americans will reflexively yell out “Property Rights!” whenever an endangered species needs to be protected or a business owner has to comply with safety regulations. And a lot of these same people also think illegal immigration is the root of all of America’s problems, and the government needs to do whatever it takes to keep THEM out. Mass searches and deportations, building a huge fence along the U.S.-Mexican border — whatever it takes to keep those slimy ethnic creatures out of our country — do it!

Here comes the cognitive dissonance. This could be a wedge that splits conservatives into two bitterly divided camps.

The Homeland Security Department wants to complete 370 miles of border fencing by the end of 2008. A lot of property owners in Texas and Arizona don’t want this fence running through their property. And Homeland Security is threatening to confiscate the property of any landowner who doesn’t cooperate.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said “vee can do ziss zee easy vay or zee hard vay The door is still open to talk, but it’s not open for endless talk.”

Juan Salinas, the county judge of Hidalgo County, Texas, said: “I tell you, on this one issue, the Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, Democrats and Republicans, white, black, brown, everybody is against the border fence. It just doesn’t make sense. We’ve been trying to talk to them about using other ways. It’s a disappointment that, again, the Department of Homeland Security is not listening to local taxpayers.”

Local people are opposed to the fence for cultural, economic and environmental reasons. The Rio Grande is the only source of fresh water for a lot of ranchers and this fence would cut off their access to it. And the local economies depend on cross-border traffic. It doesn’t just flow one way — many Americans do volunteer work south of the border and lots of extended families live on both sides of the border. Twenty years ago we were urging the Soviet Union to tear down the Berlin Wall; now we’re planning to build one.

OK, Righties — which is it? Which side are you on — the KGB Homeland Security Department, or the “property rights” and “local autonomy” that you’re always screaming about? Well???