Obviously, you don’t understand the difference between being unwilling and unable. Don’t worry, you’ll figure it out eventually.

You know, if you throw in a few “yo mama” jokes, I just might get defensive enough to consider wasting my time arguing with you.

You sound like someone who’d know some good “yo mama” jokes.

My jumping in to this discussion was really more about hating hearing Huckabee getting bashed for no reason (seems to be fairly common on RedState)

I guess watching Mitt and Huck duke it out during the primaries and ending up with McCain as the nominee as a result makes me a little paranoid about the possibility that conservatives won’t get our act together in time to choose a true conservative in 2012 (whether it be Huck, Palin, Jindal, etc.) before we get another moderate handed to us on an iron platter (complete with chains).

At this point, though, you’re right…better to just breathe and root for the party as a whole than to worry about finding “the One.”

Don’t make the mistake of thinking you’re on the same “team” with anybody who has a double digit IQ or actual conservative creds.

Now then, put up or shut up. Answer the the points from a factual persuasion.

I liked it that she screwed up when she says “snow-machine”, instead of “Snowmobile”, like we say here in the “48″.

this video has as much relevence as yours did.
I do think that the reason she is articulating well in this video is because she has at least 101 teleprompters in the convention hall. See how she looks all around when she is talking.
I was talking about her consrvative principles, and her articulation of them.
what do you think?
just askin

this is after your 1:12 comment because I watched it twice.

Given the number of knives stuck in the party by so-called Republican moderates and commentators that dwarf Caesar’s assassins in numbers, right now I want anybody articulate who can enunciate conservative principles out there talking without trying to figure out if they are the “solution”.

In fact, no one person is the “solution” – that’s the Democrat’s cult of personality approach that threatens to send our country off the cliff. We do ourselves not favor to follow them.

Instead we need voices – and we need people to stand at the state and local levels and get elected and make our case to the voters, because our national organization is still being routed.

So let’s stop playing winnow. I am well aware of Sarah’s vulnerabilities as far as federal office and her need to build a record – but I also know that she is one of the best speakers we have in terms of connecting with her audience and exciting them. And right now, we’ve got very few others who voters will listen to.

So let’s just give her room to blossom – and worry about 2012 in another couple of years.

So stop trying to clear a path for Huck by cutting down others. He won’t be any use to you if we don’t have a viable party for 2012. And if we cut down many more trees, we won’t have anything left after the flood sweeps through.

The jury is still out on Jindal, Pence, Cantor, Barbour, Sanford, etc. in my book.

Romney, McCain, Rudy, Thompson and Jeb Bush are not the future of the Republican party. I hope they’ll still be a part of it, of course, and I think they can play a vital role, but I just don’t think they can inspire a nation or champion conservative principles the way we desperately need our leaders to right now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfIKdRmWkBI

She did this numerous times during the campaign. When asked questions about gay rights she spent the majority of her time falling all over herself trying to convince the interviewer of how tolerant she is and how many friends and family members she has who are either gay or who support gay rights. If we’re going to change the hearts and minds of Americans on these and other important issues, we have to be able to explain why we believe what we believe.

She was right on with most of her positions, and she gave a good speech now and then, but in sit-down interviews there just didn’t seem to be a whole lot of substance there, and believe me, I know the media sliced and diced her interviews to make her look bad.

Still, at a time when too many Americans aren’t familiar with what conservatives believe and/or why, it’s not a good time to be trusting individuals who are weak communicators with being THE voice of our beliefs. I hope she’ll continue to be a major player…I just don’t think we should put all or even most of our eggs in her basket.

I made no attempt to “put together an argument that makes any sense” to you because I didn’t think it was worth it. Calling me names isn’t exactly the greatest way to engage people in a conversation. It’s a great way to start a shouting match, but I don’t feel like shouting at someone who’s supposed to be on my team.

Oh, well, maybe you’ll come around in time.

You completely ignore all the actual, real “fact” thingys and make a fool out of yourself in public. Note that I never said Rudy was some kind of a pro-life icon, I just noted that his record on the issue while holding office was better than Huckabee’s. Wanna address that one?

Secondly, Rudy has a long history of not backing away from his promises after he gets elected and in fact, he promised to do all of the things I noted. Huckabee never said a word about what he would do. I guess we’re just supposed to guess, huh? Comment?

Third, Rudy was the first to select a very distinguished panel of very conservative legal scholars who would advise him on all judicial appointments. Huckabee made several statements that would lead one to believe he’s never read the Constitution and had no clue about cases the SCOTUS has decided.

Fourth, you really don’t know how to put together an argument that makes any sense do you?

I am still frustrated by the way Huckabee was treated in the primary by guys like Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, etc. who distorted his record because they were too busy drooling over Rudy, Romney, and Fred (sounds a lot like mbecker908).

Yes, I had my doubts about Huck’s record on fiscal issues at one time. I’m not so pro-social issues that I don’t care about a candidate’s stance on lower taxes and smaller government. But when I actually took the time to check it out myself, I realized that groups like the Club for Growth were spreading lies…maybe with good intentions, but they were still lies.

It’s also frustrating to me that this group of individuals is pretending to be the face of the Republican Party when some of them represent what’s been wrong with the Republican Party in the last several years:

Romney with his flip-flopping on social issues and all of his “fee” hikes that supposedly weren’t taxes.
McCain with his flip-flopping on tax cuts, immigration, etc.
And even Palin to some extent simply because of her inability to skillfully enunciate her conservative principles.

I hear you kyle8, we’ve definitely gotten away from our fiscal principles as a party (or at least our leadership has), and that’s why we’ve gotten our butts kicked in the past two election cycles. I see the need to focus on fiscal issues right now, especially considering the state the economy is in.

I just get worried when I hear about Republican groups like this intentionally leaving out social issues, as if they’re willing to throw them under the bus if that’s what it takes to get elected or to be cool in the eyes of the media. Especially considering the fact that recent polls are showing that we’re actually making inroads in the minds of the American people when it comes to national opinion about abortion.

I’m ready and willing to fight with other conservatives on behalf of conservative candidates who focus on fiscal issues moreso than social issues. But if I can’t trust them on social issues, it makes it that much harder for me to trust that they’ll even stay true to their fiscal principles (i.e. Romney). Does that make sense?

As for mbecker908′s comparison of Rudy and Huckabee on their abortion records and the references to the importance of abortion reduction, “Congratulations, man, you sound like Obama.”

With respect to only the abortion issue, Rudy has a better record on abortion that Huckabee. During Rudy’s term as mayor of one of the most liberal enclaves in the country the absolute number of abortions dropped and the rate of abortion went down. During Huckabee’s term as governor, the absolute number of abortions went up and the abortion rate went up. Rudy promised to keep the Mexico City accords in place along with every other administrative sanction in place during the Bush years. He also had a very distinguished panel of legal scholars who were going to be his front line in selecting judicial nominees and every one of them was publicly prolife. Huckabee’s idea of who should be on the court was a mystery.

Huckabee was the only candidate who supported the Human Life Amendment. Of course he never bothered to tell us which version of the HLA he supported and since seven different versions have been introduced into Congress over the years and only two actually have language that would “outlaw” abortion and the other five do nothing more than overturn Roe’s effect on making abortion legal but do nothing but return the issue to the states to legislate the whole “HLA” thing is nothing more than a trojan horse like the ERA was on the left.

Huckabee’s record on spending is horrible. He never met a tax he didn’t like and we’ve got video of him begging the AR legislature to pass tax increases as he lists them off one by one.

He’s never met a problem that government couldn’t solve.

His foreign policy stands when he was a candidate didn’t sound a whole lot different than Obama. And his position on immigration was solidly backed by his work with the Mexican government to get consular cards issued in AR for id.

Most of the people here are socons. But we’re certainly not going to support a Marxist who purports to be prolife and who offers exactly no strategies to advance the prolife/profamily cause.

You aren’t willing to support any ficon or security con who will honor and advance socon values. If you were, you’d have supported Rudy. Or Fred.

But fiscal issue on the other hand, those are right now more important than ever. Furthermore, if Bush and the Republicans in the senate had given a crap about fiscal issues then maybe we would not be in the inferior position we are now.

So it is a matter of timing. I don’t want to kick any leg off the stool, but I do want you and others like you to wake up and concentrate on the real problems right now, because soon we are going to be facing 1970′s style stagflation if not worse.

And this is a direct consequence of the party ignoring fiscal issue for a long time now.

I’ll admit, I care more about social issues than I do the other two, but I, like Huckabee, still consider myself conservative on all three, and I value pure fiscal conservatives and national security conservatives and the need for them in our party, even if they don’t care about social issues as much as I do.

I just get sick of fi-cons like ya’ll who pooh-pooh so-cons who don’t measure up to the perfect standards of fiscal conservatism laid out by your gods and goddesses at the Club for Growth and similar organizations.

Rudy wasn’t a “good candidate.” He was a one-pegger (national security) who realized he couldn’t compete in any of the early states and eventually found out he couldn’t even compete in Florida. Romney was a one-pegger, too (fiscal) whose money helped him teeter longer than he should have been able to before he, too, fell on his face. And Fred was a “good candidate”?! He may have looked good on paper and in 30-second ads, but he was a lazy bum of a candidate.

Of the top candidates in 2008, Huck came closest to having all three legs of the stool. I know it’s not “cool” to be a so-con in Washington, Hollywood, or on the coasts. But in mainstream America we care less about being “cool” and more about having values and convictions. And we’re willing to go to work for any fi-con or national security conservative who shares and who’ll honor and advance our values. Tell us to “go away” if you must, but once we’re gone, where does that leave you?