Mike Huckabee on Meet the Press, part 2

Last week, in part 1, I talked about the Huckster’s compromising position on abortion.

I actually agreed with some other things Friar Huck said in that interview. He said that he would be in favor of using military force in Pakistan to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden. He said that he would try not to turn it into a war with whole nation of Pakistan. I think it is refreshing to hear a candidate say something like this with all the hateful rhetoric out there. I want the President to be someone who will pursue justice while minimizing the loss of innocent life, and avoid overthrowing governments and costly nation building.

However, Huckaberry Fin still believes in this war in Iraq which has unnecessarily cost thousands of innocent lives.

As I pointed out last week, he talks out of both sides of his mouth on abortion.

Huckabee raised his hand when the question was asked “Who does not believe in evolution?” But later he said that he did not know "how or when God created".

Huckabee has said, “I am a 10th amendment candidate.” But he believes in the “No Child Left Behind” program which oversteps the authority of the federal government and pours money into a system that teaches evolution as fact.

This is all reminiscent of Bush in the 2000 campaign saying that he did not believe in “nation building”.

Bush also said in the 2000 campaign that he was pro-life, but at the same time he said would chose the most qualified judges and not use abortion as a “litmus test”. I believed him, so I didn’t vote for him. He spoke out against taking innocent life for the purpose of saving others (in reference to funding embryonic stem cell research), but yet he believes that abortion should be legal in cases of rape and incest.

Bush also said that he was against gay marriage, but then appointed a homosexual to an office for AIDS policy and got cozy with the Log Cabin Republicans.

We should learn a lesson from all of this.

The main blogger, Gregjaye, pointed out that Huckabee is making some bold statements against homosexuality.

Can we really believe him?

Notice that Friar Huck did not say anything about being against civil unions, anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation, and didn’t say that he would never appoint a homosexual to an office.

I heard that Huckabee refused to answer a question about whether Christians were the only ones going to heaven. He is both morally and financially bankrupt.

Why not vote for a man who supports the returning our government to its constitutional roots and comes right out says what he believes without any hypocrisy. (I am speaking of Ron Paul, of course.)

For six, nearly consecutive years, we had a Repuplican President, a Republican Congress, and the majority of the Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents (it was and still is six to three, in fact). And yet abortion remained legal, and the amount of taxpayers' dollars that went into Klanned Parenthood actually increased during that time. More money was spent by the federal government during those six years than all previous administrations combined!

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?

James 2:14-16 (ESV)

Please don't elect another Bush clone!

Should the U.S. Fund “Moderate” Terrorism?

The U.S. is engaged in several attempts to arm various groups around the world as they are fighting against extremists and terrorists. But are these groups themselves terrorists?

It is well known that President Bush wants to establish a Palestinian state. The U.S. is giving them $190 million in aid to do this. The U.S. is arming the Palestinian group Fatah as they are fighting against the more radical, but popularly elected Hamas. They have taken over the Gaza Strip, and the Bush wants Fatah to control the West Bank. But will the weapons that we are giving them end up being pointed at the United States? King George wants to “spread democracy”, but only when the elected are to his liking.

The U.S. is now engaged in arming Sunnis in Iraq, even some former Bathists (ones who were loyal to Saddam Hussein). The hope is that they will use these weapons to fight against Al Qaeda. These were the very people who President Bush said were evil and were in cahoots with Al Qaeda and must be overthrown for the safety of the United States. Now he is saying we must help them defeat Al Qaeda. Is this wacky or what? Some of the dollars we are pouring into Iraq are bound to end up in hands of the insurgents.

The U.S. has given aid to Pakistan in order to seek out and kill Al Qaeda members who have crossed the border from Afghanistan. Remember that the justification for overthrowing the Taliban in Afghanistan was that they refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden. He has not been caught, despite the fact that Pakistani President Musharaf has said, “we have done our part”. Not only has Musharaf been complacent about this, he has made treaties with Taliban factions and has created a “safe zone” (no Pakistani police or military presence) for terrorists in Pakistan along the Afghanistan border. Musharaf will not even allow U.S. forces to come into that region and deliver justice to these murderous terrorists. Remember that President Bush once said, “We will make no distinction between the terrorists and those who harbor them.” The case for war against Pakistan is now equal to that of the case for war against Afghanistan and far greater than the case for war in Iraq ever was, and yet President Bush still wants to give Pakistan aid.

The Mujahadeen fighters (which included Osama Bin Laden) that were armed by both the Carter and Reagan administrations against the Soviet Union became the Al Qaeda of today. The establishment of the Taliban government was also funded by the United States under the Clinton administration. Bush claimed that he was against such “nation building” when he first campaigned for president in 2000, but unfortunately, he discarded this promise soon after he was elected.

The other Islamic madman that the world has focused its attention on in is this Mahmoud Amedinajad. (I think that the mullahs have the real power in Iran, but this is moot point—they are all of the same ilk.) I don’t know that the U.S. is funding Iran now, but it did help Iran at one time. Remember the Iran-Contra scandal?

I have only mentioned the funding of Islamic groups in this article only because that’s where everyone’s attention is these days. Don’t think that I don’t know that they have not cornered the market on terrorism. Both republicans and democrats alike have funded and/or aided countless other thugs, dictators, and bloody revolutionaries who were worse than those they overthrew.

Is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” really a good policy? Have we really learned the lessons of September 11th?

Psalm 118:8, 9 says, “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.”

Psalm 146:3 says, “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.”

Isaiah 31:1-3 says, “Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD! Yet he also is wise, and will bring evil, and will not call back his words: but will arise against the house of the evildoers, and against the help of them that work iniquity. Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, and not spirit. When the LORD shall stretch out his hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and he that is holpen shall fall down, and they shall fail together.”