("He has criticized President George W. Bush's tax cuts as being too oriented towards the wealthy, although the Congressional Budget Office released a report in 2004, that claimed the opposite." )
does not have a source, and as far as i have seen is not supported by his statements . I may be wrong, but this allegation should be taken off the article, unless proven otherwise. Thanks, --Tash 11:59, 27 August 2007 (EDT)
Also, this sentence at the end of the top summary should be fixed:
"His victory has placed moved him unto the top tier of Republican primary canidates."
--Tash 12:04, 28 August 2007 (EDT)
hey im supprised that there isn`t more info on his religious views, even fox are suggesting that all the religious talk means he doesn`t have to talk about real politics. Personally I quite like the guy he seems like a genuine caring person but I think if he does win the republican nomination the democrats will win the election. He is too conservative to pull in any democrat votes. This is what fox are saying and I think it might be true, if he wins the nomination the republicans dont stand a chance of winning the presidency. I know this might be a little hard to swallow for some but i think its true, just as the democrats dont stand a chance if the nominate a far left nut, the same (not that im calling any1 a nut) could be said for the GOP. --Realist2 09:13, 19 December 2007 (EST)
By the way in not American im british but i find American politics fasinating, British politics are dull and theres no difference in the parties, all of them, even our most conservative mainstream party is centre, maybe centre left! If you do want to vote for a conservative party the only option is the BNP (British National Party) but them are racists so no-one likes them and they get like 3% of the vote. --Realist2 09:20, 19 December 2007 (EST)
Mike Huckabee is actually a reliable candidate?
Huckabee's statement that he agreed with the court's sodomy ruling was made one week after the decision.
I think that Mike Huckabee is a liberal hoax, who is temporarily supporting conservative ideas to be promoted in the GOP. I think that Ron Paul is the right conservative candidate. Thiudareiks 09:42, 1 January 2008 (EST)
- Talk pages on CP are actually meant to discuss the article, not a general discussion forum about the subject of the article. What you think about eg Mike Huckabee is irrelevant. Make a referenced contribution to the article or drink a nice cup of "shsssssh" :) 10px Fox (talk|contribs) 09:50, 1 January 2008 (EST)
I've heard that he hasn't stood up well for freedom of education. Could be bad for homeschoolers if he becomes president.
--Double Edge 11:05, 22 January 2008 (EST)Double Edge
I took out a section that was just put back in, with the editor saying it was only fair to put in controversy about both sides. This is "controversy" about his son! This deserves no place in an article about him. If you have controversies actually about the candidate, feel free to add them. ThomasB 22:50, 3 January 2008 (EST)
Actually there is reason to mention this particular incident. Mike Huckabee is now facing questions as to how large of a role he played in preventing a state investigation into the incident. The then Chief of State Police has testified that people close to Huckabee (his attorney and Chief of Staff) personally called the local prosecuting attorney to reduce the chances of an investigation. It is currently unclear how large a role Huckabee took in stopping the investigation into his son's actions, but it is certainly relevant as it is a possible example of corruption. Kiss20 16:24, 4 January 2008
- This is liberal claptrap, the kind of gossip that has ruined Wikipedia and poisons debate of the issues. It's pathetic, really. Ever hear of "innocent until proven guilty"? Not only is proof lacking, but there are not even any charges. It has no place here.--Aschlafly 16:29, 4 January 2008 (EST)
The lack of charges, and innocent until proven guilty is not the issue here. The issue is that there is the possibility that Huckabee abused his position of power to protect his son. The candidate's political stance is irrelevant here, it is a question as to whether his past actions show his willingness to protect those close to him from the law. All crimes, no matter who committed them, should be investigated to the full extent of the law. Kiss20 17:22, 4 January 2008
- Some people who don't like Huckabee have raised unsubstantiated charges that are not particularly serious anyway. Not here.--Aschlafly 17:24, 4 January 2008 (EST)
Unsubstantiated? The chief of state police testified that he was pressured by two people very close to Huckabee to cease any investigation. That seems pretty substantial. Kiss20 17:28, 4 January 2008
- Not here. Go to Wikipedia for that National-Enquirer stuff. We have more significant things to discuss and learn here.--Aschlafly 17:38, 4 January 2008 (EST)
- During our debate over the premature reporting of Heath Ledger's death on Main Page:Talk, these rules didn't seem to apply Mr.Schalfly. Ledger should have been 'innocent until proven guilty' as you suggest Huckabee should be, and given that my cited references to a quality Perth newspaper were removed and replaced by National Enquirer cites, this rings pretty hollow, my friend. Misterlinx 22:23, 5 February 2008 (EST)
- It was yourself that inserted the National Enquirer cite, HelpJazz - see my CNN cite here which you replaced with your own National Enquirer cite. Also see Mr.Schlafly's removal of my cite of a well-respected newspaper, The West Australian here. Seems like National Enquirer cites and assuming innocence before guilt is proven are the norm around here? Misterlinx 16:42, 6 February 2008 (EST)
- I see, I thought you were talking about this page. I didn't actually replace anything with a National Enquirer cite, I mearly suggested (on the talk page) that a good place to find more stories about celebrity values would be a newspaper which focuses on the dirty details of celebrities. Apparently nobody got the joke.
- Back to the issue at hand: the rule is "no gossip". If another page breaks this rule, you can't use this as a reason why you, also, can break the rule (see tu quoque. You can use this as an argument to appeal the rule, but in the mean time you should still follow it. Instead, make your case (independent of the fact that gossip is allowed elsewhere) as to how this is not gossip and why it should be allowed. In this case, I think you'd be hard-pressed to argue that possible abuse of power 10 years ago is relevant enough to the present for inclusion. HelpJazz 16:59, 6 February 2008 (EST)
Whats interesting here is that this is considered gossip and ignored by the conservapedia junta and considered "not serious" despite a chief of police testifying about it. However I am almost certain that if it was a claim against say, Barack Obama, it would no doubt receive criticism. Rebuttal? MetcalfeM
Keep goin Huck!
I added this to the article, but I wanted to say that despite finishing third in the Republican Primary, I expect Huck to pull it out in the long run! South Carolina has always been kind to social conservatives and openly evangelical candidates!-MexMax 00:44, 9 January 2008 (EST)
|!||Part of this article was copied from Citizendium but the copied text was originally written by me, RJJensen (under the name Richard Jensen) and does not include alterations made by others on that site.|
Though I like Huckabee's values on most issues, his explicit declaration that he would not treat regular citizens the same way made me shake my head in disappointment. "The crime wasn't that bad" is only something I expect to hear from liberals. BHarlan 13:26, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
And nobody's expunging my record, even though I am not traveling around promoting drug use and promiscuity. What I did was illegal, and I paid the price and had the note put on my DMV record. Speeding is wrong, but I'm not complaining about Richards's speeding. I'm complaining about the selective treatment of Hollywood celebrities as special citizens. I have never, and will never, pardon a rock musician just because he is famous. BHarlan 19:52, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
RJJensen and the Rolling Stones
I dropped the parody of making out Huckabee to be a purveyor of Hollywood values. Conservatives never saw him that way and of course a speeding ticket is not a criminal offense. RJJensen 21:30, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
- It is not parody. Do not call me names, sir. Yes, it is a minor offense, but special treatment for rock stars is exactly that, no matter how you liberals spin it.
- I will no longer engage you or your like on this subject. Good day. BHarlan 22:58, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
- One last note: the idea that Huckabee is some conservative litmus test is bizarre. He has called for more government intervention, for instance, into private health choices of individuals, including insurance choice. I support most of what Huckabee stands for, including his faith-focused worldview. This encyclopedia, however, does not censor. BHarlan 23:02, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
I'm hesitant to bring this up, and I'm certainly not going to put it in the article without consensus from senior editors, but I think we need to revisit the issue of whether Huckabee is really conservative when it comes to dealing with criminals. I like a lot of his positions, but when a man is serving a hundred-plus year jail sentence, there's usually a reason for that. Commuting the sentence of someone who has time and time again committed violent crimes is the sort of thing I would expect from the worst kind of bleeding-heart liberal.
Some people are simply a danger to society and need to be removed from it. It's not a nice truth, it's not a pleasant truth, but it's a truth nonetheless. When it's forgotten, the consequences are too often tragic, as they were in this case.
In many ways, Huckabee is a solid conservative, but in this area, I feel he's dropped the ball, and more than once.
--Benp 17:03, 1 December 2009 (EST)
- If someone failed at being conservative in any way, yes we should condemn it. When this came before Huckabee, there was a severe lack of common sense by him and the parole board in Arkansas; in the case of the Washington State judge who released Clemmons on bail a few days ago, there was also a lack of common sense; why on earth would anyone in their right mind release someone on bail if he was accused of assualting a cop and raping a child? Then there's the ACLU, who hounded state governors over the years to get better deals and clemencies for the worst of the worst. But ultimate responsibility falls on Clemmons, who would have had no problem with the law at all if he chose to live an honest life. He chose not to, and as a result of his choice four cops are dead. Karajou 17:16, 1 December 2009 (EST)
Huckabee Statement Regarding Maurice Clemmons 
|“|| "The senseless and savage execution of police officers in Washington State has saddened the nation, and early reports indicate that a person of interest is a repeat offender who once lived in Arkansas and was wanted on outstanding warrants here and Washington State. The murder of any individual is profound tragedy, but the murder of a police officer is the worst of all murders in that it is an assault on every citizen and the laws we live within.
Should he be found to be responsible for this horrible tragedy, it will be the result of a series of failures in the criminal justice system in both Arkansas and Washington State. He was recommended for and received a commutation of his original sentence from 1990, making him parole eligible and was paroled by the parole board once they determined he met the conditions at that time. He was arrested later for parole violation and taken back to prison to serve his full term, but prosecutors dropped the charges that would have held him. It appears that he has continued to have a string of criminal and psychotic behavior but was not kept incarcerated by either state. This is a horrible and tragic event and if found and convicted the offender should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. Our thoughts and prayers are and should be with the families of those honorable, brave, and heroic police officers."
I don't see any lack of responsibility on Huckabee's part. The Parole Board recommended that the Governor commute the sentence of a kid who was sixteen years old at the time, an act of true Christian Charity. Later failures were due to the prosecutors and the State of Washington. Given the media's smearing of Huckabee, making the news stories appear as if Huck's actions alone made the Washington shootings possible, it is no wonder you have doubts, Ben, but the facts show otherwise.
- Well, Clemmons now has to answer to a much higher authority, and I think he's going to find that the reckoning is high. I'm not sure I agree with the idea that being sixteen is sufficient to mitigate the seriousness of the offense, but looking at the big picture, I see your point concerning Governor Huckabee. Given the demands on a Governor's time, it's entirely possible that he didn't even have Clemmons' full record in front of him, and was simply taking it on faith that the Parole Board was being prudent in their recommendation. I do think that the full facts of this need to come out, because the system failed in a big way--this should never have happened. --Benp 18:17, 1 December 2009 (EST)
- Agreed on the facts coming out. I don't know if you are young, middleaged or old, Ben, but many of us would have a problem with a sixteen year old getting 100 years or whatever they gave him originally. To not take a chance on Redemption is contrary to our beliefs. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 18:36, 1 December 2009 (EST)