The Huckabee/Paul Smackdown

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Here's a YouTube video of it.  I just loved this - although both men had HUGE crowd reactions, I think Huckabee's was stronger.

Also, note Tancredo the statue when they pan out.

Post your comments about this part of the debate only - leave the rest for the other thread - this was so different though, that I think it merits it's own thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9sA5FQfE1E

[Boris]

Huckabee spoke in nearly 100% meaningless platitudes (not that the other candidates don't). Honor? lol. Other than sounding Nixonian, he doesn't seem to realize that the terms 'honor' and 'America' are somewhat on the lines of mutually exclusive to most human beings on this planet, which means we'd be saving face pretty much to only ourselves. But I guess that's okay. It's not my life on the line.

Seriously, though, if Huckabee supports the 'surge', that's fine. But he should back up his support with hard data and facts rather than asinine analogies and trivial rhetoric. It's 'smackdowns' like this that exemplify everything that's wrong with the American political system.

[Eraserhead]

At least Huckabbe showed some repect towards Paul unlike the Italian fascist standing on stage.

[nlm]

I'll agree with Boris - Huckabee was speaking in almost all platitudes and emotion driven rhetoric.

Ron Paul was not speaking in platitudes and emotion driven rhetoric - nor has he been through out, and that is refreshing.

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

[Rob]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

[nlm]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

Good point.

[SPC]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

Yeah. His debate performance lost any respect I had for him due to his Colbert appearance.

Huckabee sounds Nixonian when he says this. He obviously has no intention of abiding by the Constitution (he even states that the president's conscience is more important), and seems to advocate an all-powerful state (by saying the neocons' probelms are our problems) and open borders (calling illegal immigration laws racist).

Paul and McCain were definitely the winners of the debate, in my mind.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

Such a good scientist is hard to find these days.

[Lief 🗽]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

Such a good scientist is hard to find these days.

Don't be ridiculous.

Paul won, obviously, because he actually said things that are true and make sense, while Huckabee just repeated "united", "America" and "honor" over and over again.

[MODU]

...and seems to advocate an all-powerful state (by saying the neocons' probelms are our problems) ...

You missed his point all together.  He's saying that any problems the neo-cons got the country in are OUR problems, because we are all Americans and they are running to become the leader of the nation.  The problems won't magically disappear in January 2009.  Paul, on the other hand, was trying to make it seem as if they would (and it was probably the worst response he gave the entire evening).

[Eraserhead]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

Such a good scientist is hard to find these days.

The sad thing is that you're serious.

[ilikeverin]

Huckabee made some good points.  Too Americentric, of course, but it is true that Iraq's current mess is our fault.

Well, interesting exchange.  I appreciated the passion that they both felt for their sides.

[Reluctant Republican]

The first time I saw it I thought Paul got more applause, but now I’m not so sure. I was impressed with Huckabee, though I don’t agree with him, at least he treated Paul’s view as something worthy of debate as opposed to Giuliani’s approach of just bashing him. This whole exchange will help both Paul and Huckabee and energise their supporters, and this might help Huckabee finally reach the first tier.

[Know Your Rights!]

The first time I saw it I thought Paul got more applause, but now I’m not so sure. I was impressed with Huckabee, though I don’t agree with him, at least he treated Paul’s view as something worthy of debate as opposed to Giuliani’s approach of just bashing him. This whole exchange will help both Paul and Huckabee and energise their supporters, and this might help Huckabee finally reach the fist tier.

IMO - he's there.

[Reluctant Republican]

The first time I saw it I thought Paul got more applause, but now I’m not so sure. I was impressed with Huckabee, though I don’t agree with him, at least he treated Paul’s view as something worthy of debate as opposed to Giuliani’s approach of just bashing him. This whole exchange will help both Paul and Huckabee and energise their supporters, and this might help Huckabee finally reach the fist tier.

IMO - he's there.

Eh, maybe. Needs to improve his fundrasing though, and I think this will help him do that.

[StateBoiler]

Huckabee dropped quite a bit in my estimation - he showed himself to either be a fool or hack.

What exactly did you expect from a guy who thinks humans coexisted with dinosaurs?

Such a good scientist is hard to find these days.

God is almighty and all-powerful and all-knowing. He can do whatever he wants however he wants. Just as the Pharisees were exposed as not being obedient toward God cause they did not believe that Jesus was the messiah cause it did not fit their 100% views of how the world was and their program for when they thought the messiah would come, so are fundamentalists that say God could not do things as he pleases.

God could've created dinosaurs before he created humans, where does it say he did not in the Bible? The earth could be more than 6000 years old, where does it say it's not in the Bible? If you say God could not do the aforementioned things, then you are limiting God's power, and if you are limiting God's power, you're saying he's not almighty, all-powerful, and all-knowing, and if he's not those things, than what you're saying is he's not really God, are you?

You're making the same mistake Galileo's contemporaries made. Galileo discovered four moons that orbited Jupiter with his telescope. At the time believing that the sun and planets did not rotate around the Earth was saying you were an atheist according to the Christian worldview. By setting up his telescope so that everyone could see, he destroyed the belief in geocentrism. Christianity was not destroyed because this "central Christian belief" was erased.

If someone could prove to you the Earth was older than 6000 years and that dinosaurs did exist, it wouldn't make Christianity dead and you wouldn't become an atheist. So why do you base your faith around ultimately trivial matters that are irrelevant toward your faith? Having an open mind is not a sin. Thankfully, cause if there were less open minds in the world, there would be far less people converted to Christianity.

Place your faith in God, his son, and his abilities to do as he pleases, not in a bunch of rocks floating above our planet in the sky or that the large bones in the earth could not be older than our race. God left us everything in this world for us to discover for a reason. So nothing we ever find will disprove his existance. Have enough faith in the Almighty to realize that he's ultimately far wiser than you or I and as such does not have to follow a flawed human-created program or schedule for him to follow.

[Reluctant Republican]

Complete rumor, but according to http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=48507 CNN wants to stage a debate just between Huckabee and Paul. I don’t think it will happen myself and the site does not seem that reliable, but if this is true that would be awesome.

[Eraserhead]

Complete rumor, but according to http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=48507 CNN wants to stage a debate just between Huckabee and Paul. I don’t think it will happen myself and the site does not seem that reliable, but if this is true that would be awesome.

Very hard to believe but I would certainly tune in for that one.

[Know Your Rights!]

Complete rumor, but according to http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=48507 CNN wants to stage a debate just between Huckabee and Paul. I don’t think it will happen myself and the site does not seem that reliable, but if this is true that would be awesome.

Very hard to believe but I would certainly tune in for that one.

They also said Paul had raised five million bucks halfway through the last quarter.

[angus]

Huckabee made some good points.  Too Americentric, of course, but it is true that Iraq's current mess is our fault.

Well, interesting exchange.  I appreciated the passion that they both felt for their sides.

Nice post.  Except for the "too americentric" part, I share your impressions.  (Remember, it's a GOP presidential primary debate.  One cannot be too americentric in such a venue.)

[minionofmidas]

Of course, Huckabee got the "break and buy" thing from Colin Powell, who used it to try to explain to Bush why you should NOT go in.

Paul is of course wrong about this not being all Americans' responsibility (but then, he wants Republicans' votes. Couldn't tell the truth under these circumstances, couldn't possibly.) ... He's also wrong to continue the sentence after "we're losing" - that was all that was necessary there. The war was lost the second it was ordered, because its objectives were completely unachievable. He's completely right when he said that digging in and not facing up to the fact the war is lost is not helping America's "honour" at all, of course. Once the only reason you're doing something is to save face / to preserve America's honour (it is the same thing, just that the second version is weasel-worded) you've pretty much lost all over already. Doing something in order not to show weakness is perhaps the strongest way of showing weakness there is.

I have argued a wee bit like Huckabee for a while... ooh, around 2004/5... although not exactly quite the same way... but I've come around to seeing I was wrong.
Iraq can achieve peace, but only after the Americans are gone. It's a necessary condition for further progress. It's not in itself sufficient, of course, but it's necessary- That's a pretty bleak assessment, but it's the facts as I see them.

[nlm]

The greatest flaw in the Huckabee line of think is that we are "fixing" it.

We are not "fixing" it - we certainly broke it, but now we are trying to create something new there.

We are not trying to provide a stable government in Iraq - we are trying to create a government there in our own image; in a place that has never had anything close to that.

The reality of what Huckabee means is "since we broke it we need to remake it in our image" - which is a fool's errand and one that the American people would never buy into if they understood what he (and Bush and most of the other Republicans standing on the stage with Huckabee) was actually saying - and they know that, so they run this line of crap about "fixing it" out there.

[minionofmidas]

The greatest flaw in the Huckabee line of think is that we are "fixing" it.

We are not "fixing" it - we certainly broke it, but now we are trying to create something new there.

We are not trying to provide a stable government in Iraq - we are trying to create a government there in our own image; in a place that has never had anything close to that.

The reality of what Huckabee means is "since we broke it we need to remake it in our image" - which is a fool's errand and one that the American people would never buy into if they understood what he (and Bush and most of the other Republicans standing on the stage with Huckabee) was actually saying - and they know that, so they run this line of crap about "fixing it" out there.

Very true as well.

[nlm]

The greatest flaw in the Huckabee line of think is that we are "fixing" it.

We are not "fixing" it - we certainly broke it, but now we are trying to create something new there.

We are not trying to provide a stable government in Iraq - we are trying to create a government there in our own image; in a place that has never had anything close to that.

The reality of what Huckabee means is "since we broke it we need to remake it in our image" - which is a fool's errand and one that the American people would never buy into if they understood what he (and Bush and most of the other Republicans standing on the stage with Huckabee) was actually saying - and they know that, so they run this line of crap about "fixing it" out there.

Very true as well.

Thank you sir.