Fundamentally, the United States is a religious country and he’s a preacher. We need a preacher after 8 year of George Bush and his cabal of amoral capitalist money-loving monsters. Remember what Jesus said to the rich man:

“Sell everything you have and give it to the poor.”

I wonder if Huckabee will remind us that “the love of money is the root of all (much) evil.”

You edged right up to a hugely important point in your “big government conservative” (BGC) argument but didn’t go all the way, namely: The BGC phenomenon is the creation of the Republican party. Under Delay and Bush there was an explosion of earmarks and the biggest new entitlement program since LBJ, not to mention the resulting deficits. Conservative commentators were shamefully silent as all this happened so the implicit message was “we love big government as long as we’re the ones making it big!” They sold GOP small-government credibility for a generation and the chickens are just starting to come home to roost. For a similar reason I suspect Ron Paul is making lots of noise among those looking for the second coming of Ross Perot. Perot ended up freaking out but despite his spectacular self-immolation keep this in mind: He got 20% of the vote and a few years later the budget was in balance.

It takes a special kind of idiocy to do that and I congratulate you Mr. Rasband. You truly are the Clueless Commenter of the Day and are in the running for Cluebat of the Year.

When is someone going to ask Huck how he is going to win without the West, his having alienated all the Mormons and libertarians who live out here.

Your article appears to point out that the Republican Presidential candidate with views or positions most closely aligned the Democratic party is Mike Huckabee. Based pretty much on religious issues Huckabee is anointed with the prefix Conservative. Huckabee like Romney leaves me wondering where he really stands on many of the other important issues. I know what both gentlemen currently say their positions are, likewise for Guiliani.

The Republican party has three potential candidates running for nomination that we can pretty much pin to the wall regarding (with almost certainty) where they stand on the issues and based on that, the positions we would expect them to follow as our president.

Those candidates, John McCain, Ron Paul and Fred Thompson probably have the most consistent records relating to their positions on ALL issues. If the party were to nominate one of these candidates I could understand why the choice was made. I might not agree with the choice that was made but I would know why that choice was made. Their obvious record and consistent position on issues(for the most part)dictates that. As Republicans our choice should be made among those top three candidates. The choices as represented by each would be limited conservatism (John McCain), consistant conservatisim (Fred Thompson) or radical conservatism (Ron Paul).

Pick any one of the Democrats running for president and you pretty much know what their presidential format would be. Pick McCain, Thompson or Paul and you also know what to expect. But with Romney, Guiliani or Huckabee, really, I just don’t know. They express one thing today, and based on their history would you put money on their view remaining consistent after being elected president?

I wouldn’t.

If the candidate is to speak the language of government as helper without making it seem as if he is a traditional liberal while espousing conservative social views we might be back peddling to the Republican party of years past. That might not be a bad thing but we should at least feel confident about what the candidates are telling us.

That’s what happens when “conservatives” decide that it’s a good idea to promote their own values through government. As soon as you start asking for federal “solutions” to issues such as gay marriage, abortion, and stem cell research, you’ve already given up the game. All we have now are two groups with competing ideas on morality tussling over who gets to impose their will on the rest of the country. It’s no surprise that citizens would come to expect the government to deal with everything they see as a problem.

No, I’m not a Ron Paul supporter/spammer.

WASHINGTON | If friends or admirers are considering a Christmas gift for suddenly surging Republica…

Don’t confuse “near front runner status” with gaining the approval of the majority of Republicans. We’re talking 20-25% not 45-55%.

I hope that the pols showing Huckabee in the lead are as meaningful as the MSM’s exit pols of Kerry winning the 2004 election; wishful thinking.