So what's the mood like there at CPAC?

Well, for us economic conservatives, I think it's time we all get to know who our congressional candidate is and make sure he or she will stand firm on conservative principles when President McCain starts to bend.

Heck, these Coulters and Limbaughs have to start pushing congressional races so we take back the House. It's where we can return to responsible government.

I love the fact that romney dropped out before Huck.....Huck ain't winning, but I want him to stay in until he has more delegates then Mitt.

McCain better pray that Hillary wins the Dem nomination. If Obama wins, it'll be Dole/Clinton II: Electric Boogaloo.

"If I fight on in my campaign all the way to the convention, I'd forestall the loss of a national campaign and frankly, I'd be making it easier for Clinton or Obama to win. I simply cannot let my campaign abet a surrender to terror."

Mitt Romney - American Hero. I think he just singlehandedly won the war.

I do believe I called this one yesterday.

You just can't win, huh? Thompson, the Cowboys, Romney...

Well, I don't suspect my boy will be in it for too much longer either.

Thank goodness Karol didn't support Huck...kiss of death.

all the huck haters can say what they want, but you have to give him a tremendous amount of credit....

he's had no money....he wasn't well known nationally...he was marginalized by the media....he's been marginalized in the debates....the republican establishment was not only against him but tried using voter supression by saying a vote for huck was a vote for mccain.

despite all that, huck is in the final 2....even though he'll probably be out in a little while.

Noble effort by Romney. Now it's time to work together. Way too much at stake. Go Mac go!

Posted by: Larry at February 7, 2008 02:14 PM

yeah. it's not hard to stay in when you have another liberal republican front-runner making backroom deals with you to stay in to split the conservative vote.

What an election for you Karol! I mean how many losses you have so far. Now, with you supporting McCain, you are guaranteed final blow in November. 0-4! Sorry K.

I'd rather vote for a so called liberal like huck; then a fraud like mitt.

You support the Huckster and then label Romney a fraud? Incredible.

Huck ain't a fraud.....now mitt is another story...it's the reason with all that money he went nowhere...he sounded like the "real" conservative, he had all the money, he had the look of a president....but the people saw through it.

So is Hucksterbee sincere or not about wanting to amend the Constitution to align with God's law?

You're between Scylla and Charybdis. One answer will reveal Hucksterbee as the religious freak we know him to be. The other answer will reveal him as the liar and panderer we know him to be.

I'm not a christian; therefore I'm not going to get into the minds of how they think or what they think....frankly, I don't care.

I'm more interested in the issues....I suggest you go to the huckster's website; which clearly explains his positions and responds to the attacks by the club for growth, etc...

It is an issue if a candidate is a religious freak who wants to impose his religious will on others. It doesn't matter if it's Sharia law in Britain or Christian freaks in the U.S.

You don't have to be a Christian to answer the question. It's a very objective, simple question, so are you going to answer it or not?

I won't hold my breath waiting. You've always evaded answering before, and you always will. Go ahead, stick your head in the sand like a good ostrich.

Oh, I did check out the hypocrite's site, and there's nothing I could find where he rebuts the Club for Growth. But I did find this right off the bat:

http://www.mikehuckabee.com/?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_id=29

"And if we built those lanes of highways -- with American labor, American steel, American concrete - I believe it would do more to stimulate the economy."

So let's get this straight...he wants to portray himself as a fiscal conservative, yet he wants to TAX the American people $150 billion?

In other words, just like in Arkansas, he believes that tax revenues come out of thin air. Just like any liberal tax-and-spender, he acts as if the money were free. Where is his conservatism, which implies a belief in limited government? Where is his federalism, which means individual states are responsible for themselves?

Oh, that's right, Huckster is conservative only in morals. In everything else, especially fiscal policy, he's as liberal as anyone.

Here's a free clue: the money comes from somewhere. Every dollar that government taxes is a dollar that must be taken from the private sector. There's no net economic growth from government spending. This is not a new thought. It's been around since the mid-19th century, debunking Keynes almost 90 years before "General Theory."

typical nonsense....I've answered your question...I don't think Huck is trying to impose his religon on me.

you obviously didn't read the huckster's website carefully....you must have missed the "TRUTH SQUAD" section...go read it.

in regards to the 150 billion on infrastructure....huck was referring to the stimulus bill....instead of giving everyone $600, 1,000 or whatever the amount is; he wants to invest in infrastructure....that's a real stimulus package and not a band aid.

I suppose that's as direct an answer as you'll ever give, though it still dodges the question. So if he doesn't believe in imposing his religion on us, why did he talk about amending the Constitution and God's Law? Since you say he's not trying to impose his religion, he must therefore have been lying to win those people's votes. Thanks for clearing up the matter.

His site buries the "Truth Squad" portion, but I found it once you told me about it. So the Huckster claims that some Club for Growth members believe that "public FUNDING should never be considered to pay for such things as highways, prisons, schools and Medicare"?

He's portraying the CfG as full-privatization advocates, which is an outright lie. The CfG doesn't deny that things like prisons are legitimate funding, but the CfG's conservatives and libertarians do say that highway funding is ridiculously pork-filled now, as are schools, and ESPECIALLY Medicare.

Do you even know how much of the federal budget is devoted to absurd "entitlement spending" like Social Security and Medicare? It's over $1 trillion now. That's a million million dollars, in case you can't conceive how big it is.

I read more than enough of his site -- it's his and your thinking is the nonsense. You still can't get it through your thick zealot skull that when taxes are used to pay for highways or anything else, it's not a stimulus. The money doesn't come out of thin air. That's money taken away from the rest of the economy: that's $150 billion less that taxpayers have to spend on everything else. If government "creates" 47,500 jobs by spending $1 billion on highways, that's perfectly offset by jobs lost elsewhere, created by the money people would have had if it weren't for the taxes. In other words, there's no increase in economic activity, only a shift in spending.

Even if government borrows the money, that's money people have to repay later with their taxes. You're evidently unaware that that's what's happening now with the current "stimulus" farce: we're getting rebates, but government spending isn't being reduced, so we'll have to pay for the rebates later with higher taxes. What don't you understand?

This is not a new thought, as I said. It's been around for 150 years. I don't know what's your excuse for not keeping up. If you want to read more, go here. http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/BasEss1.html

A real stimulus is to encourage people to produce more, which happens when tax rates are cut. Hucksterbee can brag all he wants about income taxes during his governorship, but he lies about his record by omitting that he raised plenty of other taxes.

But I don't expect you to understand any of this. Go on, go support your candidate just because he fits your moral conservativism.