Tag Archives: Mike Huckabee

Those Republican Classes On How To Woo Women Aren’t Working

After the 2012 election, Republicans announced that they would be changing their ways.  Call it outreach, sensitivity training, whatever, they knew they had female problems.  They also have minority problems, immigration problems, LGBT problems, 47% problems, but I’m going to focus on their female problems for this post.  Let’s start with their latest example.  Mike Huckabee.

“If the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of government then so be it! Let us take that discussion all across America because women are far more than the Democrats have played them to be,” Huckabee said.

Huckabee argued that Democrats “think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication.”

Huckabee also argued that his party is not waging a war on women.

“The fact is the Republicans don’t have a war on women, they have a war for women, to empower them to be something other than victims of their gender,” Huckabee said.

Huckabee’s comments would be shocking if he were an outlier in the Republican party, but he’s not, so they aren’t.  These are the views of the base of the Republican party – you know, the group that will decide who will win GOP primaries.

Take a good look at what Huckabee is saying.  Love the Uncle Sugar term.  It seems he’s comparing purchasing birth control to scoring heroin.  Uncle Sugar is the pusher, getting unsuspecting women hooked.  And, in my opinion, Uncle Sugar was a carefully placed term, designed to call forth the stereotypical image of a Hollywood drug dealer.  Just like the word “thug” is being used today.

The controlling their libido line is Republican gospel.  Good girls control their libido by not having sex, bad girls don’t.  What is it with Republicans and the Madonna/whore references?  They love dividing women into two groups – those that have and enjoy sex and… those that don’t?  Is this based on their own sexual experience?  And I’m not even trying to be snarky with this question.  I simply don’t understand how a person who has any interaction with women could express these views.

The controlling their libidos line is the equivalent of the “hold an aspirin between their knees” comment, and just as offensive.  Why do Republicans always focus on women’s libidos when it comes to sex?  It takes two, don’tchaknow.  Most men have a vested interest in their partners’ birth control.  But in GOP land sex and birth control discussions only seem to focus on those slutty women.  And when you add Huckabee’s (and others) past comments about how wives should “graciously submit to their husband’s sacrificial leadership” it all makes sense.  Men should have control over women’s sexuality.  Men should decide when a woman has sex and when she becomes pregnant.  Basically, men who support contraception aren’t really men – they are either using woman for sexy time or weak for allowing the women in their lives to call the shots.  What’s always missing from Republican discussions on sex is a healthy, functioning relationship.  It always seems to be boys will be boys, men only want women for sex and women are in charge of civilizing men… until they get that ring on their finger, then they must relinquish control and submit.

The reverse psychology bit at the end of Huckabee’s statement is priceless.  Huckabee claims that Democrats are the ones who “think that women are nothing more than helpless and hopeless creatures whose only goal in life is to have the government provide for them birth control medication.”  Really?  This coming from the party that supports waiting periods before an abortion because women have to be told to go home and think about their decision, because abortion is an… impulse buy?  Like shoes?  This is a party that supports invasive, and completely unnecessary, medical procedures before an abortion because women are… “helpless and hopeless creatures” who don’t understand what they’re doing?  It boggles the mind.

He goes on to say, “The fact is the Republicans don’t have a war on women, they have a war for women, to empower them to be something other than victims of their gender.”  Again, really?  This from a party whose latest cry against the ACA is to not only stop contraceptive coverage, but to charge women more than men because women have babies.  Another thing that takes two, and one (baby machine coverage) that you’d think “pro-lifers” would support.

Pay attention when Republicans talk about sex, birth control and pregnancy.  Notice how men are always missing from the conversation?  Me, too.

Keep in mind that Huckabee also supported Akin’s “legitimate rape” comments.  Madonna/whore all over again.  It’s what they really, really believe.  They really believe there’s rape and legitimate rape.  The GOP would just prefer their candidates kept that opinion to themselves, or if women would only take rape lemons and make lemonade.

And no matter how many sensitivity courses the GOP holds, this nonsense isn’t going away.  I doubt they’ll even be able to tone it down.  It’s who the GOP has become, and, truthfully, social issues are all they have left to run on.  Lord knows, they have no interest in fixing the economy.  Don’t believe me?  Go check out the bills they spend their time on.

Rick Santorum ripped the lid off the Republican agenda in October 2011 (not 1911, 2011) when he said:

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country.” And also, “Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that’s okay, contraception is okay. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

That was the opening shot toward a subject that wasn’t even controversial – contraception.  I’ve included this because Republicans like to pretend the birth control wars were started by Democrats making it up.  Not true.  The GOP owns the War on Women.  100%.

Santorum, the one who uttered the word “Blah” not black, defended Huckabee.

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (R) said Mike Huckabee would probably phrase his “libido” comment about birth control differently if he had a do-over.

How would one rephrase cannot control their libido?  Slave to their sexy-time urges?  Good girls just say No?  Can someone help me out here?

Now, before reading Santorum’s next whopper, scroll up and reread his “sexual realm” comment.  Okay… ready?  Here’s Santorum today:

“That’s one of the things that’s most frustrating is there isn’t a lot of disagreement on access to contraception,” he said. “Whether the government should pay for it, there is a disagreement.”

That is what’s called lying.  He, and many other Republicans, have a huge issue with access to contraception.  They love lying about it.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on Friday repeated the misguided conservative talking point that the birth control coverage rule included in Obamacare forces employers to cover abortion-inducing pills.

This, of course, is false.

Many conservatives, including former presidential candidates Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, have claimed that emergency contraception causes abortions by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting into the uterus. They argue that a fertilized egg is essentially a person, the same logic that is used to lobby for fetal personhood laws.

But scientists and medical experts have debunked the claim that the morning-after pill causes abortions. The New York Times wrote in June 2012 that “the politically charged debate over morning-after pills and abortion…is probably rooted in outdated or incorrect scientific guesses about how the pills work.”

The contraception fight is on the table.  Republicans have put it there by allowing their true beliefs to take center stage – and they aren’t above lying about how birth control pills and Plan B works to “shut the whole thing down.”  (That phrase never gets old.  It also will never go away!)

So, my prediction is that Mike Huckabee won’t be the only Republican failing the GOP’s sensitivity training course – which only consists of one lesson: Stop saying what you really believe.  Good luck with that.

The Reason Mike Huckabee Isn’t Running For President…

He’s busy re-writing history. Did you know that Reagan stopped all crime?

There’s a lot of history to re-write, to make sure Ronald Reagan gets all the credit for good things and none of the blame for bad things. Obviously Mike Huckabee will be very busy with this project.

(This is for real – apparently Huckabee is going to market history videos for kids.)

Huckabee Out For 2012

Mike Huckabee announced tonight on his Fox show that he’s not running for president in 2012.

At the very end of his eponymous Fox News show, Huckabee said that, despite all the “signs and signals” pointing him toward a run, he decided this week not to launch a campaign.

“All the factors say ‘go,’ but my heart says ‘no’ and that’s the decision I’ve made,” Huckabee said. “And in it, I’ve finally found some resolution.”

…

“Under the best of circumstances, being president is a job that takes one to the limit of his or her human capacity. For me, to do it apart from the inner confidence that I was undertaking it with God’s full blessing is simply unthinkable,” he said.

Huckabee knows he can’t win, plus he’s perfectly happy making money from his Fox show. Running for president would cut into that revenue stream.

What does this mean for the 2012 GOP race? I see Pawlenty as the big winner here. Romney has been savaged from his own side for his health care speech. That leaves Pawlenty as the establishment favorite, though he’s probably sweating bullets ath the prospect of Mitch Daniels possibly entering the race.

Even Republicans Are Less Than Impressed By The GOP Field

Republicans are taking a closer look at their potential 2012 field and are not impressed. Case in point – George Will. He fires shots across the bow of Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich in his latest column:

If pessimism is not creeping on little cat’s feet into Republicans’ thinking about their 2012 presidential prospects, that is another reason for pessimism. This is because it indicates they do not understand that sensible Americans, who pay scant attention to presidential politics at this point in the electoral cycle, must nevertheless be detecting vibrations of weirdness emanating from people associated with the party.

The most recent vibrator is Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas who won the 2008 Republican caucuses in Iowa and reached that year’s national convention with more delegates than Mitt Romney, and who might run again.

Will describes Huckabee’s 2 week run of sticking his foot in his mouth over Huckabee’s Obama is Kenyan gaffes and walkbacks. Will adds this wisdom:

Republicans should understand that when self-described conservatives such as Malzberg voice question-rants like the one above and Republicans do not recoil from them, the conservative party is indirectly injured. As it is directly when Newt Gingrich, who seems to be theatrically tiptoeing toward a presidential candidacy, speculates about Obama having a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” mentality.

…

So the Republican winnowing process is far advanced. But the nominee may emerge much diminished by involvement in a process cluttered with careless, delusional, egomaniacal, spotlight-chasing candidates to whom the sensible American majority would never entrust a lemonade stand, much less nuclear weapons.

Yikes! It’s true but harsh. In the past the GOP usually lines up behind an establishment pick. The establishment favors Mitch Daniels or Mitt Romney. However we are in the new age of the Tea Party and I don’t know that they will line up behind the establishment pick.

The Economist shows the weakness of the GOP field in handy-dandy chart form.

Business Insider adds an even more stark assessment of the GOP’s chances:

(Do you seriously think Romney or Huckabee could beat Obama? Seriously? Romney couldn’t even beat McCain. Huckabee got off to a great start with mainstream Americans this week when he blasted Natalie Portman for getting knocked up without a husband. (Never mind Bristol Palin). The Sarah Palin bubble has burst, and now she just terrifies people. Chris Christie is losing steam in New Jersey, and he’s not running. Newt Gingrich couldn’t win a decade ago (and, according to fellow Republicans, he’s a weirdo). Unless there’s some great undiscovered hope waiting in the wings–or unless there’s another economic crisis–the Republicans are toast.)

Perhaps Huckabee Should Stop Talking?

Have you ever heard of the first rule of digging holes? The rule states that if you find yourself in a hole – stop digging. Mike Huckabee should study this rule. He’s been on a rampage of silliness lately. He talked about Obama’s childhood in Kenya (false), learning from his grandfather and father (false) to hate British colonialism (Huckabee is pro-British imperialism?). Then he clarified that he meant Indonesia (the Indonesian Mau Mau rebellion) but Obama is still anti-American. Now he has a new target:

In a radio appearance on Monday, Mike Huckabee attacked actress Natalie Portman for having a child “out of wedlock.” Huckabee said that it’s “troubling” to see people like “Natalie Portman or some other Hollywood starlet who boasts of, ‘Hey look, you know, we’re having children, we’re not married, but we’re having these children, and they’re doing just fine.'” Huckabee added that “it’s unfortunate that we glorify and glamorize the idea of out of children wedlock.”  

Huckabee’s remarks came in response to radio host Michael Medved, who discussed Portman’s Academy Awards speech last Sunday. During her speech, Portman thanked fiancé Benjamin Millepied, “who choreographed the film, and has now given me my most important role of my life.” Medved said that Millepied “didn’t give her the most wonderful gift, which would be a wedding ring! And it just seems to me that sending that kind of message is problematic.”

Yep, that little lady should get married and go back into the kitchen, the slut. Thanks, Mike Huckabee, for reminding everyone you’re just another theocratic culture warrior.

Huckabee Tells A Lie – Which Will Become The Tea Party’s “Truth” In 5… 4… 3…

I honestly expected honesty from a former preacher who constantly plays up how moral and religious he is.

Mike Huckabee:

During a radio appearance yesterday, Mike Huckabee repeatedly falsely claimed that President Obama grew up in Kenya. After questioning Obama’s purported secrecy about the birth certificate, radio host Steve Malzberg asked Huckabee if “we deserve to know more about this man.” Huckabee responded, “I would love to know more. What I know is troubling enough.”

Speaking on WOR’s The Steve Malzberg Show, Huckabee — a Fox News host and potential presidential candidate — said that “one thing that I do know is his having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example, very different than the average American … his perspective as growing up in Kenya with a Kenyan father and grandfather, their view of the Mau Mau Revolution in Kenya is very different than ours because he probably grew up hearing that the British are a bunch of imperialists who persecuted his grandfather.”

Wasn’t there some sort of special, important law in the bible about lying?

Mr. Reagan, We’re Ready for Our Close-Up

With Fox Noise snapping up Republican leaders to the soft chairs of punditry, will there be anyone left to run against Obama in 2012? Mike Huckabee recently said that his is quite content on being on television.

“It’s kind of given me a new perspective of the power of the media more so than the power of good policy. Running for president did not necessarily cause people to say ‘Oh, I know who you are.’ But being on Fox News has. It’s really embarrassing when you’re running for president of the United States and nobody seems to have any clue.”

Another 2012 Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin is continuing on the celebrity train with an appearance on Jay Leno and even working on creating a TV series, while Newt Gringrich — who is awaiting God to tell him what to do — has created an industry of . . . well . . . being Newt Gingrich. Criticizing from the Roger Ailes lap is easy, but real governing is hard. As we’ve seen time after time, Republicans distaste of government makes them totally ineffectual at governing.  Though the spotlight might bring a glitter and adulation to these GOP celebrities, it can also wilt any real or imagined political power they may have.

Another Republican Presidential Contender Bites The Dust

This time it’s Mike Huckabee, and it’s not a sex scandal. It’s a clemency scandal (another one). The man accused in the execution of 4 police officers in Washington state was granted clemency by Mike Huckabee.

You may have heard that four police officers were murdered in what under different circumstances would look like a mob assassination in Washington state coffeehouse this morning.

The man local police are seeking for questioning is Maurice Clemmons, 37, a man with a lifetime history of violence, burglary, aggravated robbery, theft and rape. Clemmons was serving what was essentially a life sentence in Arkansas before having his sentence commuted by then-Gov. Mike Huckabee.

The reason for the clemency at the time was the accused’s young age at the time of the crime:

When Clemmons received the 60-year sentence, he was already serving 48 years on five felony convictions and facing up to 95 more years on charges of robbery, theft of property and possessing a handgun on school property. Records from Clemmons’ sentencing described him as 5-foot-7 and 108 pounds. The crimes were committed when he was 17.

Clemmons served 11 years before being released.

That’s tough news for Huckabee, considering he was the top presidential contender among Republicans:

Looking ahead to the 2012 presidential election, 71% of Republicans say they would seriously consider voting for Mike Huckabee. This gives Huckabee a slight edge over Mitt Romney (65%) and Sarah Palin (65%) in this early test of the strength of several potential Republican contenders. A majority of Republicans also say they would seriously consider voting for Newt Gingrich, but far fewer say they are currently ready to support the lesser-known Tim Pawlenty or Haley Barbour.

I think Huckabee possibly (maybe) could have survived one clemency scandal (see here for the Wayne Dumond case), but two? No way.