I’m Voting for Mike

MikeHuckabee.com - I Like Mike!

I have decided that I will be voting for Mike Huckabee as the next President of the United States. I have installed a button which links to the Huckabee for President website in my right sidebar. If you would like to learn more about Mike Huckabee and his position on the issues, please visit his website. There are a few other men that I could vote for if it comes down to it in the General Election, but for now Huckabee is my man. I hope that he wins the Republican nomination and subsequently, the White House. I am not telling anyone else how to vote. I am simply disclosing how I will vote. I invite all to study the candidates and the issues and come to their own conclusions.


  1. Steve, do you normally support big government Republicans?

    Or are you under the impression that the Huckster isn’t one?

  2. Hugh,

    Well, I voted for George W. Bush, so I guess I do.

    But I don’t think that Huckabee is necessarily a big government man.

    I am voting for him because I believe he is a man of principle and has the best chance to win the general election.

    My opinion on the other Republican candidates are as follows:

    Fred Thompson has shown no energy (though I wanted to support him from the outset).

    Mitt Romney has an inconsistent record on abortion (the most important issue for me).

    Rudy Guilliani is not pro-life (again, abortion is the most important issue for me).

    Ron Paul is a quack.

    I don’t know anything about the other guys. I am assuming that they don’t have a chance.

  3. Really? Did you see the YouTube debate? Hold on to your wallet.

    I just don’t get the feeling that he views the role of government as being limited in any way; certainly not by the Constitution.

    However, I do like his support of the Fair Tax.

    How is Ron Paul a “quack?” And by asking this, am I a quack?

  4. Hugh,

    You’re a quack. Just kidding. I figured you were a Ron Paul supporter from the way you framed your previous response.

    I don’t really think Ron Paul is a quack, but he does give me that impression by the way he speaks (he seems angry and irrational at times). I’m sure you interpret that as passion, which I’m willing to concede.

    My main problem with Ron Paul is his view on the war and his policy of isolationism. I think it is unrealistic in the world we’re living in today.

    Thanks for the discussion. I’m glad you’re wrestling with the issues and seeking to vote responsibly.

  5. Of course I am a Thompson supporter, however, I am beginning to get nervous about his chances. Based on Huckabee’s stand on the issues, I believe he would certainly be a good choice. I’m just not as sure of his chances of winning the General election as you seem to be.

  6. First the GOP base loved McCain. Then they found out more about him.

    Then they loved Rudy. Then they found out more about him.

    Then they loved Mitt. Then they found out more about him.

    Then they loved Fred. Then they found out more about him.

    Now they love Huck. How long will that last?

    Maybe it is time for the GOP base to stop dismissing Ron Paul and take a good hard look at who he is and what he stands for. Ron Paul is exactly what he claims to be; a humble man of principle. He has been a consistent and vocal advocate for economic and personal liberty, limited government, and a non-interventionist foreign policy for his whole adult life. His record in Congress speaks for itself. He does not have to try to explain why he has changed his position on the issues because he hasn’t.

    He did not waiver in his opposition to abortion on The View earlier this week. In fact, he got most of the “ladies” to acknowledge that they don’t support late term abortions.

  7. I hope I am not being a nuisance but, does this make anyone question their support for the Huckster?

    From NBC’s Tricia Miller:
    The 16,000-member New Hampshire affiliate of the National Education Association has chosen to recommend to its members Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary and Mike Huckabee in the Republican primary, according to a source within the state NEA.This is the first time the state affiliate has picked a candidate in the GOP primary, and it follows Huckabee’s showing as the only Republican who spoke to the NEA convention in July.

  8. Steve,
    Kudos to you for stepping out and stating the candidate who will receive your vote in these very important times. I’m sure it’s not surprise to you that I’m voting for Ron Paul.

    In practice I would say that Ron Paul is against abortion more than any candidate since he’s the only one running who actually has had the opportunity to perform one as an OB doc. He does think that the constitution does not give the federal government the right to legalize or ban abortion which gives some the impression that he is not strongly against abortion. The federal government cannot exercise powers where it has no authority.

    It is perhaps unfair to say that he supports isolationist policies. An isolationist by definition restricts trade with other nations. He is for open trade, travel, communication and diplomacy with other nations but against entangling alliances with other countries in foreign affairs. This puts him in the good company of people like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and James Madison.

    Here’s a quote from Paul on the issue . . .

    “Free trade means no sanctions against Iran, or Cuba or anyone else for that matter. Entangling alliances with no one means no foreign aid to Pakistan, or Egypt, or Israel, or anyone else for that matter. If an American citizen determines a foreign country or cause is worthy of their money, let them send it, and encourage their neighbors to send money too, but our government has no authority to use hard-earned American taxpayer dollars to mire us in these nightmarishly complicated, no-win entangling alliances.”

    Bryan F.

  9. Hugh and Bryan,

    Thanks for your comments and concern! I encourage you to support the candidate of your choice. I’m glad you’re thinking through the issues and seeking to vote responsibly. I hope all Americans do the same. We will be a healthier country if all citizens take their responsibility to vote seriously.

  10. Interesting. You say you wanted to support Thompson but he has not shown “energy.” I’m not sure what that means.

    I however am not chosing a candidate based on whether or not he can win (i.e. which is the candidate that we can get into the white house and hopefully control). I am chosing the best candidate.

    What makes Huckabee the best candidate over your intitial choice of Thompson? What is the lack of “energy” you mention? I am curious.

  11. Blair,

    Thanks for the comment. I’m not sure “energy” was the best term for me to use. I meant he didn’t seem enthused/excited about running for President of the United States. He was not as likeable as I thought he would be. He is an excellent candidate in terms of the issues and experience, but I don’t think he is electable because of his demeanor/appearance.

    Perhaps this shouldn’t matter, but the reality is that it does in our television age. I think Huckabee is a solid conservative candidate (especially on the moral issues, which are most important to me). He also comes across as engaging and articulate. I think he can win the general election. Those are some of the factors which have caused me to decide to vote for Huckabee.

    Plus, I believe that Huckabee’s underdog status is and will continue to help him with American voters.

    As I’ve said before, so say I now again: I am not necessarily trying to persuade anyone with this post. I posted who I have decided to vote for. In the comments I have clarified some reasons why. But I am not an apologist for Huckabee. That is not my calling. I don’t agree with him on everything. But I do think everyone should consider him as a Presidential candidate, just as all candidates should be considered.

  12. Steve,

    I believe your characterization of Dr. Paul as a “quack” is way out of line. Someone who stands by his principles, has integrity, and follows the constitution is labeled by you as a quack?

    This is especially disappointing due to Dr. Paul’s faith and his belief to not impose his faith on others in relation to politics.

    I am not sure if you have looked much into Dr. Paul or just listened to what the TV says, but this is a quote from Dr. Paul regarding his faith (which he has backed up with ten terms in Congress).

    “I have never been one who is comfortable talking about my faith in the political arena. In fact, the pandering that typically occurs in the election season I find to be distasteful. But for those who have asked, I freely confess that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, and that I seek His guidance in all that I do. I know, as you do, that our freedoms come not from man, but from God. My record of public service reflects my reverence for the Natural Rights with which we have been endowed by a loving Creator.

    I have worked tirelessly to defend and restore those rights for all Americans, born and unborn alike. The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideal of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle.

    In 40 years of medical practice, I never once considered performing an abortion, nor did I ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, I have authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception, H.R. 1094. I am also the prime sponsor of H.R. 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. I have also authored H.R. 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for so-called “population control.” Many talk about being pro-life. I have taken and will continue to advocate direct action to restore protection for the unborn.”

    Someone who has the integrity to not pander to voters, has never voted for a congressional payraise, and does not participate in the Congressional Pension Program (because he feels it is unfair for taxpayers) certainly shows he has principles and integrity – something that is severely lacking in politics. Not to mention while practicing medicine he did not accept medicare and medicade payments. Instead when a poor person or family came to him for medical procedures/checkups he either did them for free or for VERY little payment (thus showing his principles of not placing additional burden on American taxpayers, supporting the poor, and sacrificin his own potential monetary gain). THIS is something I look for in a Presidential candidate. Someone we can trust, who has a consistent record and know where he stands. I happen to agree with many (but not all) of his positions as well.

    With regards to Mr. Huckabee, I find his positions on illegal immigration, taxes, and integrity (with the scandals of him charging funds from the taxpayers for his personal account, him claiming several times to have a theology degree when he does not, and countless pardons of murderers) to not be in line with my views or many other Christians.

    Please take some time to really look over Dr. Paul’s record, positions, and consistency and compare it with Mr. Huckabee’s. I do not need Mr. Huckabee telling me he is honest and tells the truth (as he frequently says on TV) I need a President who’s actions prove his integrity.

    Like you said, you are not trying to tell others to vote and I appreciate those sentiments. I also hope you do not take my writings as such. I really just wish people would look further into candidates prior to voting. If someone truly looks deep into the options and positions of the candidates I respect that. I just hope people will make informed decisions prior to placing such an important vote.


    Jay Fradd
    Sevierville, TN
    First Baptist Church Of Sevierville

  13. Jay,

    Thanks for your comment. I appreciate at least one thing about the Paul supporters. You guys are passionate. Kudos!

    If you had read my second response to Hugh above you would have seen the following clarification of the “quack” comment.

    I don’t really think Ron Paul is a quack, but he does give me that impression by the way he speaks (he seems angry and irrational at times). I’m sure you interpret that as passion, which I’m willing to concede.

    My main problem with Ron Paul is his view on the war and his policy of isolationism. I think it is unrealistic in the world we’re living in today.

    Thanks for the discussion. I’m glad you’re wrestling with the issues and seeking to vote responsibly.

    Thanks again for stopping by. By the way, can you get me a good deal on a cabin rental in the Smokies?

  14. Ron Paul is great on domestic policies, especially his desire to get us off the federal reserve and back on the gold standard, but he is a quack when it comes to the war that we are currently engaged in. He basically ignores 1400 years of history, when it comes to the Muslims. They have always been on jihad against the West and will continue to even if we bring our troops home. Huck is the only one that is right on all of the major issues of our time both domestic and foreign. Go Huck!

  15. Steve,

    Thank you for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I am sorry i did not see your clarification initially.

    I admit, I am very conservative and was initially skeptical about Dr. Paul’s foreign policy positions – in fact I am still a little bit hesitant to say he is correct on all positions. He has, however, encouraged me to do a lot more research on foreign policy. I have read three books of differing perspectives since I saw his position on foreign policy and read a portion of the 911 Commission’s Report and do believe “blowback” was a contributing factor to the attacks. I cannot imagine the feelings Americans would have if we had foreign nation’s military bases on our soil – it would certainly add a feeling of unease among our population.

    I agree with him regarding America’s failed foreign policy of financially supporting dictators and groups such as Saddam Hussein (when they were in war against the Soviet Union in the late 1970’s and 1980’s) as well as Bin Laden and other extremists when Afghanistan was at war with the Soviets. It seems to me we get involved too much and many times the people we initially support end up being our enemies after we give them support financially and with weapons. His ideas of staying out of other countries internal affairs does not seem way off base to me.

    Dr. Paul is stong on illegal immigration, securing our borders, and protecting our sovereignty which are all vital in the war against islamic terrorists. I find this to be much more important than spending Trillions to nation build in the middle east.

    Non-intervention is quite a bit different than being a isolationist. Quite frankly our country cannot afford to continually wage in wars (more specifically nation building) in the middle east. along with our current entitlement programs and current level of spending. If we do we are going to eventually be financially uncapable of having a strong national defense and protecting our own borders which is of the most importance and the primary purpose of our government.

    I had initial interest in Mr. Huckabee, but his ethics violations as Arkansas Governor, weak illegal immigration stance (Renting space for the Mexican consulate in Arkansas for $1, supporting free College education for illegal immigrants), and not being a true fiscal conservative (increasing taxes and not cutting spending while Governor of Arkansas) led me to investigate other candidates.


    I guess it comes down to which issues are most important to an individual. I see some of Dr. Paul’s foreign policy issues flawed, but believe our financial security as a nation in order to fight terrorism on a more micro level abroad is more important than nation building.

    Thanks again for taking the time to respond, and I am completely done talking about politics. It gets a bit nauseating discussing it in great detail and hearing it on the news 24/7!

    As far as cabin rentals are concerned, it depends when you are looking to rent a cabin – if it is January through March I would say probably, but after that the demand increases substantially and more difficult to get a deal! :-)

Join the conversation . . .

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s