Mike Huckabee

"The Increasingly Irrelevant Christian Primary" for the Republican Nomination

The GOP should stop talking about bringing God back and start talking about cutting spending and regulation.

|

My latest piece at Time.com extends my earlier argument that the Republican Party should talk less about god and more about cutting spending and regulation.

While there's no reason to think that voters are clamoring for more religion in politics, Mike Huckabee will make exactly such a move the cornerstone of his candidacy if he chooses to run for president. The former governor has taken a leave of absence from his gig as a Fox News host while he ponders his options and promotes his new book,God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy. He continues to view gay marriage as an abomination and just last fall threatened to leave the Republican Party if it did not "grow a spine" and defend the traditional definition of marriage.

That might sell a lot of books and draw an intense and loyal following on Fox News, but it has nothing to do with most people's top political concerns. By vast majorities, Americans mostly care about things such as the economy, job creation, health care, and government spending. Those are the concerns that must be front and center for any successful candidate and party….

It is a bizarre paradox that displays of religiosity have become increasingly public and de riguer in GOP politics as Americans turn away from organized religion. Republicans won big in the midterms not because they are the party of God but because President Obama and the Democrats overreached, overspent, and overregulated over the past few years. Republicans can win the White House in 2016, but only if they put forth a powerful agenda to address worldly problems while leaving religion where it belongs: in houses of worship.

Read the whole piece here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Seattle suburb bans cheese in city buildings, for one day (this Friday)

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Dang, you beat me to it.

  1. “…the Republican Party should talk less about god and more about cutting spending and regulation.”

    That would be abandoning their platform. Hint: Their platform is not what they say it is.

    1. Plus they might win

      1. Not that I would believe them if they talked about that stuff.

  2. They can’t stop, we haven’t hit peak derp yet. Besides, the primaries wouldn’t be any fun without Rick Santorum.

  3. So, what, you think like they’re stupid or something? I assure you they’re not. The Religious Right has been an important part of their winning coalition for close to 40 yrs., certainly 35. And they’ve been brilliant at playing them. They talk about the social issues, but hardly ever deliver. I don’t mind the Religious Right being suckers for another election cycle. Not only that, but the Religious Right tends to be much greater supporters of the issues you/we favor than are most people or even most Republicans, so what’s not to love?

    1. So the dumbest people in the country agree with you on a bunch of political issues. And your lesson from that isn’t to reexamine your opinions in light of that disturbing fact, but to thank them for being your useful idiots. Astounding.

      1. Tony – “People who disagree with me agree with you. That is evidence that you are wrong and you are blind if you can’t see that.”

        Arguing with Tiny is like boxing with one of those blow-up clowns with a sandbag in the bottom of it. Trouble is, just like the clown, he just won’t stay down. Just keeps popping back up over and over and over….

        1. I believe the analogy you’re looking for is:

          It’s like trying to sword fight a fart.

          1. Don’t insult farts.

          2. You are right. I forgot that one, so I made one up.

        2. People who believe strongly that their imaginary friend hates gays and that this should motivate their political choices agree with you on economic issues. Such idiots could only have come to the correct ideas on economic policies by sheer accident. Occam’s razor suggests they’re just wrong about that as they are everything else except what’s in their immediate knowledge sphere, such as how to do things with animals.

          You have the plutocracy and the morons on your side. Surely that coalition has got economics right, surely.

          1. Occam’s razor suggests they’re just wrong about that as they are everything else

            You do not know how Occam’s Razor works.

            You have the plutocracy and the morons on your side. Surely that coalition has got economics right, surely.

            Our side produced the most prosperous places on Earth. Your side made Detroit.

            1. Yes I do. It is not simpler to assume that the Christianists and the plutocrats have stumbled upon the best economic system than it is to assume that they’re just wrong and so are you.

              Your side has never done anything useful. You just take a lot of credit when not due. Capitalism made Detroit, idiot. My philosophy made the entire modern technological world.

              1. Capitalism made Detroit, idiot. My philosophy made the entire modern technological world.

                The stateism you salivate for made the gulags, the gas chambers, the killing fields.. or, more simply, caused the death of 100+ million people during the 20th century.

                1. Smilin Joe,

                  Fuck off, you Holocaust denying cunt.

                  1. Dafuq?

                    1. I think it was sarcasm.. but I did name the gas chambers, so I’m not sure. Either way, it wasn’t an inclusive list. Just naming a few of the big ones.

                    2. It’s a troll with a rather unamusing schtick. Toss it in the “ignore” pile.

                  2. Don’t piss off SJF, or he will smite the RADIASHUNZ up you. Also, up yours Choad!

              2. And which philosophy is that?

              3. My philosophy made the entire modern technological world.

                Fascism did no such thing.

          2. Wow, Tony what a world class thinker you are.

            Did you know Newton believed in alchemy and astrology? I guess we can chuck physics then.

            Guilt by association is a logical fallacy.

            1. Tony has said, that you could tell Carl Sagan was a great scientist, because he smoked pot.

              If he’s not a sock puppet, he’s brain damaged.

              1. LOL everyone knows the true path to enlightenment is through LSD man

            2. You are not Isaac Newton.

          3. People who believe strongly that their imaginary friend hates gays and that this should motivate their political choices agree with you on economic issues. Such idiots could only have come to the correct ideas on economic policies by sheer accident. Occam’s razor suggests they’re just wrong about that as they are

            Holy fuck, this is hilarious. Tony, a huge portion of blacks and Hispanics are very Christian. Which party do they vote for again? Like 80% of Muslims in this country vote Democrat. Is Allah somehow more of a rational belief than Christ?

            You want to know the least religious group in modern American politics? Libertarians. So by your logic, since most of us are so vehemently irreligious, we must be totally right about everything!

            Thanks for arguing on behalf of what a genius I am, Tony. I didn’t know you thought so highly of atheist, small government classical liberals like myself.

          4. Also Tony, guess which party has most of the incredibly badly educated inner city voters voting on its behalf?

            I’ll give you three guesses. Because the worst educated people in this country are in the inner cities, so theoretically, if those people vote Democrat, then the dumbest people don’t vote for Republicans.

            So Tony, who do the people in Detroit vote for? It’s got the lowest literacy rate of anywhere in America, so clearly those people must be voting for Republicans since they’re so badly educated.

            1. The dumbest fuckers in the country, Creationists, vote overwhelmingly GOP.

              1. What percentage of people who think 9/11 was an inside job vote Democrat?

                I’m betting it’s pretty high, big guy.

                1. At least there is a plausible case that Cheney was behind the WTC attacks.

                  No evidence, but plausible. There is no plausible case for Creationism.

                  And anti gov libertarians have the highest rate of CT believers. I know because I posted on the Liberty Forum back then.

                  1. And anti gov libertarians have the highest rate of CT believers. I know because I posted on the Liberty Forum back then.

                    This is completely unimportant to my point.

                    I don’t care who has the most idiots or the most conspiracy theorists because I am neither an idiot nor a conspiracy theorist.

                    There are right ideas and wrong ideas. Attacking the people who hold the idea rather than the idea itself is an ad hominem attack which has no bearing on how right the argument is.

                    Republicans being religious doesn’t mean Republicans are wrong. Inner city Democrats being badly educated doesn’t mean the Democrats are wrong. Lots of libertarians being conspiracy theorists doesn’t mean libertarianism is wrong.

                    That’s the point. Thanks for playing, even though you lost, idiot.

              2. Aaaaaand there he is.

                1. Cheney got everything he wanted out if 9-11. Wars, access to oil, a surveillance state, huge defense spending, DHS, and huge deficits.

                  Lucky for him but the world got fucked.

                  1. At least there is a plausible case that Cheney was behind the WTC attacks.

                    No there isn’t dipshit.

                    And anti gov libertarians have the highest rate of CT believers. I know because I posted on the Liberty Forum back then.

                    I KNOW BECAUSE THE INTERNET TOLD ME

                    1. Says the resident war-boner waver. Cheney had the motive, means, and opportunity.

                      Of course Islamo-pigs actually did it though.

                    2. Says the resident war-boner waver. Cheney had the motive, means, and opportunity.

                      Of course Islamo-pigs actually did it though.

                      The vice president has the means to tell the entire American security apparatus to stand down?

                      That’s weird. I never read that in the Constitution.

                    3. Opportunity? He did?

                  2. Thanks for the laughs. 🙂

              3. They just misinterpreted it because they don’t understand.
                I believe that this means that Consciousness is the part that is created in the image of god. the meat suits our minds ride around in are not what was referenced.

          5. You claim, “Such idiots could only have come to the correct ideas on economic policies by sheer accident.” To ASSume that people of faith cannot understand economics would be more indicative of your not actually knowing any.

      2. So the dumbest people in the country…

        That statement seems a tad discriminatory, Tony.

      3. So the dumbest people in the country agree with you on a bunch of political issues.

        No, you don’t.

        1. Now *that* was funny.

      4. I agree with Tony. Republicans and right wingers should just be killed.

        1. I know; kill them all! Cause they’re violent, you see?

        2. Ah, another member of the party of peace and love. You know, the ones that will eat their own if they dare deviate from the party’s memes and slogans.

      5. Go eat a turd sammich you mongoloid racist. You and your comments take the dial of derp to a 15/10. Please do me a favor and explore outside of your moms basement and interact with the real world instead of drooling on your computer reading salon.

      6. Not so, you hardly agree with us about anything, Tony, and even when you do you can’t admit it because you’re since a partisan hack.

      7. At least those religious people, however ridiculous their mystic beliefs, still manage to function as productive individuals; the Republicans have all the money, remember?

        You dumbass leftoids are unemployable, incompetent bums who are less efficacious than people who openly profess to believe in ghosts and supernatural dimensions. Doesn’t say much for the leftoids.

        1. The leftists do openly profess to believe in mythical gods. It’s just that their mythical god is otherwise known as an all benevolent super centralized government. They have lots of other mythical things that they believe in, as well.

          1. Like “recycling” and “organic food”.

      8. So the dumbest people in the country agree with you on a bunch of political issues. And your lesson from that isn’t to reexamine your opinions in light of that disturbing fact, but to thank them for being your useful idiots.

        There you have it, in the clearest possible light, proggie politics in a nutshell (emphasis on the nut) – principals, not principles.

      9. Hey guys.

        There’s maybe a score and a half (at this time) comments above that are reactions to the Turd sammich and the giant douche who often visit here.

        In a nutshell, their biggest pleasure is to ruin this forum and derail all sane discourse.

        And they are succeeding day after day.
        Please stop arguing with the retards.
        I can’t get 2 minutes into any thread without giving up. It’s like fucking Groundhog Day for retards.

        Thank you, carry on.

        1. I dunno, its more fun to engage them because otherwise this turns into a big libertarian circle jerk

    2. Replace regions right with economic conservatives and your statement is equally true.

      We’d like some limited government now, please.

      1. Religious

      2. That’s true, they don’t deliver much for either, but they’re pretty good at slowing down change in the opposite direction, which is about the best we’ve been able to get in the world political climate.

      3. The problem is that conservatives believe in BIg Gov. See Bush and Cheney. Obama is more of a fiscal tightwad than any elected GOPer. And that us not real praise.

        1. I call this the progressive right vs progressive left dichotomy

    3. They’ve already got the Christians. It isn’t the Christians they need to win. They need me to win. And if they want my vote, they need to drop the rhetoric of Flying Spaghetti Monsters and start spoutin sum liberty, instead. They’ve got the perfect candidate to gain my vote. All they need to do is not be fucking stupid…

      …tall order.

      1. They will fight tooth and nail to keep your candidate off of the ballot. If he gets the nomination I would not be surprised to see them attempt to sabotage his campaign in favor of whatever fascist piece of shit the Dems nominate.

        Liberty is for suckers. They agree with the dems on goals, just not methods.

        http://www.breitbart.com/big-g…..tion-bill/

      2. Yeah, but if you’re a politician and you want to win the Republican primary, which Jindal and Huckabee still think they can do, you need the religious vote in the primary.

        This is the fallacy of composition. It might theoretically be good for the Republican Party if they talked less about God, but it wouldn’t be good for the individual people in that party who want to run for president. They need to talk about this because the Religious Right is a major component of their primary base.

        Furthermore, this is all assuming the Republican candidates are doing everything for venal reasons, rather than legitimate belief. Many politicians actually believe what they say. Elizabeth Warren is actually a crazy leftist. Huckabee and Santorum are actually incredibly religious. So both you and Gillespie are assuming that their religious statements are some kind of show, but that isn’t necessarily the case, especially with people like Huckabee.

        1. the Religious Right is a major component of their primary base.

          You wouldn’t know it from the direction of the GOP. They are getting more apathetic to gay marriage, not less. I think the RR is dying and more and more of the GOP is tired of pandering to this liability.

          1. They’re dying over time but if you were to ask a Republican primary voter ‘hey, what do you think about that God fellow’ you’d get about 90% support.

            The Republican base has become less conservative on social issues, but it’s still filled with evangelical Christians and talking about your love of God plays very well with the Republican primary voters.

          2. Sort of true. But, I think this shows just how short-sighted the religious right is on the issues. The country is getting less religious over time. Demanding the Republicans try to push the country in a more religiously conservative direction is only going to leave the Republicans marginalized. And with a marginalized seat at the table, their biggest challenge is protecting their own right to live their lives the way they see fit (the progressives are more than happy to demand adherence to progressive mores and values). If they were smart, they’d push to have a libertarian position locked in to protect their own position. And I think some of the smarter ones are starting to pick up on that.

            1. “If they were smart, they’d push to have a libertarian position locked in to protect their own position.”

              Question posed and answered.

        2. As I’ve said before. If I were Paul, I’d get all the party bigwigs as well as those running against him and flat out state:

          I am going to be president. I will either be the Republican nominee or I’ll run 3rd party until I win.

          He who can destroy a thing. controls a thing. Rand Paul has the capability to end the Republican party and I, for one, would love watching him do it.

          1. I think that’s overplaying his hand. He should rule out Romney or another shit like that. Still, I like your style.

          2. I immediately thought about the scene in The Untouchables where Capone bashes one of his lieutenant’s brains out with a baseball bat onto the table at a gang gathering in order to make the others realize how serious he is.

            I like it. Maybe Paul should bring a bat to that meeting.

            1. So that’s where O-Ren Ishii learned her management style.

          3. Rand could well be the next POTUS. I don’t have much doubt that he would be if it weren’t for all the forces aligned against him. The SoCons hate him. The NeoCons hate him. The Progs hate him. The establishment of both parties and their cronies, hate him.

            Why do they all hate him so much? Because he stands to limit the one thing they all love most, power over other peoples lives, and despite all of that, the majority of people might still vote for him.

            But make no mistake, he is up against the worst onslaught of downright hatred from the powers that be, of any potential candidate, since, well, his father.

            1. The SoCons hate him.

              Some cite on this needed. My impression is that the socons tend to find him more confusing than anything else. They kinda sorta understand what he’s saying, and they kinda sorta feel like he’s talking the same language, but they just don’t entirely get this civil liberties and foreign policy restraint stuff.

          4. What makes you think he’s in that kind of dominating position? If he were, don’t you think he’d know it & act accordingly? Hell, if his position were as dominant as you seem to think it is, he wouldn’t need elections, he could just install himself in a coup.

            1. Hell, if his position were as dominant as you seem to think it is, he wouldn’t need elections, he could just install himself in a coup.

              Methinks Francisco is overestimating Rand’s popularity.

          5. I am going to be president. I will either be the Republican nominee or I’ll run 3rd party until I win.

            What color is the sky in your world?

            1. You think ANY Republican could ever win again with Paul running third party? He’d take 10-15% of the vote. 90% of that would come from the right. When Republicans win, they win by 2%.

              So…blue, unless it’s cloudy.

              1. Oh please if Rand did that then he would peter out by 2020. And he will be out of the Senate until 2022 at least.

        3. That may be true, in which case they’re legit but their major backers are phony.

      3. They need me to win.

        Obviously not, unless you always vote for winning candidates for very office, every election.

        1. And you were the deciding vote.

          1. Of course I’m serious. You bring up a poll about independents, that makes you the representative of independents? They’re not like you.

            1. It makes me NOT one of the 25% of Americans who identify as Republican, which includes ALL of the Socons and ALL of the Neocons.

              Christ, Republicans are fucking stupid!

              1. Christ, Republicans are fucking stupid!

                Didn’t you just claim that Rand Paul is some Andrew Jackson/Theodore Roosevelt-like figure?

      4. They’ve already got the Christians. It isn’t the Christians they need to win. They need me to win.

        Kind of true. They need a guy who can get your vote while not alienating enough of the base vote to get crushed on turnout.

        To me, that’s one of Dr. Paul’s greatest strengths. I think he has the potential to very much broaden the Republican voting block (in the general) without sacrificing too many of the existing base votes. As far as I can tell, the only votes Paul is a dealbreaker on is the neo-cons. And, really, they’ve never really delivered much politically and always been afforded way too big a seat at the table.

    4. Not only that, but the Religious Right tends to be much greater supporters of the issues you/we favor than are most people or even most Republicans, so what’s not to love?

      HAH! And especially not the politicians they support in the primaries. Huckabee and Santorum are just as shitty on economic issues as they are on social issues.

      1. But their voters poll otherwise. Their voters don’t vote only for them, they also vote for & favor much more congenial candidates and have much more congenial views themselves.

    5. “Not only that, but the Religious Right tends to be much greater supporters of the issues you/we favor than are most people or even most Republicans, so what’s not to love?”

      Really? How? What issues are you referring to?

      1. Not talking and soup.

        1. Soup is good, I’ll give you that. They need a soup plank in their platform. Like a plank about soup, not a plank made out of soup. Cause that would be stupid.

          1. Planck Soup, because Rethuglicans are that stingy.

            1. I saw what you did there.

              *bows*

      2. Basically being against socialism. Religious “conservatives”, although they mostly agree with the entire rest of the world in favoring some degree of forcible redistrib’n, are much stingier about it than most.

        1. Poll people on it (or just look up existing polls) if you don’t believe it. There’s a high negative correl’n between religiosity & socialist ideas. The more frequently people attend church, the more they oppose taxes.

        2. There is a lot more to libertarianism than opposing socialism. Just because a lot of progressives oppose the drug war (or at least parts of it), Patriot Act, and foreign wars doesn’t mean they agree with most of libertarianism.

          The economic views of the religious right tend to take a backseat to their social views, and their economic record is hardly much to write home about.

  4. Like my pastor used to say, “Meriwether, there’s no ‘I’ in God”.

    1. He also used to say, with admiration, that, “religion is the opiate of the masses” and “as soon as a religion comes to dominate it has as its opponents all those who would have been its first disciples”. But he could play a mean guitar.

    2. Yeah, but there is an “I” in “Iesus”

      1. Nicely done!

        1. I could never figure out who that “Inri” guy was when I was a kid.

          1. “He was a IOOOO!1!!”

            I think I just farted in binary.

            1. Damn! Again with the follow-up.

              *bows*

  5. So what they’re gonna drop God in addition to gays (untenable now), and be left with guns? Thank Cher for Obamacare. It doesn’t start with a G but it certainly seems to fit the bill. My advice to Republicans, of course, is to notice they possess a neocortex and that it can be used.

    1. Physician, heal thyself.

    2. Sumthin, sumthin, pot, kettle.

    3. Shit. I thought it was GObamacare this whole time. Thanks for correcting me on this.

      And please, tell us more about all of this.

  6. These sorts of articles from Gillespie are idiotic because he doesn’t seem to understand a few things:

    1. Republicans might actually, shockingly enough, believe in God. It’s silly, I know, but about 85% of Americans still do. As such, many of these Republicans who are talking about God are NOT doing so for political gain, they’re doing it because they’re expressing their actual beliefs. There are all sorts of issues libertarians believe in which are vastly less popular than talking about God (such as open borders, which basically no one other than extreme libertarians and Democratic Party apparatchiks are actually in favor of) yet I never hear Gillespie argue that libertarians should jettison that aspect of their belief system. It’s almost like Gillespie is arguing that conservatives should get rid of their most cherished beliefs for no other reason than to benefit libertarians, but libertarians should never have to similarly compromise.

    2. This is still good politics. If you want to win the Republican primary for president, you need some of the religious vote. They’re a huge portion of the Republican base. So if your goal is to win the primary, you can always talk about God now, then not talk about it while trying to win the presidency with an expanded electorate.

    In other words, not only is this not bad for them politically, it’s also an expression of a principle they actually hold to. Gillespie doesn’t understand either of these facts.

    1. To some extent I agree with you, however the two most openly religious candidates for the GOP nomination, Huckabee and Santorum, are also the two most pro-government candidates in the pool. I’ve got no problem with religious people, but the ones who wear it on their sleeve are usually the ones I have the least in common with.

      1. I’m not saying that I have any positive feelings about Huckabee or Santorum. They’re my two least favorite people still trying to run for president. I would vote for Christie or Jeb Bush before either of them.

        The point is that Nick’s article isn’t about why they’re wrong, it’s about how the Republicans can win elections. First of all, that’s laughable coming from an open borders libertarian like Nick whose ideas are despised by 95% of the electorate. Secondly, he doesn’t understand that this is partially a means of gaining support in the primaries. Thirdly, several of these people actually believe what they say and are saying it based on principle.

        Now I happen to think their principles are idiotic, but I’d never jettison my most deeply held beliefs barring some unforeseen occurrence, so why should I assume Huckabee would jettison his religious beliefs just for electoral advantage?

        1. I get your point. I would, however, like to see the GOP really around some actual limited government conservatives some day.

          Ah, who the hell am I kidding?

        2. You’re off base here Irish. First, Gillespie is not trying to become president. Libertarianism is not a party. Second, you can believe in God while toning down the Jesus rhetoric and playing up the FYCS rhetoric.

          1. Libertarianism is not a party.

            That’s weird. I was under the impression they ran political candidates. I thought there were several on my last ballot, but I must have hallucinated.

            Second, you can believe in God while toning down the Jesus rhetoric and playing up the FYCS rhetoric.

            Rick Santorum came in second in the Republican primaries last time. He won the popular vote in 11 states.

            Rick Santorum literally has nothing going for him as a Republican candidate other than his lust for Jesus and it won him 11 states in the popular vote during the primary.

            Talking about God wins you a hell of a lot of votes in the Republican primary.

            Oh, and you want to know who came in second in 2008? Huckabee! The second place finishers in the Republican primary the last two cycles were hardcore SoCons with no other value as candidates. Both had no personality, were far more big government than the primary base, and yet they came in second because of how many pro-God Republican primary voters there are.

            1. LP =/= libertarianism and thank Zod for that.

              You make a good point otherwise. Disturbing, but keep in mind that the GOP had NO good mainstream candidates in those races. The respectable showing for Santorum and Huckabee were a byproduct of very bad choices.

            2. Not only that, but if you’re black & a Democrat politician, you don’t even get the black votes unless you make at least a nod at religion. You can be Moslem or Xtian, but not atheist.

        3. To be fair to Nick, I don’t think this article is really an attempt to convince Huckabee and Jindal to tone down the religious rhetoric, but rather to encourage the nomination of a candidate (namely, Paul) who, while not necessarily nonreligious or silent about religion, doesn’t make religion and social conservatism the centerpiece of their campaign.

          1. Which in general is a better strategy than a candidate with no personality that loves the God talk. The ‘culture war’ stuff is going to come up regardless of the Republican who’s running and it would be nice to see someone who’s willing to disrupt it with other ‘surprise’ policies (anti-NSA spying, criticism of the War on Drugs, etc.).

    2. You can win the religious right with libertarian principles. They see themselves as on the defensive on culture war issues against the government. Just say you’re not going to use government force to attack their deeply held beliefs and you will win most of them.

      1. No you can’t. The RR and social conservatism are inimical to freedom. They hate immigration and free trade. They love cops and V-chips.

      2. “Just say you’re not going to use government force to attack their deeply held beliefs and you will win most of them.”

        And sadly, your position will be deemed radical and out of the mainstream.

        Allowing people to bake whatever cakes they want, allowing them run their churches without IRS harassment, allowing them to decide for themselves whether to give their employees birth control, makes you a radical. Even if you’re the most secular person ever to come out of seculartown, defending these rights makes you “controversial,” “extremist,” or a “bomb-thrower.”

    3. I disagree. Comparing libertarianism to the GOP is inept one is a party the other a movement. Further, I think the religious fundies are getting a lot less powerful. Pandering now = pain later. Nick is right Americans don’t want to hear about God.

      1. Well, if you look at the last midterm election, it was filled with God-talk, particularly in the southern states, and I have it on good authority that the Republicans did okay.

        1. Presidential elections are different.

    4. I agree with your take somewhat. I don’t think Gillespie’s central point here, though, was that Republicans should never talk about God, but rather that they would be dumb to make a religiously-based socially conservative agenda their top focus. Say what you want about open borders, but I’ve never seen Nick advocate that a candidate make that the focus of their campaign. Reason generally gets shit on by other libertarian groups for being too flexible and pragmatic when it comes to politics. I think that talking about God to some extent is clearly good politics (even the vast majority of Democratic candidates do so), but not in the way Huckabee and Jindal do (at least at a national level).

      Also, I think that a politician can believe in God and still pander and make promises that he or she has no intention of ever seriously attempting to fulfill.

      1. Double this!

        Paul is religious. It’s not the base of his platform.

      2. Say what you want about open borders, but I’ve never seen Nick advocate that a candidate make that the focus of their campaign.

        Sure, but if a Republican candidate were talking about how much he likes immigration, even though that’s not good politically, would Nick ever tell him to stop talking about the subject? Did Nick ever tell Ron Paul to stop talking about his opposition to military intervention just because it didn’t play well with Republican voters in 2004?

        No. Because Nick only tells people to jettison their principles when their principles are things Nick doesn’t like. If their principles are in line with Nick’s, then they shouldn’t get rid of them, no matter how unpopular.

        1. Ron Paul didn’t run in 2004. And in 08, I don’t think his foreign policy views (as long as he left out the Craig Paul Roberts-esque batshit stuff) would have hurt him in a general election. The public hated the Iraq War and IIRC he was the only Republican who opposed it.

          Also, again, I don’t see this piece as being an appeal to Huckabee or Jindal to stop talking about Jesus, as mucha as an appeal to Republican voters as to what they should look for most in a candidate if they want to win the White House in 2016.

          1. I don’t think his foreign policy views (as long as he left out the Craig Paul Roberts-esque batshit stuff)

            His FP views ARE Craig Paul Roberts-esque batshit stuff.

            1. I meant basic stuff like opposing Iraq or not wanting to get further bogged down in Afghanistan. You can disagree with those positions or non-interventionism all you want, but it’s pretty fucking stupid to suggest that anyone who opposed the Iraq War is just as crazy as someone suggesting with no evidence that the CIA orchestrated the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

    5. It’s almost like Gillespie is arguing that conservatives should get rid of their most cherished beliefs for no other reason than to benefit libertarians, but libertarians should never have to similarly compromise.

      Considering that for the entire history of “fusionism” it’s been the other way around…well, turnabout is fair play, I say!

  7. Time to play Spot the Not! 2 of the following are real quotes from Huckabee:

    1. The three most influential people in my life are FDR, Jesus, and Elvis.

    2. Inside every human being there are treasures to unlock.

    3. No one is more important to the future of our state than our teachers.

    1. 1. FDR doesn’t ring true to me.

    2. I am gonna say #1.

    3. Yep, 1. I thought a really absurd one would throw off the scent.

      2 could be the opening line of a Sugarfree short story.

  8. You know who else shunned their god in the name of frugality?

    1. Am I too late to answer? I was getting a bowl of hot, delicious homemade chicken and sausage gumbo.

      I say it was…..uh…Peter?

  9. Whats wrong with talking about God? As long as they also obey the constitution who cares?

    1. Agreed. If they actually follow the constitution it would preclude them doing anything damaging. I wouldn’t give a flying fuck what else they did.

      Never. Gonna. Happen.

    2. Religiosity is against reason and does not bode well for the candidate’s respect for individual rights.

      1. This is why libertarians can’t win elections

    3. It’s not that talking about God is bad, it’s that it’s often a subject politicians talk about to appeal to people without actually saying anything substantive as to how they would govern, what policies they would enact, etc. (this goes for Dems and well as the GOP), and furthermore, that in the cases Gillespie refers too, is often accompanied by anti-liberty policies when they do go into specifics.

    4. Religion is inherently oppressive.

      1. I agree. Please tell us more about this.

      2. Oh? Pray tell. What exactly about it is oppressive?

        Serious question.

      3. Government on the other hand…

      4. C’mon Tony, tell us. What makes religion inherently oppressive? Go into detail.

        1. It’s got rules, man, and customs. And the rules aren’t democratically formed and coercively applied against all of those who are or ever claimed to be part of the religion.

          1. I didn’t think he would bite. Even a dullard like Tony sensed a trap.

            There is no aspect of religion that makes it oppressive that his philosophy does not have in spades.

        2. No person is free when their mind is chained to a king or god.

          1. I call foul on the singular and plural mismatch in that sentence. Unacceptable grammar for this forum, sir!

          2. No shit.

            Funny you should say that. Also funny that you didn’t show up to knob-gobble Obumbles in the comments for the article on the labor participation rate being at abysmally low.

          3. Palin’s Buttplug|1.15.15 @ 10:51PM|#
            “No person is free when their mind is chained to a king or god.”

            Says turd, absent the least hope of self-awareness.
            Fuck off, turd.

      5. Tony, your trolling game has gotten weak lately.

  10. It is a bizarre paradox that displays of religiosity have become increasingly public and de riguer in GOP politics as Americans turn away from organized religion.

    Not really. These kinds of changes always elicit a death rattle. They are being left behind and it makes them angry and loud. Soon, they will be alone.

  11. Does the NAP cover kicking demon ass? To be a principled libertarian, can one be like spike with the chip?

    1. That depends. If you use cacodaemon to summon a level VI or higher demon, you are justified in using Spiritwrack to contain them. Lesser demons are protected by animal cruelty laws.

      1. It’s it self defense to destroy a being who would destroy you if given the opportunity? When do you cross the line into blood sport?

        1. When you summon Frank Dux.

          1. “I am an Americain…really…don’t mind my OUTRAGEOUS Belgian/French accent! I’m Creole…from da bayou! Really!”

            *kicks Tony in the groinal region*

            /Frank Dux

            1. That would have made the movie watchable.

  12. Spot the Not with Huckabee: Round 2

    1. I’ve never, ever tasted beer.

    2. I drink a different kind of Jesus juice.

    3. Nothing beats the feel of a nice leather Bible.

    1. I’m going to go with 2. Because if he really said that, then … Yuck.

    2. All three of those have strangely sexual and masochistic undertones.

      1. That’s true. Can they all be things he didn’t say?

      2. “Inside every human being there are treasures to unlock.”

        -actual Huckabee quote

    3. Too funny.

      I am saying three. It seems a little over the top.

    4. OK, no more bets

      The Not was 3.

      Suthenboy is 2 for 2 tonight.

      1. Out of curiosity, how can you be sure that Huckabee has never said number 3?

        1. We all understood that Derp meant ‘on the record’.

          We are all also suspicious that Huck probably did say #3 but off of the record. Probably to Harry Reid who was not hit by an exercise belt but with a leather bound bible, because he couldn’t say the safe word with a ball gag in his mouth.

          Who knows? A video may be ‘leaked’ someday…..

          1. PLEASE STOP!

          2. I Imagined him saying it as uses said lushly leather-bound Bible to spank a hooker. Tomayto-tomahto.

            1. I thought that’s what I said.

              1. My mistake. If I saw Harry Reid working a street corner, I’m getting a speeding ticket before I hit city limits.

    5. Was it like, “I’ve never, ever tasted…beer.”?

      1. It’s from an NYT interview:

        Q: Could it possibly be true that you have never, ever tried alcohol in your life?

        A: That’s true, other than communion wine in Europe. But I’ve never, ever tasted beer.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07…..eally.html

  13. ATTENTION: NON-SOCON GOP CANDIDATES

    The best way to appease the SoCon element is not to invite a discussion about your own religious bonafides, but to keep SoCon eyes on the transgressions by Democrats.

    If you remind them that the Democrat candidate is hostile to their religious values, they won’t care if you are merely apathetic.

    1. And try not to make stupid rape or abortion comments, too.

    2. Great points.

  14. I’m done arguing about the Republican primaries, so I’ll leave you with Twitchy having one of their patented bitch fits over something that’s a total non-issue.

    Basically, Luke Russert pointed out the following regarding Joni Ernst getting the State of the Union rebuttal:

    Joni Ernst’s meteoric rise continues. This time last year she was an unknown pig farmer, on Tues she will deliver GOP SOTU response.

    This is factually accurate. She literally ran campaign ads about the fact that she was a Good ol’ Gal who spent time castrating pigs and eatin’ biscuits.

    So of course conservatives decide to engage in their bizarre martyr complex:

    What the condescending, sneering little twerp failed to note is that Ernst is much more than an “unknown pig farmer”:

    Condescending and sneering are apparently conservative code words for ‘an accurate statement of fact.’

    How ridiculously dismissive & sexist. Also, a Lt.Col., 21 years in the Army and a Co. Commander in Kuwait.

    Yes, the fact that she was a lieutenant colonel doesn’t fucking matter because he was talking about what she was doing before the election – namely working as a pig farmer.

    Conservative outrage machine, GO!

    1. Conservatives who complain loudly about leftists promoting victimhood, and exaggerating claims of (racial, sexist, religious, anti-LGBT, etc.) bias in our society, who simultaneously have a massive victim complex where straight white Christian men are being systematically persecuted based on those qualities are among the most baffling of hypocrites* to me. I know that quote wasn’t directly related to that, but your line about the martyr complex reminded me of it. This is an example of a conservative reading things into language that really aren’t there, much as leftists do on many occasions.

      *Joining them would be feminists victim-blaming Charlie Hebdo victims. The cognitive dissonance and lack of self-awareness is simply astounding.

      1. And to be clear, I’m not accusing all conservatives of having such a complex.

    2. The persecution complex is just one of a bazillion reasons conservatives are hopeless and need to learn to do as we tell them.

  15. SoCons and Proggies think so much alike. Why can’t they just be friends? Oh fuck, what am I suggesting here, the last time that happened, they banned alcohol!

    1. *laughing…now crying*

  16. So is the Tony in this thread not the real Tony? His arguments are so fucking stupid that I almost think it’s a Tony sockpuppet.

    I don’t remember Tony making arguments quite this dumb.

    1. No – it’s the same one. I have him microchipped.

    2. He gets drunk and right before he passes out on the floor of his mum’s basement face down in his own puke, he can get pretty deranged.

      I was thinking after reading his first few posts in this thread, that it’s probably about time to ignore him for the sake of the thread.

      1. But his arguments in this thread are so hilarious and riddled with logical fallacies.

        ‘Republicans are religious! Since religion is wrong, Republicans must be wrong about everything else! Because being wrong about one thing is proof that you’re wrong about everything, and also apparently Democrats are never religious!’

        The string of arguments that led him to make this retarded a statement is so ridiculous that I can’t imagine this is the real Tony.

        1. He gets quite ridiculous at times. Don’t you remember the time he was threatening us with cruise missiles and posted pictures of them, that his beloved government was going to kill us all with?

          1. God, I forgot about that. Holy shit.

            More evidence of sock puppetry, that someone more unhinged than usual had their hand up the Tony ass.

            1. “…someone more unhinged than usual had their hand up the Tony ass.”

              I’m hoping my gay friends abide by the same tried-and-tested rule that my straight friends obey: never stick it in crazy.

          2. I have to see that link. Please. I NEED IT.

    3. The person who posts using the handle Tony is seldom the same person posting as the one a week before.

      It is a sock used by a number of people, probably media matters staff or some such shit. Over the years I have noticed a number of different styles and wildly different levels of articulation and reasoning skills.

      1. I dunno, he seems like the same fucktard to me every time.

  17. “Inside every human being, there are treasures to unlock,” Huckabee sighed as he tugged on his wedding ring. The ring was snug a rusted nut on his meaty, hairy finger.

    From the closet, Huckabee heard a muffled drawl: “You just about ready? This hog is ready for his slop!”

    The ring finally popped off like a champagne cork. Huckabee paused to look at the family picture on his desk before putting it in the desk drawer. It was from the Arkansas State fair. He had eaten his son’s cotton candy while the son was at the port-a-potty. Huckabee had said he dropped it and had to throw it the trash. He had used the same ruse that day to get a corndog from his daughter and a funnel cake from his wife.

    1. Stop that goddammit.

      I just ate.

  18. “OK Wilbur, I’m ready!” Huckabee shouted as he dropped his pants. The closet door creaked open part way. A leg clad in pink fishnets poked out enticingly.
    The leg bent slowly back and forth.

    A female voice began to imitate the rustle of cymbals- “Ch, ch-ch, ch, ch-ch-ch…” The door opened further. Huckabee felt a jolt of arousal at the fringe of the pink negligee. “Oh, Hillary, yes…” Huckabee blurted out.

    “You’re supposed to call me ‘Wilbur'” Clinton gently corrected him as she flopped her post-menopausal breasts in tired shimmy. She stopped briefly to adjust the elastic strap on her plastic pig nose.

    1. PLEASE STOP TAKING SUGARFREE’S JOB

      1. I can’t help it. I’ve been laughing ever since I read that Huckabee quote about unlocking the treasures inside people.
        The story wrote itself from there.

        1. You left out the *gag* bewildering web of purple veins showing *gag* through the fishnet and *gag* heavy cankles.

          The pig nose is a nice touch.

    2. Is this your audition for Charlie Hebdo?

  19. SugarFree, are you just gonna let Derpetologist show you up like that?

  20. Clinton dropped to all fours and let out a few hearty oinks and snorts. Huckabee began mock chasing her while shouting “Soo wee! I’m gonna getcha!”

    Huckabee was mesmerized as Clinton’s haunches and thighs shuddered like a cat preparing to vomit. She rounded the desk once and kicked over the wastebasket to slow down Huckabee’s advance. Huckabee rushed forth and grabbed Clinton in a bear hug.

    “Wee! Wee! Wee!” Clinton squealed. He gingerly carried her a few steps a nearby table strewn with Christian pamphlets. Huckabee let Clinton down and brushed off the table with an angry sweep of his hand.

    1. Holy shit, this is awesome. It’s not as good as Sugarfree’s Jonathan Gruber/Nancy Pelosi fuckfest, but it’s still very good.

      And nothing will ever be as good as Sugarfree’s Gruber/Pelosi slashfic. Nothing.

      1. I’m not sure anyone else can be as “good” as Sugarfree.

      2. “…Jonathan Gruber/Nancy Pelosi fuckfest…”

        AAAACK! *GAG GAG GAG*

        I am so glad I missed that. This is like finding out that the lobby of the hotel you are staying in was used as an Ebola patient triage room while you were out and was cleaned up and disinfected before you returned.

    2. All love to Sugarfree, I have to repost this:

      “If thish even gets out, I’ll have toh deny I knowsh you, dear Jonathan,” Nancy whispered, the rot at the core of her being foaming out of her mouth in rancid waves.

      “It’s fine, Nancy. I don’t care about me, you and the bill are all that matters,” Jonathan murmured in the grey nightmare of her crotch. He went back to licking the scab that covered her clitoral hood. It tasted like mushrooms and peppermint.

      “Wesh can make thesh CBO play ball, but I’m worried about the publish-ick,” she said. She shuddered under the attention of his bullshit-coated tongue, the crispy folds of her withered labia rasping together like insect wings.

      Jonathan screwed a finger into her slack anus and then another. “We make the whole thing completely opaque. No one will be able to figure out what what is even the damn bill.” He paused to spit in her change purse. “The idiots in the flyover states won’t know what hit them.”

      “Ah, Jonathan. Dosh it! Dosh it, now!” she slurred, covering the top of his head in ancient spittle.

      He jerked his fingers from her ass, drew back to make a fist and then hit her in the crotch as hard as he could. She screamed and howled.

      “Again!”

      The wet, dull thuds of Nancy getting what she demanded echoed through the legislative chamber.

      1. I posted my comment above before scrolling down to find out that the lobby has in fact received new patients while I was at the desk getting my messages and it is no longer a mystery where that mucousey, red fluid that splashed on my cheek came from.

        1. The first time I read that I laughed for literally 5 minutes. The last line is brilliant.

  21. Clinton laid her upper body on the table and put her feet on the floor. A web of spider veins blossomed on the backs of her knees. On the small of her back was a fading tattoo of her beloved childhood pet- a stray kitten she had named Peanut.

    Clinton thought lovingly of cradling Peanut as Huckabee panted and thusted through her like aging airboat through a weed-choked bayou. 5 minutes, then 10 minutes, then 20 minutes passed. Huckabee stopped. He hadn’t been able to finish in years. Tears began to well up in his eyes as he withdrew. Clinton stood and turned to face him.

    “I’m sorry…” he began to blubber. Clinton placed her finger on his lips and shushed him. She embraced him and whispered in his ear “what difference at this point does it make?”

    1. The last line incorporates her philosophy perfectly. Nihilism.

  22. A buzz from Clinton’s purse cut the embrace short. She checked her phone. “Bill got caught hiding in the dressing room at Lane Bryant. I have to go pick him up at the sheriff’s office.”

    “OK. Was it good for you?” Huckabee asked hopefully.

    “Fantastic” Clinton said as she hurriedly changed into a beige pantsuit.

    After she had left, Huckabee redressed, reset the family photo and put back on his wedding ring with the help of some leftover coconut butter.

    He took an old bible off his bookshelf. He loved the feel of the leather cover. He opened it to Exodus 22:19 and set it on his desk. From a desk drawer, he retrieved a small whip. He read the verse slowly and then hit himself on the back with all his might.

    “Whosoever lies with an animal shall be put to death.”

    THWACK!

    He hurried to finish his ritual so as not to miss the kick-off.

      1. Fuck you. And Fuck Irish for posting SugarFree. My gumbo keeps trying to escape through my nose and I am going to have nightmares.

        1. You have to admit that Sugarfree story is goddamn hilarious.

  23. The fact that there is no libertarian primary (relevant or otherwise) is also telling.

    1. Well, it’s the quality of small “l” libertarianism that really matters more than anything. Political parties, regardless of how lofty of principles they’re initially founded upon, tend to sink rather quickly. Perhaps, for that reason, it makes more sense to lift parties up to libertarian ideals than to found parties upon those ideals.

  24. I’ve felt for years that the religious republicans have been turning their backs on God for years. Not because they haven’t injected enough religion into politics. The opposite in fact. I consider myself somewhat religious and even I get tired of all of the talk by religious politicians who use God as an excuse to control what others do. They’re always so focused on what Johnny is smoking, who he’s having sex with, and what he looks at on his pc when no one is looking. They’re actions don’t save ANYBODY, though that’s not to say that it is right to restrict somebody’s freedom even if it saves them. Consequently, they make religious people that just want to live their lives in peace look bad. They make people want to step up and make aggressive laws against religious people. They also turn legitimate issues into religious ones, which causes people to miss the legitimate points. I will say I am against abortion, though not for religious reasons. I also disagree with the idea that homosexuality is wrong religious or otherwise. I’m not here to debate either issue. I just believe that the best way for somebody to peacefully live their lives and believe in whatever religion or lack thereof is to prevent any one religion or lack thereof to rule over others.

    1. And if you were running for president I’d be vastly more likely to vote for you than fucking Mike Huckabee.

      I wish every religious person were like you. Unfortunately, they’re not like you, so we are constantly being assailed by the likes of Rick Santorum.

      1. Well, duh, who’s likely to fuck Huck?

  25. “It is a bizarre paradox that displays of religiosity have become increasingly public and de riguer in GOP politics as Americans turn away from organized religion.”

    No, it’s not.

    Christians are feeling threatened, and so are circling the wagons. Religious folks prove their bona fides by being crazier than the next guy.

    Like the SJWs going after the Vagina Monologues. I love it when the crazies eat their own.

  26. If Christians truly care about being “saved” so they will have a chance to help others be “saved” they need to start focusing on getting small the government pols into office. They’re way short of the votes they need to get their “ideal” candidates into office, so it’s either a matter of their survival to help put small-government types in who, if sincere, will allow them to exist. It’s either that, or just waste their votes on unelectable candidates and in doing so unwittingly put big government types in office. And, as everyone should know by now, big government types see themselves as jealous gods who will not tolerate any gods other than themselves.

  27. I would think sincerely religious people would spend more time preparing for the afterlife rather than try to control people in the here and now.

    If you believe in an all-knowing, all-powerful god, nothing can happen which is contrary to its will. Why then take it upon yourself to see that god’s will is done?

    It makes no sense unless a lot of people are using religion as camouflage for the desire to rule.

    1. Derpetologist|1.16.15 @ 12:15AM|#
      “I would think sincerely religious people would spend more time preparing for the afterlife rather than try to control people in the here and now.”

      I’d say what you qualify as “sincerely religious people’ exist mostly in isolated communities.
      What we get are people who believe, but somehow believe they are called upon by their sky-daddy to correct what the rest of us do with our lives.
      And, yes, there is little difference between them, the mud-momma bleevers and the gov’t-god bleevers; all of them bleeve there is a ‘greater good’ to be achieved if we all just gave up our interest in living our lives and devoted ourselves to the ’cause’.
      Fuck every one of them with a creosote-soaked fence post.

      1. Be careful there, Derpetologist and Sevo. Isaac Newton believed in the sky-daddy. I don’t, but dwarfs on shoulders of giants…

        And the story goes that Thomas Aquinas repented, on his death bed, his advocacy of secularism.

  28. The former governor has taken a leave of absence from his senses.

  29. my co-worker’s mom makes $75 every hour on the laptop . She has been fired from work for ten months but last month her paycheck was $13904 just working on the laptop for a few hours. use this link………..
    ????? http://www.netcash50.com

  30. my co-worker’s half-sister makes $69 /hr on the internet . She has been fired from work for ten months but last month her payment was $17800 just working on the internet for a few hours. try here……
    ????? http://www.cashbuzz80.com

  31. I agree with Nick on the political points of his article, but calling obvious cause and effect a “bizarre paradox” goes over the line. Evangelicals respond to the attention BECAUSE they are in decline and insecure. If you want another example of this, check out team blue’s treatment of a group with a badly damaged brand: feminists. All of their bogus statistics are held up by Dem politicians like pieces of the true cross.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.