Christianists should be insulted, actually...

...for the rest of us

I think little Chuckie's been kicked in the head a few times too many. And as far as the Huckster, combine Rudy's egomania with a god delusion and he's your boy.

Christians won't be insulted because Christians know that the five loaves and two fish came from a boy in the crowd. Nice try though.

John 6:9

There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?

Now, what did Gov. Huckabee say again?

Well, you know, the same way the little boy fed 5,000 with two fish and five biscuits.

Except that all the Scripture says is that the boy came up with the original loaves and fishes. Jesus did the actual work of feeding the five thousand, from the passage in John cited above:

"There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish; but what good are these for so many?"

Jesus said, "Have the people recline." Now there was a great deal of grass in that place. So the men reclined, about five thousand in number.

Then Jesus took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed them to those who were reclining, and also as much of the fish as they wanted.

When they had had their fill, he said to his disciples, "Gather the fragments left over, so that nothing will be wasted."

So they collected them, and filled twelve wicker baskets with fragments from the five barley loaves that had been more than they could eat.

When the people saw the sign he had done, they said, "This is truly the Prophet, the one who is to come into the world."

The Synoptics give no mention of the source of the original five loaves and two fish. (See the quote from Matthew cited by Shane-O.) Reconciling the Gospel of John to the Synoptics can be tricky business sometimes.

...for the rest of us

I think of the stories of how the communists would post passages of scripture in their communist newspapers in order to mock Christianity, but in actuality, the undergroung church was thanking God for providing them a way to have access to the sacred verses that had been banned by the atheist government.

Thank you for posting this passage, it has buttressed my faith.

Meanwhile, Mike Huckabee, an ordained minister, was not equating himself with Christ, a fact many would clearly recognize. It's not unrealistic for someone with a degree in Theology to allude to the book they spent so many years studying.

Your blatant logical fallacy, however, is how you try to render guilt by association onto Mike Huckabee from President Bush.

One bad politician who hopes to do God's will doesn't make all politicians with similar hopes bad politicians. And neither men have ever had intentions of establishing a theocracy in America. Mike Huckabee isn't out to christianize America, but he speaks with decisive conviction, has a sincere and genuine demeanor (as well as some interesting ideas regarding the IRS and other issues) and has a level of authenticity only rivaled by Barack Obama.

Nice attempt to ridicule Mike Huckabee (I found it laughable at best), but I'm not buying it, and neither are many others.

Thought this was relevant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-BFEhkIujA

Is he for it or against it?

If he's against it, what's his plan to deal with it? Because clergy sex abuse is a big problem for Southern Baptists, the church in which Huckabee is an ordained minister, as it is in authoritarian circles generally.

Not saying Huckabee is an abuser himself, you understand--except possibly of power and money--but you'd think a minister would have a position on this important matter. Especially one who wishes to bring Christianity into the public square.

Thanks for your comment, inciteful, and looking forward to your response.

Oh, and on "authenticity." I've had a bellyful of authenticity narratives. The last candidate everybody wanted to sit down and have a beer with was George W. Bush, and everybody knows how that turned out. I understand why you Republicans would want to run from Bush, no harm in it, but please don't try to recycle the same plays from the same playbook, just with a different candidate. It gets old. Screw authenticity, and lets talk about policy outcomes.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

Honestly, I can’t say for certain where he stands on this particular issue, because he hasn’t (to my knowledge) said anything outright about it…But you asked if he was for it or against it. I can’t imagine that anybody would say that they are FOR sexually abusing children, so in that sense, it’s sort of a loaded question.

Of course he’s against it, but has he developed a comprehensive plan to combat it? I don’t know.

As far as “authenticity” goes, don’t confuse it with approachability. I’m not saying that I want to interact socially with Mike Huckabee, invite him over for a barbecue or something. I mean that he is very straight forward and you can expect him to keep his word for integrity’s sake. He says what ne means, means what he says, and goes no further. Look at the Youtube debate, where he said that if the gay repblican group, the Log Cabin Republicans wanted to support him, he would accept their support, but he’s not going to change his stance on the issues because of the source of his finances. He’s not out to give the political answers he thinks people want to hear. Most candidates seem to do that, including Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, Dennis Kucinich, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Joe Biden. I think the people would rather have a president who they can expect to remain consistent rather than one who goes along with the fad of the day, being a puppet to special interest groups. You never know WHO is pulling those strings.

Don’t call me a republican just because I stood up for Mike Huckabee. Before someone brought him to my attention, I was torn between John Edwards and Barack Obama. I, too, am looking for someone with competence.

In terms of policy, Huckabee wants to overhaul the tax system, so that we’re not taxed on our productivity but on our consumption, which I think makes a lot more sense. His plan makes the US more competitive in the global market, and removes advantages illegals have by making them pay the same tax as citizens. He also wants to secure the national borders and has a plan to deal with the mess that resulted from NOT securing them for so long. Furthermore, he insists that the US should become energy independent, agriculturally independent and says that a country that can’t feed itself, defend itself, and depends on other countries to supply its energy has traded it’s freedom to those countries who sustain them. By becoming energy independent, we will stop funding BOTH SIDES of the war on terror, supporting our troops with our tax dollars and supporting the terrorists with our gas dollars. Mike Huckabee also stands for a stronger education system, building the future with technological advancements, and reforming the health-care system.

These are answers that make sense.

Inciteful - I love the commentary.

What concerns me is not that a Mike Huckabee presidency would be one that tries to convert all Americans.

What does concern me is more of the Bush 43 method of governing - not simply because both Huckabee and Bush are Evangelicals. Rather, the messianic ideology where a leader puts the Bible and alleged conversations with Jesus and God above the Constitution.

As to the "fair" tax: consider what fiat money (which leads to and has led to a real inflation in the price of necessary goods for lower income people) combined with a consumption tax (which, again, will inflate the actual cost of necessary goods for lower income people) will do to widen the already rediculous gap in wealth among United States citizens.

The Bill of Rights is a born rebel. It reeks with sedition. In every clause it shakes its fist in the face of constituted authority. . . . it is the one guaranty of human freedom to the American people. - Frank Irving Cobb

As a matter of fact, if you've read up on Gov. Huckabee's plan, then you already know that people below the poverty level would not be adversly affected by the fair tax.

Also, believing that God has chosen him for a special task does not mean that Gov. Huckabee has any intention of placing the bible above the constitution. That would mean being neither faithful to the constitution or the task for which he was chosen.

In other words, if God has chosen Mike Huckabee to be president, then God has also chosen him to uphold the constitution, because that's what presidents are to do.

was Bush.

How'd that work out for the country?

What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing and expecting a different result?

Soothing words on the Constitution, inciteful, but lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. He hangs out with supporters, including "America is a Christian nation" para-historians and falsifiers like David Barton. So, show us some links to what Huckabee is actually saying, because your personal assurances, and a dime, will get you a cup of coffee. Even if I saw a Huckabee JFK Speech, I'd check it for Christianist dog whistles; we've had some experience with you guys under Bush.

It's intriguing that Huckabee has no position on clergy sex abuse--and surely you, a Huckabee advocate would know if he did--especially in his denomination, the Southern Baptists. Makes him look like he can't stand up for kids against the pastors of his own sect, which looks like a character issue, to me. Besides the whole, you know, justice thing.

NOTE Inciteful, we really do have to assume that any persistent Huckabee advocate is a Republican--just a Republican operative running from their trashed brand. I'm sure you'd be the first to understand why that would be.

We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan

inciteful, you say:

In terms of policy, Huckabee wants to overhaul the tax system, so that we’re not taxed on our productivity but on our consumption, which I think makes a lot more sense.

Now I'd like you to think of two people. One goes to work every night at a nursing home, where she cleans floors, tidies patient' rooms, and otherwise does janitorial work. Lotsa fun bodily fluids in nursing homes, ya know? She makes minimum wage and gets no benefits at all.

The other goes to work during the daytime, wears a suit, sits at a nice desk, and shuffles papers and/or computer files. He works in the financial industry. Maybe he even helped implement sales of these "financial instruments" which are now proving to be complete fabulations, imaginary money, into which many people invested real money such as their savings or pension accounts etc. He makes $200k in a salary and in recent years has gotten annual bonuses of many many thousands more.

Person no. 1 spends every cent she makes on "consumption" because it consists of a roof over her head and food for herself and her dependents. So every cent she makes is going to be subject to this "consumption tax" you find so admirable, which I assume to be a sort of sales tax. I am acquainted with the one in Arkansas since we have an identical one in Tennessee--it indeed taxes food, clothing, baby formula, diapers, virtually everything one needs for daily life.

Person no. 2 spends vastly more on the same items--better, fresher food, better-made clothing that lasts longer, not to mention telecommunications services, nice electronics, etc etc etc. However much more in pure dollars he spends on such living expenses though it is just a tiny bit of his total income.

The rest of his "productivity" (we can leave the subject of whether what he is "producing" is really something that does society any good or not for another time) you think it is fair that he should enjoy tax free. So it can sit in an account somewhere and build up at a faster rate, allowing him the assurance of putting his kids through a prestigious college without the bother of scholarships or loans, a nice retirement at an early age, and, after his very expensive funeral, the ability to pass what's left on to said heirs to keep them in the same income--er i mean "productivity"--bracket and comfortable station in life.

Now if you want to advocate this or vote for those who do, by all means go ahead. But kindly do not try to think for a minute that anybody here is going to find it an improvement over our current system, flawed in many respects though it is, or an advancement of the "Christian principles" you claim to advocate too.

huckabee only claims,
is that prayer is powerful
and that God is doing what he does best.

Jesus is God.
Huckabee only is covered by the holy spirit,
this is what Jesus said he'd give anyone they belive, himself.

The holy spirit, God, rests inside those who believe, and prayer is powerful.

Why do you think kind david focused so much on intercessors, and was the most sucessful king in history?