I Actually Agreed With Rush This Week

It's no unknown fact that FOX news, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter have fell off into the brink of biased media reporting because their pockets are lined with Washington Insider Dollars - or so one must assume. It's actually gotten so bad that many conservatives have either started surfing other political news outlets and commentators, or have simply turned them off altogether.

I now watch CNN more than FOX and only watch Fox long enough to be able to accurately describe their newly acquired SPIN-ZONE status with unfair-unbalanced reporting. I promise - I'll get off this broken record spill before I end this post.

Rush Limbaugh this week - in commentating on the Thursday night FOX Debate stated that "We should not be afraid to go after McCain's record." Most all debate watchers are in agreement that McCain made it through Thursday's debate "unscathed." Huckabee took the first punch from Thompson and gave back better than he received (In Normal Huck Fashion - I love it when he gets tough). Ron Paul took several hits (what's new), Mitt might have alluded to some McCain records but didn't really show his teeth too much - and didn't take too many scratches and bites from anyone either. Giuliani had his moments of giving as well as receiving some minor discussion. Huckabee's biggest hits probably came from the Moderator's - again - FOX people trying to Spin the Religion aspect of Huckabee into a negative....how do they sleep at night? (I have thoughts about that - but I don't want to offend some Huckabee supporters in the process - we'll wait until after November to discuss if your still interested).

Overall - McCain took it easy on everyone and in return didn't take any hits either. Rush says "go after his record." I agree, but with respect. He may be a Hero, but he is not Presidential material. When he was defeated by George Bush, he held a grudge against the President for almost 2 years, voting against proposals that Bush conceived or openly approved. McCain has sided with Democrats on many pivotal Bills that came before his signature pen.

WorldNetDaily.com came out with an article today stating that James Dobson has placed his stamp of DISapproval on John McCain. Though the article attempts to appear unbiased, the subtleties run clear that WorldNetDaily has drank the same Kool-Aide FOX has been drinking from GOP Washington insiders. But Dobson is a tee-totaler and doesn't drink that kind of kool-aide. He has no fear of pointing out the falicies of McCain's record.

Sidebar: When I mention subtleties of articles and reporting....I just want to give you an example of what I'm referring to here. This is a quote from WND.com on Dobson....

"Dobson, who always is careful to note that he's not speaking for the non-profit ministry, which cannot advocate for or against candidates legally, also doesn't hesitate to state his personal opinions on social or political issues and agendas."

This paragraph would almost be overlooked by the reader. That last sentence just leaps off the page at me. Has it occurred to WND that the reason Dobson offers his personal opinion is because a reporter probably stuck a microphone and camera in his face and asked.....NOT TO MENTION - ever heard of Free Speech? He has that right!

Well - if McCain had his way - certainly those rights would be absolved. Sometimes loopholes are good. Had Dobson been sitting in his office in the Focus on the Family premises and made that statement - his 501 c 3 would have been in jeopardy, but because he was - and noted thusly - that he was speaking as a private citizen and in his home - he could make those statements. Thank you McCain and Feingold for your bill to allow Big Government to split hairs in the private sector in order to stifle those you knew would not support you in 2008.

I still believe the McCain-Feingold bill was quite self-serving on John McCain's part. He new he was going to run again. He knew Evangelicals wouldn't support him. He knew he couldn't play on the same monetary ball field as other candidates would be able to - so he created and managed the passing of a bill that would bring the ball-game to his turf. How self-serving is that.

Dobson further points out his distaste for McCain as President in the fact the McCain does not support a One Man One Woman Marriage.

McCain stated: "I think that gay marriage should be allowed, if there is a ceremony kind of thing, if you want to call it that...I don't have any problem with that."

If I had any persuasion to think that McCain would be a lesser of two evils choice for me - you just lost me with that quote.

McCain also supports a Democratic authored legislative bill that creates obstacles for ministries to reach constituents with action messages about pending legislation.

This is currently being fought by groups like ACLJ, American Family Association, and Center for Moral Clarity. If this type of legislation is passed - it will effectively silence the church at large and our ability to amass opposition to future legislation such as Stem Cell Research, Abortion bills, Free Speech, and virtually limitless counts of bills that affect our everyday living and freedoms in this country.

Other rules are hidden deeply into this current legislation that include rules to "eliminate the many recent scandals involving members of Congress, ...require pro-family groups to provide documentation of their actions to the government anytime they try to spark any grass-roots action." Where is "smaller government" in this type of legislation? This is Big Government looming over the Church and affiliated organizations. This is Big Brother at his worse.

This would mean that "phone calls, personal visits, emails, magazines, broadcasts, phone banks, appearances, travel, fundraising, and other items all would be subject to government tabulation, verification, and audits....on and on it goes" according to Dobson.

"'Clearly, the objective here is to hide what goes on from the public and punish
and silence those of us who would talk about what our representatives are
doing,' Dobson said of the plan by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. American Family
Association Chairman Donald Wildmon, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins and American Values President Gary Bauer joined Dobson in urging listeners to flood Capitol Hill with phone calls demanding those speech limits be removed."

Don Wildmon referred to McCain's bill as "We don't want to hear from you and this is the way we're going to handle it."

I have blogged before - and I have written Mr. Bauer personally that there is a clear and present danger in front of us at this hour. It is the shutting down of the Evangelical and sending us back to the Dance Floor Sidelines to be wallflower's and never being asked to dance. We were courted in the '80's and learned how to dance in the political arena. Now that we as Evangelicals not only know how to dance - but have cleared the floor with our tango-ing Mike Huckabee - we're not welcome anymore. Washington's liberal bills can't get passed because the Evangelicals have a right to free speech and OMG!!! They are using it!!!!

I recall the day when the church in America was practically powerless. We have seen the church mature into a strong voice. Now - we see a government trying to squeeze us back into our box with articles like Robert Novak's stating that we aren't REALLY SERIOUS REPUBLICANS.

To this point, Mr. Dobson states "Republican leaders in Congress during this term apparently never understood, or they forgot, why Ronald Reagan was so loved and why he is considered one of our greatest presidents. If they hope to return to power in '08, they must rediscover the conservative principles that resonated with the majority of Americans in the 1980s – and still resonate with them today. Failure to do so will be catastrophic,"

Maybe it is this mentality that the Robert Novak's of journalism don't take Evangelicals sincerely. In fact I know it is. I experience it somewhat in my local Republican arena. GOP's believe you ought to vote GOP if Suddam Hussein himself were running against Hillary. I'm sorry - I can't buy into that. I have principals when I walk into a voting booth. If the candidate that the GOP's put up in nomination does not adhere to my principals- I won't vote for them.

I am not a Republican because I agree with the Party Platform. I am a Republican because the Party Platform agrees with me.

If that changes - and it will if certain candidates are nominated (Romney, Giuliani, and McCain, Thompson is a close call and will require consideration) - I will not be bound to my party. I will consider a 3rd party and watch to see if Hillary's hand burns when she places it on the Bible in January '09.

As far back as 1998, James Dobson has stated that the GOP has ignored moral issues.

Evangelicals have been asked to "take one for the party" election after election and to me - with the war on terror, the economy teetering on the edge of falling into the brink, illegal immigration helping the poor economy exist - there is just too much to risk to not consider a candidate who understands the political as well as spiritual implications of foreign policy, domestic policies and freedoms that we currently enjoy, stand to lose, and those we have already lost.

We still live in the greatest country in the world (Obama believes mother Africa to be the greatest), we will be weakened if that which made us strong is stripped away one legislative bill at a time. Let's elect a candidate that will change the face of Washington and keep America Great at the same time. That candidate is Mike Huckabee.

Flip/Flop Is Too Nice Of A Term

When I was young, I was always taught that if a person cheats on or lies to other people, they will eventually cheat on or lie to you. The principal that Anne Coulter fails to realize in her praise of Mitt's Tricks on the Dem's (see my post Tricky Mitt video #2) is if a person(s) is capable of it (as is everyone) with one person or group, that individuals character flaw will not allow them to draw the line no matter who's team they happen to be playing for.

Mike Huckabee's book: Character IS The Issue point's out very strongly how Mike Huckabee feels about doing what's right. Even his campaign today- almost ten years after his books release, he fights against advisers (like me) to resist the temptation of counter-attacking the attack ad's with similar negativity. Though Mike Huckabee has been creatively making counter-statements (as well he should), the like's of Mitt Romney (who has now added John McCain to his adversarial list albeit without Faux News assistance - only Evangelical Mike receives that honor as a distaste to Washington Insiders) and all his wealth and attack ads cannot escape his own shifting shibboleth.

Please browse through these documented quotes about Washington's latest subject of infatuation (Mitt Romney):

Abortion rights
"I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard." Boston Herald Debate, 10/29/02

"Roe v. Wade continues to work its destructive logic throughout our society This can't continue." Speech to the Massachusetts Citizens For Life Mother's Day Pioneer Valley Dinner, 5/10/07

[ok, ok, a man can change his heart - even if it is right before he runs for President. Even if he changes...I suppose I'm still supposed to understand Romney's 2007 belief that states like Massachusetts should have the right to remain Pro Choice - Mitt Romney is Soft on Abortion BTW: Need a great deal for an abortion? Drive to Massachusetts - Romney signed a bill that allows for $50 Co-Pay's for Abortions - a bill that could have been vetoed by Pro-Lifer's as dedicated to the cause as Romney after such a thoughtful life changing decision as he SAYS he had. I RECANT my former statement about Romney being Soft on Abortion - - He remains to be Pro-Abortion]

Immigration reform

"With these 11 million people [here illegally], let's have them registered, know who they are....those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process towards application for citizenship." Lowell Sun, 3/30/06
"One simple rule: no amnesty. If that [Kennedy-McCain bill] is not a form of amnesty, I don't know what is." New York Times, 6/4/07

[If I hear anyone is soft on immigration without Romney being included in the list - I think I'll be sick]

Gun laws

"We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them. I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety."
Romney in 2002 gov. debate, Boston Globe, 1/14/07

"I have a gun of my own. I go hunting myself. I'm a member of the NRA and believe firmly in the right to bear arms." Boston Globe, 1/14/07

Amendment to ban gay marriage

"Mitt does not support it...As far as Mitt is concerned, it goes farther than current law, and therefore it's unnecessary." Romney spokesman, Boston Globe, 3/22/02
"When I was Governor, we took every conceivable step within the law to stop, block or slow down this unprecedented court decision." Speech to National Right to Life Convention, 6/15/07

"No new taxes" pledge

"I'm not intending to, at this stage, sign a document which would prevent me from being able to look specifically at the revenue needs of the commonwealth" Associated Press, 3/27/02
"Signing the pledge now sends a very clear message to those in Washington who have voted against tax relief and for tax hikes that such actions will never grow our regional and national economies." Romney spokesman, Boston Globe, 1/5/07

Minimum wage

"I think the minimum wage ought to keep pace with inflation. I think the minimum wage is a good thing to have in our economy and I think it ought to be updated." Boston Globe, 10/17/94
"[T]he challenge with raising the minimum wage excessively is it is a hurt to those that are entering the work force, the very poor, those that are trying to get early jobs, get those first jobs." Associated Press, 7/25/06

Cutting Social Security

"I don't think you go back and rewrite the contract the government has with people who've retired." Boston Globe, 10/17/94

"Personal accounts would be a big plus."... [Romney]also said changing the retirement age could be considered, as well as basing the Social Security cost of living adjustment on a different inflation gauge. Union Leader, 6/7/07

Adoption non-discrimination

Governor Mitt Romney and a legislative leader yesterday delivered unwelcome news to the Catholic bishops of Massachusetts, who plan to seek permission from the state to exclude gay and lesbian parents from adopting children through its social service agencies. The governor said he was not authorized to give such an exemption... Boston Globe, 2/17/06
"And then another slide along the slippery slope. The Catholic Church was forced to end its adoption service, which was crucial in helping the state find homes for some of our most difficult to place children... Now, even religious freedom was being trumped by the new-found 'right' of gay marriage." Speech to National Right to Life Convention, 6/15/07

Stem cell research

[Romney] endorsed embryonic stem cell research, saying the controversial science might one day help treat his wife's multiple sclerosis...."I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research. I'd be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don't know if I could budge him an inch." Boston Globe, 6/14/02
"FACT: Governor Romney Opposes Using Taxpayer Money to Fund Embryo-Destructive Research." www.MittRomney.com A Record of Protecting Life

Bush tax cuts

Governor Mitt Romney refused yesterday to endorse tax cuts at the heart of President Bush's economic program...In addition to refusing to endorse the president's tax cut, the governor surprised several people at the meeting by saying he is open to a federal increase in gas taxes.
Boston Globe, 4/11/0

[Romney] said it was "absolutely critical" to renew tax cuts proposed by President George W. Bush. Letting them expire would result in a "massive tax increase" that would retard economic growth, Romney said. Detroit Free Press, 2/8/07

Reagan Republicanism

"I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush." Boston Herald, 10/27/94

"Ronald Reagan is ... my hero. ... I believe that our party's ascendancy began with Ronald Reagan's brand of visionary and courageous leadership." Boston Globe, 1/19/07

[This to me is the biggest Elephant In The Room. No one is bringing this into the lime-light and I don't understand why]

Desire to serve in Vietnam

"I was not planning on signing up for the military. It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam..." Boston Herald, 5/2/94
"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam." Boston Globe, 6/24/07

[this flip flop is just plain offensive - my apologies to any Democrat Vietnam Vet's for this GOP candidate named Mitt Romney]

In Closing: I was shocked to learn last night in a discussion with friends that in Mitt Romney's Anti-Socialized Healthcare rhetoric - he passed a law as Governor in Massachusetts that MANDATES every citizen of Mass. to have Health Care. This is a John Edwards plan implemented. In other words - in case your not familiar with the word "MANDATE" - In Mass., you would be REQUIRED to own Health Insurance. Well - what if I were wealthy enough or had enough investments that I didn't need healthcare to spend my hard-earned dollars on - if I get sick - I'll just pay for my hospital visit out of my pocket - - but NOT in Mass. where Mitt Romney had Executive privaledge. In my understanding that is the epitomy of SOCIALISM coming from a GOP Candidate named Mitt Romney.

Without once stating the issues I have regarding his Mormonism - we have a complete list of why NOT to vote for Mitt Romney.

Quote for the Day: "Mitt Romney spends all his time telling people why we should not vote for other candidates but very little time explaining why we should vote for Mitt Romney." - Mike Huckabee

Explain yourself Mitt

Mike Is RIGHT for U.S.

As The Worm Turns

William Shakespeare wrote in Henry VI, Part 3, where Lord Clifford urges the king against lenity and harmful pity, saying:

To whom do lions cast their gentle looks?
Not to the beast that would usurp their den.
Whose hand is that the forest bear doth lick?
Not his that spoils her young before her face.
Who 'scapes the lurking serpent's mortal sting?
Not he that sets his foot upon her back.
The smallest worm will turn being trodden on,
And doves will peck in safeguard of their brood.

Though too heavy a thought to be campaign clambake, "The Worm Is About To Turn" is a cliche that fits our current political climate.

Only a few weeks ago, Mike Huckabee was not getting enough attention in the media. Bloggers blogged, spinners spun, blitz's blasted and Mike's Glory-bound train took no jokers. Huckabee has arrived! O'Reily's olive branch obtained, Bauer's bashing buttoned, Hannity's hush now heralding its time to sing: FIVE GOLDEN RINGS!! four calling birds, three french hens, two turtle doves.......

Enter The new phase. Eight Candidates Clashing. Mike has left the 2nd tier behind to be in double digits nationally in the Rasmussen polls. He is well within the margin of error to be named #1 in Iowa - though the mainstream (and not so mainstream) media still refuses to recognize Mike as a contender. Fred who has floundered his campaign thus far with a lackadaisical approach - finally woke from slumber to hit Mike with six (6) negative ads "informing" Americans that Mike isn't a "Beltway insider" (as if that were a negative). Mitt's mindless mudsling would have you to believe that Mike is soft on immigration, when in fact - as a Governor of Arkansas he obeyed the laws and gave illegal immigrants the education required by state law as any governor would be required. Yes, in addition he allowed those immigrants who were successful in their education the same rights as other students with the requirements of maintaining above average GPA's and Citizenship. But, Mr. Romney fails to mention his personal lawn pawns amidst the rhetoric. Just so my bases are covered - they are not pawns - they are people (immigrants, aliens or whatever label you wish to place them under) and people deserve a chance in life - through the appropriate channels - to succeed. That is the very definition of being an American - more to the point - a Pro-life (all of life) American - how soon we forget after 231 years (or three years if your a former Massachusetts Governor adamantly campaigning as a pro-abortion and anti-Regan/Bush candidate).

While we all hear the bells on Christmas day, in the background you may very well hear the ringing of a hammer driving a wedge between the Evangelical/Values Voter and the GOP. Articles like Robert Novak's today (http://tinyurl.com/2plrus) will be the hammer as he views Evangelicals as not "serious republicans" or "real conservatives." I find it interesting that of all people, Robert Novak would be the town crier for defining the "real conservative" when he was a primary proponent of the evangelical inclusion into the GOP during the Reagan years. Now as the worm begins to turn and a true Evangelical shows up to the dance - he has cold feet and wants Evangelicals banished to the irrelevance of being political wall-flowers again.

Novak claims that Evangelicals pose a threat and Mike is the reputed repercussion of the religious right. He claims that Huckabee "press[ed] his new lifestyle" of good health on Americans after he lost 100 lbs. Let's hope Jenny Craig never runs for President, American might feel "pressed." I suppose Mr. Novak would prefer Americans to remain overweight and Diabetes to continue to be the fastest growing disease plaguing this country. Speaking of being pressed - wouldn't that be what Mr. Novak is doing in his article in trying to convince Americans that Evangelicals are bad (or a threat) for the GOP?

Who purports that Evangelicals created this candidate? Mike Huckabee has arrived on his own. Evangelicals have been shy to support Mike and some "Err-elevant" Evangelicals have supported other candidates in spite of the polarized view on the issues between them and their candidate of choice. Mike has at least wished for - if not actually asked for Evangelical monetary support as he struggled to get his train up the steep hill he has now crested. It hasn't been there. In fact, one evangelical leader suggested to me that Mike needs to 'prove he can make it on his own' before evangelicals will get behind him [with donations - implied]. Well, He's here, He's alive and thriving - and evidently threatening to pull off a nomination

One final thought before I close this episode of "As The Worm Turns," if I had the audience and the desire to go speak to the other GOP candidates - I would offer them this piece of advice.
Don't attack Mike too harshly - that strategy will backfire. It backfired with Reagan and it will backfire with Huckabee. He's a likeable candidate - by both parties and some in between. When other candidates attack Mike - especially with half-truths and blatant un-truths, they will only serve to burn themselves.

After claiming that Mike is no Goldwater-Reagan Republican - I think Iowa will prove him wrong as will the other February 5 states. Mike Huckabee is in fact the most Reaganesque candidate on the sale block. Rudy - would call for a Platform change by taking out the Pro-Life plank and Mitt is just too fake and flip-flop. Fred's closest association with Reagan is his acting career.

Mike remains the clear choice for the Value Voter and the Evangelical. He envisions an administration that is tough on immigration/border laws, victory in Iraq, Pro-Life, Pro-Marriage, Pro-Family, and Pro-American.

Your comments (even yours Ron Paul of Virginia) are welcome.

What's Fred Got That Mike Ain't Got?

In light of this weeks endorsment for Fred Thompson from National Right To Life, I thought I would copy and paste an old post from my other blog on myspace. It received several comments from Mike Huckabee supporters. I hope to receive some comments from Fred Supporters being a little broader audience in this venue. Whoever your candidate is - feel free to comment (you can also comment on these responses. Just note the # your referring to).

To get started - here are a few responses I've received on my other blog:

1. (my favorite so far): Mike Huckabee will give us 1 definition of marriage across America of one man plus one woman equals marriage.Fred Thompson says he will give us 50 definitions of marriage by allowing 50 different states to define Marriage.

2. "I think Mike has many things that Fred doesn't: Charisma, character, humour, great communicative & speaking skills, and he has the ability to draw attention naturally. Fred has only 1 thing, people mascarading him as another Reagan. His 1st speech was a let down, he's not raising much money and soon people will begin to see he isn't anywhere near Reagan. Another thing is i only know of two politicians that could naturally outdo Hillary in a debate, because of their great communication: Gingrich & Huckabee."

3. "Fred Thompson originally had my vote and only because I thought he might be famous enough to get enough votes to beat Hillary. But, when he decided so long to run, and after the values voters debate that he didn't show up for. I'm for Mike.. Fred Thompson has a young family. He's been divorced several times, and I think he doesn't have any real answers. NOr do I think he is a true conservative."

4. Fred has got nothing much to say and what little he has to say he has trouble saying it. Mike has plenty to say, and knows how to say it. Did you see the Gov on the Glenn Beck show on CNN tonight, he spoke and made sense for the whole hour!! (note: I just heard Fred on CSPAN - and he has as much if not more trouble with speaking and speech giving as Pres. Bush - Hillary will rip him to shreds - mp)

5. "I feel I can actually trust Mike Huckabee. Fred has advisors telling him what to say and even when Fred does say something he is reading it off a sheet of paper. I have yet to see Mike Huckabee read from a script. The words he says are words of conviction that come right from his heart. I know who Mike was ten years ago and I know how Mike will be ten years from now. He convictions are firm with deep roots. That's the difference between Mike and Fred."

What is an Elephant In The Room?

For those who may not be familiar with the phrase "Elephant In The Room" let me explain 2 ways, defintion and example:

Definition: The phrase is an old English Idiom that suggests something (a topic of discussion) is in the air and not being addressed. Another common and similar phrase would be the 8,000 lb gorilla in the room. The phrase also implies a value judgement that an issue needs to be discussed openly.

Example: (insert giddy snickers and chuckles) - Mike Huckabee has been the unmentionable candidate on many discussions for the last several months throughout the media (inclusive of Fox). In spite of all the discussion coming from Democrats to the contrary of Mike being the one to watch - Mike was simply ignored. In fact - Bill O'Reilly went so far to say that Mike would never make double digits in the polls (funny - I remember these same people talking about the unreliability of polls in the last two elections and following discussions of polls up with phrases like "if you believe the polls" - now the polls are the end-all to politics, making or breaking candidates, or so it seems).

Enter the Elephant (and if you've seen pictures of Mike Huckabee prior to his huge weight-loss as Governor of Arkansas - there's no correlation between the two). Mike Huckabee entered this race and not only climbed out of the trenches of "lower tier-ism" but became a 4th member of the upper tier - and still was refused to be recognized. I suggest that Mike Huckabee became the Elephant in the Room when he reached 10% in the polls (although probably way before then - I just have to start somewhere). Now the Elephant is not only in the Room - But he's just showing off now. Take a look at these Iowa Numbers (I mean - if you believe the polls):

Romney 26%
Huckabee 24%
Giuliani 11% (Wow - down from 15 earlier this week)
UNDECIDED 13% (If Thompson won over 1/2 of this - he would still be trailing)
Thompson 11% (hmm NRLC, still think your anti pro-life legislation candidate is worthy?)
Paul 4%
McCain 4%
Tancredo 1%
Hunter 1%

NRLC's Dr. Franz Forges Faulty Fred Facts

This morning the National Right To Life Committee endorsed Fred Thompson as their choice for the GOP Nomination for President. Just so you know, if Fred Thompson wins the GOP Nomination - he is the only other candidate I could support other than Mike Huckabee that will keep my vote in the GOP - and that secondary support is quickly waning as the primary process continues.

However, many conservatives, values voters, single issue (pro-life) voters, have great difficulty with today's endorsement. The NRLC commented several factors (faulty as they are) that they considered in selecting a candidate to endorse.

Wanda Franz, Ph.d., President of NRLC stated:
"Our endorsement is a testament to Senator Thompson's long-standing pro-life record, his commitment to unborn children, and our our belief in his ability to win."

Certainly I hear the same sub-text of "ability to win" - A cliche that Mike Huckabee has been tagged with from all sides of the GOP since his 2nd place position in the Ames, Iowa straw poll and his continued rise in popularity among GOP voters. There are certainly many issues that bring others to doubt Mike's ability to win - money not being the least of them - but all have been discounted time and again by our dark horse candidate, Mike Huckabee.

As I read the comment from Dr. Franz "Thompson's long-standing pro-life record" some comments come to mind:
"...an amendment...going back even further than pre-Roe V. Wade, to have a constitutional amendment to do that, I do not think would be the way to go." - Fred Thomson - on Meet the Press November 4, 2007

"Nobody's proposed a federal law on [banning abortion in first trimester]" - Fred Thompson - on Meet The Press November 4, 2007

FACTOID: There are THREE (3) laws currently pending in congress

1. "Right to Life Act" H.R. 618 (boasting of 94 co-sponsors)
2. "Sanctity of Life Act" H.R. 1094
3. H.R. 2597

Sounds like Fred is slipping on his "life-long" pro-life position, as a former Senator and a Presidential candidate seeking Evangelical support - shouldn't he be "UP" on this sort of thing?

Thompson also stated in that same November 4th interview with Tim Russert that states should have the right to determine the definition of Marriage being between a man and a woman. In other words - this is not a National Dilemma - it's a State dilemma.

Every Republican platform since 1980 has supported a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe. V. Wade and every GOP candidate nominated has supported that platform. Now we have a GOP slate of candidates - of which Fred Thompson is a member that does not support a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe V. Wade. I have seen this coming since the GOP started touting "We re the party of INCLUSION." Now we have arrived at the result of compromise which is division within our own house. The Bible will prove itself once again to be true and accurate - "A House divided against itself will not stand."

Mike Huckabee on the other hand - is not on the same page as the other GOP candidates. He virtually stands alone in his support for a constitutional amendment for overturning Roe V. Wade. In fact, Janet Folger's [WorldNetDaily.com] stated today: Governor Huckabee is "exactly where Ronald Reagan was in 1979 in the polls and in finances." That fact alone throws the argument of "winnability" right out of the window.

Lest I be accused of being a "one-issue" voter - let me state that I am not, I'm simply dealing with this one issue now. Across the board - no matter how faithless the "Faith.org's" may be at the moment - Mike Hucakbee is a real man of Faith and Character. I believe he will win. If I'm proven wrong, I will say "he should have won." I will not enjoy an election that I have to choose between the "lesser of two evils." Mike Huckabee has stated many times: "The way to beat the Democrats is NOT to be LIKE the Democrats." That philosophy was proven true in the Virginia elections last week. those GOP's that compromised on their message lost, those that stood true to the conservative message across the board, won.

Dr. Franz also states in today's endorsement that "unlike endorsements by single individuals, this endorsement was made by representatives of statewide pro-life organizations across America which themselves are comprised of local community chapters and grass roots activists."

In this link you will be directed to an article by Jerry Cox - the Arkansas chapter of NRLC (I think you'll find -once again - faulty facts in Franz's statement).
http://www.mikehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=697

By the way - I can't help but laugh at how the NRLC tries to sell the endorsement "NRLC Shake Up Race For Republican Presidential Nomination" Yeah - - - Right!!! I'm ALL Shook Up!