The Conclusive Case For An Anabaptist View Of Government In Less Than Two Minutes

Behold Mike Huckabee:


That makes my brain ache. The only thing worse than the nonsense Huckabee is saying is the knowing, pious hums of affirmation coming from the host (no idea who that guy and his wife are). I am declaring an edict that any Christian who does the eyes closed, head nodding, "mmmhhhmmm" when someone else is talking is subject to immediate excommunication.

When we make the church about politics and politics about the church we should expect to receive mockery. Not the sort of mockery we expect because of the foolishness of the cross (1 Cor 1:18) but rather the sort of well-deserved mockery that this kind of garbage draws. I have no reason to doubt that Mike Huckabee is a brother in Christ. I wish another brother would take him aside and tell him that this sort of stuff is doing nothing to advance the cause of Christ.

As an aside, is this what the Republican party is going into 2016 with? Mike Huckabee. Mitt "Third Time Is the Charm!" "The Human Weather-vane" Romney. Jeb "Also Third Time's The Charm" Bush Version 3.0. Sarah Palin. If that is the plan, to pick from whichever candidate emerges from the GOP clown car as the anointed one to slay the Hillary dragon, they can do so without my support and without my vote (which they aren't getting regardless nor is anyone else). America is 17 trillion in debt and heading full speed over a fiscal cliff that will make pre-World War II Germany look like a model of fiscal discipline and people are serious about Mike Huckabee? I guess he would be a better President than the current President but that is true of just about anyone you picked up off the streets.

Huck drops out

Mike Huckabee dropped out a few minutes ago. He ran a heck of a campaign with no money, and was the last guy standing before McCain clinched. I expect him to rally the troops around McCain and work to get him elected. He should be proud of the campaign he ran for the most part and the groundswell of support he raised. If nothing else, it helped remind the National Review crowd that they need us a lot more than we need them!

Funny stuff!

It is nice to have a Republican who has a sense of humor....

Romney Drops Out

In a somewhat surprising move, at least this quickly, Mitt Romney has dropped out of the race to be the Republican nominee. It was a pretty classy exit statement:

Mitt Romney suspended his presidential campaign Thursday, telling a stunned conservative group that continuing his uphill battle against John McCain would hurt the Republican Party and make it more likely that the Democratic candidate would win the general election in November.

“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention … I’d forestall the launch of a national campaign and frankly I’d be making make it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win,” Romney told the Conservative Political Action Conference. “Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”

As early as yesterday, the Romney campaign was drafting a road map to winning the nomination, despite trailing McCain badly in the race for delegates. But according to a campaign spokesman, Romney decided to drop out as he was writing the CPAC speech late Wednesday.

“This isn’t an easy decision. I hate to lose,” Romney said Thursday, as many in the crowd booed the decision. “If this were only about me, I’d go on, but it’s never been only about me. I entered this race because I love America, and because I love America in this time of war, I feel I have to now stand aside, for our party and for our country.”

I assume Huckabee will follow shortly, and the party can begin to rally around McCain. Time for the Rush Limbaugh/Ann Coulter cabal to swallow their pride, keep McCain honest from a conservative standpoint but quit bellyaching and threatening to support Hillary or stay home. Romney was very gracious in defeat and bowing out, his supporters should take their cue from his actions and support the nominee. Not everyone is being gracious about it though:

Evangelical leader Pat Robertson told FOX News Radio Thursday morning that he and other evangelicals would not support McCain, citing his temper.

Robertson referenced a Wall Street Journal article describing him as a “capped live volcano,” adding: “You never know when he’s going to explode … If you’ve got a guy who’s the commander in chief with his hand on the red button, I just don’t know, I wouldn’t like to be in WWIII, and I just have a feeling he wants to show how macho he is and we might just get ourselves in something we don’t want.”

Uh, someone who called for the assassination of the leader of a foreign nation and has prophesied untold destruction on America is being critical of someone else for being intemperate and unstable? McCain may be a hothead, but he served this nation in war and spent years being tortured by the North Vietnamese. He knows far better than the vast majority of Americans, including Pat Robertson, what war is really like.

I hate to break it to you Pat, but you ceased to be relevant to Christians as a whole many, many years ago. I don't know of any Christian under the age of 60 who gives a rip what Pat Robertson says or thinks. He has become like the crazy old great uncle at family events that people tolerate because they are trying to be polite. He has no business and no right declaring who evangelicals will or will not support.

Not looking good for Mitt

Despite the sniffing and hand-wringing by National Review and Rush Limbaugh (is he still on the air?), it is not looking good for Mitt Romney with Super Tuesday three days away... According to the latest Real Clear Politics polls, Romney is not ahead in any of the Super Tuesday states. If he gets swept in every state on Super Tuesday (except his home state of Massachusetts ), where does he go from there? I guess he can keep pouring his seemingly endless personal fortune into a failed campaign, but after all he touts himself as being a businessman so he must come to the point where he realizes it ain't gonna happen and drops out.

Huckabee is also looking like he is at the end of the line, but at least he still has a shot to be on the ticket. His support through Tuesday from social conservatives will sink Mitt in the South.

Adding to the fun is this insane comment from formerly relevant, alleged conservative Ann Coulter saying she would both vote and campaign for Hillary Clinton if John McCain is the nominee....



Huh. So all of a sudden, opposition to torturing people is a leftist position. Last time I checked, John McCain knows a little more about torture than Ann Coulter, inflicted on him while doing more to defend freedom than Coulter has even dreamed about.

What does South Carolina mean?

Looks like McCain wins South Carolina, with Huckabee in a close (but no cigar) second. If Huckabee was unable to even win over the evangelical population in a heavily Baptist state, and has yet to really draw from non-Evangelicals, what does that mean for his candidacy?

1. First that the elite in the conservative movement have poisoned people against Huckabee to the point that they parrot back "facts" about him with no real knowledge of what he has or does stand for. A substantial number of conservatives think that Huckabee is not a genuine conservative, falsely but perhaps fatally.


2. Second that it is time to start looking soberly at what the future holds with Super Duper Tuesday coming up, money no doubt dwindling fast and the really expensive advertising states on the horizon.


3. Huckabee may no longer be viable for the top spot, but could be a king-maker and a solid VP candidate (which is what I have thought for some time given his kid gloves approach to McCain)

While a McCain-Huckabee ticket may not be ideal, it sure beats having Romney or Rudy on the ticket. Evangelical voters (I think) can get behind McCain because of his generally pro-life stance and his notable service as a veteran. With Huckabee alongside, it becomes a ticket that will draw evangelicals, moderates and independents. It may not shake out that way, but Huckabee could be potentially one of the most influential VP candidates in a long time, delivering the evangelical vote while not scaring off the more secular middle.

I am not giving up on Huckabee yet, but he needs to win Florida REALLY badly or he better start picking out curtains for the Old Executive Office building. He is running in fourth in Florida according to Real Clear Politics, and a fourth place finish means the end for Huckabee's candidacy.

As a side note, Romney apparently spent $4 million in South Carolina and came in fourth behind Fred Thompson who never really started running. He may lead in the delegate count, but outside of states like Michigan where he has name recognition and Western states like Nevada and Wyoming with overwhelming mormon populations, he hasn't fared all that well. According to the Real Clear Politics national poll, despite winning three states outright, Romney is in a distant third nationally behind McCain and Huckabee. Rudy is fourth and his strategy to wait seems to be backfiring, which is just as well because Evangelical voters have a pretty visceral reaction against him.

For shame Michigan...


Congrats to Romney and his supporters for their win yesterday.


What is sad is the way Romney positioned himself and that people ate it up. The whole auto jobs not coming back to Michigan kerfuffle by McCain was dead on. Instead of lamenting the loss of high paying auto industry jobs for low skilled workers, we better as a state start to figure out how to replace those jobs. Otherwise we can wallow in our 7%+ unemployment indefinitely. Those jobs really are gone and aren't coming back. The UAW and weak-kneed auto executives have made sure of that by pricing the auto industry out of competitiveness through ridiculous salaries for relatively low skilled workers, untenable promises of pensions and health care and union rules that make auto plant jobs into entitlements.

Promising to fight to bring those jobs back is shameless pandering. Recognizing that the world has changed and so must Michigan is the honest approach, but apparently honesty is not what people want to hear.

Primary Day in Michigan!

Just got back from the polls, we were voters number 125 and 126 which is a pretty decent turnout for the northwoods of Michigan. Two more votes for Huckabee!

Huckabee on marriage



A great response to a pointed question in a Fox News debate on gender roles in marriage. The question hit at the 2000 Baptist Faith & Message's call for wives to sumbit to their husbands leadership: A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.

I doubt any other candidate could or would answer that question (or be asked it) in a humble, humorous and Christ-honoring way.

Why again do evangelical leaders not like Mike?

Is it Splits/ville in Red America?

The New York Times seems to think so.

Not that the NY Times has the pulse of evangelical, Middle America. But the article (which probably requires registration) does recognize the growing rift between old school Evangelical leaders and the younger believers who don't walk in lockstep. The Times does go too far, as do many other mainline news sources, in claiming that young evangelicals are granola eating, tree hugging social liberals but there is a sense in which a responsibility to our fellow man is more of a hallmark than in time past. The old guard is far too political, and while I am as anti-abortion as anyone there are times when we get so tunnel visioned on that issue that we exclude all other human suffering. The answer is not more government, but there is a real sense in which the church has lost both the Gospel message of repentance and the commandment to love one another.

Back in the day, evangelical Christians got their news from places like The 700 Club and Focus on the Family. Many still do, but for younger, more internet savvy Christians, blogs and webpages are replacing these mediums (I also attribute to the internet generation the resurgence of Calvinism among young evangelicals. No longer do they hear about Calvinism as some strange bogeyman or that men like Spurgeon were really Finney-ite semi-Pelagians.) We don;t have to, and in fact refuse to, wait to see what Pat Robertson or the late Rev. Falwell or Pat Robertson have to say about issues or candidates. We can discuss amongst ourselves, real-time, right now. Huckabee's nomination has exposed the rift, and the uneasy truce.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. If Rudy is the nominee will the Christian Right stay home, or will they begrudgingly go to the polls to keep Hillary or Obama out of the White House. Will the coalition survive if Huckabee gets nominated and the elite fiscal conservatives and neo-cons refuse to support him? If McCain gets the nomination, does he select Huckabee as his VP to gather in the evangelical vote? If Romney is the nominee....ugh, let's not even think about that...

Only two days until the Michigan primary!

Romney pushing the panic button?

Looks like the coiffed one is really scared that he is going to lose Michigan. According to the Detroit Free Press, he is pulling ads in other states to focus on Michigan where he is losing ground to McCain and Huckabee....

A relaxed Romney, the Bloomfield Hills native and former Massachusetts governor, made several stops Wednesday in Grand Rapids, following his disappointing second-place finish in New Hampshire. His campaign announced it was adding emphasis to the Michigan campaign, pulling television ads in South Carolina and Florida to beef up Michigan. He also added an appearance Monday before the Detroit Economic Club.

That doesn't sound good for Romney, and he is waaaay behind in the polls in South Carolina and Florida. If he fails to do better than second in Michigan, and distant thirds in Florida and South Carolina the question becomes how much more of his own money does he pour into a losing cause?

New Huckabee TV ad



A new ad is running in Michigan. Not sure I care for the shots at Romney for coming from a wealthy family, but it should play well in Michigan. Romney is going to be in serious trouble if he loses in Michigan and the latest polls show him trailing McCain badly, with McCain at 29%, Romnet at 20% and Huckabee at 18%. If Huckabee passes Romney and he ends up with a bronze (to use his annoying olympic analogy), Romney is in serious trouble.

Only five days until the Michigan primary!

Disappointing...

One of my favorite writers for National Review online is Jay Nordlinger. Unfailingly clever, staunchly anti-communist, a music critic and free Cuba advocate, his columns are always entertaining, educational and thought provoking. But his recent column takes a shot at Huckabee that is both a cheap shot and an ignorant one

One more word about politics, while I’m fulminating: In early days, when Huckabee was a fringe candidate, he was kind of entertaining and endearing — a charming goober, adorning the campaign. Now that he is a major candidate, he is positively unnerving — with his incredibly naïve views about foreign policy. Views not so different from Barack Obama’s.

And we’re in the middle of a war, both the shooting kind and the “cold” kind (if you consider the war against Islamofascism another long, twilight struggle, as I do).

If the two major-party nominees are Obama and Huckabee: What differences will they stress? Their skin color?

That was ugly and inaccurate on a number of levels. Obama is a fanatic about being pro-abortion, as evidenced by this Townhall.com editorial by Terence Jeffrey that I linked to from the NRO website! Now you may not like some stuff about Huckabee but he is the most consistent pro-life candidate out there. Jay, do you really think that the only difference between Huckabee and Obama is their skin color? Huckabee is a solid Second Amendment supporter, an advocate of radical changes to the tax code, of school choice and home schooling. Other than failing to march the party line on President Bush's Iraq policy, where is the similarity between Obama and Huckabee? That is like suggesting that Romney and Ted Kennedy are one and the same because they both were elected to political positions in Mass. Truly a disappointing comment from a man who normally is sober minded and clear thinking, but in this case has been drinking the National Review anti-Huckabee Kool-Aid.

Huh, more people carrying guns legally equals lower gun violence?

From the Detroit Free Press:

Michigan sees fewer gun deaths — with more permits

Six years after new rules made it much easier to get a license to carry concealed weapons, the number of Michiganders legally packing heat has increased more than six-fold.

But dire predictions about increased violence and bloodshed have largely gone unfulfilled, according to law enforcement officials and, to the extent they can be measured, crime statistics.

The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined.

Isn't that the opposite of what we are always warned? The breathless warnings that concealed carry permits will lead to blood running in the streets? Wild west style shootouts in the streets over every little slight or insult? The reality is that allowing law abiding citizens to legally be trained, registered and carry firearms (which are still legal in this country) does not in any way increase gun violence.

This is the illogical argument of gun control advocates boils down to this: making something illegal does not discourage criminals! They are already committing crimes. That is why we call them criminals! Someone inclined to commit a crime is not going to be dissuaded from using a gun by making it illegal. Someone inclined to steal a car is not discouraged because stealing cars is illegal. They are discouraged by harsh penalties for breaking the law. The focus should be on punishing those who commit crimes, not those who follow the legal process for owning and carrying a legal firearm.

In a related note, Mike Huckabee has the exact right attitude about gun rights in America. It is not about hunting or self-defense in the home. From his position paper on the 2nd Amendment:

They knew that a government facing an armed populace was less likely to take away our rights, while a disarmed population wouldn't have much hope. As Ronald Reagan reminded us, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction." Without our Second Amendment rights, all of our other rights aren't inalienable, they're just "on loan" from the government.

Other candidates say gun control doesn't affect hunting. Now I'm a very avid hunter, but the Second Amendment isn't really about hunting. It's about tyranny and self-defense. The Founding Fathers weren't worried about our being able to bag a duck or a deer, they were worried about our keeping our fundamental freedoms.

Quite right! Every right we have as citizens is dependent on the 2nd Amendment, on the ability of an armed populace to keep the government in check. It is only the 2nd Amendment that keeps our other freedoms secure.

Great Answer from Huckabee on Evolution versus Creationism



I suspect that Governor Huckabee believes as I do in a literal six-days, but it is a political debate and his answer is eloquent and humble.

New Hampshire

The Hall Monitor of American Politics

Remember the kid in high school that had some meaningless position but thought it made them a power broker? The hall monitor, the office workers, the equipment manager. There are similar people in the adult world, small time functionaries that use a little sphere of influence to try to make other people as miserable as they are: clerks at the drivers license renewal counter, IRS employees, mall security guards. That is what New Hampshire is like: A tiny, relatively irrelevant state that sneers at the rest of the country and looks down on everyone outside of New England, especially Midwesterners. Once every four years New Hampshire crawls out of obscurity and we are treated to their demands that candidates spend time in their state, genuflecting to the altar of the "First in the Nation Primary". New Hampshire has a whopping 24 GOP delegates, compared to 47 in South Carolina, 40 in Iowa and 60 in Michigan. All New Hampshire brings to the table is being first, and because of that every candidate is forced to spend time in state that has no real bearing on the direction of the rest of the country.

Check out this quote I came across in the Manchester Union-Leader:

FIRST, THE GOOD NEWS for supporters of Mitt Romney: A man has survived a 47-story fall from a New York skyscraper. So anything is possible.

Now the bad news: Judd Gregg was right. New Hampshire still picks Presidents.

Weeks before the Iowa caucuses this past Thursday night clobbered Romney and his multi-million-dollar campaign, his man, Gregg, had dismissed them as meaningless.

Taking a line first used by Gov. John Sununu, Gregg said, "Iowa picks corn. New Hampshire picks Presidents."

What could be worse than picking corn! We lived in New Hampshire for several years, and one thing became clear: there are few people in this world who are more arrogant with less cause than New Hampsherites. Huckabee is not going to do well in New Hampshire, a state full of beautiful old churches, churches that are empty on Sundays. It was fun during the election cycle, we had a ton of candidate come through. I met Dan Quayle and Bill Bradley, and a bunch of candidates were in our town parade. But there is not a constitutional right for New Hampshire to be first and you would be hard pressed to find a state less in tune with the rest of the country.

A fun new video...



Some people have too much time on their hands (like me!)

On Huckabee's win in Iowa...

Very exciting stuff, a show that the Christian social conservatives have unified in large part behind a candidate and refused to be cowed by the smear attacks and arrogant head patting from the establishment GOP. The hand-wringing and moaning on National Review since Iowa has been unseemly. The truth remains that Huckabee is not a country club Republican (not that there is anything wrong with that), and he brings out lots of people to pull the lever. Romney can not, and will not, rally the party base like Huckabee and because of that and in spite of his spending a ton of his own money, he will not be the nominee. In the internet age, money to buy TV ads is becoming less important. The message goes right out, virtually for free, via email and blogs. Look at goof ball Ron Paul, he raises tons of money and gets his followers into a froth with virtually no effort at all. I despise John Edwards but he made an interesting quip that we are holding an election, not an auction. Word of mouth among evangelicals will make a ton of impact for Huckabee in South Carolina and Michigan.

Dr. Mohler posted an excellent analysis of the Iowa results, and made an especially good point here:

The rhetoric of the race -- and the rhetoric of many evangelicals -- is disturbing. This race is important and necessarily so. We are talking about the next President of the United States, after all. But evangelicals have invested far too much hope in the political process. No government can make people good, transform humanity, or eliminate sin. The political sphere is important, but never ultimate. Jesus Christ is Lord -- and He will be Lord regardless of who sits in the Oval Office.

There is always the danger of assuming that electing the right man will make everything right in the world and accomplish all of our goals. The reality is that the only way to win the war is to win people for Christ.

(As an aside, the word is out that Albert Mohler will be nominated for president of the Southern Baptist convention, something I would obviously support whole-heartedly. I am not sure the SBC will elect a Calvinist as President yet, but given the almost universal respect of Dr. Mohler it may happen.)

Huckabee on homeschoolers...

Leave them alone, they are doing great!



Mike Huckabee also specifically and strongly expresses his support not only of public schools but also homeschoolers. His education issues page states the following:

I have been a strong, consistent supporter of the rights of parents to home school their children, of creating more charter schools, and of public school choice.

I am not as big a fan of his arts and culture curriculum, but I think he has the right frame of mind where eduction is concerned. Huckabee also received a fairly unprecedented early endorsement from the Home School Legal Defense Association:

HSLDA’s PAC Committee has taken the historic step of making an early endorsement in the 2008 race for president.

We believe that Mike Huckabee, Governor of Arkansas, should be elected the next President of the United States. Mike is a principled conservative, a friend of homeschooling, a man of character, and a man with a mature faith in Jesus Christ.

Mike Huckabee, as governor, was the first to appoint a homeschooler to the Arkansas State Board of Education, and to our knowledge the first to do so in any state. He is adamantly opposed to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and is committed to stopping the erosion of parental rights. He is pro-life. He supports traditional marriage. He believes that the Internal Revenue Service should be abolished and replaced with the Fair Tax—a move that we strongly support because it would greatly benefit homeschooling families. He believes and is willing to say that Islamic extremism needs to be understood as a theologically driven threat. He believes that America must be strong, but should never be perceived as a bully. He believes that our borders must be secured not only from illegal immigration but from the growing trend among American judges of “illegally importing” international law into our American judicial systems.

Huckabee is a pretty solid ally of homeschoolers, which just adds to his appeal!

Coulter weighs in on Huckabee

Ann Coulter used to be somewhat amusing, but like Hannity and O'Reilly she has become such a caricature that she no longer speaks with any semblance of authority or accuracy. Coulter, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, all are primarily entertainers. As long as they recognize that, as Limbaugh always has, they are fine. Where they get in trouble is when they start to forget their role and take themselves too seriously. Coulter is mostly given notice because she is intentionally bombastic and abrasive, and just as much because she is modestly attractive. Her rant in Human Events against Mike Huckabee is both rude and ignorant.

Coulter starts off with this doozie and it goes downhill from there:

As far as I can tell, it's mostly secular liberals swooning over Huckabee. Liberals adore Huckabee because he fits their image of what an evangelical should be: stupid and easily led.

I know quite a few people who either actively support or are seriously considering Huckabee, not a one them is a "secular liberal". I would imagine that one would be hard pressed for Ms. Coulter to drop me into the "secular liberal" category as well, especially given Ms. Coulter's juvenile religious convictions (see for example her summary of her Christian beliefs in a Townhall Column: People are sinful and need to be redeemed, and this is your lucky day because I'm here to redeem you even though you don't deserve it, and I have to get the crap kicked out of me to do it. Who needs Calvin and Luther when you have a theologian like that!). If calling a candidate "stupid" and questioning his ability to read is the best argument that Coulter can come up with, it certainly speaks volumes more about her than Huckabee. Then there was this gem:

Asked on CNN's "Larry King Live" Monday night about his beliefs on evolution, Huckabee rushed to assure King that he has no interest in altering textbooks that foist this fraud on innocent schoolchildren. I don't understand that. Does Huckabee believe Darwinism is a hoax or not? If he knows it's a fraud, then why does he want it taught to schoolchildren? What other discredited mystery religions -- as mathematician David Berlinski calls Darwinism -- does Huckabee want to teach children? Sorcery? Phrenology? Alchemy?

So what exactly did Huckabee say on Larry King Live? An outright renouncement of creationism? A Richard Dawkins-esque defense of evolution? Not quite. This is from the transcript of the show:

KING: You've said that you do not believe in evolution. That being a given, how would you deal with the teaching of it in the classroom?

HUCKABEE: The same way I did as a parent, the same way I did as a governor. I don't get into that. I'm not a science teacher. I don't write the curriculum for the science books.My kids, Larry, went to the public schools of Arkansas. I was the first governor in 50 years whose kids had all of their first through 12th grade education in the Arkansas public schools.So, you know, when people say oh, what is he going to do to the textbooks -- well, if I was going to do it, I would have done it when I was governor. Presidents have nothing to do with the curriculum of education.

That was the basis for claiming that Huckabee abandoned creationism on Larry King Live?

Are there any candidates who are proposing teaching creationism in public school textbooks? Is that even a topic of discussion for Presidential candidates? Next we have this inane comment:

When not evolving his position on Darwinism, Huckabee insults gays by pointlessly citing the Bible's rather pointed remarks about sodomy -- fitting the MSM's image of evangelicals sitting around all day denouncing gays. (Which is just so unfair. I'm usually done denouncing gays by 10:30 a.m., 11 tops.) And yet, Huckabee has said he agrees with the Supreme Court's lunatic opinion that sodomy is a constitutional right.

So let me get this straight. Coulter unequivocally claims that Huckabee says that sodomy is a Constitutional right because he said that Lawrence v. Texas was ""probably was appropriate." From that Coulter suggests that Huckabee is "pro-sodomy" and a friend of gay marriage. That makes as much sense as saying that Coulter's penchant for wearing tiny dresses and stiletto heels means she is in favor of legalizing prostitution. (Was that a cheap shot? Yep, but no less so that Coulter's entire editorial)

Is it really the top priority of the United States to enforce sodomy laws? Is doing so a sure path to legalizing gay marriage? Hardly. I think that Lawrence v. Texas was poorly decided, but it is hardly a make or break issue and not frothing at the mouth about it is certainly not tacit approval of gay marriage. Huckabee is a strong proponent of traditional marriage, and his marriage position page on the web backs this up:

- I support and have consistently supported passage of a federal constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
- As Governor of Arkansas, I led the successful effort to pass a similar state constitutional amendment in 2002.
- As Governor of Arkansas, I led the successful effort to make our state only the third to adopt "covenant" marriage.
- Our true strength comes from our families.

It may bear noting that Mike and Janet Huckabee got married in 1974 and have been married for the last 33 years. Coulter has been engaged several times but never married, which hardly makes her a authority on marriage. Again, a cheap shot but I am trying to stay in the spirit that Coulter enjoys.

She ends her hit piece with this:

I guess Huckabee is one of those pro-sodomy, pro-gay marriage, pro-evolution evangelical Christians.

Perhaps the most banal argument is to call Republicans "liberal" when they clearly are not. It lessens the real impact of what being liberal means when it becomes a playground insult in the hands of Coulter. Ann should stick to attacking liberals on Fox News and leave serious discussions to others.