Huckabee scores first Super Tuesday win

Utah, I think you are out of touch. I thank you for fighting for all of our freedoms for the last 66 years, but today is a different world. We have big problems with our foundation, and our most basic rights. Yes, women are still free to vote, but that doesn't necessarily even mean that our vote will count. You see what I'm saying? To say that the constitution does not protect us FROM religion is silly. You are reading into the amendment what simply is not there, and at the same time, you ignore the basic words that complete a simple and meaningful sentence. Let's look a it AGAIN. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" Congress, which is interpreted to mean any branch of federal government, shall make NO LAW, meaning NO LAW, respecting, meaning in respect of, or adhering to, and establishment of religion, meaning ANY religious establishment. In short: The federal Government is prohibited from passing laws based on/as a result of religion, and states are not allowed to get in the way of that protection. Seems pretty simple to me. I'm not sure why this isn't the correct place to have this discussion. What better place than this? On a page discussing a candidate who has very little understanding of this very amendment...

swankink, our nation and our time can be summed up in an old quote from Benjamin Franklin, "Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security."

We had more liberty and more freedom, had. Now in a time of Big Brother, policing the world, and forcing our belief in democracy on other countries of the world, our nation has become a social-capitalist monstrosity.

We have given the federal government too much control and too much power. The United States of America does not need to be the world's global police force. The United States of America no longer holds true to its name. Our federal government is acting on its own and without state consent. This is an abomination!

It's time to return to truth of our name. It's time to return the political power to our states, the United States.

Vote Ron Paul.

AngelinaH- I have been exercising, and fighting for, My Freedoms for nearly 66 years. I KNOW what has been eroded and what hasn't.
And since the subject is totally subjective and even nebulous, this isn't the correct forum for a comprehensive discussion.
But I CAN say that your interpretation of the religious aspect of the 1st Amendment does not coincide with 200+ years of court interpretation.
So we must abide by that until it is changed.
As for my personal reading of that Amendment, I choose to see it as our government may NOT establish a "National Religion", nor decree that there MUST be RELIGION, nor decree that there MUST NOT be RELIGION!!
To me the language is fairly plain and simple. Especially if you place it within the context of the founder's experience with English law and the Church of England, as well as the Roman Catholic Church. They didn't want to inhibit the individual from choosing for himself. But they did not want the individual dictated to either.
Awfully damned farsighted of them!
So you can't push it to either extreme.

And for the record. I do not adhere to religion or believe in the Supernatural. :+)

what makes you think we ever had freedom? we just have enough information out there to connect the dots. history changes in a second nowadays, don't you think it would have been easier to make people think they were free 100 years ago when information wasn't so available?

this country is run by a tyrant w/out a face. "they" probably laugh at fidel castro for showing his. presidents in america are all puppets. afterall, why conquer a country or run for president when you can pay $10 billion to rig an election? whoever has the most money rules the world. they have us confused, I'm kinda scared at this point, my head is spinning, maybe i'll vote for mitt?

God, can someone tell me who to vote for? ok Hillary, tell me to vote for you, you so pretty AND you multi-task!

And, by the way, your freedoms have not survived. They have been severely degraded. It may not be exactly noticeable to the average citizan, but it is happening. Don't recall Alberto's comments about the constitution? You don't remember him saying that the constitution does not "grant" habeas corpus? My friend, your rights are not intact.

Like too many of our public officials, you do not understand the constitution, or the amendments that are in place to protect you. Let me show you the first ammendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Okay, let's go back to that first line. What else do you need to see? "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." That one sentence guarantees our freedom FROM religion. The second sentence guarantees our freedom OF religion. These amendments are in place, because the greatest thinkers who came before us, who founded this nation, were fleeing oppression. Even if he won't get elected, we need to demand more of our candidates. It's silly that any millionaire with an agenda can run for president, and have a chance if he's got enough funding. In my opinion, Huckabee is unacceptable as a candidate. That's not to say the others smell like roses, but we've got to have some kind of minimum standards, and Huckabee ain't cuttin' it.

there are SOOOO MANY PEOPLE who don't want to waste a vote, face it if you are deciding between the front 4 you are wasting your vote either way. they all work for the same people! I can't imagine how terrible this world would be if mccain or hillary were running for pres, but it isn't gonna be much better with obama or mitt romney.

"they" 're trying to scare everyone with stocks dropping 370 points, so you'll vote for someone "meaningful", you don't want a jackass in charge so you vote for mitt cause the media says he's number two. The polls aren't over til november so VOTE FOR CHANGE not for a candidate. Everyone knows Ron Paul isn't a crazy lunatic like everyone in the media is painting him out to be, vote for him now and vote for him as independent.

You've gotta see that the media is waggin the dog! WAKE UP! WAKE UP! Lest we spend another 20 years in baghdad.

No. I'm not going to call you "Crazy". :+) But I do want to remind you that the Constitution does NOT guarantee "Freedom FROM Religion". Many of us would wish that it did, but we can't impose our beliefs any more than Huckabee can. We had a religious president in jimmy Carter. Although he did not have an auspicious presidency, he did not harm the Constitution. And neither would Huckabee. He could TRY to amend the Constitution to suit him. But many have tried that. And many have failed. Our system is pretty damned strong. It has withstood much more danger than is proposed by Huckabee (let me remind you of the last 8 years!!).
I would be unhappy if he were to be elected (Tiniest of chances that would happen). I am totally convinced that our Republic would survive. I live in a Theocracy, Utah. I despise many things about the religious tone of the governance of this state. But my freedoms survive. :+)

good to know. I'm with you overall. If Hillary get's the nomination, I will have to consider the republican candidates as a serious option.

AngelinaH, I will vote. If Ron Paul is not electable then I will vote based on the credibility, reputation, voting record, and character of the other candidates, democrat or republican.

Please, people vote intelligently.

I totally understand what you're saying. It's kind of an obtuse problem to deal with. What I'm trying to say is, the fact that, a) he would disregard a key American principle, and b) he would impose his religion on a nation if given the opportunity, well, that should make him ineligible. I think we should have some basic standards when it comes to eligibility, and I think an understanding and respect for our constitution should be high on that list. Let's not forget, these are JOB candidates, and it is our job to lay out what we are expecting. I understand what you are saying, I get your point, and I'm not suggesting that candidates should have limited ability to speak. I submit only that a presidential candidate should never, ever, ever, consider projecting his religious values and views upon our constitution and our people. I never said anything about freedom of speech. I'm talking about freedom of, and freedom from, religion. He said, point blank, that the constitution needed to be amended to fit god's standards. That is not presidential material. Let him run for some other office, or let him start a mega church. I don't care what he does with his life, or his freedom. I only care that he does not infringe upon mine. He cannot fit every religion into the constitution, so I'd prefer that we leave it SEPERATE. Wasn't that kinda the WHOLE IDEA of this "America" thing? Call me crazy...

AngelinaH- doesn't it strike you as a little hypocritical that you propose Unconstitutional action against an individual for making "unconstitutional comments"?
"it IS frightening that so many people support a presidential candidate who has made entirely unconstitutional comments. His comments should REALLY bar him from being considered as a candidate."
But I guess it all depends on "who's Ox is Gored" when it comes to Freedom of Speech?? :+)

I agree that Huckabee should NOT be elected President. But "Barring" his candidacy is very reminiscent of how leaders in such places Myanmar (Burma), Russia, and other despotic countries guarantee their own election.
So Let's just remain within the Constitution and vote against those we do not want rather than "Barring" them!!

Pfestler, I don't disagree with you. I really don't. But at some point, at least for NOW, we have to realize that this election is going to happen within the current framework. We can make change happen, but it's not going to happen overnight. All I'm saying is, I seriously doubt the viability of Ron Paul's nomination. If he doesn't get the nomination, you won't vote at all come election time? How is that going to help?

I'm sorry, I disagree.

What I currently see is a circus being run by the frontrunners for this presidential election and supported by the media (CNN, FOX, BBC) which glamourizes the 4 main candidates.

I've listened to all the debates and the only sane candidate with legitimate views at this point is Ron Paul.

I had enough of our people's complacency with our own political system. I have had enough of the B.S. the continues to flow out of the mouths of these so called candidates of "change". I've had enough of the immature and uneducated voters going into the polling booth and voting on superficial arguments!

The past 16 years of political idiocy has degraded our nation, undermined our political system, overrun our schools with so much reform our children are left confused and ignorant, and has turned a united country with a respectable reputation into a divided nation, which is either feared or a joke to the global community.

We have turned into a democracy of blind loyalism and superficial ideals. My heart is seriously filled with agony from the ignorance of our voters. This is NOT a joke. Our future and our well-being is at stake here!

Sorry, kind of went off on a rant. I apologize, I'm just frustrated about the current mentality of most voters. It's just really sad and dissappointing to watch America become saturated with political ignorance.

At this point, I will only vote Ron Paul.

pFestler, I hate to break this to you, but Ron Paul is not going to get the nomination. He goes way to far outside of the comfortable Republican zone... Let's be serious. I'm not saying I don't like him, but he's kind of messing up his message by delivering it with a hefty dose of crazy. At least that's how he comes off in relation to the other candidates. In any case, it IS frightening that so many people support a presidential candidate who has made entirely unconstitutional comments. His comments should REALLY bar him from being considered as a candidate. It's very important that we do not tailor our nation's laws to suit A god. We have to keep our rights to freedom of, and freedom FROM, religion and religious persecution. We need a president who can represent the entire diverse nation that we are, and not just a particular religious group. In that, I do agree that Ron Paul would be a better choice. Ron Paul may be one of the best candidates on the ballot, but when has that ever mattered? We won't get the chance to vote for him. Who's your viable selection PFestler?

mzzim, why so much anger? People have the right to vote for whoever they choose.

However, I really hope people make an informed and intelligent decision instead of basing it off of superficial arguments (i.e. gender, race, religion, philanthropy, etc.).

Julie, all we need to do is elect a president who knows and stays true to our constitution in order for our children to learn about it. Vote Ron Paul.

SCARY!!!! Someone's got to send a few schools down to West Virignia so the kids there can learn about the Constitution. Do they already have schools in West Virginia? Yes? How about books, do they have those? I mean, besides the bible.

Wow! So all the people in West Virginia want Huckabee to incorporate the BIBLE into the Constitution of the United States? Very scary!

You do know that all that bible crap is all made up stuff written by mere mortals. I can't believe people fall for this stuff. It's all part of organized religion to manipulate and control you. I agree with Bill Mahar ..read his book.